Net-Moto :: Community :: Racing :: :: Racing Videos Sponsor :: Contact
 Forums   Features   Trackdays   Moto Crash Incidents   Race Team   CMSP Training   Sponsors      Donate   Terms of Service 
BARF - Bay Area Riders Forum  Home   UserCP   Register   Calendar   Members   FAQ   Search  AMA

Go Back   BARF - Bay Area Riders Forum > Moto > LEO Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-06-2018, 09:20 AM   #46
Whammy
Veteran of Road Racing
 
Whammy's Avatar
 
AMA #3283620
Contributor +

Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Lost again
Motorcycles: 2016 Aprilia Dorsoduro 750
Name:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR662 View Post
Today though, I went out for an hour at a popular busy intersection and I wrote 6 cell phone tickets. Im sure I missed many of the people using their cell phone. Im also sure there were many motorists that saw these people using a cell phone and wondered "why aren't the police ever around when we need them". In every city there are tickets being issued, but again almost every city is very understaffed. Ride safe, be aware, and do you're best to make it home safe.

God Bless you! stay safe!
Whammy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2018, 11:35 AM   #47
TheRiddler
Riddle me this.
 
TheRiddler's Avatar
 
AMA #: 1099639
Contributor + 1%

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California
Motorcycles: Any of the two-wheeled kind.
Name: Matt
Quote:
Originally Posted by bojangle View Post
The problem with tallying cell phone related crashes is that it usually relies on the honesty of the driver. I ask, they say no, and it's not indicated in the report. That doesn't make them any less "at fault", but I'd say it's pretty well underreported.

This is compared to DUI cases where arrests don't rely on the honesty of the driver.
This is extremely accurate. We have a checkbox on the form for if a cellphone was in use, and how (handsfree or otherwise). Exactly 0% of people I've asked have told me they were using their cellphone, even when the other driver says they saw them on their phone. Even if them not being on their phone is likely a lie, I have to check the box that they weren't on their phone based on their statement.

The same is true in hit and run collisions; there is no option for "cellphone use unknown."

Once in less than a blue moon, I'll ask them what happened and they'll say they looked down at their phone. I suspect the recorded data is way off.
TheRiddler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2018, 12:16 PM   #48
Junkie
re-tarded
 
Junkie's Avatar
 
Contributor + 3%

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Alameda
Motorcycles: SV1000,WR450tards (03 for sale),YZ426tard
Name: Daniel
is the no option for cellphone use unknown a new thing? looking at the CHP report from when I was hit and run'd on the bay bridge 3 years ago I see "cell phone unknown" checked for the guy who hit me

(I was also listed as vehicle/party 1, when I thought normally that was the at fault party, but the report put him at fault)
Junkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2018, 12:44 PM   #49
DataDan
Mama says he's bona fide
 
DataDan's Avatar
 
BARF Mod Alumni
BARFie winner 2010 & 2014
Contributor ++

Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: San Luis Obispo
Motorcycles: Yamaha FJR1300
Name: Dan
The problem with statistics attributing X% of crashes to cellphone use is that there is no data to support it.

The LE estimates are much too low because they have no way to reliably determine whether a phone was in use.

Estimates from laboratory experiments are much too high. "Drive around this obstacle course while carrying on a texting conversation." Count cones hit, compare to non-texting runs. QED: Texting causes crashes. It proves no such thing, because that's not how people use cellphones in the real world.

The one experiment that was probably accurate is the Virginia Tech "100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study". Extensively instrumented cars were driven for a year by normal people in their normal routine. Vehicle dynamics and radar data identified crashes and near-crashes. Interior video identified all kinds of inattention--not just cell phone use but eating, drinking, reading, grooming, etc.

The key result reported was "population attributable risk," that is, the estimated percentage of crashes that result from various kinds of inattention. Cellphone use came it at 7%, evenly divided between dialing and yakking. Dialing risk was much higher than talking but was also much less frequent, so it contributed no more to the crash count. The absolute worst kind of inattention was drowsiness at more than 20% of crashes.

The downside of the 100-Car study for current purposes is that it was done more than 10 years ago, when smartphone functionality was in its infancy.
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.
--Richard Feynman, 5/11/1918 - 2/15/1988
DataDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2018, 12:47 PM   #50
DataDan
Mama says he's bona fide
 
DataDan's Avatar
 
BARF Mod Alumni
BARFie winner 2010 & 2014
Contributor ++

Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: San Luis Obispo
Motorcycles: Yamaha FJR1300
Name: Dan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkie View Post
is the no option for cellphone use unknown a new thing? looking at the CHP report from when I was hit and run'd on the bay bridge 3 years ago I see "cell phone unknown" checked for the guy who hit me

(I was also listed as vehicle/party 1, when I thought normally that was the at fault party, but the report put him at fault)
I don't think that's a hard and fast rule. In 2017 crashes on SWITRS, driver #1 was reported to be at fault 94% of the time. So it may be an initial assessment subject to revision when the investigation is complete.
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.
--Richard Feynman, 5/11/1918 - 2/15/1988
DataDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2018, 12:55 PM   #51
lam@barf
cage killer
 
lam@barf's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: global surveys say - the most dangerous country on earth
Motorcycles: Naked
Name:
Helmet cams and air horns. Scares the crap out of them when they realize they can't lie about what they were actually doing.

.
__________________
Physics always wins

. . . . . . . . . so get that helmet cam! . . . . . Because the D-K Effect is an SocialyTransferedDisfunction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning...3Kruger_effect

Quote:
Originally Posted by RRR70 View Post
You need to get out of California more
2013 Suzuki TU250XL3
2010 Triumph Bonneville Mag
2009 Suzuki TU250XK9 - KBC Sep 2013
2001 Honda Rebel - KBC Mar 2010
http://flexyourrights.org
lam@barf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2018, 12:56 PM   #52
David919
Ride Again!
 
David919's Avatar
 
AMA #3283700
Contributor

Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Livermore, CA
Motorcycles: 2005 Honda 919
Name: David
Quote:
Originally Posted by DataDan View Post
The absolute worst kind of inattention was drowsiness at more than 20% of crashes.
I seem to remember hearing on KCBS recently, the spring forward fall back time change contributes up to 300 additional roadway deaths a year.
__________________
Live Free, Ride Fast, Live Slow
Riding something naked is better!
The older I get, the more I share completely irrelevant info. & stories. Just sayin'.
No matter where you go, there you are!

Last edited by David919; 11-06-2018 at 01:37 PM..
David919 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2018, 01:06 PM   #53
Junkie
re-tarded
 
Junkie's Avatar
 
Contributor + 3%

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Alameda
Motorcycles: SV1000,WR450tards (03 for sale),YZ426tard
Name: Daniel
Quote:
Originally Posted by DataDan View Post
I don't think that's a hard and fast rule. In 2017 crashes on SWITRS, driver #1 was reported to be at fault 94% of the time. So it may be an initial assessment subject to revision when the investigation is complete.
I don't believe there was ever any question as to who was at fault (lawyer stuff happened because he denied he was driving, but his insurance company didn't deny that his car was the at fault vehicle AFAIK)

I may have been party 1 because they knew my info immediately, while he didn't stop.
Junkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2018, 02:09 PM   #54
mototireguy
Moto Tire Veteran
 
mototireguy's Avatar
 
Valgar beer donor
Contributor +

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Motorcycles: CBR1RR - XR650L - Madass 125
Name: Robbie
If I were judge, jury and executioner.

Anyone convicted of a distracted driving cell phone use violation should be ordered by the court to buy a cell phone cradle and attend a 2 hour class on how to use it.
__________________
* Motorcycle Tire Services @ http://MotoTireGuy.com
* 1064 Revere Ave, San Francisco CA 94124
mototireguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2018, 10:58 AM   #55
tuxumino
I Yam what I sweet potato
 
tuxumino's Avatar
 
AMA #: 249288
Chief Beer Mooch
Contributor ++++

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: RaiderNation
Motorcycles: my butt on a duc
Name:
identify and avoid, they usually give obvious clues to being on the cell phone: large gap between them and the car in front, poor lane discipline, in consistent speed and the tell tale glow of the phone in a dark car.

Thanks to the LEOs tryin to keep us safe out there
__________________
(\_/)
(O.o) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny to your signature
(> <) to help him achieve world domination.
T.M.U. Local 510 Rabbit Deployment Farce
tuxumino is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.