From: stephen@sprunk.org
On 03-Jul-14 09:39, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> On 01-Jul-14 16:26, Calvin Henry-Cotnam wrote:
>>> It is not the use of the handset that is the distraction, it is
>>> the conversation that one has on the phone. This is NOT the same
>>> as a conversation with a passenger present in the vehicle.
>>
>> Actually, studies show that the accident rate is just as high when
>> the driver is having a conversation with someone in the car as with
>> someone on the other end of a phone call.
>
> No, they don't. It's possible for the other passenger in the care to
> notice whatever the driver failed to pay attention to and shut the
> fuck up in time for the driver to resume driving attentively and
> avoid the collision. That's not the case with a remote caller.
The issue is not listening; there is _no_ adverse effect from radio
usage, for instance. So the passenger (or caller) shutting up doesn't
matter. In fact, it might make things worse because then the driver
gets distracted by responding.
There is apparently some fundamental conflict between driving and the
speech center of the brain. _That_ is the issue.
> Multiple teenage passengers in a car with a teenage driver are an
> incredibly serious distraction, however.
So are crying infants/toddlers, yet they don't cause many accidents.
> There's also a theory that hands free is MORE dangerous for certain
> drivers who make a lot of hand gestures while talking because they
> just don't hold onto the steering wheel, but holding a handset to
> talk, they don't gesture.
Never heard that one. Interesting.
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
* Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)
|
