[FoRK] Laws that ban texting while driving could be counter productive

Gary Stock gstock at nexcerpt.com
Thu Sep 15 07:07:59 PDT 2011


Stephen, I'll attempt once more to break it down simply.

This list has many quite intelligent, even wise members.

Several suggest that you are doggedly missing the point.

In this narrow venue, our simple focus is communication.

The only risks: loss of a few minutes; some frustration.

In this simple, safe environment, you remain distracted.

You are distracted from our messages by your own issues.

You appear unable to recognize the substance we provide.

This in a narrow space, focused solely ON communication.

Given that, please realize why many of us are concerned.

Are you this distracted while operating a deadly weapon?

GS







On 9/15/11 3:40 AM, Stephen Williams wrote:
> On Wed Sep 14 21:07:13 2011, Gary Stock wrote:
>> The risk of driving is largely a ~collective~ risk. It's time to stop 
>> pretending otherwise.
>>
>> Even the most superior, godlike driver can have an accident. That's 
>> why they call them "accidents."
>>
>> More than one car is often involved in a collision. That's why they 
>> call them "collisions."
>>
>> As repeatedly acknowledged here, a significant number of people are 
>> "zoned out" or suffer "stunted" performance, while another number 
>> "Have screaming kids in the car? Thinking? Being hungry? Having to go 
>> to the bathroom?" What does that distracted segment total? Forty 
>> percent all cars on the road? Sixty?
>>
>> That leaves safety up to the ~rest~ of us. We must ~compensate~ for 
>> that distracted group -- or die with them.
>>
>> As our "responsible" segment becomes more distracted by electronic 
>> devices and remote activities, safety ~does~ suffer. It's foolish to 
>> suggest otherwise -- no matter how superhuman we wish we were -- 
>> because we're not alone on the roads.


More information about the FoRK mailing list