A good read. Thanks for posting.
Am surprised by the number of dropped bikes and maybe more surprised at the mount of rear-enders by bikes. Had no idea they are so common.
The results for aggressive riding should be no surprise to any. Wonder if there were a way to factor age into that. I know I see the wild and young get pretty aggressive around here. Us old farts seem to be more laid back.
It answers questions and leaves us with more.
I enjoy reading accident studies-makes me think and wonder.
To add to the vehicle accidents and the lives lost and has been increased by the 21st century communication called "Texting" while driving. We all get the 30 second TV adds we get from private organization and our government, the theme being how bad texting is and it's up there with Driving Wwhile Iintoxicated. (alcohol % drugs).
I know it's illegal in some states and people are fined for texting. And we're told texting is as bad a DWI. Inconsistently however the penalties for texting are no where near fines for DWI. It appears to me all our government cares about testing is the money they can make? BTW any time of cellphone use by the driver increases the probability to accident.
That being said, this cellphone problem can be fixed nation wide in about 30 seconds. Here's how: All cell phones have GPS function including the speed the vehicle is going, divide the distance by the time to get MPH. If you have a navigation app already it's doing that math right now. The next step is apply a mandatory algorithm (NOT AN APP) in the phone that shuts off all type of outgoing calls with the exception of 911 when the car reaches 10 MPH. This will affect all passenger phones also... they can stop the car if it's that important. This is something the cellphones don't need any expensive modifications to the phone, just software.
How much does our nation want to fix this? I have sent this fix information to: Oprah Winfrey, NY Gov. Cuomo, NY Senators Schumer and Gillabrand and all major news anchors, (ABS, CBS, NBC). None of them responded.
I can understand the problem. None of the cellphone providers want to turn off the customers if it's not a industry mandatory application and the politicians are afraid of the lobbyist power... but it looks like nobody wants to fix it.
Yet another reason why we should have lane splitting legalized nation-wide. I had a LOT more close-call rear-enders when living in Washington before I lived overseas (and now in California) and learned to lane split. There's a mental shift - when traffic starts to get thick, you naturally start to move BETWEEN the lanes, so you can split if traffic really slows. But that also means that IF there is a car coming up behind you - you're already out of the way, passing other cars OR you are at least out of the lane to not be hit.
As for rear ending a car, I've known a few people over the years that have done that, but I honestly believe they were following too close when the car in front of them suddenly stopped. I still see a few bikers following too close and many cars doing it everyday. I really don't understand why they do it because whether they are 20 feet or 50 feet behind the car in front of them, they are going the same speed. Oh well?
A while back I suggested the same thing and I got a lot of flack from people, even people that were complaining about people using their phones while driving. However, I also suggested stopping incoming calls, but allowing a signal that informs the owner of the phone that someone is trying to call, they just can't answer until they stop.
The new collision radar should make an improvement on the rear end collisions by the millisecond reaction of speed difference between the front and rear cars. That option should be mandatory on all cars and motorcycles.
I have it in my car and at times I get the collision warning when I didn't even notice the car in front of me slowed or stopped even though I had my eyes on the road. The electronics sees it before me.
At the end of the day it is very obvious to me these politicians and celebrities all had some sort of public programming begging people to stop using the cellphone while driving. It has just collapsed to be another public obligation with no real sincerity or teeth. They just don't give a $hit. Past history says it takes a Senator or a high politician has to loose a love one and then the ball will start rolling again. A slap on the wrist for involuntary homicide... it doesn't make sense.
.......................... A slap on the wrist for involuntary homicide... it doesn't make sense.
Besides what you have, some cars will brake, but it only works at lower speeds. Honda has a system that (when in cruise) it will slow the car down to match the vehicle speed in front when that vehicle is going slower, but it won't work under 30 mph. What's cool about it is that when the driver changes lanes, it automatically goes back to the preset speed, assuming there isn't a car in front.
Anyhow, we have the technology to prevent many collisions.
I disagree with your last sentence. When there is an actual accident caused by someone using a phone while driving, the accident is treated pretty close to the same as an accident caused by someone impaired by drugs or alcohol. Here is a quick Google citation. I read of similar cases all the time. The real issue for me is the lack of citations when people are seen driving and using a phone. Even more frustrating for me is the lack of a law mandating that cellphones be inoperable at speeds of over ,say, 10 MPH.
http://www.courts.state.nh.us/press/2013/ORT-Case-1-Summary-2013.pdf
From the Maine Statute:To a degree and the situation of the accident the law is applied the same as DWI, mostly when there's a fatality. But in general the non-fatal accident the driver walks away with a fine (if any).
I can say with some factuality the general public does not take the cellphone laws and it's application seriously.
If your stopped because of tail light and the cop smells booze on you your probably going to jail. That doesn't happen when your caught texting. You even get to go with the phone to do it again 2 minutes later. Cellphone laws are not applied as DWI laws.
The textors also have ways to circumvent the law which now creates another problem of traffic and road rage and that is texting at the red light. In my heavily populated area with people and cars you can stop for a read light and there will be people in front of you texting and not paying attention to the light. What you get sometime are 2-3 people doing the same thing and when the light turns green horns start blowing. At times the textors take an extra 5-10 seconds after the light turns green to finish their texting. At times I see 3-4-5 people texting at the light... a good start for road raging.
View attachment 526