spindrift Posted July 7, 2010 Author Share Posted July 7, 2010 LOL OK I dispute the research because your figures contradict it. In other words, you disputed it first. What figures? You need the ratio of drunk drivers versus drivers on mobiles. Got it? Thought not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrence Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 What figures? You need the ratio of drunk drivers versus drivers on mobiles. Got it? Thought not. Yes, I addressed that point of the comparison already in an earlier reply. Intuitively, it seems somewhat unlikely that there are 40 times more drunk drivers than people using a mobile phone. I'd suggest the inverse is more likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted July 7, 2010 Author Share Posted July 7, 2010 Yes, I addressed that point of the comparison already in an earlier reply. Intuitively, it seems somewhat unlikely that there are 40 times more drunk drivers than people using a mobile phone. I'd suggest the inverse is more likely. Source please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrence Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 Source please. Look up "intuitively". Today I saw 2 people on their phone. I didn't see 80 drunk drivers unless pretty much every moving vehicle I saw was being driven by a drunk driver. Are you really attempting to justify your claim that there are 40 times more deaths from drunk driving than mobile use because there are 40 times more drunk drivers? As it is yourself making this claim, again it is up to you to provide your source to convince your sceptical audience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted July 7, 2010 Author Share Posted July 7, 2010 So, no source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrence Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 OK, we have a tacit retraction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted July 7, 2010 Share Posted July 7, 2010 Can you please stop the bickering and debate the topic in a more mature manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted July 8, 2010 Author Share Posted July 8, 2010 The driver's been reported. No seat belt, jumping a red, driving on a mobile, assault. The car reg comes up on a Google search too, let's just hope nobody pours Nitromors over his car, that would be hilarious, I mean very naughty. It's completely mental, there are two things you can't criticise men for and I think the gentle remonstration is what made the gorilla so out of control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul2412 Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 Isn't holding a camera whilst riding a bike illegal? Surely its irresponsible. The guy in the van was an arse, but so is the guy on the bike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted July 8, 2010 Author Share Posted July 8, 2010 Isn't holding a camera whilst riding a bike illegal? Surely its irresponsible. The guy in the van was an arse, but so is the guy on the bike. It's a helmet cam. More and more cyclists are using these to catch the chavvy thugs like the spitting driver, you can get a basic set-up for around £50. Pointing out to someone that theri illegal behaviour is placing others at risk is NOT provocation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.