Amtrak two, cell-phones zero.

Bluefront · Post by **Bluefront** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 10:47 am

Link. Actually the score is worse than that. A Google search found a bunch of incidents. It seems to be more than simple distraction. Maybe cell-phone usage can be linked to some other medical condition......

Walks in front of a train while on a cell-phone.

Drives around a crossing gate.....

Couldn't hear the whistle....

Didn't notice the tracks...

Jeez......

Felger Carbon · Post by **Felger Carbon** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 11:05 am

Darwin would approve. Evolution will either produce humans who can truly multitask, or it will produce humans who use cellphones only when motionless.

Dutchmm · Post by **Dutchmm** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 11:09 am

the first event

For the second time in less than a month, a Bay Area resident has been fatally struck by a train while walking across tracks while on a cell phone

I do realise that the rules of the English dialect of American don't necessarily apply to the main branch, but ....

Davinator · Post by **Davinator** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 11:23 am

Damn it! Felger Carbon took my natural selection reference.

And here I've been bemoaning Amtrak as the perfect example of what happens when the gov't socializes an industry and they go and get something done.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 11:56 am

Over here in the UK, it's ILLEGAL to use a cellphone whilst driving unless its hooked up to a hands free kit because it has been proven beyond any doubt that it is a dangerous activity, as has been proven by those 2 idiots, or rather those people who were previously idiots.

Well done Amtrak, keep up the good work

Andy

jhhoffma · Post by **jhhoffma** » Fri Dec 07, 2007 6:36 am

It was probably Amtrak's fault.

That train was a daily run from my city to Chicago. Turns out the train operator (do they still call them engineers?) was going 40mph in a 15mph trainyard, and the freight train he hit was on the wrong tracks. A family down the road from me is suing...

Morons.

qviri · Post by **qviri** » Fri Dec 07, 2007 7:31 am

jhhoffma wrote:A family down the road from me is suing...

For what, the bruises and scrapes?

As for the people hit - I am truly impressed. I used to live maybe 20 m in a straight line from a rail track and I could always hear, and often feel, the train before I saw it. You'd have to be engaged in a conversation of a lifetime to miss that low rumble...

Trip · Post by **Trip** » Fri Dec 07, 2007 10:17 am

Felger Carbon wrote:Darwin would approve. Evolution will either produce humans who can truly multitask, or it will produce humans who use cellphones only when motionless.

Naw, dummies still have more babies to more than cancel out their higher death rate. Watch Idiocracy

Erssa · Post by **Erssa** » Fri Dec 07, 2007 11:04 pm

I find the name of the victim pretty ironic.

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Sat Dec 08, 2007 3:48 am

"Scott Slaughter", damn thats funny

in this context anyway. I expect his family will feel pretty slaughtered as well

Some people think I am insensitive, I am and I will admit it as well, the truth of the matter is that I wouldnt be laughing at this guy's expense if he (they) were'nt so damned stupid.

He made a conscious descision to take a short-cut at his own risk, he made a conscious descision to use his cell-phone which increased his risk, thats practically suicide - I have no sympathy.

Andy

FlorisNielssen · Post by **FlorisNielssen** » Sat Dec 08, 2007 2:29 pm

andyb wrote:Over here in the UK, it's ILLEGAL to use a cellphone whilst driving unless its hooked up to a hands free kit because it has been proven beyond any doubt that it is a dangerous activity, as has been proven by those 2 idiots, or rather those people who were previously idiots.

Here in Holland it is also forbidden to use your cell phone without a car kit (hands free kit) while driving.
But it's nonsense that this is safer than holding it. If your talking while driving your distracted. Your also distracted while talking to a person next to you in the car. BUT, a person next to you notices when you need attention on the road and shuts up. While calling, the person on the other end of the line does not notice it when you need your attention. And that's the main reason for accidents where cell phone's are involved. Not the calling with one hand, driving with the other.

Although many people think it is...

andyb · Post by **andyb** » Sun Dec 09, 2007 3:27 pm

And that's the main reason for accidents where cell phone's are involved. Not the calling with one hand, driving with the other.

You are wrong, they are both dangerous: but, holding something with one hand and takling to someone who is not present in the vehicle (mobile) is much worse than just talking to someone who is not present in the vehicle (hands-free mobile).

Likewise just talking to someone is a vehicle can be dangerous because the conversation itself can be distracting, also the passenger who the driver is communicating with can themselves be distracting, or acting in a manner that is distracting, such as shouting. I have seen people arguing whilst driving, and I have been in a stationary vehicle that was hit from behind whilst the driver was having a conversation with her passenger.

You are totally right about mobiles being more dangerous, but totally wrong that having 2 hands free to drive with is no better than 1 hand.

Remember that people often look at their mobiles when choosing who to call, and then their are the real fuckwits who actually read/write whole text messages whilst driving, and with the current generation of phones people will probably even browse their photo albulms and watch movies.

There are 3 main problems with people holding things such as mobile phones whilst driving, let alone actually using the device.

1), It is/can be more difficult to use the car because there is something in your hand (depending on the item), a hand grenade will cause more concentration than a brick, but the brick is more cumbersome. A mobile phone is different to an ice-cream or a cigarette, a cigarette will change where you move your hands so that you dont burn things, and ice-cream will require balance, whilst a mobile will require care so that you dont press the small red-button and hang-up.

2), The hand held item might want attention, a ringing phone, a cigarette that is burning down to the butt, an ice-cream that might be about to dribble a cold substance onto your crotch that could be shocking and leave a suspicious mark.

3), People dont want to let the item go - hence the reason they are holding the item. They might not want to put their cigarette/ice-cream down when they pull away from the traffic lights and pick it up again when it is next safe(er) for them to do so, and people who are on a phone call dont want to just end the call or just drop the phone onto the seat next to them or even press the wrong button by accident.

4), People are stupid/dont believe that it is dangerous.

Andy

psiu · Post by **psiu** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:44 pm

Trip wrote:
Felger Carbon wrote:Darwin would approve. Evolution will either produce humans who can truly multitask, or it will produce humans who use cellphones only when motionless.
Naw, dummies still have more babies to more than cancel out their higher death rate. Watch Idiocracy

That movie is depressing...

djkest · Post by **djkest** » Tue Dec 18, 2007 3:00 pm

LITTLETON, CO â€“ A light rail train crashed into a Union Pacific coal train car that had derailed and tipped into its path on Tuesday morning during the snowy commute.

The crash occurred as the light rail train was heading north out of the Mineral Station on the Santa Fe line at the 6400 block of S. Santa Fe Drive, just south of Arapahoe Community College at about 6:15 a.m.
Link

Amtrak two, cell-phones zero.

Amtrak two, cell-phones zero.

Most of us would have laid down and died after ....