

Driven to distraction - yan
http://www.economist.com/sciencetechnology/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14575561

======
roc
RE: the US/UK difference in fatality rates -- Demographics is everything:
young people cause the most crashes and not nearly as many young people in
Europe can afford to own and drive cars. Control for age and fatalities per
million vehicle miles balance out in the other age brackets.

The only real 'solution' to distracted driving is to start building an America
where we don't _have_ to drive everywhere. Get people out from behind the
wheel. Cars are inherently dangerous and Americans are forced to use them far,
far too often.

~~~
stcredzero
Tougher enforcement would work. There's an inherent record of the crime, after
all. A few teens would be caught texting while driving after car crashes. Make
a few into examples, and you'll curtail this. Especially if there are some
cool alternatives. (A voice command texting app for the iPhone? Say one that
sends a ETA? Perhaps answers yes, no, or tldr;)

------
jacoblyles
Personally, I'm willing to take a fractional increase in a small chance of
death for the convenience of my sister being able to call me to tell me her
car broke down in another part of the city while I'm on the road. I realize
some people use their phones for trivial matters while driving, but almost
every phone call I give or take is brief and with a purpose (someone calling
me on the way to an appointment to let me know they are not going to be there,
for example).

I realize that there are two parties in the interaction, myself and the other
drivers I may effect should I get into an accident. But were the effects of an
accident limited solely to me, I am sure that the utility I get from being
able to coordinate with others while on the road is greater than the cost of a
marginal increase in the chance of an accident.

~~~
mmc
"But were the effects of an accident limited solely to me, I am sure that the
utility I get from being able to coordinate with others while on the road is
greater than the cost of a marginal increase in the chance of an accident."

Are you sure? The study the article cites (see
[http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/story.php?relyear=2009&itemno=5...](http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/story.php?relyear=2009&itemno=571)
) says that for light cars (trucks are worse), the risk of crashing is 1.3
(1.4, 2.8) times higher for talking on (reaching for, dialing) a cell phone.

I'd say that increase in risk is significant, especially because the potential
cost of an accident, even if you don't involve anyone else, is so high.

Sitting here thinking about it, I'd rather miss a call.

(EDIT, the study actually said crash or near-crash event. Not sure how to
process that.)

~~~
jacoblyles
Yes, I'm quite sure. We're talking about 40,000 annual events among a
population of 300 million. I don't mind doubling my risk there especially
considering that I'm probably a better driver than most to start with, passing
the most dangerous decade of driving with no accidents.

