Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.mobile.android > #35322 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeriahoran.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-10-15 06:04 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-10-15 20:43 +0000 |
| Articles | 8 on this page of 128 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android
Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeriahoran.net> - 2016-10-15 06:04 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeriahoran.net> - 2016-10-15 06:12 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 17:34 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeriahoran.net> - 2016-10-15 07:07 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 19:18 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-15 19:58 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 07:33 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-15 20:59 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 08:12 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States joe <none@domain.invalid> - 2016-10-15 06:46 -0500
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-15 20:43 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 08:02 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-10-16 00:56 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-15 20:43 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> - 2016-10-15 17:19 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-15 17:37 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-16 13:53 +1000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 04:37 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:34 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 20:03 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 07:51 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 21:49 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 09:08 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-17 02:16 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 14:13 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:00 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-16 16:37 +1000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 18:00 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> - 2016-10-16 11:55 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-16 12:11 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> - 2016-10-16 17:10 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-10-15 20:47 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 01:29 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-10-16 21:50 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 13:38 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 01:39 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Joe Friday <joe@justthefacts.mam> - 2016-10-15 22:22 -0500
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 04:37 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 16:57 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 15:03 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 08:22 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 00:54 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 14:26 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 04:37 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:11 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-16 16:44 +1000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 18:02 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 21:43 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-10-16 21:58 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-17 02:16 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 14:12 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 14:03 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-10-17 21:10 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-17 21:14 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2016-10-17 18:28 -0700
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-10-18 00:43 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2016-10-17 05:16 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2016-10-17 14:42 -0500
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Jack Johnson" <jhj34d@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 07:08 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2016-10-17 15:48 -0500
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 01:39 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 14:58 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 04:43 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:48 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> - 2016-10-16 00:49 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 06:21 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-16 07:25 +0100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "James Wilkinson Sword" <invalid@something.com> - 2016-10-16 16:00 +0100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Bod <bodron57@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-10-16 16:12 +0100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "James Wilkinson Sword" <invalid@something.com> - 2016-10-16 16:52 +0100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Vic Smith <thismailautodeleted@comcast.net> - 2016-10-16 10:37 -0500
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "James Wilkinson Sword" <invalid@something.com> - 2016-10-16 16:52 +0100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-16 16:46 +1000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> - 2016-10-16 10:59 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 21:44 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 17:52 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States FromTheRafters <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> - 2016-10-15 17:28 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 01:39 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-10-16 13:38 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 03:00 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-10-16 16:11 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 16:40 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-10-16 16:47 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 06:16 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-10-16 19:55 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 21:43 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 09:00 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> - 2016-10-15 11:50 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-15 12:01 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States John McGaw <Nobody@Nowh.ere> - 2016-10-15 14:30 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-15 15:08 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> - 2016-10-15 15:29 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-15 15:35 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> - 2016-10-15 16:13 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-15 16:24 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-15 20:59 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 08:09 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 01:14 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 14:39 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> - 2016-10-15 18:53 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 00:45 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> - 2016-10-15 21:16 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 01:29 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> - 2016-10-15 22:00 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 02:24 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 15:11 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 14:55 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-10-16 22:29 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States FromTheRafters <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> - 2016-10-16 23:42 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 13:38 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 03:00 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 16:52 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-16 14:15 +1000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 05:08 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States FromTheRafters <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> - 2016-10-16 02:23 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 20:03 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> - 2016-10-16 17:14 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States FromTheRafters <erratic@nomail.afraid.org> - 2016-10-16 21:04 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-17 02:16 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 00:46 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-16 00:26 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 05:14 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 11:18 -0700
