I think it takes far more concentration & brainpower to avoid running over a slow driver than it does to follow the herd. That's why I'm agitated when I'm following the slow/erratic driver. But in Hawaii I'm getting plenty of practice.
Anyone know where I can get a portable cell phone jammer that runs off 12V DC?
Insurance statistics show that far more accidents are caused by a slow moving driver than one that is speeding. For exactly this reason...they tend to be overcautious, over brake, stop in the road, or cause people behind them to pass unsafely. At least once a week I see some numbnut stop at the end of a highway entrance ramp when they have their own merging lane ahead of them, and see them get slammed into from behind. Good and safe.
Your cell phone jammer would provide no joy Nords. The brouhaha over cell phones creating accident hazards and distracting drivers, along with making the driver as 'dangerous as a drunk driver' isnt terribly valid. I've looked at the 'studies'. The oft quoted 'drunk driver' study actually demonstrated quite solidly that a driver who is well aware of the fact that they're being evaluated will be somewhat more alert than one that is on a phone or legally intoxicated. And the difference is in fractions of a second response rate...so yes, a cell phone is as distracting to a measured driver as being drunk, and both negligible. They leave out that last part though.
A "prarie dog" perspective offers your best view of the impact. Ten years ago, it was almost unheard of to be talking on the phone while driving. Today, its almost unheard of to drive past someone without seeing a phone stuck to the side of their head. Hence, we should have seen a very steadily rising accident rate almost in time with the increased adoption of cell phones and cell phone usage in cars over the last ten years. Which we dont. There is actually fluctuation to account for improved roads, improved vehicles, increased speed limits, etc...but nothing that would bear out these many "studies" that show such massive distractions.
At the behest of several CA legislators, the CHP did a very in-depth study on cell phones as a cause of an accident. They concluded that very few accidents were in fact caused by people distracted by a cell phone. The legislators, "knowing" this answer was incorrect because it didnt support legislation they wanted to push through, told the CHP to go back and change their parameters from the cell phone causing the accident to a cell phone merely being present. With that metric, that a phone being in someones pocket or in the car at the time of an accident, in fact many more accidents became "cell phone related".
This was an excellent cue on behalf of these legislators, taking a page from the NHTSA's studies on drinking and driving that take liberal use of the term "alcohol related". In one accident, a sober driver ran into the rear end of another sober driver (dont get excited now Ed, it was a car accident), and the guy who was hit had two empty beer bottles in his car. That accident was therefore 'alcohol related'. In another case, a sober driver avoiding a pedestrian ran up over a curb, struck and killed a woman sitting at a table outside a cafe. Since the woman was drinking a glass of white wine at the time, the accident became an "alcohol related fatality".
Now you know why its a good idea to never trust a study, even when the data looks right and inherently "feels correct".
Given that its obvious that the average brainless idiot on a cell phone is driving badly, and given that we've just determined that the cell phone isnt causative to increased accidents, we can only conclude that before they had a cell phone, people were distracted by other stuff that made them bad drivers. In fact, the majority of accidents have been determined to be caused by distractions outside the vehicle. Looking at the hot chick on the sidewalk, reading a billboard, checking out the new building going up, looking at that new model chrysler a couple of lanes over. Right behind that is distractions from inside the car...changing the radio station, yelling at the kids, dumping hot coffee in your lap.
So on one hand we have easily distracted people with a lot of distractions to choose from. If you remove one or a dozen, there'll still be another. And you have bad drivers who pass crappy driving tests and should never be allowed to be on the road. I took "traffic school" last year to avoid a ticket showing up on my insurance. More than half of the people in the 'class' didnt know the safe distance to follow the driver ahead, or in a merge situation who had the right of way.
I think we just detected the primary problem and solution...better schooling, more rejections until you get it right, frequent 'refreshes' of the driving rules, and quicker yanking of the drivers license when you get repeat accidents or violations.
