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
|
Replying to: tpe (Oct 13, 2006 3:55 pm) Ditto with the I-Drive, Command Center, etc. |
|
|
Replying to: smittynyc (Oct 13, 2006 9:12 am) According to a recent news article, occupant fatalities in vehicle accidents were down again for 2005. There were, however more deaths among pedestrians and motorcyclists. Pedestrian and motorcyclists deaths are counted as traffic fatalities, and are included in the final, total figure for the year.
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Oct 15, 2006 4:58 am) Can we assume that some of those deaths were due to in-attention by the driver of a car, engrossed in a cell phone call? Or did the pedestrian walk in front of a car they did not see or hear because they were talking on a cell phone or listening to an iPod? It seems we have to many gadgets to take our mind off our driving. Maybe we need to get tougher on those that cause accidents for any reason. Losing your license for causing an accident would be a good start. |
|
|
|
|
Why do you need studies and data to tell you that people who drive while talking is dangerous??? You people DO go outside sometimes, don't you? EVERY DAY I see people driving badly because they won't get off the phone. IT DOES NOT MATTER if it's hands free or not. The only difference is hands-free lets you turn the wheel more easily. I almost got run over by a woman on the phone recently while crossing an intersection. And that's just ONE example of what I see and deal with everyday. We have laws but they are not enforced and BIG DEAL... it's a $100 fine with no points. Those of you who think you are not distracted while talking... you are fooling yourself... you ARE distracted. And stop comparing eating to talking... you don't need to think while you eat. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: orangelebaron (Oct 15, 2006 7:27 am) It's human nature to blame the distraction. I could tell you (true story here) that I made an emergency dive into the break-down lane about 10 days back because a guy eating french fries in the lane next to me dropped some and dived to try and catch them before they hit his precious upholstery, resulting in his car swinging wildly and immediately into my lane. I had just glanced over to check my mirror and could see into his car. If I hadn't been looking that way and seen him begin to swing the wheel, I may not have been able to avoid colliding with him. Have they passed a shiny new law forbidding the consumption of fast food in the car? Of course not, McDonalds' lobbyist would eat them for lunch if they so much as hinted that they were going to try that...
|
|
|
Replying to: orangelebaron (Oct 15, 2006 7:27 am) When you have passengers in the car do you talk to them? Maybe you don't but that would put you in a very, very small minority. I'm not sure why a hands free phone would be any more distracting then talking to a passenger. Potentially less distracting because you wouldn't feel the need to occasionally look at the person you were conversing with. I'm not saying that using a cell phone while driving doesn't add to the danger on our roadways. It probably does. I'm stating that our views regarding this distraction should be consistent with other distractions and in line with the degree of danger they cause. When assessing this degree of danger it makes more sense to go by actual data then our gut feelings.
|
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Oct 15, 2006 10:20 pm) I do agree that eating food is also a distraction. I have not allowed anyone to eat or drink anything except water in any vehicle of mine since high school days. I don't want ketchup on my seats. It boggles the mind watching people choke down a burger while driving. It would be tougher to prove without using video evidence. Having the law on the books will make it easier to prosecute or settle lawsuits. If you have an accident while talking on a cell phone it will be evidence of inattention. |
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Oct 16, 2006 3:55 am) You left out a factor in the talking to a passenger scenario. If you are driving crazy or distracted the passenger will tell you to look out. The person on the other end of a hands free call has no idea your situation at that moment. It would be interesting to see statistics on accidents caused by distractions. I imagine it is over half. Removing one big distraction is better than saying it is just another distraction. I guess it could be expanded to NO food, makeup, drinks, audio, video, or talking allowed in any moving vehicle. I do see the next step in the Big Brother picture with GPS being installed in most new cars. It can track any and all signals with a record in the little black box. You crash and the NAV was on you lose in court. Very simple with the current technology. |
|
|
|
|
So you sort of agree with me then: "I guess it could be expanded to NO food, makeup, drinks, audio, video, or talking allowed in any moving vehicle" That's more than half of what I'm saying. We need much more aggressive police enforcement on driver distractions. I was being facetious with the lobbyist remark, but I should add that Verizon and Cingular, after battling it for years here in CA, dropped out of the fight this year, leaving only Sprint Nextel fighting it to the bitter end. I have no idea why. When Cingular and Verizon were also in the fight, the legislature failed like three separate times to pass cell phone legislation for motorists. |
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Oct 16, 2006 6:38 am)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Should cell phone drivers be singled out?
