We hear about how horrible it is. (For those of you who want a digest version and want to skip all of this, go down the the very bottom. I know I hate it when someone writes an OP with lots of stuff but no digest, so I figure I'll make it easier, too, right? )
Stats:
-35% of reaction time is lost while texting.
-SMSing while driving contributes to a rise in the possibilities of accidents by about 23 times.
-Texting keeps the driver involved in the activity for 5 seconds or 100 yards (at speed).
-Texting results in a greater loss of driving ability of MJ and alcohol.
I've been researching this and I've discovered some amazing facts.
Number of total crashes is decreasing each year while the total number of those texting while driving steadily increases.
Number of deaths each has been decreasing since 2007, each year. Per capita (per capita measured against the total number of miles traveled AND the number of deaths per accidents), the number of deaths have been decreasing for years longer than 2007.
So, wait...if 28% of wrecks happen each year due to texting while driving, why is the total number of vehicles AND the total number of miles traveled, each year, increasing each year WHILE the total number of wrecks AND the total number of fatalities decreasing? If texting while driving is REALLY that bad (it is bad, so don't mistake the tone), why is there this gigantic disparity in numbers?
In other words, if texting accounts for 28% of total wrecks, then we could easily measure to see if that has affected total number of wrecks over the last 14 years.
So let's REALLY take a look:
There is no data that I could find on text messages sent while driving, increasing...so I could only settle for total text messages by year:
The number of text messages sent is exponentially increasing. EGADS!
We can at least say, with some degree of logic, that texting while driving also increased. There's no way it could not have.
So how many total wrecks 14 years ago (1997)?
13.8 million.
How many in the latest set of data, 2008?
10.2 million.
Wait a minute.
If the number of licensed drivers, total miles traveled, the population, AND text messaging are increasing, how in the world can 28% of wrecks be blamed on texting?
Total wrecks are decreasing as well as the total number of fatalities despite all other trends pointing towards safer roads per capita. IT would be one thing if the total deaths and wrecks were increasing at a slower rate than the number of miles traveled. Not only is that not happening...the number of wrecks and deaths is DECREASING while the other is increasing.
Someone may say, 'BUT CARE SAFETY!" I did the numbers and, per capita, the number of deaths per car wreck increased for several years in a row and then the numbers started to drop, magically, in 2007.
Why?
I dunno.
Bottom line: if texting is so dangerous, and 28% of wrecks are due to texting, explain the disparity.
How can it be possible that texting causes so many problems? Does this mean if we had a law that prevented phones from working while one drives, we would experience a HUGE drop in total accidents by 28%?
That makes no sense. As the total number of accidents decrease, we are supposed to believe that the total number of accidents due to texting is greatly increasing?
How about something a tad more logical: many of those getting into wrecks got into wrecks, regardless of whether or not they were texting. How about the problem is the person rather than the texting? Meaning, take away texting and most of them would still have wrecked?
I could be a douche and make a case for texting decreasing the number of accidents while driving...and that would be marginally as sound as the sh*t we are supposed to swallow on texting.
Do I text while driving? Yes. But I rarely do it with any sort of "eyes of the road" situation.
Don't tell anyone...but I play spider solitaire on my phone whlie driving, at times. Sometimes I even watch TV.
Here's where I got my data for wreck and death stats:
So if texting while driving is increasing (probably exponentially, to fit along the trend of the total number of texts by year), yet wrecks are decreasing...yet 28% of wrecks are supposedly SMS related, then explain the decrease not only in total wrekcs but per capita (per miles and per licensed driver)?
Maybe, just maybe...there's something else going on that is making driving safer even beyond the negative influence of texting while driving? This/these new element/s would have to not only make up for the badness of texting while driving (which would have to account for 28%) but it would also have to also make up the disparity of the increased number of drivers WHILE also decreasing total # of wrecks.
That's a tall order. I looked at the numbers from 1997 to 2008, found the standard deviation, and concluded that this new element or elements that are making driving safer would have to account for greater than 16 standard deviations, if you count the 28% SMS caused wrecks as true (that element or those elements have to account for the 28% related SMS accidents (because virtually no accidents were caused by texting in 1997) WHILE also accounting for the decrease (despite the actual increase in driving) in total wrecks). MORE THAN SIXTEEN! That's such a giant paradigm shift in human behavior in less than 20 years that I seriously cannot believe it.
But, here are some ideas on what has improved safety beyond the 16 standard deviations required:
GPS. GPS has made driving safer because people are more sure of where they are going.
Internet. The internet, tied in with GPS, has made driving more safe because they know where they are going on more accurate maps.
Technology. My coworker indicates that speeding accounts for lots of wrecks so a large chunk of this can be taken "out" if technologies improve to decrease the total number of speeders in the US. This site which cites TomTom shows us that we don't really speed, on average: http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/201...in-america-nah/ So this category may not have contributed at all. But, catching speeders...has it slowed down people? I dunno. People are obviously not speeding too much, now, so I don't know how that would change the 1997 measure due to the highway speeds increasing since the 90s.
Safety laws. Safety laws have done it. Doubtful, but it can't be ruled out.
X. Factor X. There is something else going on that I haven't noticed. This accounts for the giant change.
One idea that I had was texting was improving safety. Hear me out. Because people are aware of how dangerous it is to text, they are actually driving a bit safer. The amount of "safety consciousness" is greater than the negative consequences resulting in a net change of greater safety. It's certainly the only area or change in driving habits that can have a large enough influence over driving in order to account for such a large difference in safety.
Digest!: Texting while driving has increased a WHOLE bunch...but wrecks and fatalities have decreased. There is a number disparity in the total number of texters, the safety it causes, and the claims of the number of texters contributing to the total. There's just way too much of a numbers disparity to blame 28% of all US wrecks on texting. I posit that most of those 28% would have caused wrecks, regardless of texting. Read the rest of the above to see how I support my case with numbers. Thanks!
Thoughts?
Talk about your opinion on texting while driving.
Talk about my findings not matching up with logic on the 28% number.
Talk about anything else related to texting while driving that I may have brought up.
That seems like a reasonable inference but it might not be quite as strong a correlation as you think. Early adopters for texting, like most things, were young. Many later users have been adults. As a rule young people are more likely to be suicidally stupid. There's also the possibility that as parents become more aware of texting (see my previous point) they emphasize not doing it while driving to their children.
Meh, averages are just pretty numbers on their own. I'd like to see the median speeds and the percentage of driving that is done over the limit.
Actually texting could reduce crashes in a much less roundabout way. One of the benefits of a text is that there's little pressure to answer immediately. A transition from traditional phones to texing could mean that there are not as many people who immediately get distracted when someone tries to contact them.
__________________
Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.
I don't think you really have reliable data to make any conclusions... it could be any number of factors and tbh, your theory seems like the least likely of all of them.
"My" Theory? I have listed multiple theories. Which one wold be "mine" particular theory? If you're referring to the least likely scenario of people driving safer due to being aware of using their cell phone...that's the least likely scenario but the only one that makes up the 16+ standard deviations.
The 28% figure comes from a figur released by the national safety council on the 12th of Janurary, 2010.
Check it out: adults text more than teens. I know, right? Odd.
Also, teens are more likely to die in car wrecks because they do not wear their seatbelts (on a much more likely average, believe it or not. It must be "cool" to not wear your seatbelt as a kid or something). Pretty stupid, I think...
I would say that the majority of driving is done uner the speed limit and here's why: stopping and traffic. The speeding for the quarter mile stretches that some people can do is greatly offset by the stopping and slow driving portions by a large margin. This is why the "top" limit of highway is barely averaging over the averge speed limit (and in some places, that highway is 80.) They call this a statistical outlier. It just doesn't work out enough to allow for people to speed.
Makes sense. I do most of my texting at a stoplight. When I get a phone with a qwerty keyboard (maybe?) I'll text while driving because then I don't have to take my eyes away from the road.
I am totally against texting and driving, Im against their being a law in any state with talking on ur cell while driving though. What if you are stuck somwhere or you are lost, or someone giving you directions, or its an emergency and someone is trying to reach out to you.
One thing though ive almost had afew accidents from others talking on their cells though I gotta admit. they almost made some contact with me like cutting me off really really close while talking.
texting while driving is no more dangerous than having a conversation with someone in the car while driving. the key is that your mind is off the driving and on something else.
Bullshit. Texting and driving is dangerous as hell. You gotta take your eyes off the road to text. Even if you can type blindfolded, your attention suffers.
__________________
All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
No. You can talk to someone and keep both hands on the wheel and both eyes on the road. You cannot do this while texting. No matter how you slice it, texting and driving is dangerous. Studies have proven this.
__________________
All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
Yeah, the "numbers" say 5 seconds is how long you take your eyes off the road. That's a LOOOOOOOONG time. I don't know if I have ever taken my eyes off of the road for longer than 2 seconds while doing anything except the "drive while staring" thing from 2 fast 2 furious.
You're wrong because I can send an entire text message on a the old 12-key pads and the qwerty keyboards without even looking at my phone. That includes selecting the contact, typing the message, and sending. Gefallen Engel can do the same thing. It's fairly common, I'd say.
All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
YOU CAN READ THINGS WITHOUT LOOKING AT THEM??!?!?!!? D=
Oh, it only takes you a fraction of a second to read a sentence. A fraction of a second looking away from the road can result in traveling like a hundred yards though, depending on your speed.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
Blax: You say that like everyone who isn't texting is constantly paying attention to the road instead. That's bullshit. If its not your cell, its your radio, your food, other passengers in the car. Texting is no worse than anything else.
There's also diction software where you can send a text just with your voice, too.
You're stuck in the 2000s, bro.
By that logic, anything that distracts you for a fraction of a second would be just as likely to cause a wreck. That includes passengers, an itch, a bug splatting, the radio, etc.
I sort of agree. Texting is 8x more likely to cause a wreck than just driving normally. That's what the research shows. That's 4X greater than drunk driving.
Yet, waaaaaaaaaay more people die from drunk driving than texting. Why is that?
Correct. When I drive I focus on the road unless it's something absolutely necessary requires my attention. "just drivin wut about u lol" is not something I or anyone else is absolutely obligated to risk one's life for. More []importantly[/i], it's not something that you should risk other people's lives for. And that's what a lot of people don't seem to understand, I think.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
KMC Community Forums
)
Apr 23rd, 2011 04:25 AM
Read the report, champ.
