I've grown tired of reading study after study and the many different findings that all seem to contradict one another or are just totally ridiculous. So I decide to call the National Safety Council and ask them "What is the most conclusive data you've got?" ... Unfortunately the person I really need to speak to was already gone for the day but the person I DID speak to (who admitted they were knowledgeable but not an expert on the topic) recommended I start by looking at a recent Virginia Tech study.
After starting to read it I realized that I've already been through it but I do agree with some of the opinions they offer in this part:
The Disconnect Between Naturalistic and Simulator Research
It is important to keep in mind that a driving simulator is not actual driving. Driving simulators engage participants in tracking tasks in a laboratory. As such, researchers that conduct simulator studies must be cautious when suggesting that conclusions based on simulator studies are applicable to actual driving. With the introduction of naturalistic driving studies that record drivers (through continuous video and kinematic sensors) in actual driving situations, we now have a scientific method to study driver behavior in real‐world driving conditions in the presence of real‐world daily pressures. As such, if the point of transportation safety research is to understand driver behavior in the real‐world (e.g., increase crash risk due to cell phone use), and when conflicting findings occur between naturalistic studies and simulator studies, findings from the real‐world, and not the simulator‐world, must be considered the gold standard.
It is also critical to note that some results of recent naturalistic driving studies, including those highlighted here as well as others (e.g., Sayer, Devonshire and Flanagan, 2007) are at odds with results obtained from simulator studies. Future research is necessary to explore the reasons why simulator studies sometimes do not reflect studies conducted in actual driving conditions (i.e., the full context of the driving environment). It may be, as Sayer, Devonshire and Flanagan (2007) note, that controlled investigations cannot account for driver choice behavior and risk perception as it actually occurs in real‐world driving. If this assessment is accurate, the generalizability of simulator findings, at least in some cases, may be greatly limited outside of the simulated environment.
Showing posts with label Allentown. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Allentown. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Why Am I Opposed to Cell Phone Bans?
With a growing number of Cities and States implementing 'Fine-Based' bans on hand held devices while driving I feel it is important that the data used to base the decision of such legislation be accurate and unbiased. Furthermore I feel it is import that these bans actually address the problem and do not create additional problems; either by way of adding undo finical strain on innocent motorists or by over-extending those involved with enforcing the bans and indirectly creating more harm than good. I think most would agree it is not advantageous to take away the personal freedoms of citizens and/or fine those who do not abide by the ban when there is little to no benefit of implementing or enforcing the ban. Nor is it beneficial for police officers to be apprehending cell phone users instead of violent criminals, especially when the decision to do so is based off of flawed, biased, or incorrect data.
Thus far I have found multiple studies that paint a distorted picture of the dangers related to cell phone use while driving and feel it is unfair and irresponsible for legislators to even consider implementing any type of bans based upon this data. Additionally I have found no evidence that cell phone and texting bans have a positive effect in areas that have implemented them. Typically proponents for these types of bans complain there is no positive effect due to lack of enforcement while enforcement officials argue that they are either enforcing the bans but it is having little effect or that the bans are too difficult to enforce. Whether you feel cell phone use while driving is dangerous or not, there is more and more evidence that banning these devices, in any capacity, is not accomplishing the intended goal and merely adding undue hardship on citizens and law enforcment officials in those communities that implement these bans.
Thus far I have found multiple studies that paint a distorted picture of the dangers related to cell phone use while driving and feel it is unfair and irresponsible for legislators to even consider implementing any type of bans based upon this data. Additionally I have found no evidence that cell phone and texting bans have a positive effect in areas that have implemented them. Typically proponents for these types of bans complain there is no positive effect due to lack of enforcement while enforcement officials argue that they are either enforcing the bans but it is having little effect or that the bans are too difficult to enforce. Whether you feel cell phone use while driving is dangerous or not, there is more and more evidence that banning these devices, in any capacity, is not accomplishing the intended goal and merely adding undue hardship on citizens and law enforcment officials in those communities that implement these bans.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Allentown City Council BANNED CELL PHONES Last Night
It's true ... Allentown now has a cell phone ban
I went to this meeting armed to the hilt with REAL data against this getting passed but I was given only 3 minutes to speak!!! It took me 3 DAYS to research everything! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr! What REALLY makes me mad is how they *PASSED A LAW* without being AT ALL informed on the subject!!!
