Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Dangers of texting drivers....any data?

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Dangers of texting drivers....any data?

Old 07-17-15, 07:08 PM
  #26  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
mihlbach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 6,643
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 114 Post(s)
Liked 125 Times in 67 Posts
Originally Posted by Marcus_Ti
More importantly you're talking a subset or riders who not only are brain damaged children on a good day, but are pulling stupid stunts with minimal experience and handling skills. Pretty much the only way you could ask for a worse combination is if the kids were texting no handed while riding...which I have seen done.
To clarify, we are talking about racers....no stunts. Racers mostly train on streets by doing sprints, not stunts. Regardless, most of these kids ride around their neighborhoods on bikes.
I'm 42... I have a phd from an Ivy League school and I ride bmx bikes in addition to commuting, road cycling, and other types of cycling. I'm certainly not brain dead, nor are most of the kids I know who ride.

Last edited by mihlbach; 07-17-15 at 07:16 PM.
mihlbach is offline  
Old 07-17-15, 09:08 PM
  #27  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,545

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,432 Times in 1,345 Posts
Originally Posted by mihlbach
....
I'm 42... I have a phd from an Ivy League school .... I'm certainly not brain dead, ....
Are you sure? After all you're posting on BF.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 12:21 AM
  #28  
What happened?
 
Rollfast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 8,050

Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!

Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1835 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times in 255 Posts
Who is texting? Around here they're back on their phones again.
__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.
Rollfast is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 06:11 AM
  #29  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924

Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,054 Times in 634 Posts
Since so many people seem to want new laws, how about this one. Anyone that causes an accident while on their cell phone automatically loses their drivers license for 6 months.
rydabent is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 06:36 AM
  #30  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,545

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,432 Times in 1,345 Posts
Originally Posted by rydabent
Since so many people seem to want new laws, how about this one. Anyone that causes an accident while on their cell phone automatically loses their drivers license for 6 months.
Assuming your premise that people want or we need new laws (not sure I do on either point), the problem is that harsh penalties increase the likelihood of a hit and run. One of the laws that people keep forgetting about, and politicians keep violating is the law of unintended consequences.

We need to do everything possible to discourage of texting (I'm less concerned about talking on the phone than many others) while driving, but we have to be careful not to create a more serious problem. Unless hit and run penalties are ramped up first, any increased penalties for accidents are going to push a bubble out in that direction.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 06:40 AM
  #31  
FLIR Kitten to 0.05C
 
Marcus_Ti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,331

Bikes: Roadie: Seven Axiom Race Ti w/Chorus 11s. CX/Adventure: Carver Gravel Grinder w/ Di2

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2349 Post(s)
Liked 406 Times in 254 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
Assuming your premise that people want or we need new laws (not sure I do on either point), the problem is that harsh penalties increase the likelihood of a hit and run. One of the laws that people keep forgetting about, and politicians keep violating is the law of unintended consequences.

We need to do everything possible to discourage of texting (I'm less concerned about talking on the phone than many others) while driving, but we have to be careful not to create a more serious problem. Unless hit and run penalties are ramped up first, any increased penalties for accidents are going to push a bubble out in that direction.

Thing is many States already make it illegal to use a cellphone while driving... And those laws are basically unenforced, unless you get pulled over for something else.
Marcus_Ti is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 06:55 AM
  #32  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,545

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,432 Times in 1,345 Posts
Originally Posted by Marcus_Ti
Thing is many States already make it illegal to use a cellphone while driving... And those laws are basically unenforced, unless you get pulled over for something else.
Part of the problem is that we keep asking for and getting laws piecemeal in reaction to the crise de jour (crisis of the day) so we have unenforced laws, and no proportionality of penalties. We need to design our system of laws and penalties to discourage people from trading up and committing more serious offenses to evade the consequences of lesser ones.

A classic example is dumping. Cities often raise dumping fees to raise dough or at cover their costs. Sounds reasonable, except that when you have high fees for legal dumping at the town dump, you end up with illegal dumping all over the place.

