On Cell Phone Forums
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31
  1. #21
    Harry K
    Guest

    Re: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks


    Daniel J. Stern wrote:
    > On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, Arif Khokar wrote:
    >
    > > The problem stems from Google Groups beta's interface.

    >
    > Naw, I don't buy it. It's the driver's job to know how to use all the
    > controls and read all the displays.


    Yeah, that is the problem and I have been trying to break myself of the
    habit of using the 'quick reply' thingy. Why it is even there I can't
    imagine. I am doing better, I usually catch myself now before sending
    and redo it.

    Harry K




    See More: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks




  2. #22
    The Blue
    Guest

    Re: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks



    Daniel J. Stern wrote:

    >On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, The Blue wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >>>>Old people are much more of a danger than cell phones.
    >>>>
    >>>>

    >
    >
    >
    >>> <>Cite?

    >>

    This is from the study in question I have other sources I assumed this
    was common knowledge that senior are a hazard on the road. Strayer said
    they found that when 18- to-25-year-olds were placed in a driving
    simulator and talked on a cellular phone, they reacted to brake lights
    from a car in front of them as slowly as 65- to 74-year-olds who<> were
    not using a cell phone.

    http://www.e-z.net/~ts/reaction.htm
    http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/olderdrivers.html
    http://www.usroads.com/journals/rej/9708/re970804.htm
    Sharing is caring Screw the RIAA





  3. #23
    (Pete Cresswell)
    Guest

    Re: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks

    Per phone-jockey:
    >Just today I observed three vehicles swerving from lanes
    >and all three drivers were using cell phones. It's getting
    >ridiculous out there!


    Some weeks ago, my dentist said that some guy almost got him - who appeared to
    be doing email on a BlackBerry.
    --
    PeteCresswell



  4. #24
    Notan
    Guest

    Re: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks

    "(Pete Cresswell)" wrote:
    >
    > Per phone-jockey:
    > >Just today I observed three vehicles swerving from lanes
    > >and all three drivers were using cell phones. It's getting
    > >ridiculous out there!

    >
    > Some weeks ago, my dentist said that some guy almost got him - who appeared to
    > be doing email on a BlackBerry.


    Pretty good concentration to determine "email on a Blackberry" while traveling
    in
    a moving vehicle.

    Maybe your dentist should've had his eyes on the road!

    Notan



  5. #25
    Daniel J. Stern
    Guest

    Re: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks

    On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, The Blue wrote:

    > I assumed this was common knowledge that senior are a hazard on the
    > road.


    "Common knowledge" is frequently not supportable by anything more than
    repetition.

    > they found that when 18- to-25-year-olds were placed in a driving
    > simulator and talked on a cellular phone, they reacted to brake lights
    > from a car in front of them as slowly as 65- to 74-year-olds who<> were
    > not using a cell phone.


    That does not support your assertion that elderly drivers are more
    dangerous than celphone users.



  6. #26
    Lurking
    Guest

    Re: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks

    The Blue wrote:
    >
    >
    > Daniel J. Stern wrote:
    >
    >>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, The Blue wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>>>Old people are much more of a danger than cell phones.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>> <>Cite?
    >>>

    > This is from the study in question I have other sources I assumed this
    > was common knowledge that senior are a hazard on the road. Strayer said
    > they found that when 18- to-25-year-olds were placed in a driving
    > simulator and talked on a cellular phone, they reacted to brake lights
    > from a car in front of them as slowly as 65- to 74-year-olds who<> were
    > not using a cell phone.
    >

    Slower reaction time does not does not mean _much_more_of_a_danger_. If
    your also following so closely that your slow reaction causes an
    accident... The people that have the real numbers are insurance
    companies. 18- to 25-year-olds have the highest rates because they cost
    the insurance company the most. Most 65- to 74-year-olds have figured
    out that they are not invincible and compensate for their slower
    reaction times.