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States "Quert Black" <098lp@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 06:50 +1100
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-15 15:55 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-10-15 21:01 -0400
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-16 01:14 +0000
Re: Does Australia have similar cellphone "related" accident rates as the United States Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> - 2016-10-15 20:43 +0000
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-16 00:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <161020160026298977%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #35357 |
In article <LICdnYCWcN_0Lp_FnZ2dnUU7-IPNnZ2d@giganews.com>, Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net> wrote: > > you *must* have proof. > > Agree which doesn't exist. that's the point. it's an *asusmption* that call records showing activity around the time of the *assumed* time of collision is a factor. it might be related, or it might not. nobody knows exactly what happened except those involved in the collision and they're not going to admit it's because of a phone or they're incapable of admitting anything, i.e., dead. > >> If you left the house in a rage, driving is not boring. My only point > >> is, had you not used the phone and got into (or continued) the argument > >> you'd have a different frame of mind. > > > > driving is very boring. people sometimes fall asleep while driving. > > Seriously, if you just had an argument with your wife would you fall > asleep from boredom? Yes, there are times you could, but that is not > one of them. that doesn't make driving any less boring. there's really not a lot to do, which is why shitty drivers manage to avoid crashing all the time. > >> Another false argument is talking on the phone is no different than > >> talking to a person in the car. It is. Also depends on the > >> conversation. To give a quick call "I'm on my way home" takes away less > >> brain power that to try and give technical instructions on how to > >> install a piece of equipment. > > > > it's not false at all. > > > > talking to someone sitting next to you is exactly the same as talking > > to someone through a phone. in both cases, your mind is focused on the > > conversation more than it is the traffic. > > No, its not and has been proven. actually, it hasn't been proven. > >> When talking to the person next to you it is easy to stop talking if > >> traffic suddenly needs your attention but not as easy on the phone. > >> Human nature of how we work. > > > > same with a phone call. > > > > simply say "can't talk" and toss the phone on the seat. > > That would be good, but it is not what happens. that's the fault of the driver. stupid drivers will always exist. autonomous vehicles can't happen fast enough. > >> Every situation of both traffic and call are > >> different. Most of us have seen distracted driving from phone use. > >> Like the driver in the left lane going 10 under the speed limit with > >> phone in hand. > > > > who is to say he woudn't have done that without a phone? > > > > stupid drivers have existed since long before there ever were > > cellphones. > > Actual experience. It is very rare under normal conditions, but more > often I see drivers on the phone not paying attention to tieir > surroundings. that's only because cellphones are visible, plus you can't tell if they're using a speakerphone. people do all sorts of things while driving, such as: > > what about the person driving with an unfolded paper map, or reading > > the newspaper, or eating breakfast and drinking coffee? i see people eating/drinking food very frequently. > > they even made pads of paper to stick on the windshield so you could > > *take notes* while driving. > > > They exist too, but less than the phone idiots. In the past month, from > personal experience, I saw three on the phone, one reading what may have > been a map. None are acceptable. that's the point. none are acceptable, but people only focus on phones being a factor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-16 05:14 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <e6fa12FmorjU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #35330 |
PeteCresswell <x@y.Invalid> wrote > Algeria Horan wrote >> The AMTA indicates that a tenth of 1 percent of >> Australian crashes are "related" to illegal cellphone use: > I have always wondered how the people who gather statistics > determine whether a driver in a crash was using a cell phone. Its not that hard with voice calls, bit harder with SMS, particularly if they are preparing the first one and haven't sent it yet. > It would seem that only a vanishingly-small percentage of drivers would > own up to cell phone use when being interviewed for an accident report. Sure, but that isnt the only way to know that. > That would seem to leave the police finding the cell phone, determining > it's ID or phone number, looking up use in the phone company's database, > and correlating time of calls with the moment of the accident.... Yes and that isnt that hard to do. And to do it the other way in this country. The authoritys do know what phone SIMs you have unless you go out of your way to get an anonymous one which is rather harder to do in this country. > all of which also seem to be of vanishingly-small probability. Fraid not. > Am I missing something? Yep.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-15 11:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nttrsq$nl1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #35330 |
On 10/15/2016 08:50 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote: > Per Algeria Horan: >>The AMTA indicates that a tenth of 1 percent of Australian crashes are >>"related" to illegal cellphone use: > > I have always wondered how the people who gather statistics determine > whether a driver in a crash was using a cell phone. > > It would seem that only a vanishingly-small percentage of drivers would > own up to cell phone use when being interviewed for an accident report. > > That would seem to leave the police finding the cell phone, determining > it's ID or phone number, looking up use in the phone company's database, > and correlating time of calls with the moment of the accident.... all of > which also seem to be of vanishingly-small probability. > > Am I missing something? The record on the phone itself? Mine gives the date, but not the time. Is that generic or just me? -- Cheers, Bev Always carry a length of fiber-optic cable in your pocket. Should you be shipwrecked and find yourself stranded on a desert island, bury the cable in the sand. A few hours later, a guy driving a backhoe will be along to dig it up. Ask him to rescue you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Quert Black" <098lp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-16 06:50 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <e6ffjlFo3ndU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #35333 |
"The Real Bev" <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote in message news:nttrsq$nl1$1@dont-email.me... > On 10/15/2016 08:50 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote: >> Per Algeria Horan: >>>The AMTA indicates that a tenth of 1 percent of Australian crashes are >>>"related" to illegal cellphone use: >> >> I have always wondered how the people who gather statistics determine >> whether a driver in a crash was using a cell phone. >> >> It would seem that only a vanishingly-small percentage of drivers would >> own up to cell phone use when being interviewed for an accident report. >> >> That would seem to leave the police finding the cell phone, determining >> it's ID or phone number, looking up use in the phone company's database, >> and correlating time of calls with the moment of the accident.... all of >> which also seem to be of vanishingly-small probability. >> >> Am I missing something? > > The record on the phone itself? Mine gives the date, but not the time. Is > that generic No, iphones have both the time and date of calls and texts. > or just me? Obviously others that use your model phone get the same result.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-15 15:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <151020161555138502%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #35333 |
In article <nttrsq$nl1$1@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote: > > The record on the phone itself? Mine gives the date, but not the time. > Is that generic or just me? you have a shitty phone. i haven't seen a phone that doesn't give the call time *and* duration in a really, really long time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-15 21:01 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <hu38lwo72aw9$.p0qbdbdguo5s.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #35333 |
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 11:18:20 -0700, The Real Bev wrote: > The record on the phone itself? Mine gives the date, but not the time. > Is that generic or just me? "Call details" give date, time, duration, whether incoming or outgoing, &c. (Android 2.3.5 as embodied in antique Moto Droid X2.) Not clear whether "time" shows time call began or time call ended; nor what TZ is in use. HTH. Cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-16 01:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ntuka0$f8p$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #35362 |
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 21:01:44 -0400, tlvp wrote: >> The record on the phone itself? Mine gives the date, but not the time. >> Is that generic or just me? > > "Call details" give date, time, duration, whether incoming or outgoing, &c. > (Android 2.3.5 as embodied in antique Moto Droid X2.) Not clear whether > "time" shows time call began or time call ended; nor what TZ is in use. The real bull elephant in the room is the fact that the accident rates are entirely unaffected in both Australia and in the United States by the use of cellphones (we can presume NHTSA numbers of 5% for handheld and 2% for texting) while driving. The female elephant in the room is the fact that cellphones are likely to be at least as common in cars as drivers with eye-correction (glasses or contacts). That is to say, they're nearly ubiquitous, so, of course they're gonna be found "in use" during an accident in a huge number of situations. For example, about 75% of American adults apparently wear eye correction (either near or far sighted or both): http://glassescrafter.com/information/percentage-population-wears-glasses.html Therefore, we'd expect about 75% of all accidents to "involve" a driver who needs corrective devices. Notice how horrible a statistic I can make news out of if I want to? I could get a Salem-Witch-Trial McCarthyism-Red-Scare style news story out the door simply by fomenting the concept that people needing corrective devices "cause" 75% of all the accidents! My point is that it's entirely the wrong approach to simply see if the cellphone was being _used_ at the time of the accident, just as it would be the wrong approach to see if corrective lenses were being used at the time of the accident.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Algeria Horan <algeriahoran@algeria.horan.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-15 20:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ntu4dh$1pd0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #35330 |
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 11:50:25 -0400, (PeteCresswell) wrote: > I have always wondered how the people who gather statistics determine > whether a driver in a crash was using a cell phone. You're approaching the problem the hard way. The facts don't make the news because the facts aren't scary. With cellphone use almost ubiquitous in both Australia and in the USA, nearly 100% of all crashes "involve" cellphones - just like nearly 100% of all crashes involved people wearing socks. > It would seem that only a vanishingly-small percentage of drivers would > own up to cell phone use when being interviewed for an accident report. They do it anonymously, as reported in the papers I already cited, but even so, you're approaching the problem in the wrong direction. It's like you're trying to prove the existence of the Loch Ness Monster by finding people who took pictures of the Loch Ness Monster, which you must concede is an unreliable approach by all accounts. > That would seem to leave the police finding the cell phone, determining > it's ID or phone number, looking up use in the phone company's database, > and correlating time of calls with the moment of the accident.... all of > which also seem to be of vanishingly-small probability. > > Am I missing something? You're missing the accidents. Where are the accidents? They don't exist. The record in both Australia and in the United States shows that extremely clearly! These are facts which Rod Speed intimates that mysteriously clever aliens must have manipulated so as to EXACTLY cancel out the astoundingly huge increase in accidents he fabricated in his own mind must have occurred: http://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2011/compendia/statab/131ed/tables/12s1109.xls https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/# If you're asking _why_ the accident rate, in the real world, isn't affected one bit by the explosion of cellphones, it's NOT because people aren't using them. People are using cellphones, for millions and millions of miles driven! https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812326 "the _use_ of cellphones is consistently at about 2% for texting and at abuot 5% for handheld use while driving (with visible-headset use roughly around half of a percent)" The most obvious reason why cellphone use isn't causing accidents is so simple, most people don't want to believe it. The reason is simply that the additional distraction of cellphone use is simply added to an already long list of (far more important) distractions, as the NHTSA says so themselves: https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812260 .. So what we have is the cellphone is no more distracting than talking to a passenger: Examining the Impact of Cell Phone Conversations on Driving Using Meta-Analytic Techniques http://hfs.sagepub.com/content/48/1/196.abstrac I realize all this doesn't make the news, simply because none of what I'm telling you is the slightest bit scary. And not scary doesn't make news. But you have to read more than the "scary" news to understand boring facts.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android
csiph-web