If one wants to dig deeper, that's surely welcome: it's not me bundling these people groups together, it's different research authors (and you). The discussion

If one wants to dig deeper, that's surely welcome: it's not me bundling these people groups together, it's different research authors (and you). The discussion was on safety of touchscreens in cars, and you brought the claim that pedestrians are more at risk, which I countered with some statistical data from one study. By contextualizing the data without supporting it with evidence, you are driving your unfounded point. For example, I can argue touchscreens are used much less on roads with pedestrians, since you tune your AC/music/navigation... more often on long motorway trips (I similarly have no basis for this claim other than personal gut feel). The point is that more people who are injured or die in a traffic accident are not pedestrians: the "machine engineered for safety" does not protect them any better than pedestrians have it: if there are deaths due to touchscreen use, plausibly it's more drivers/passengers than pedestrians.