  7. #27
    Notan
    Guest

    Re: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks

    Lurking wrote:
    >
    > The Blue wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > > Daniel J. Stern wrote:
    > >
    > >>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, The Blue wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>>>Old people are much more of a danger than cell phones.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>> <>Cite?
    > >>>

    > > This is from the study in question I have other sources I assumed this
    > > was common knowledge that senior are a hazard on the road. Strayer said
    > > they found that when 18- to-25-year-olds were placed in a driving
    > > simulator and talked on a cellular phone, they reacted to brake lights
    > > from a car in front of them as slowly as 65- to 74-year-olds who<> were
    > > not using a cell phone.
    > >

    > Slower reaction time does not does not mean _much_more_of_a_danger_. If
    > your also following so closely that your slow reaction causes an
    > accident... The people that have the real numbers are insurance
    > companies. 18- to 25-year-olds have the highest rates because they cost
    > the insurance company the most. Most 65- to 74-year-olds have figured
    > out that they are not invincible and compensate for their slower
    > reaction times.


    You don't have to be *in* an accident to cause one.

    The little old lady, driving slowly in the left-hand lane,
    who decides (a bit late) that "this is her exit" and proceeds
    to exit the highway/freeway, may leave unscathed, with cars
    piling up around her.

    I've seen it happen.

    Notan



  8. #28
    Lurking
    Guest

    Re: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks

    Notan wrote:
    > Lurking wrote:
    >
    >>The Blue wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>Daniel J. Stern wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>On Wed, 2 Feb 2005, The Blue wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>Old people are much more of a danger than cell phones.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>><>Cite?
    >>>>>
    >>>This is from the study in question I have other sources I assumed this
    >>>was common knowledge that senior are a hazard on the road. Strayer said
    >>>they found that when 18- to-25-year-olds were placed in a driving
    >>>simulator and talked on a cellular phone, they reacted to brake lights
    >>>from a car in front of them as slowly as 65- to 74-year-olds who<> were
    >>>not using a cell phone.
    >>>

    >>
    >>Slower reaction time does not does not mean _much_more_of_a_danger_. If
    >>your also following so closely that your slow reaction causes an
    >>accident... The people that have the real numbers are insurance
    >>companies. 18- to 25-year-olds have the highest rates because they cost
    >>the insurance company the most. Most 65- to 74-year-olds have figured
    >>out that they are not invincible and compensate for their slower
    >>reaction times.

    >
    >
    > You don't have to be *in* an accident to cause one.
    >
    > The little old lady, driving slowly in the left-hand lane,
    > who decides (a bit late) that "this is her exit" and proceeds
    > to exit the highway/freeway, may leave unscathed, with cars
    > piling up around her.
    >
    > I've seen it happen.
    >

    and BMWs, Audis, red sports cars, SUVs with soccer moms, delivery
    trucks, pickups.... kids/"adults" weaving through traffic and on and
    on. so what is your point? 18-25 year old males have the highest
    insurance rates and the high death rate of any age group.




  9. #29
    Notan
    Guest

    Re: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks

    <snip>

    Lurking wrote:
    >
    > Notan wrote:
    > >
    > > You don't have to be *in* an accident to cause one.
    > >
    > > The little old lady, driving slowly in the left-hand lane,
    > > who decides (a bit late) that "this is her exit" and proceeds
    > > to exit the highway/freeway, may leave unscathed, with cars
    > > piling up around her.
    > >
    > > I've seen it happen.
    > >

    > and BMWs, Audis, red sports cars, SUVs with soccer moms, delivery
    > trucks, pickups.... kids/"adults" weaving through traffic and on and
    > on. so what is your point? 18-25 year old males have the highest
    > insurance rates and the high death rate of any age group.


    No one ever said they didn't.

    What's *your* point?

    Notan



  10. #30
    (Pete Cresswell)
    Guest

    Re: Cellphone Drivers Equivalent to Drunks

    Per Notan:
    >Pretty good concentration to determine "email on a Blackberry" while traveling
    >in
    >a moving vehicle.
    >
    >Maybe your dentist should've had his eyes on the road!


    I understood his use of "Blackberry" tb a generic for any email device.

    Driving the Atlantic City Expressway last summer, some guy in a Jeep Cherokee
    almost nailed me. I was crusing the right lane, he was next to me in the
    middle lane. Just started coming over....I took to the shoulder, but just a
    quick glance told me that he was holding a cell phone in one hand and dialing
    with the other. Couldn't have been more than a tenth of a second that I took
    to look at him....but it was easy to see.

    If he was doing email on a Blackberry-type thumbpad I think it would have been
    equally obvious if his hands were in view.


    --
    PeteCresswell



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast