Frank Slootweg wrote on 21 Mar 2024 15:34:47 GMT :

> In our country (NL) there are similar laws and we *know* that use of
> mobile phones causes accidents, including with severe injury and death
> (like 4 people in a (other) car), because we keep detailed stats on
> circumstances, cause, etc.

There's a HUGE difference between an "accident" and the "accident rate".

> 'Andrew' seems to have some problems with statistics, because the
> accident rate not going up (BTW, it *does* go up in our country) doesn't
> mean that use of mobile phones doesn't cause accidents (to anyone with a
> somewhat functioning brain, it's blatantly obvious that it does). *Why*
> he can't draw (t)his erronous conclusion, has been explained to him all
> the previous times his silly claim came up. Some people learn, others
> don't.

I never once said inattentive driving doesn't cause accidents, Frank.

>> You are free to call the lawmakers and the entire police system morons.
>
> When 'Andrew' starts insulting, everyone knows he has no case, but
> can't handle/admit that fact.

I'm extremely well educated, Frank, which if you consider that mere fact to
be an insult to you, then that's your issue to deal with Frank. Not mine.

Read what I wrote, which is that the reliable statistics in the USA (and
Australia, by the way, but not in the UK for some odd reason) clearly and
emphatically show the accident rate in all fifty states has not changed
from its steady downward trend every year for the past few decades.

That steady downward trend remained such before, during & after the
meteoric rise in the use and ownership of cellphones while driving.

If you want to dispute those reliable statistics, you need to provide
something more than your "guess" that all reliable statistics are wrong.