When speaking, Mike Schlossberg (the author of this nightmare) often miss quoted the only study he referenced while drafting this piece of garbage and not a single council member even noticed. (Note: It was a study done with only 40 people, some who never owned a cell phone, the study was done in a driving simulator, the study arbitrarily mentions an "increased rate of crashes" when in fact crashes are down 20% since 2000 and cell phone subscriptions are up 1,262.4% since 1994, so on and so on ...) Also just minutes before the meeting started I was showing Councilman Julio Guridy the U.S. Census "Motor Vehicle Crash Data" and it was "NEW" information to him!? Which means... there MORONS passed this thing without ever ONCE looking at the crash statistics ... not to even formulate a baseline?!
When the meeting was over I attempted to speak to Mike Schlossberg, I tried to ask him what he read in the study that made him think this is a matter that needed legislation, but he just kept telling me he wasn't going to talk about it and acted like a HUGE DICK!! I can only suspect it is because he didn't read or understand the study and the bias of it's findings.
With all that said ...
I CHALLANGE **ANYONE** TO DEBATE ME ON THIS SUBJECT!
While I would preferr it be Mike Schlossberg he doesn't know enough about it to even try. (Does my challange seem childish or baiting? Remember... he authored a law to take away your rights ... don't you want to make sure he actually knows something about the subject? Only 4 people spoke on the matter before it was voted on and I was THE ONLY ONE to present any data)
Wanna see how stupid the study used as the foundation of this ban is for yourself ... here it is: A comparison of the cell-phone driver and the drunk driver. (Be sure not to miss the parts where they say ... we didn't find evidence that drunk driving is really dangerous but just ignore it ... i'll try to find time to point out each of the flaws in this study at a later time)
I went to this meeting armed to the hilt with REAL data against this getting passed but I was given only 3 minutes to speak!!! It took me 3 DAYS to research everything! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr! What REALLY makes me mad is how they *PASSED A LAW* without being AT ALL informed on the subject!!!
When speaking, Mike Schlossberg (the author of this nightmare) often miss quoted the only study he referenced while drafting this piece of garbage and not a single council member even noticed. (Note: It was a study done with only 40 people, some who never owned a cell phone, the study was done in a driving simulator, the study arbitrarily mentions an "increased rate of crashes" when in fact crashes are down 20% since 2000 and cell phone subscriptions are up 1,262.4% since 1994, so on and so on ...) Also just minutes before the meeting started I was showing Councilman Julio Guridy the U.S. Census "Motor Vehicle Crash Data" and it was "NEW" information to him!? Which means... there MORONS passed this thing without ever ONCE looking at the crash statistics ... not to even formulate a baseline?!
When the meeting was over I attempted to speak to Mike Schlossberg, I tried to ask him what he read in the study that made him think this is a matter that needed legislation, but he just kept telling me he wasn't going to talk about it and acted like a HUGE DICK!! I can only suspect it is because he didn't read or understand the study and the bias of it's findings.
With all that said ...
I CHALLANGE **ANYONE** TO DEBATE ME ON THIS SUBJECT!
