Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Should cell phone drivers be singled out?
3688 messages, Last post on Oct 27, 2009 at 11:39 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
OK, I would like to hear some opinions from the crowd here. California has recently passed a law, which takes effect in July 2008, forbidding cell phone use while driving, but of course allowing it as long as you don't have the phone up to your ear - if you are using a headset, or a speakerphone, but not holding the phone, you are fine. In doing so, California becomes like number 39 in the list of states with similar legislation on the books. My objections to this are twofold: (1) In all the debate leading up to this "landmark legislation", it was repeated time and again that reliable data from police agencies is EXTREMELY spotty on whether cell phone use makes any contribution to safety or the lack thereof among drivers. Therefore, we have no way of really knowing whether cell phones are realy the menace to the driving public that so many people want to paint them. Yes, I know that intuitively, it seems obvious to some that cell phone use while driving simply MUST impair a driver's abilities. But what is intuitively obvious is not always the truth, as we all know. This leads me to point (2) there are SO MANY things people do in their cars now that is much more dangerous than using a phone, I can't even begin to name them all. I have witnessed, at 60 mph in the last couple of weeks, people - putting on make-up - reading the newspaper - trying to read a map - eating a fast food combo - stuff dripping everywhere, trying to steer with the elbows while manhandling that Big Mac, that sort of thing - fiddling with the darn iPod, trying to make sense of the display and figure out why the darn thing just won't play the right track I can think of others - I mean, we have aftermarket entertainment systems now that will play movies in the car, as well as TV, and internet access. This trend is only going to escalate in the next few years. Already there is a fuss here in California because people have begun text messaging while driving, and the freshly minted "landmark legislation" failed to outlaw texting! Which makes me think that no matter how much legislation you write, people will always find a way around it. Which leads me to my point: I don't think it ws right to single out cell phones in this way. What I would like to see instead is a law mandating special penalties for any erratic or dangerous driving that is deemed to be caused by the driver doing ANYTHING while driving (including all the ones I listed above, AND using cell phones, AND anything else that might exist) that distracts him/her from the task at hand. I am talking SERIOUS penalties on the order of drunk driving penalties - perhaps a $500 minimum fine, and two points on the driving record instead of the usual one. And yes, in the interest of full disclosure, I am a cell phone owner and user, and I have been known to carry on a conversation or two while driving, although I try to avoid it. I know, boo hiss, right?! I also expect that most enthusiasts here will be of the mindset "get off the phone and DRIVE!" like that bumper sticker the Car Talk guys put out. But I am as much interested in clamping down on all sorts of negligent driving behaviors as I am in not singling out cell phones. The roads are a mess, after all. I am curious to hear others' thoughts on this, if you would care to respond. |
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Oct 12, 2006 8:24 pm) Having just retired from the oil fields in Alaska I know about driving restrictions. There were no fines or points for not wearing your seatbelt, talking on the cell phone even hands free, not wearing safety glasses with side pieces along with all the usual speeding etc etc. It was 3 strikes and you are FIRED. BP ruled the roads like dictators. Your driving privilege on the field was taken away FOREVER. And of course you were fired instantly for any kind of alcohol or drugs in your possession. Not even allowed to pack your own things. Escorted to the plane and put on it. No due process in the oil patch, you are out of there, gone, history. The only thing I have against the CA cell phone law is that it should go into affect immediately. No hands free, no text messaging, pull over if you want to answer a call or have to make a call. We got along fine without the darn things for a long time. They are an obvious distraction along with all the others you mentioned. The cops should be equipped with a tracking device and any signal coming from a car and they get a ticket. For other distractions the cops need to become more observant and spend less time in the donut shop.