I'm sorry I don't have an easy answer, but I'm not ready to grab the first easy answer that comes along.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 06:57 AM
  #33  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Villages, FL
Posts: 14

Bikes: 2007 Jamis Aurora

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
When I was a kid, back in the 50's, we rode where we wanted with no hesitation and never looked half the time. In and out of traffic, either side of the street, sidewalks, etc. No place was off limits. It's a wonder we survived.
Chacam is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 07:22 AM
  #34  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Northern San Diego
Posts: 1,857

Bikes: mid 1980s De Rosa SL, 1985 Tommasini Super Prestige all Campy SR, 1992 Paramount PDG Series 7, 1997 Lemond Zurich, 1998 Trek Y-foil, 2006 Schwinn Super Sport GS, 2006 Specialized Hardrock Sport

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by FBinNY
That's when you give up, and talk to some of the kids and parents directly.

Sadly the whole texting brouhaha is highly exaggerated and making people paranoid. Yes, it does cause an increase in accidents, but it's not a sea change, and the problems that exist always existed because drivers were always driving distracted, whether it was fiddling with the radio, eating a bagel and coffee, turning around to yell at their children, putting on makeup, and even reading the newspaper. Nothing's changed and out roads and streets are roughly as safe (or dangerous) as they've been for years. We just pin different labels on the causes when writing accident reports.
I definitely disagree that cell phones haven't resulted in a sea change in the overall hazard level for cyclists - it's a statistical fact that nowadays, cell phone distraction rivals drunk driving as the largest cause of auto accidents in general - and while drunk driving happens mostly at night - cell phone use in the car happens mostly during the day time when most of us ride. It is a fact that drivers distracted by cell phone use while driving is the single greatest safety threat for recreational cyclists on public roads.
D1andonlyDman is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 07:28 AM
  #35  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Northern San Diego
Posts: 1,857

Bikes: mid 1980s De Rosa SL, 1985 Tommasini Super Prestige all Campy SR, 1992 Paramount PDG Series 7, 1997 Lemond Zurich, 1998 Trek Y-foil, 2006 Schwinn Super Sport GS, 2006 Specialized Hardrock Sport

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by rydabent
Since so many people seem to want new laws, how about this one. Anyone that causes an accident while on their cell phone automatically loses their drivers license for 6 months.
I would actually add to the penalty that the person can no longer legally use a cell phone - and I'd make it for a year - and their name gets put on a list that cell phone carriers must check before offering service. That threat might actually cause people to think twice about it.
D1andonlyDman is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 07:34 AM
  #36  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,545

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,432 Times in 1,345 Posts
Originally Posted by D1andonlyDman
I definitely disagree that cell phones haven't resulted in a sea change in the overall hazard level for cyclists - it's a statistical fact that nowadays, cell phone distraction rivals drunk driving as the largest cause of auto accidents in general - and while drunk driving happens mostly at night - cell phone use in the car happens mostly during the day time when most of us ride. It is a fact that drivers distracted by cell phone use while driving is the single greatest safety threat for recreational cyclists on public roads.
And yet, where are all these accidents? The overall accident rate is not rising dramatically. And more to the point that the OP is dealing with, it certainly isn't rising dramatically enough for bicyclists to abandon the right side of the road and play dodge-em on the left.

However, if you believe I'm wrong on that point, feel free to ride against traffic or on the sidewalk, or abandon the roads entirely. For my part, while I agree about the risks of driving while texting, I'll continue to take my chances on the right. In short, there may be a storm, but the sky isn't falling.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 07:40 AM
  #37  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Northern San Diego
Posts: 1,857

Bikes: mid 1980s De Rosa SL, 1985 Tommasini Super Prestige all Campy SR, 1992 Paramount PDG Series 7, 1997 Lemond Zurich, 1998 Trek Y-foil, 2006 Schwinn Super Sport GS, 2006 Specialized Hardrock Sport

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by FBinNY
And yet, where are all these accidents? The overall accident rate is not rising dramatically. And more to the point that the OP is dealing with, it certainly isn't rising dramatically enough for bicyclists to abandon the right side of the road and play dodge-em on the left.