While I would preferr it be Mike Schlossberg he doesn't know enough about it to even try. (Does my challange seem childish or baiting? Remember... he authored a law to take away your rights ... don't you want to make sure he actually knows something about the subject? Only 4 people spoke on the matter before it was voted on and I was THE ONLY ONE to present any data)
Wanna see how stupid the study used as the foundation of this ban is for yourself ... here it is: A comparison of the cell-phone driver and the drunk driver. (Be sure not to miss the parts where they say ... we didn't find evidence that drunk driving is really dangerous but just ignore it ... i'll try to find time to point out each of the flaws in this study at a later time)
CELL PHONE BAN INFORMATION (Part 1)
CELL PHONE BAN INFORMATION (Part 1) Fatal Crashes vs. Cell Phone Subscibers from 1994 to 2008 Prepared by: Craig Friebolin - March, 2010 ... | ||||
| Year | All Crashes Nationally | Fatal Crashes Nationally | Cell Phone Subscibers | |
| 1980 | 17,900,000 | 53,200 | no data | |
| 1985 | no data | no data | 203,600 | |
| 1990 | 11,500,000 | 46,800 | 4,368,686 | |
| 1994 | no data | 36,254 | 19,283,306 | |
| 1995 | 10,700,000 | 37,241 | 28,154,414 | |
| 1996 | no data | 37,494 | 38,195,466 | |
| 1997 | no data | 37,324 | 48,705,553 | |
| 1998 | no data | 37,107 | 60,831,431 | |
| 1999 | no data | 37,140 | 76,284,753 | |
| 2000 | 13,400,000 | 37,526 | 97,035,925 | |
| 2001 | no data | 37,862 | 118,397,734 | |
| 2002 | no data | 38,491 | 134,561,370 | |
| 2003 | 11,800,000 | 38,477 | 148,065,824 | |
| 2004 | 10,900,000 | 38,444 | 169,467,393 | |
| 2005 | 10,700,000 | 39,252 | 194,479,364 | |
| 2006 | 10,400,000 | 38,648 | 219,652,457 | |
| 2007 | 10,600,000 | 37,435 | 243,482,202 | |
| 2008 | no data | 34,017 | 262,720,165 | |
| 2009 | no data | no data | no data | |
| 2010 | no data | no data | no data | |
| %(+/-) | 0.9% Decrease* | 6.2% Decrease | 1,262.4% Increase | |
* 0.9 Decrease from 1995 to 2007 Subscribers Average Call Length: (approx) 2.3 minutes | ||||
Conclusion: Assuming that cell phones are indeed a distraction; they are no more distracting than other common tasks that an overwhelming majority of drivers are already equipped to handle. (i.e. - looking in a rear view mirror, or rolling down a window). Because cell phones do not increase the amount of motor vehicle accidents it is clear that only the likelihood of a driver being on a cell phone at the time of an accident has actually increased. | ||||
Perspective: Total US Licenced Drivers in 1995 was: 176,628,482Perspective: USA Smoking Death rate extrapolations (2010): 440,000 per year | ||||
All Crash Data: U.S. Census Bureau http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2010/tables/10s1067.pdf | ||||
| Fatal Crash Data: Fatality Analysis Reporting System http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/ | ||||
| Cell Data: CTIA - International Association for the Wireless Telecommunications Industry http://files.ctia.org/pdf/CTIA_Survey_Midyear_2009_Graphics.pdf | ||||
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Responce to Michael Donovan's recent post
City Councilman and Allentown Parking Authority Board Member Michael Donovan recently posted this blog entry: Parking Ticket Fines ... below are my thoughts:
@STREET CLEANING:
Wow ... you're my hero. Except for the fact that Street Cleaning in Allentown is COMPLETELY UNNESASSARY! I've spoken to several people in the Allentown Streets Department as to why they do so much redundant street cleaning and within a day found a reasonable solution that would eliminate all the parking havoc caused by the current method. I then presented that solution to the Streets Department and never got a response to my endless follow-up calls. Next I presented a case for a performance audit of current Street Cleaning methods to the City Controller and "surprise surprise" I got no response. The fact of the matter is; that a reasonably priced upgrade to the city's water system would solve MANY PROBLEMS, but the current method that involves two city departments following each other around for countless man hours and requires every citizen to move their car off the streets in a city that is already hard-pressed for parking seems like the cheaper, easier and more logical way to go, right?
