Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    rec.autos.driving    |    Automobile discussion (general)    |    162,178 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 160,490 of 162,178    |
|    Liam O'Connor to Your Name    |
|    Re: Finally, California drivers can read    |
|    28 Feb 14 19:17:18    |
      XPost: comp.mobile.android, comp.mobile.ipad       From: liamoconnor@example.com              On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 15:46:14 +1300, Your Name wrote:              > What is in no doubt is that many accidents have been proven to be       > caused by a driver using their cellphone, or any other unneccessary       > distraction.              If that presumably logical assumption is true, then we *must* see       a correspondingly similar curve in increased accidents following       the curve of cellphone adoption.              If we don't see a simialr curve, and if we can't find a mitigating       factor, then we just as surely *must* assume cellphone use is not       causing increased accidents.              Does anyone have figures for accidents trending cell phone adoption?              If not, what you're really saying is that the same people who       have accidents using cellphones would have had accidents anyway.              I, myself, have never had an accident in my life, although I've       had a claim for someone hitting my car when it was parked. And, I       use my cellphone all the time. Of course, that's a study of one,       and perhaps a statistic waiting to occur, but, in the aggregate,       if cellphone use is causing accidents, then we MUST see a curve       of increased accidents trending the same line as cellphone use.              Do we?              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca