Advocacy & Safety - Crash toll shows iPod fans riding for a fall

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1887112005



New figures from America, where the iPod boom was born, suggest eight out of 10 crashes involve driver distraction due to hi-tech gadgets.

...

The researchers found that 80% of the crashes and 65% of the near crashes were a result of driver distraction.

The majority of the incidents involved the use of hi-tech devices, primarily hand-held mobile phones, but also personal digital assistants and digital music players.


I kind of laughed. Makes me glad that I ditched headphones when riding years and years ago...

So now they are grouping ipods in with cell phones?

Sounds like a slight spin.

Of driver distraction:
Cell Phone: 50%
Children: 30%
Outside Happenings (i.e. hot girl, loose dog, funny billboard): 10%
Radio: 4%
mp3 Player: 4%
Other: 2%
(Remember, 62% of all statistics are made up on the spot).

If you group iPods in with Cell Phones, now you have "54%" hi tech gadgets. Hardly fair for iPod's to be grouped in like that.

So now they are grouping ipods in with cell phones?

Sounds like a slight spin.

Of driver distraction:
Cell Phone: 50%
Children: 30%
Outside Happenings (i.e. hot girl, loose dog, funny billboard): 10%
Radio: 4%
mp3 Player: 4%
Other: 2%
(Remember, 62% of all statistics are made up on the spot).

If you group iPods in with Cell Phones, now you have "54%" hi tech gadgets. Hardly fair for iPod's to be grouped in like that.

You lie about 90% of the time. I made that up too.

70% of all statiscs are made up. 65% of the population knows that one.

70% of all statiscs are made up. 65% of the population knows that one.
That's 80% right.

75% of people don't understand percentages.

Which means that 3/4s of you haven't understood what I've just written

There are only 10 types of people in this world..

Those who understand binary... and those who don't.

I'm right 99.99% of the time (I am human after all) :)

There are 3 kinds of lies:

1. Lies.

2. Damn lies.

3. Statistics.

HereNt, since you are able to find such an obscure article that skews stats to attack Ipods, I am sure you can find and post the California law that prohibits headphones. I do not believe it exist. Every person who I have challenged to find the law has gone quite. All the claims of such a law have referenced:

CA law on Wearing of Headsets or Earplugs
27400. A person operating a motor vehicle or bicycle may not wear a headset covering, or earplugs in, both ears. This prohibition does not apply to any of the following:
1. (a) A person operating authorized emergency vehicles, as defined in Section 165.
(b) A person engaged in the operation of either special construction equipment or equipment for use in the maintenance of any highway.
(c) A person engaged in the operation of refuse collection equipment who is wearing a safety headset or safety earplugs.
(d) A person wearing personal hearing protectors in the form of earplugs or molds that are specifically designed to attenuate injurious noise levels. The plugs or molds shall be designed in a manner so as to not inhibit the wearer's ability to hear a siren or horn from an emergency vehicle or a horn from another motor vehicle.

The headset coverings and earplugs this law talks about are hearing protection devices and not music or cell headphones. The headsets are those Mickey mouse ear protection style coverings.

Odd, the example the article chooses in an attempt to show how dangerous Ipod headphones are, deals with a new driver who turns around to the passenger in the back seat. The driver was not even listening to the Ipod. How does this incident or any of the data on motor vehicle drivers correlate to cyclist that just listen to music and do not mess with their playlist while riding?

Seems their example shows it is dangerous to drive while not looking where you are driving, rather than the articles claim that cycling with headphones is dangerous.

Cell phones are a different situation where the driver engages in active conversation.

Granted my post may be a little “all over the map”, but then again, the article was completely “all over the map”.

HereNt, since you are able to find such an obscure article that skews stats to attack Ipods, I am sure you can find and post the California law that prohibits headphones. I do not believe it exist. Every person who I have challenged to find the law has gone quite. All the claims of such a law have referenced:

CA law on Wearing of Headsets or Earplugs
27400. A person operating a motor vehicle or bicycle may not wear a headset covering, or earplugs in, both ears. This prohibition does not apply to any of the following:
1. (a) A person operating authorized emergency vehicles, as defined in Section 165.
(b) A person engaged in the operation of either special construction equipment or equipment for use in the maintenance of any highway.
(c) A person engaged in the operation of refuse collection equipment who is wearing a safety headset or safety earplugs.
(d) A person wearing personal hearing protectors in the form of earplugs or molds that are specifically designed to attenuate injurious noise levels. The plugs or molds shall be designed in a manner so as to not inhibit the wearer's ability to hear a siren or horn from an emergency vehicle or a horn from another motor vehicle.

The headset coverings and earplugs this law talks about are hearing protection devices and not music or cell headphones. The headsets are those Mickey mouse ear protection style coverings.

Odd, the example the article chooses in an attempt to show how dangerous Ipod headphones are, deals with a new driver who turns around to the passenger in the back seat. The driver was not even listening to the Ipod. How does this incident or any of the data on motor vehicle drivers correlate to cyclist that just listen to music and do not mess with their playlist while riding?