@DOUBLE PARKING:
Because some grumpy old man at the Morning Call wrote one of the worst, one-sided, articles about double parking ever (Paul Carpenter: Double-parking plague infects city); you're going to raise the fine? (I see no mention of enforcement, just rising the fine; which will actually accomplish nothing) Now, I admit some people double park in a very inconsiderate manner ... they park in the middle of the street then leave the vehicle sitting, while others, pullover, do a quick 'drop-off' to let a passenger out who may have a heavy item or child/children with them, etc.. But to simply punish EVERYONE is not the answer because it doesn't address the problem.
The REAL problem is; THERE IS NO PLACE TO PARK! This is an ENORMOUS FAILURE on the part of the Allentown Parking Authority. With that said I would like to add; WOW YOU HAVE NERVE! YOU HAVE FAILED AND NOW YOU WANT TO FURTHER PUNISH THE CITIZENS OF ALLENTOWN FOR YOUR FAILURE!?!? I am very very very un-impressed.
There are only and handful of solutions to the city's parking problems and they are clear cut:
1) The Allentown Parking Authority must buy land, build parking lots, and offer free parking to residents to alleviate congestion.
And/Or
2) The City and the Parking Authority need to work together and not allow houses to be converted to apartments in areas with little or no parking. Furthermore they need to convert some of the multi-family buildings back to single homes.
Raising fines to give the 'appearance of action' does NOTHING to actually solve the problem.
@TRUCK RESTRICTION:
THIS LAW IS MORONIC! If a truck is parked on a city street in a manner that obstructs the flow of traffic and is a danger then give it a ticket. But to simply BAN a truck from parking anywhere is stupid! This is clearly something that falls into the "We have To-Many-Laws category" since other laws already address any REAL PROBLEM that could occur from an oversized vehicle being parked on the street. All this law does is punish and inconvenience people who happen to drive a truck. (PERIOD)
@MULTIPLE TICKETS:
Every once in a while you do something that will only help bring attention to the fact that Allentown Parking Authority is out of control. When we have a city full of hard-to-ignore, big-yellow-boots, on every car, truck, SUV, baby stroller and ambulance; people will start to take a good long look at how the APA is run and I can assure you they will not be pleased.
------------------------------------------------
For more information on the Corrupt, Wasteful, Hypocritical, Nuisance that is the APA visit this site about the Allentown Parking Authority
@STREET CLEANING:
Wow ... you're my hero. Except for the fact that Street Cleaning in Allentown is COMPLETELY UNNESASSARY! I've spoken to several people in the Allentown Streets Department as to why they do so much redundant street cleaning and within a day found a reasonable solution that would eliminate all the parking havoc caused by the current method. I then presented that solution to the Streets Department and never got a response to my endless follow-up calls. Next I presented a case for a performance audit of current Street Cleaning methods to the City Controller and "surprise surprise" I got no response. The fact of the matter is; that a reasonably priced upgrade to the city's water system would solve MANY PROBLEMS, but the current method that involves two city departments following each other around for countless man hours and requires every citizen to move their car off the streets in a city that is already hard-pressed for parking seems like the cheaper, easier and more logical way to go, right?
@DOUBLE PARKING:
Because some grumpy old man at the Morning Call wrote one of the worst, one-sided, articles about double parking ever (Paul Carpenter: Double-parking plague infects city); you're going to raise the fine? (I see no mention of enforcement, just rising the fine; which will actually accomplish nothing) Now, I admit some people double park in a very inconsiderate manner ... they park in the middle of the street then leave the vehicle sitting, while others, pullover, do a quick 'drop-off' to let a passenger out who may have a heavy item or child/children with them, etc.. But to simply punish EVERYONE is not the answer because it doesn't address the problem.
