Phone and Text Bans On Drivers Shown Ineffective 406
shmG writes to share news of a recent study on the impact of laws which ban the use of cell phones while driving. There appears to be no reduction in accidents as a result of these laws. "The HLDI compared collisions of 100 insured vehicles per year in New York, Washington DC, Connecticut, and California — all states with currently enacted roadway text bans. Despite those laws, monthly fluctuations in crash rates didn't change after bans were enacted, [although] there were less people using devices while driving. An earlier study conducted by the HLDI reported that cellphone use was directly linked to four-fold increases in crash injuries. Also independent studies done by universities have shown correlation between driving while using a phone and crashes."
Re:Compliance Rates & Hands-Free Use (Score:1, Informative)
Ironically though, those who think they can multitask are precisely those who can't
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8219212.stm
We can then conclude that we still might as well ban the usage in cars as those who could actually do it won't be doing it anyways.
Re:Not too surprising (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Compliance Rates & Hands-Free Use (Score:3, Informative)
You do not have the right to drive, hence the requirement for a driving test, and if you fail, you cannot drive.
Actually, you only need a license to drive on public roads.
Re:Compliance Rates & Hands-Free Use (Score:3, Informative)
"Civil rights" just means our rights to have privileges offered in in a fair and equal way to all. So for example, they can turn you down for a driver's license (a privilege) if you fail the driver's test, but not simply because you're black. If I open my store doors for people to come on my property to transact business (their privilege, not their right) then I have to open the doors for everybody. Just because racial (e.g.) discrimination is prohibited doesn't mean it's not a privilege.