CenturionIM

Sorry, but that just sound so much like dont blame the ***, blame the shooter.

FBinNY 

Yes, it's a similar concept. I believe (my opinion, your free to express yours) that we've gotten into pattern of blaming things, be they weapons, cars, cell phones, demon rum, etc. for the ills of society. That's a distraction from trying to find out why people do stuff and how to change it.

Cell phones are a perfect example. now being blamed for a large percentage of accidents. But the numbers simply don't support that conclusion, since the fatality rate in car accidents is flat to down over the last decade. Some of that can be attributed to better passenger protection systems, but not enough to offset large numbers of accidents from a cause that didn't exist in the past.

I'm aware that there are many who can't walk and chew gum, but a large number of drivers are able to either not use the cell phone at all while driving, or use it in a way that the distraction factor isn't unreasonable. I even know people capable or riding a bike while using a cell phone.

So, instead of blaming things, maybe we can have a dialog on personal responsibility. The insurance companies can exercise some leadership by writing policies that would deny the collision/comp part of the protection if the driver/owner was using a cell phone at the time of the crash. Or tone it down a bit, and simply stop selling low or no deductible collision/comp policies covering moving accidents altogether. Knowing they were going to ear the first few thousand $$$$ in auto repairs might have people be a bit more careful out there. (then again, it might not).

enigmaT120

There are, but I don't know why they leave the scene. If you're sober you most likely won't get a ticket.

howsteepisit

Hit and runs are happen for many reasons, such as driving on a suspended license, fear of ruin in a lawsuit, lack of insurance, previous warrants, general stupidity, so on and on.

Chris516

DWI. or DUI

genec

I agree with your dialog on personal responsibility... the bottom line in any collision is the vehicle operator... blaming a cell phone or alcohol or the sun or any other thing is just like calling collisions "accidents."

Collisions are rarely accidents, they are more often due to the lack of personal responsibility of the vehicle operator... simply not paying attention or choosing to do an errant act like speed or ignore the red.

But let's touch on the cell phone stats for just a moment... you yourself cited the lack of increased deaths as an indicator... the problem with that is that not all collisions result in death, and since the advent of the airbag, (and more and more cars now on the road have them) far more collisions can be walked away from. As to whether cell phones are contributing to collisions... or as to whether the decision to be distracted by using a cell phone contributes to collisions... to the best of my knowledge, no agency is actively collecting cell phone data, post collision... (usually requires a warrant) maybe when a death occurs, but not otherwise... so we really don't know how often a person decides to glance at a text or dial a phone, and then becomes involved in a collision.

What we do know, is that in some areas, the rate of bicycle deaths and pedestrian deaths has not gone down the way motorist deaths have declined... and hit and run incidents have marginally increased.

Bottom line... motorists seem to be doing well, but those around motorists... not so good.

I-Like-To-Bike

How do "we" know that in some areas, the rate of bicycle deaths and pedestrian deaths has not gone down the way motorist deaths have declined? Or that any alleged difference in change/decline of so-called "death rates" is attributable to cell phones?

How are these so-called "rate of of deaths" calculated; any relationship to the various population of motorist, bicyclist and pedestrian populations' exposure to traffic hazards? Do "we know" of any evidence that the so-called "death rate" for bicyclists or pedestrians has been effected in any significant way by the introduction of cell phones?

Robert C

I realize it is an old study (1997); but the New England Journal of Medicine determined that, based on accident statistics, there is no significant difference in the level of impairment between hands free and other devices. This studies has been supported by similar work at MIT and the University of Utah. The University of Utah work was also referenced by the APA.

In the New England Journal of medicine the following points are raised:

genec

Well we only "know" the rates of death that are reported or recorded by authorities to national agencies... we don't know the numbers of non-death related collisions.

Overall there had been declines in both pedestrian and cyclist deaths until recently... Meanwhile there is still a decline in motor vehicle operator deaths.

Pedestrian & Bicycle Information Center

This is but one source... feel free to use google to see other sources... the NHTSA is another good source... but bear in mind that all these sources count DEATHS... not collisions. And very little data is directly attributable to the use of cell phones as often a warrant is required to determine cell phone use.

But feel free to google cell phone use and distraction and please note the number of studies that have determined that cell phone use while driving can be dangerous.

genec

Fatal hit-and-run crashes on rise in U.S.

FBinNY 

This has little to do with accident causality, except possibly DUI, and more to do with the mix of legal, insured drivers, and illegal and/or uninsured drivers, and/or a general moral decline in American society.

All this proves is that more people feel the need (or choice) to try to escape responsibility for one reason or another. It's an important trend to study, but doesn't link to cell phone use or distracted driving as an issue.

hotbike

update:
Man arrested in Rickenbacker Causeway crash that killed bicyclist | News - Home

I-Like-To-Bike

Perhaps you can clarify how the rise in fatal hit and run crashes is evidence supporting your hyperbolic ranting about cell phone use.

As I suspected, this citation as well the URLs you cited in previous posts are all about total numbers of fatalities and do not provide any indication of actual risk or so-called "death rate", given that the totals are associated with the size of the population, i.e. what is the size of the various populations (bicyclists, motorists, pedestrians) and is it variable. And the totals provide zero information about increased risk to bicyclists from cell phone use. Using your same method of deduction, presumably a low number of total fatalities for golf cart riders or roller skaters is evidence of a low "death rate" as well as a lack of danger from cell phone use.

