Re: How will the police find me.

knuttle wrote on Mon, 20 May 2024 20:34:36 -0400 :

This is another statistic.
In the past 50 years the government has mandated 100's of safety devices
on automobiles.  Each device was to reduce traffic accidents because it
would reduce death by 10%.
 
SO assume there were 100 devices added each reducing the traffic
accidents. accidents reduced 10% for each device, and 100 device, means
there are no traffic accidents on cars that had all of those devices
implemented.
 
(if there were 100 lost lives, after the 1st device there were 90 death,
after the 2nd 81, the 3rd 73, and so on until 100 devices )
 
So much for the published statistics on the lives saved by each new
device added to the car, it means nothing in the real world.

Clearly you jumped to conclusions by understanding nothing of what I said.

You need to be careful that I constantly said "accident rate" which is an
extremely accurate statistic compiled by the US Census Bureau for each of
the fifty states since the 1920's (well, 48 states in those days), and
which is reported by police & insurance companies and normalized by miles
driven and as such is extremely well respected data for reliability.

Every single state reported similar trends of the accident rate going
steadily down (for very good reasons, mind you) during the entire time that
phone ownership rates were skyrocketing - laying proof to the lie that
cellphones have any negative effect on the accident rate.

If anything, they have a positive effect by reducing the accident rate
(e.g., reducing sudden unexpected traffic, re-routing traffic, warning of
construction and congestion, fewer confused turnarounds, etc.).

You didn't understand a single word of what an "accident rate" means.

What you spoke about were "injuries" which is a second-order function of
tremendously different metrics, e.g., seatbelts, padded dashboards,
airbags, safety tempered glass, stronger door locks, crush zones,
break-away sign posts, yielding guardrails, sand barrels, etc.

In fact, injuries are even lessened by cellphones, given the first
responder call can be made within minutes of an injury accident, where time
is of the essence in reducing the length of the hospital stay.

You won't understand any of that because you only believe in unsound myths.

It's a myth that cellphones raise the accident rate.
There is zero evidence for it in the United States.

I'm not saying a lot of morons don't believe they increase the accident
rate, as there are many morons who say exactly what you just said.

The only people "saying it", besides fools who are morons, are entities
with something to gain, mainly lawyers, insurance companies & police.

Nobody else would ever claim that cellphone use had any effect on the
accident rate in the USA when the US Census Bureau already said otherwise.

Note that there are aggregate studies of the efficacy of safety laws also,
which would knock your socks off if you read them (as I have).

But if you think cellphones raised the accident rate, you're not ready to
read the scientific facts about the first order and second order effect of
safety laws in the past 25 years in terms of length of hospital stay.

Suffice to say, morons always believe in myths.
Because morons never question common myths.

They hear them. They believe them. They never question them.

Find a cite, not from the three biased sources (lawyers, insurance & cops)
on the net about the US accident rate and tell me what you found.

If you find it, I'll read it - but not from those biased three sources.
HINT: You won't find it.