Posted by Ronald O. Christian on October 20, 2011, 6:40 pm
I need a drink. You-all can join me if you like.
I don't watch TV, but I still get commercials on the radio on the way
to/from work. Recently I've heard on the radio commercials that say:
1) The number one cause of accidents is talking/texting on the
cell phone
2) The number one cause of accidents is following too closely
3) The number one cause of accidents is driving too fast
Now, I'm not a mathematician, but I'm pretty sure that as a root cause
for a particular event, there can be only one number 1. That's,
sort-of, like, why it's called number 1.
So.... what? I am grappling for a conclusion. Is it all those people
talking and texting while driving too close at too high a rate of
speed that's causing the accidents? If we could get all those
speeder/tailgaters to stop talking on the damned phone, would the
accidents go away? Or is it safe to talk on the phone as long as
you're not speeding and/or tailgating?
Or, maybe it's an exact three-way tie for number one? That doesn't
seem likely.
Or, could it be that with the best of intentions, the department of
transportation is working backwards from "X is bad" and inventing
statistics to convince us not to do X?
Ron
-
2003 FLHTCUI "Noisy Glide"
http://www.christianfamilywebsite.com
http://www.ronaldchristian.com
Posted by Jinks on October 20, 2011, 7:14 pm
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:40:19 -0700, Ronald O. Christian
>I need a drink. You-all can join me if you like.
>I don't watch TV, but I still get commercials on the radio on the way
>to/from work. Recently I've heard on the radio commercials that say:
>1) The number one cause of accidents is talking/texting on the
>cell phone
>2) The number one cause of accidents is following too closely
>3) The number one cause of accidents is driving too fast
>Now, I'm not a mathematician, but I'm pretty sure that as a root cause
>for a particular event, there can be only one number 1. That's,
>sort-of, like, why it's called number 1.
>So.... what? I am grappling for a conclusion. Is it all those people
>talking and texting while driving too close at too high a rate of
>speed that's causing the accidents? If we could get all those
>speeder/tailgaters to stop talking on the damned phone, would the
>accidents go away? Or is it safe to talk on the phone as long as
>you're not speeding and/or tailgating?
>Or, maybe it's an exact three-way tie for number one? That doesn't
>seem likely.
>Or, could it be that with the best of intentions, the department of
>transportation is working backwards from "X is bad" and inventing
>statistics to convince us not to do X?
OR, it "could be" that everything said on a commercial is
BULLSHIT designed to self promote whatever the entity paying for the
commercial is selling at that moment. Unfortunately, about 80% of the
American population is gullible enough to believe anything in print or
on broadcast media.
If we were a more intelligent nation we wouldn't believe that
BULLSHIT, the lies told by lending institutions, wall street,
congress, politicians in general, & other con men..........<shrug>
Jinks ('86 FXRS, '07 FLTR)
#64
Remember, "No good deed goes unpunished"
Posted by Mike on October 20, 2011, 8:34 pm
> OR, it "could be" that everything said on a commercial is
> BULLSHIT designed to self promote whatever the entity paying for the
> commercial is selling at that moment. Unfortunately, about 80% of the
> American population is gullible enough to believe anything in print or
> on broadcast media.
> If we were a more intelligent nation we wouldn't believe that
> BULLSHIT, the lies told by lending institutions, wall street,
> congress, politicians in general, & other con men..........<shrug>
What, you mean Al Gore didn't invent the internet! Huh
Mike
caspr
Posted by Dean on October 21, 2011, 7:40 pm
>On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:40:19 -0700, Ronald O. Christian
>>
>>I need a drink. You-all can join me if you like.
>>
>>I don't watch TV, but I still get commercials on the radio on the way
>>to/from work. Recently I've heard on the radio commercials that say:
>>
>>1) The number one cause of accidents is talking/texting on the
>>cell phone
>>2) The number one cause of accidents is following too closely
>>3) The number one cause of accidents is driving too fast
>>
>>Now, I'm not a mathematician, but I'm pretty sure that as a root cause
>>for a particular event, there can be only one number 1. That's,
>>sort-of, like, why it's called number 1.
>>
>>So.... what? I am grappling for a conclusion. Is it all those people
>>talking and texting while driving too close at too high a rate of
>>speed that's causing the accidents? If we could get all those
>>speeder/tailgaters to stop talking on the damned phone, would the
>>accidents go away? Or is it safe to talk on the phone as long as
>>you're not speeding and/or tailgating?
>>
>>Or, maybe it's an exact three-way tie for number one? That doesn't
>>seem likely.
>>
>>Or, could it be that with the best of intentions, the department of
>>transportation is working backwards from "X is bad" and inventing
>>statistics to convince us not to do X?
> OR, it "could be" that everything said on a commercial is
>BULLSHIT designed to self promote whatever the entity paying for the
>commercial is selling at that moment. Unfortunately, about 80% of the
>American population is gullible enough to believe anything in print or
>on broadcast media.
> If we were a more intelligent nation we wouldn't believe that
>BULLSHIT, the lies told by lending institutions, wall street,
>congress, politicians in general, & other con men..........<shrug>
>Jinks ('86 FXRS, '07 FLTR)
>#64
>Remember, "No good deed goes unpunished"
How about; The number one cause of fatal highway accidents is caused
by speed differential followed by change of lanes without due regard.
Who the fuck knows from year to year, but the above two were, and
probably still are, the proximate cause of a preponderance of
fatalities.
No doubt texting is adding to the numbers. You can roll almost all of
the reasons into one large category: Driving With Head Up Ass.
Dean
2011 FLHTK
06FLHR Sold
EKIII
Posted by Ronald O. Christian on October 22, 2011, 2:26 am
>You can roll almost all of
>the reasons into one large category: Driving With Head Up Ass.
Agreed. Back in the Old Days, there were a few traffic citations and
then there was one called "reckless driving", which was anything that
in the opinion of the cop was driving with head up ass. I think that
sub-dividing the head-up-ass offense into so many individual
infractions may have diluted the effect some.
Ron
-
2003 FLHTCUI "Noisy Glide"
http://www.christianfamilywebsite.com
http://www.ronaldchristian.com
>I don't watch TV, but I still get commercials on the radio on the way
>to/from work. Recently I've heard on the radio commercials that say:
>1) The number one cause of accidents is talking/texting on the
>cell phone
>2) The number one cause of accidents is following too closely
>3) The number one cause of accidents is driving too fast
>Now, I'm not a mathematician, but I'm pretty sure that as a root cause
>for a particular event, there can be only one number 1. That's,
>sort-of, like, why it's called number 1.
>So.... what? I am grappling for a conclusion. Is it all those people
>talking and texting while driving too close at too high a rate of
>speed that's causing the accidents? If we could get all those
>speeder/tailgaters to stop talking on the damned phone, would the
>accidents go away? Or is it safe to talk on the phone as long as
>you're not speeding and/or tailgating?
>Or, maybe it's an exact three-way tie for number one? That doesn't
>seem likely.
>Or, could it be that with the best of intentions, the department of
>transportation is working backwards from "X is bad" and inventing
>statistics to convince us not to do X?