Another factor affecting risk is how much exposure (time) are cyclists exposed to hazard? Is it increasing for cyclists? Are they riding in the same type of environments as previously (more riding in traffic vice in the park)?

Your cited figures provide little hint if traffic risk has risen or fallen or remained the same for cyclists, and even less information to support the hysterical rants on A&S about the rising and horrific danger to cyclists from cell phones use.

IMO, your so-called "death rates" and the cited URLs do not support your or other posters' hysterical/hyperbolic ranting about any cell phone use that is little better than Danger! Danger! Danger! Cell Phone in Use, Woe is Me!

genec

The very numbers you require are simply NOT COLLECTED by any agency... the link I provided Pedestrian & Bicycle Information Center has derived their data and made their statements based on summations of NHTSA data. Further the site clearly acknowledges that the data is misleading as there is no reliable source.

The same is also true for cell phone associated deaths... as there is no dedicated resource collecting data on whether cell phone use is related to a death or collision... such data often requires a warrant, which isn't usually pursued. Yet there have been numerous studies pointing to cell phone related distraction... which while some here seem to deny, has been acknowledged by national agencies. They have also created a web site devoted to the issue of distracted driving... Distracted Driving | National Highway Traffic Safety Administration | Texting and Driving

But until cell phone use data is routinely collected, post crash, there will never be accurate statistics on information about increased risk to bicyclists from cell phone use.

And regardless of various studies, some here still refuse to acknowledge any link between cell phone use and automotive related deaths... much in the same way the tobacco companies refused to acknowledge any relationship between their product and lung cancer related deaths. The head in the sand technique is strong in some, here.

https://www.nsc.org/learn/NSC-Initiat...rash-data.aspx

genec

CONCLUSION
We found an increasing trend in the rate of fatalities
for pedestrian and bicycle rider victims of distracted
driving crashes. Some characteristics of the victim and
crash scene may provide useful insights into further
research and policy efforts. The data from this study
can be used by advocates of policies to reduce distracted
driving or improve the safety of the built environment
for pedestrians and bicyclists.

https://www.publichealthreports.org/i...articleID=3020

Yet again another report based on the scant data available... But I have yet to see a single report that states that there is no increase of distraction related deaths to cyclists and peds by any reputable national agency.

I-Like-To-Bike

The real conclusion and bottom line, there is no credible data supporting the hysterical (IMO) ranting about significantly increased danger to bicyclists from cell phone use. Only fear and supposition.

Also no one claims that cell phones use may not distract a driver if used carelessly. Just like eating, smoking, talking or otherwise interacting with passengers. It happens.

Where are rants similar (in tone and logic) to ban passengers, especially distracting children and romantic partners, entertainment devices or anything else identified as possibly distracting to motorists,all in order to save bicyclists from a feared dangerous menace? Can A&S expect similar ranting about informational road signs and billboards that may distract motorists? Perhaps scenic vistas should be walled off from view from the road in order to prevent any possible distraction? And what about all those distracting lovelies strolling along side of the road?

The objection here is to the hysterical nature of the unfounded ranting about an alleged significant increased danger to cyclists from cell phone use, as if the cycling environment has drastically changed about the ranters, and drastic measures are called for to save these fearful cyclists from an alleged plague of death and destruction.

Yes there are lots of laboratory experiments suggesting the researchers' desired conclusions, but little field evidence that the studies' conclusions about potential distraction are supported by real world conditions or results.

howsteepisit

To clarify the definition of distracted driving, I fell asleep at the wheel and wrecked a car in Idaho in 2012, only accident I ever had. I was ticketed for and found guilty of distracted driving for falling asleep.

FBinNY 

That's pretty distracted. Were you dreaming about cell phones?

I-Like-To-Bike

Perhaps a ban on driving while tired, or at night, or without evidence of the driver having a good night's sleep before driving is called for. Or restrictions on anyone driving without maintaining a log book (perhaps maintained automatically by Google, et al.) of driving hours as required by DOT for commercial long distance truckers. Yeah that's the ticket to reduce driving distracted by sleepiness, an automatic engine shutdown for at least 8 hours when the daily limit is exceeded. Think of all the innocent cyclists that might be saved!

howsteepisit

I am pretty much old school, have little actual use for cell phones. But last thing I recall was singing John Denver songs to stay awake...Didn't work. Bad scene. Sadly, life biggest lessons are often costly.

I-Like-To-Bike

That would be a nightmare that would keep at least some A&S posters wide awake!

I-Like-To-Bike

Ah, your choice in music was the culprit, sleep inducing music distracting you from staying awake. All entertainment devices should be prohibited from playing John Denver and other sleep inducing distraction while driving.

Next time listen to the Rolling Stones or some 60's R&B.

howsteepisit

I'll keep that in mind, but next time I will get enough sleep and stop when sleepy.

Coal Buster

That's the way Idaho defines it. In my state, falling asleep at the wheel is illegal and is defined as "falling asleep while driving." The idea being that as a driver you are responsible for knowing when you're too tired to drive.

howsteepisit

My point was made in the context of the latter part of this thread that distracted driving has taken a very wide ranging definition far beyond simply cell phones and personal electronic devices.