Lot's of things are fine and work. I appreciate the people who have the brains and motivation to make them work finer and betterer.
-Mike
-Mike
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
It is pretty much impossible to do 2 things at once, your brain just flicks between the two, it doesn't give half to one thing and half the other.
In this topic.. Natural Selection takes out the innocent not necessarily the stupid one using the phone.If it weren't for the danger to other drivers I'd say just allow natural selection to take its course.
^^^^ THIS +100000000000.Totally agree. I've been rear ended while stopped by a cell user going 35 mph who didn't even hit the brakes, and had many near misses where people who thought they were just fine to use their phone almost hit me. Several of these times my son was in the car with me. Nothing makes me angrier than these occasions. If he ever got hurt by one of these irresponsible sociopaths, I'd be very tempted to inflict serious bodily harm.
Thats not entirely accurate. Plenty of people are capable of multitasking.
And if there was a collision, even though I wasn't using my phone, it's automatically my fault because I'm the Professional Driver - per the US DOT.
Some days it's all I can do to NOT put some texter in the ditch. 10-4?
I love the dashcam... Everyone should have one with a 911 stream in cases where idiocy, drunk divers and crashes need to be reported immediately.I feel sorry for drivers like that.
(non-phone related)
Earlier this year a car crashed into a lorry and the very initial reports were putting the lorry driver at fault. Until he brought out his dashboard-camera footage:
LORRY CRASH A90 ABERDEEN LIVE ON BOARD TRUCK CAM - YouTube
Scarey stuff!
It is interesting that government officials would recommend something like this even while traffic accident rates (per capita) have remained flat for 15 years, indicating that the roads are no more dangerous now than they were in 1996, before most people had cell phones.
What's your source for that info?
It is interesting that government officials would recommend something like this even while traffic accident rates (per capita) have remained flat for 15 years, indicating that the roads are no more dangerous now than they were in 1996, before most people had cell phones.
YEEEES! Touche'! Well done, Sir!So, it stands to reason that without cell phone accidents the stats would have actually improved instead of stayed flat.
So, it stands to reason that without cell phone accidents the stats would have actually improved instead of stayed flat.
So, it stands to reason that without cell phone accidents the stats would have actually improved instead of stayed flat.
Actually in terms of fatalities per mile driven, they have dropped significantly.
There was a WSJ article posted in one of the first 4 pages that discussed this. Funny, because everyone in favor of banning cell phones seemed to ignore the article![]()
No. By staying flat it seems to hint that cell phone distractions merely replaced other distractions (fiddling with a CD player, talking to a passenger, trying to settle down screaming kids in the back, billboards, etc...).