Read the article, accidents involving drivers distracted using their phone are up 27%. The fact that overall accident stats are down doesn't take away the increasing problem of distracted drivers.
That doesn't exhibit a causal relationship at all. If the frequency of "distracted" driving is up 27%, and also accidents where "distracted" driving are present are up 27%, then you have shown nothing. Leaving out the other key metric is poor studying at best, and deceitful at worst. To hear you crusaders talk, half the cars on the road have people on their phones all the time. We should then expect 50% of accidents to involve someone who was on their phone at a minimum.
It is like me telling you that from the time before radios were installed in cars and when radios were installed in cars the percentage of accidents involving radios in cars went from 0% to nearly 100%. Great. All you have really told me is that cars all have radios now. By your logic though, it was obviously the radio that caused the accident! I mean, studies show that when you're changing a radio station your reaction time is slowed, right? Well, great, but can you prove a relationship between that level of increased reaction time and a higher incidence of accidents?