Seems their example shows it is dangerous to drive while not looking where you are driving, rather than the articles claim that cycling with headphones is dangerous.

Cell phones are a different situation where the driver engages in active conversation.

Granted my post may be a little “all over the map”, but then again, the article was completely “all over the map”.

You interpretation of the law is skewed. It says headsets, which include stereo head sets. The exemption has to do with heavy equipment and emergency vehicles that can cause ear damage. No where does it exempt stereo headsets. It is still illegal to wear music headsets.

they can blame gadgets all they want...

But we all know that before gadgets these same drivers/riders was crashing from distractions anyways!!!!!


Just like everything else people need to point a finger at some thing. They need to only point a finger at idiot drivers and riders! Thank you .

I kind of laughed. Makes me glad that I ditched headphones when riding years and years ago...

Yes, driving while talking on the phone is just like listening to an ipod while riding.......uh-huh.....

100% of vehicle accidents are attributable to a loose nut behind the wheel.

Yes, driving while talking on the phone is just like listening to an ipod while riding.......uh-huh.....

Eye roll... totally agree with you. I'm so not giving up the ipod. Or the phone for that matter.

PEBSWADS

Problem Exists Between Steering Wheel And Driver's Seat

100% of vehicle accidents are attributable to a loose nut behind the wheel.

Death is responsible for 100% of all fatalities.

and marriage is the leading cause of divorce...........

I'm right 99.99% of the time (I am human after all) :)

your slipping, thought you were better than that

and marriage is the leading cause of divorce...........

Plane crashes into cemetary, hundreds of bodies found!
Studies show poor people make less money!

You interpretation of the law is skewed. It says headsets, which include stereo head sets. The exemption has to do with heavy equipment and emergency vehicles that can cause ear damage. No where does it exempt stereo headsets. It is still illegal to wear music headsets.
"headset covering" is the term used in the law and that term is not the same as the mini-headphones/earphones that fit into the ear (most state laws define these devices as “earphones attached to radio, tape player, or other similar device that provides the listener with radio programs, music, or other recorded information”). If the term "headset covering" was intended for use as "stereo headsets" or “earphones” then its has been mis-applied. The wording of the law is either outdated or not intended to apply to this type of earphones. Note that the law was updated last year. Why would the term earphones not have been inserted at that time, since the law was being updated anyway.

Of course it would not surprise me if CA law enforcement chose to mis-apply this law to include earphones. But it is improper unless the law is updated .

Read the Florida law if you want to see a law intended to outlaw headphones for bicyclist.

If you can show me a definition in the CA vehicle code that includes earphones under the term "headset covering", then I will concede to your wisdom. But, please excuse me if I don't hold my breath.

I always thought those things were sucking ppl's brains out....

75% of people don't understand percentages.

Which means that 3/4s of you haven't understood what I've just written

Whaddayamean, 3/4s of me? There aren't that many of me. :)

--J

Whaddayamean, 3/4s of me? There aren't that many of me. :)

--J
Just under half of you... but then again 2/3 of people don't understand fractions

HereNt, since you are able to find such an obscure article that skews stats to attack Ipods, I am sure you can find and post the California law that prohibits headphones.

Um, actually, I just signed up for google alerts 'bicycle bike' and get news stories delivered that way. I'm not sure why you are talking about CA law, since you're in HI and I'm in MN...

At any rate, I just found it funny. I don't think I'm ever going to go back to the loss of my senses that riding with headphones creates...

too....many.....PERCENTAGES! :eek: :crash: :fight: :crash:

Florida and California have already made it illegal to use any sort of headset or listening device while operating a motor vehicle or bicycle.
Are they really saying that you can't legally listen to the radio built into your car in FL and CA?

Um, actually, I just signed up for google alerts 'bicycle bike' and get news stories delivered that way. I'm not sure why you are talking about CA law, since you're in HI and I'm in MN...

At any rate, I just found it funny. I don't think I'm ever going to go back to the loss of my senses that riding with headphones creates...
Because the article referenced it and the Florida law. And the article is from Scotland.

I respect your choice. :)

Without a valid scientific study providing the danger of mp3 players and cycling, everyone should respect my choice. Using a mirror has help me avoid accidents while cycling, using an Ipod has neither helped or hurt my cycling safety. Yet the article and other seem to try and build support for spreading earphone/headphone - music player prohibition laws. :(

If the article is correct in its information that
“New figures from America, where the iPod boom was born, suggest eight out of 10 crashes involve driver distraction due to hi-tech gadgets.”
is correct, then accident rates would have gone up 400% since the introduction of hi-tech gadgets. Accident rates have gone up somewhat, but not even close to 400%.
Note that you choose to include that quote in your OP. :rolleyes:

I suspect that cell phones are the big culprit. It isn't the sound so much as the mental distraction. So in that case you should ban radios, CD players, raucous kids, anything in the automobile that might distract the driver.

Good luck.

I am going to continue cycling with my iPod.

Are they really saying that you can't legally listen to the radio built into your car in FL and CA?
FL specifically targets earphone/headphone, or other listening devices and leaves car stereos alone. Other states also have earphone/headphone device laws for motor vehicle drivers but leave cyclist alone.

too....many.....PERCENTAGES! :eek: :crash: :fight: :crash:

I know right, this thread has 65% more percentages than necessary.