|
|
|
Sounds like a case of good intentions, but we all know what the road to hell is paved with. I can't imagine a good lawyer not being able to easily find a way to get out of these kind of charges. It'd come down to word vs word, and most cops are no more trustworthy than most motorists. As was said, there are also so many other distractions that are just as annoying or dangerous, those should be chased just as hard. I can't imagine a hands free conversation being any worse than smoking or eating or drinking or doing hair/makeup or getting involved with a real passenger, etc. |
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Oct 12, 2006 8:24 pm) I was never distracted by using the hands-free cell. I sure can't say that about the hand-held cell. I haven't read them, but assume the studies found the same results I had. |
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Oct 12, 2006 8:24 pm) I personally think that using a cell phone while driving is not a good idea but I also feel we have way too many laws, most of them inneffective. This is just one more. The thought of being in an accident should be enough of a deterrent to force people to pay attention. If not then they run the risk of suffering the consequences. If they injure someone else then the civil courts can handle that. IMO, education is almost always better than laws. An educational campaign along the lines of the anti-smoking campaign would be at least as effective as a law. |
|
|
|
|
Good point about the accidents - I never even thought about that. Cell phones went from a spotty take rate to like 90% in the last five to seven years. How come the accident rates haven't doubled and tripled in the same time frame? That's what I was talking about, that we have no reliable data to show that cells are the threat to motoring they are being made out to be. And I agree this law will be ineffectual. If they manage to extend it to texting, people will just keep their texting below the line of the windows and cops will never even be able to see the phone. How will they ever enforce it? I so wish we did better driver's education in this country, and had much more rigorous (and frequent) driver testing for a license. I know this particular point has been much-discussed already at Edmunds. OTOH, erratic or dangerous driving goes on all the time, for lots of reasons, including late-night street racing. Let's legislate truly punishing minimum financial and other penalties for that, and include cell phone use if it has contributed on a case by case basis. |
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Oct 13, 2006 8:32 am) I thought there have been plenty of studies saying that cell phones lead to an increased chance of having an accident: http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/cellphones/ "How come the accident rates haven't doubled and tripled in the same time frame?" But fatalities and accident rates aren't going down, either. Shouldn't those rates dip appreciably as newer and safer cars, including many with bullet-proof ESC, hit the roads? I agree with much of what you're saying -- distracted (no matter the source), reckless, and selfish (tailgaters, red-light runners, super-speeders, people whose actions belie a genuine belief that their time and life are more important than anyone elses) driving are really at the heart of the problem. But cell phones are just such low-hanging fruit -- everyone has them and everyone claims to be outraged at what they see cell-phone-using drivers do. It's a slam-dunk for the politicians, and there's no downside that I can see. Maybe the economy will suffer because John Doe doesn't get the call to pick up a bottle of white zinfandel before heading home, but I doubt it. Personally, even if a twenty-year exhaustive survey by the most well-respected organizations were to show that cell phones don't have any impact on accident rates, I'd choose not to believe it. Hell, any time I go out for lunch at work I see dozens of examples of people not being able to WALK while using the things. |
|
|
Replying to: smittynyc (Oct 13, 2006 9:12 am) I was referring to the type of accident that is categorized as property damage only. I agree that safer cars and greater use of seatbelts should lower fatality rates. But you would think that cell phone use should definitely drive up the number of fender benders. There is no empirical data to support this. However I do agree with you that common sense would indicate that cell phone use must divert some attention from driving, which should increase risk. I'm speculating here but is it possible that many people realize this when using their cell phones and try to compensate by paying greater attention than normal? Afterall, how many of us can honestly say that we always focus 100% on the task of driving? |
|
|
Replying to: smittynyc (Oct 13, 2006 9:12 am)
|
|
| A little while back I read a news story that quoted a study that said cell phone users cause as many accidents as drunk drivers. If that's true, then the people getting a ticket and small fine for it should consider themselves lucky, as we throw drunk drivers in jail, and fines are in the thousands. Yes, I do believe they cause accidents. As for the other distractions (eating, makeup, etc.), there is a law police can enforce, it's called "Failure To Pay Time And Attention". They probably don't enforce it as much as they should, though. | |
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Should cell phone drivers be singled out?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