However, if you believe I'm wrong on that point, feel free to ride against traffic or on the sidewalk, or abandon the roads entirely. For my part, while I agree about the risks of driving while texting, I'll continue to take my chances on the right. In short, there may be a storm, but the sky isn't falling.
Where are all these accidents? In actual fact, the accident rate due to drunk driving has dropped precipitously, largely due to the activism of MADD, and the fact that it has now become much less socially acceptable to do so. Cell phone distraction has taken up the slack and more. It needs to become socially unacceptable to use one's cell phone while driving - but the telecomm industry is making too much money to let that ever happen.

I certainly don't believe that riding against traffic is the solution. And as for mainly abandoning riding on the roads - unfortunately, Multi-use bike paths have their own set of hazards - mainly blind turns, and pedestrians and other cyclists who are oblivious to the need to stay on their side of the path around those blind turns.
D1andonlyDman is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 08:10 AM
  #38  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,545

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,432 Times in 1,345 Posts
Originally Posted by D1andonlyDman
Where are all these accidents? In actual fact, the accident rate due to drunk driving has dropped precipitously, largely due to the activism of MADD, and the fact that it has now become much less socially acceptable to do so. Cell phone distraction has taken up the slack and more. ....
This has become an apples and oranges thread. I'm writing to the original question, which is whether cell phones have changed the overall risks enough to justify riding on the left. And to that point is the data that the overall accident rate is virtually unchanged.

You and others are writing about cell phone risks per se, which is something different.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 08:15 AM
  #39  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,951

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,517 Times in 1,031 Posts
Originally Posted by D1andonlyDman
I definitely disagree that cell phones haven't resulted in a sea change in the overall hazard level for cyclists - it's a statistical fact that nowadays, cell phone distraction rivals drunk driving as the largest cause of auto accidents in general - and while drunk driving happens mostly at night - cell phone use in the car happens mostly during the day time when most of us ride. It is a fact that drivers distracted by cell phone use while driving is the single greatest safety threat for recreational cyclists on public roads.
Any references available for these "statistical facts"? And please no references to guesstimates, or hysterical blog rhetoric based on extrapolations from experimental studies.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 08:19 AM
  #40  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,951

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,517 Times in 1,031 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
This has become an apples and oranges thread. I'm writing to the original question, which is whether cell phones have changed the overall risks enough to justify riding on the left. And to that point is the data that the overall accident rate is virtually unchanged.

You and others are writing about cell phone risks per se, which is something different.
To be a little more accurate, the OP brought up both subjects/questions. You choose to discuss riding on the left (apples), others choose to discuss the alleged increased danger/risk to cyclists because of texting (oranges). What is the problem?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 08:27 AM
  #41  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,545

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,432 Times in 1,345 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
To be a little more accurate, the OP brought up both subjects/questions. You choose to discuss riding on the left (apples), others choose to discuss the alleged increased danger/risk to cyclists because of texting (oranges). What is the problem?
Nothing wrong with it, I simply made the apples and oranges reference because people quote my references to no overall change, and hop to cell phone rants. If they disagree with my contention that the overall risks haven't changed enough to justify riding on the left, I'm ready to do it. OTOH if they want to argue about dealing with texting while driving, I'm willing to discuss that (up to a point). But they're separate and distinct arguments.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 08:31 AM
  #42  
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times in 3,158 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
I guess I am. Read what I wrote. I'm not endorsing texting while driving, nor am I saying that texting isn't (probably) leading to an increase in accidents. What I am saying is that this newest form of distracted driving is just another in a long standing pattern, and not a sea change in road safety. Certainly not enough of a change to support the argument for switching sides and riding bikes on the left.