I know right, this thread has 65% more percentages than necessary.
And you just pushed it to 68%

I plan on riding in the dark, without a light, on the sidewalk, no water, helmet free, jammin to mp3's, sippin beer out of a tap attached to a keg in the bob trailer, with my girlfriend riding on the handlebars naked. Take that pc police!

I plan on riding in the dark, without a light, on the sidewalk, no water, helmet free, jammin to mp3's, sippin beer out of a tap attached to a keg in the bob trailer, with my girlfriend riding on the handlebars naked. Take that pc police!


Girlfriend naked....... in the dark.....with no lights .......


???? I hope you know how to ride with no hands.... Otherwise that naked girl won't do you any good! :lol:

Headphones being less safe when riding a bicycle isn't something that started with MP3 players. Even though people may ride frequently with headphones doesn't mean that it is safe. You are limiting one of your senses, and it is the second most important sense for riding a bicycle safely, next to sight. Sight is limited to field of vision, and mirrors have a limited field of view also. Hearing takes in a much greater area around you.

On paths the things are even less safe because it is harder to hear other bicycles.

I plan on riding in the dark, without a light, on the sidewalk, no water, helmet free, jammin to mp3's, sippin beer out of a tap attached to a keg in the bob trailer, with my girlfriend riding on the handlebars naked. Take that pc police!

Please post pictures.

Please post pictures.

http://www.theslinglady.com/images/Flax-Black-swatch.jpg

You are limiting one of your senses, and it is the second most important sense for riding a bicycle safely, next to sight. Sight is limited to field of vision, and mirrors have a limited field of view also. Hearing takes in a much greater area around you.

alloy addict

not everybody agrees with you.
check this article. It is the only one I have seen that addresses this question.

http://www.headwize.com/articles/jallen1_art.htm

Byootifull ride in this morning through South Central LA, sunny 70 degrees, rocking out to the new Bob Mould the whole way in. And it's already Tuesday! Hooray for Labor Day and light MP3 players!

alloy addict

not everybody agrees with you.
check this article. It is the only one I have seen that addresses this question.

http://www.headwize.com/articles/jallen1_art.htm


Great article!!


and P.S.

Slvoid, please use a flash next time you take a pic in the dark!! :lol:

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1887112005

I kind of laughed. Makes me glad that I ditched headphones when riding years and years ago...

like trying to check you're cycle computer in the dark by the passing street lights :)
anyways y'all can tell me how wrong I was at the funural
Har Har Har!

As a partially deaf cyclist, there is no way I'd limit what's left of my hearing (about 60-70% in one ear; the other one doesn't work at all). Not sure what you hearing capable types should do. Oops, I dropped more percentages in this thread, sorry all.

http://www.theslinglady.com/images/Flax-Black-swatch.jpg



:roflmao: :roflmao:

slvoid....you have out done yourself ! If there is ever a contest for the best clever reply to a stupid comment, I nominate this response as the hands down winner. You have raised the bar for all of us !!

Good job.

like trying to check you're cycle computer in the dark by the passing street lights :)
anyways y'all can tell me how wrong I was at the funural
Har Har Har!

Yeah, I never check to see if I am a bike computer in the dark by passing street lights :P

(sorry, your vs you're [you are] - couldn't resist)

alloy addict

not everybody agrees with you.
check this article. It is the only one I have seen that addresses this question.

http://www.headwize.com/articles/jallen1_art.htm

Considering the source of the article, I see it as being more biased than most arguments. I really don't care what other people do, but I will not limit my needed senses.

Besides, riding is entertainment enough.

:eek: 40% of sick days are taken on Mondays and Fridays! :eek:

(and I still think headphones are a bad idea -- I don't care if my man Lance uses them while riding)

/sigh

why does this s**t have to start up about every month?

...look....if you use headphones while operating a "vehicle" (most states consider a bike one), it's a very good idea to follow the vehicle code.

Thing is, when a crash happens, you are going to be the one most likely to get faulted...so you should be doing as much as possible to avoid fault. Since headphones while operating vehicles is prohibited in many states, it's best to either get a handle-bar mounted radio, one of those SI-5 backpacks with built-in speakers, or leave the tunes off until you get where you want to go.

Headphones being less safe when riding a bicycle isn't something that started with MP3 players. Even though people may ride frequently with headphones doesn't mean that it is safe. You are limiting one of your senses, and it is the second most important sense for riding a bicycle safely, next to sight. Sight is limited to field of vision, and mirrors have a limited field of view also. Hearing takes in a much greater area around you.

On paths the things are even less safe because it is harder to hear other bicycles.

Hearing is not the second most important when riding your bike. Sense of balance is first, sight is second, I would argue that common sense is third, hearing maybe fourth.

Eye roll... totally agree with you. I'm so not giving up the ipod.

I just use one earphone (right ear, of course)...I can still hear vehicles....

Oh god, all these percentage jokes are cracking me up! *sarcastic stare*