The REAL problem is; THERE IS NO PLACE TO PARK! This is an ENORMOUS FAILURE on the part of the Allentown Parking Authority. With that said I would like to add; WOW YOU HAVE NERVE! YOU HAVE FAILED AND NOW YOU WANT TO FURTHER PUNISH THE CITIZENS OF ALLENTOWN FOR YOUR FAILURE!?!? I am very very very un-impressed.
There are only and handful of solutions to the city's parking problems and they are clear cut:
1) The Allentown Parking Authority must buy land, build parking lots, and offer free parking to residents to alleviate congestion.
And/Or
2) The City and the Parking Authority need to work together and not allow houses to be converted to apartments in areas with little or no parking. Furthermore they need to convert some of the multi-family buildings back to single homes.
Raising fines to give the 'appearance of action' does NOTHING to actually solve the problem.
@TRUCK RESTRICTION:
THIS LAW IS MORONIC! If a truck is parked on a city street in a manner that obstructs the flow of traffic and is a danger then give it a ticket. But to simply BAN a truck from parking anywhere is stupid! This is clearly something that falls into the "We have To-Many-Laws category" since other laws already address any REAL PROBLEM that could occur from an oversized vehicle being parked on the street. All this law does is punish and inconvenience people who happen to drive a truck. (PERIOD)
@MULTIPLE TICKETS:
Every once in a while you do something that will only help bring attention to the fact that Allentown Parking Authority is out of control. When we have a city full of hard-to-ignore, big-yellow-boots, on every car, truck, SUV, baby stroller and ambulance; people will start to take a good long look at how the APA is run and I can assure you they will not be pleased.
------------------------------------------------
For more information on the Corrupt, Wasteful, Hypocritical, Nuisance that is the APA visit this site about the Allentown Parking Authority
Sunday, August 30, 2009
The Allentown PA Parking Authority Sucks!
The Allentown PA Parking Authority is a business that targets low-income families for profit (period)
Need Proof they target low income families? Ok... Click Here
How much profit? AT LEAST 5 million dollars annually (but I've seen a report of 19 million recently). Need Proof? Ok... Click Here
If you think they HAVE to give out this many tickets... you're wrong!
A large number of tickets are given out due to "Street Cleaning".
Street Cleaning closes down 25% of Center City parking for several hours 4 days a week in a City that is AWARE OF THE FACT that there are not enough places to park already.
The City claims it "has to" street clean because of regulations from Fed. & State Government with regard to pollutants that enter into the water supply via street drains/gutters so their hands are tied.
HOWEVER! Allentown's water filter system is archaic!
Solution: Take the MILLIONS the Parking Authority makes and re-invest it into replacing the gutters with newer ones! This would eliminate the need for all the redundant street cleaning, solve the parking problem and make more citizens happy and less inconvenienced!
If you agree with the proposed solution above then call this guy at the Allentown Dept of Public Works and rip into him: Richard Young - 610-437-7587
Need Proof they target low income families? Ok... Click Here
How much profit? AT LEAST 5 million dollars annually (but I've seen a report of 19 million recently). Need Proof? Ok... Click Here
If you think they HAVE to give out this many tickets... you're wrong!
A large number of tickets are given out due to "Street Cleaning".
Street Cleaning closes down 25% of Center City parking for several hours 4 days a week in a City that is AWARE OF THE FACT that there are not enough places to park already.
The City claims it "has to" street clean because of regulations from Fed. & State Government with regard to pollutants that enter into the water supply via street drains/gutters so their hands are tied.
HOWEVER! Allentown's water filter system is archaic!
Solution: Take the MILLIONS the Parking Authority makes and re-invest it into replacing the gutters with newer ones! This would eliminate the need for all the redundant street cleaning, solve the parking problem and make more citizens happy and less inconvenienced!
If you agree with the proposed solution above then call this guy at the Allentown Dept of Public Works and rip into him: Richard Young - 610-437-7587
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