Like with all things, the media take the newest hot issue and focus plenty of attention on it, which has he effect of stirring up fears in disproportion to the problem. Distracted is a problem, it's just not a new problem.
As much as I rant about texting and driving... I fully agree with FB's response in that this is "Certainly not enough of a change to support the argument for switching sides and riding bikes on the left."
genec is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 08:38 AM
  #43  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Northern San Diego
Posts: 1,857

Bikes: mid 1980s De Rosa SL, 1985 Tommasini Super Prestige all Campy SR, 1992 Paramount PDG Series 7, 1997 Lemond Zurich, 1998 Trek Y-foil, 2006 Schwinn Super Sport GS, 2006 Specialized Hardrock Sport

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
Any references available for these "statistical facts"? And please no references to guesstimates, or hysterical blog rhetoric based on extrapolations from experimental studies.
Cellphone use causes over 1 in 4 car accidents

Distracted Driving | Motor Vehicle Safety | CDC Injury Center
D1andonlyDman is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 08:56 AM
  #44  
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times in 3,158 Posts
No no, that just won't work... there are those here that need to see the "smoking cell phone" in the motorist's hand while standing over the dying body of a hapless cyclist, before they will admit that hey, perhaps cell phones might possibly be a problem.
genec is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 08:58 AM
  #45  
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times in 3,158 Posts
I suspect this is a more accurate picture of the real environment out there on the road:

https://medium.com/@chris_urmson/the...2-8d5e2990101b

National crashes-per-miles-driven rates are currently calculated on police-reported crashes. Yet there are millions of fender benders every year that go unreported and uncounted — potentially as many as 55% of all crashes, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
genec is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 09:10 AM
  #46  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,545

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,432 Times in 1,345 Posts
Originally Posted by genec
No no, that just won't work... there are those here that need to see the "smoking cell phone" in the motorist's hand while standing over the dying body of a hapless cyclist, before they will admit that hey, perhaps cell phones might possibly be a problem.
I don't think there's any serious debate over whether cell phones (and other sources of distraction) are a problem. The debate there is about how to manage it.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 09:15 AM
  #47  
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times in 3,158 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
I don't think there's any serious debate over whether cell phones (and other sources of distraction) are a problem. The debate there is about how to manage it.



Look back in this thread and you will see deniers of whether cell phones are a problem for cyclists.
genec is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 09:25 AM
  #48  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,545

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Mentioned: 139 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5703 Post(s)
Liked 2,432 Times in 1,345 Posts
Originally Posted by genec


Look back in this thread and you will see deniers of whether cell phones are a problem for cyclists.
At your suggestion, I scrolled back and couldn't find any. The closest I came was myself, but only if you misread my posts.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 09:32 AM
  #49  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,951

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,517 Times in 1,031 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
Nothing wrong with it, I simply made the apples and oranges reference because people quote my references to no overall change, and hop to cell phone rants. If they disagree with my contention that the overall risks haven't changed enough to justify riding on the left, I'm ready to do it. OTOH if they want to argue about dealing with texting while driving, I'm willing to discuss that (up to a point). But they're separate and distinct arguments.
I agree with your contention that the overall risks haven't changed enough to justify riding on the left.

In addition, my contention is that there are few (if any) significant "statistical facts" or any other credible evidence that the alleged "increased risk" to cyclists from cell phone use justifies the hysterical ranting that appears almost daily on this topic on numerous threads on BF, as well as other sources of media blathering/pontificating.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 07-18-15, 10:03 AM
  #50  
Senior Member
 
asmac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,261

Bikes: Salsa Vaya

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 172 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
In addition, my contention is that there are few (if any) significant "statistical facts" or any other credible evidence that the alleged "increased risk" to cyclists from cell phone use justifies the hysterical ranting that appears almost daily on this topic on numerous threads on BF, as well as other sources of media blathering/pontificating.
Are "statistical facts" different from plain old non-statistical facts? As usual, you apparently can't see or deduce the obvious.
asmac is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.