4 ms·

Yes, it's been illegal for years - but EVERY DAY I see people on their phones - talking, texting. My favorite move is when they're holding their phone like a wa

Yes, it's been illegal for years - but EVERY DAY I see people on their phones - talking, texting. My favorite move is when they're holding their phone like a waiter - it's on speaker phone, but I would consider that in no way "hands free" operation. And they are always driving recklessly (inconsistent speed, sometimes swerving). It's absolutely out of control.

ajross 7y ago
FWIW, the data doesn't really bear this out. Vehicle travel has been getting steadily safer in the US for decades. Obviously there are problems that need to be addressed, and those change over time, but the war is a long one and we're winning. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in... That's not to say driving with a phone is safe, but it's not a crisis. We address it with the same tools we always have: law enforcement and regulation of safety technologies.
- jeromegv 7y ago
  We're winning. This is absolutely crazy that 36 000 deaths a year in the USA is considered "winning". Like it couldn't get any better. Hey it's better than the apocalypse from 30 years ago, we are WINNING. If terrorism was 36,000 deaths every year you can bet this would be a big topic of conversation. Other data to look at, shared of accidents caused by distracted driving are way way up. Perhaps if distracted driving was going down instead of going up, we would be getting much lower than 36,000 death/year Source: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-are-you-a-distracted-driver-probably-heres-why/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-are-you-a-dis...
  - ajross 7y ago
    My point was that our reaction to this new problem of distracted driving should be commensurate with our reaction to the "old problems" of, I dunno, DUI or road rage or whatever. Because numerically it doesn't really make sense. By all means let's work to reduce traffic fatalities. Let's just do it in a smarter way that "OMG phones in cars" -- I mean, how about work on better civil infrastructure choices so people aren't incentivized to drive in the first place.
- pixl97 7y ago
  Eh. You're likely making a statistical error also. Cars are massively more safe to get in an accident in. In theory the rates of deaths should have fallen far further.
  - jersey 7y ago
    How do you know they should have fallen much further? How are you quantifying the increases in safety? Cars might be less safe even since cars are getting lighter to hit fuel efficiency regulations.
- Enginerrrd 7y ago
  The decrease in fatalities is mostly a result of improved safety technologies. The appropriate statistic would be to look at accident rates under similar traffic densities and speeds to see whether or not that bears out.
- jarofghosts 7y ago
  That rate only applies to fatalities as the result of motor vehicle collisions, which is likely going down because we keep making vehicles more and more tank-like. See: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/22/us/pedestrian-cyclist-deaths-traffic.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/22/us/pedestrian-cyclist-dea...
tolstoshev 7y ago
It's not the hands that are the problem, it's the cognitive load. Hands free is no safer than hands on, when it comes to talking on the phone. https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2014/04/15/326289.htm https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2014/04/15/32...
- bradlys 7y ago
  Is having a conversation with someone in the car any different than having one over the phone? I don't see anyone advocating for a ban on conversation in cars.
  - tolstoshev 7y ago
    The hypothesis of why local conversations are safer is that when traffic gets complex, the passenger will see that as well and pause the conversation. The person on the phone doesn't have that awareness. However some jurisdictions have restrictions on passengers for younger/provisional drivers, for just that reason.

ajross 7y ago

FWIW, the data doesn't really bear this out. Vehicle travel has been getting steadily safer in the US for decades. Obviously there are problems that need to be addressed, and those change over time, but the war is a long one and we're winning. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in... That's not to say driving with a phone is safe, but it's not a crisis. We address it with the same tools we always have: law enforcement and regulation of safety technologies.

jeromegv 7y ago
We're winning. This is absolutely crazy that 36 000 deaths a year in the USA is considered "winning". Like it couldn't get any better. Hey it's better than the apocalypse from 30 years ago, we are WINNING. If terrorism was 36,000 deaths every year you can bet this would be a big topic of conversation. Other data to look at, shared of accidents caused by distracted driving are way way up. Perhaps if distracted driving was going down instead of going up, we would be getting much lower than 36,000 death/year Source: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-are-you-a-distracted-driver-probably-heres-why/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-are-you-a-dis...
- ajross 7y ago
  My point was that our reaction to this new problem of distracted driving should be commensurate with our reaction to the "old problems" of, I dunno, DUI or road rage or whatever. Because numerically it doesn't really make sense. By all means let's work to reduce traffic fatalities. Let's just do it in a smarter way that "OMG phones in cars" -- I mean, how about work on better civil infrastructure choices so people aren't incentivized to drive in the first place.
pixl97 7y ago
Eh. You're likely making a statistical error also. Cars are massively more safe to get in an accident in. In theory the rates of deaths should have fallen far further.
- jersey 7y ago
  How do you know they should have fallen much further? How are you quantifying the increases in safety? Cars might be less safe even since cars are getting lighter to hit fuel efficiency regulations.
Enginerrrd 7y ago
The decrease in fatalities is mostly a result of improved safety technologies. The appropriate statistic would be to look at accident rates under similar traffic densities and speeds to see whether or not that bears out.
jarofghosts 7y ago
That rate only applies to fatalities as the result of motor vehicle collisions, which is likely going down because we keep making vehicles more and more tank-like. See: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/22/us/pedestrian-cyclist-deaths-traffic.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/22/us/pedestrian-cyclist-dea...

tolstoshev 7y ago

It's not the hands that are the problem, it's the cognitive load. Hands free is no safer than hands on, when it comes to talking on the phone. https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2014/04/15/326289.htm https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2014/04/15/32...

bradlys 7y ago
Is having a conversation with someone in the car any different than having one over the phone? I don't see anyone advocating for a ban on conversation in cars.
- tolstoshev 7y ago
  The hypothesis of why local conversations are safer is that when traffic gets complex, the passenger will see that as well and pause the conversation. The person on the phone doesn't have that awareness. However some jurisdictions have restrictions on passengers for younger/provisional drivers, for just that reason.