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: lilengineerboy (Mar 09, 2009 6:18 pm) "While the accident investigation is not complete, initial investigation indicates that the Metrolink train’s engineer failed to stop for a red signal and was using his personal cell phone throughout his on-duty shift until seconds before the collision occurred. Other evidence indicates that accident risk increases when those who control vehicles use personal wireless devices." CPUC It'll probably take another 6 months or so for the final NTHSA report on the Metrolink wreck to be completed. |
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Mar 08, 2009 8:16 pm) While most humans probably don't need 100% of their processing power to drive most of the time, the least able among us are also the least likely to differentiate between good times to dial and bad times. (You know, the 17-year-old who is still struggling to stay between the lines while regulating his/her speed.) While Mozart and Einstein were geniuses who probably had a lot more processing power than most humans today, I wouldn't want either of them writing symphonies, solving complex equations, or using cell phones while driving if they were alive today. According to the CTIA-Wireless Association, over 250 million Americans now subscribe to a cellular-phone service. That, if factored against the latest U.S. Census population clock as of Tuesday evening, places the penetration rate at 82.4 percent -- which, I assume, is its highest point ever. In ten years, that number has more than quadrupled from 55 million subscribers in 1997. That means more phones. With an estimate that at least 10% of all drivers are on the phone at any given time. I believe the term used for that was Simple math. More meaningless statistics. Crystal meth use is up as well. It also has a higher penetration than ever before. Using your assumption about cell phone use and applying it to crystal meth: X% of all crystal meth users are on meth while driving at any given time, and applying your same improved highway safety assertion, one could conclude that drivers who are high on crank aren't any less safe than sober drivers. Statistics can be made to say whatever the user wants them to say. Hence the phrase: "Statistics lie and liars use statistics". (No offense intended). over year, another 10% reduction in highway fatalities...with another drop in crashes as well... There are lots of reasons for the decline in highway fatalities, not the least of which are improved automobile safety equipment and better highways. Cars get better every year--better able to avoid a crash and better able to mitigate injuries in the event of a crash. Highway signage and road markings continually improve. The only factor that never really improves is the human being driving the vehicle. My argument is that the number of highway fatalities continues to decline IN SPITE OF poorer performing drivers.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: vinnyny (Mar 10, 2009 1:05 am) Why do you keep bringing up special cases and applying them in aggregate? Are you advocating laws on just these drivers? Most states have those in process already. More meaningless statistics. In the real world, we call this "data." Its how informed decisions are made. You learn about an issue, research it, collect data, and make a decision about it. Or you can act out of ignorance and fear, but after the last 8 years, people aren't such fans of that anymore. There are lots of reasons for the decline in highway fatalities, not the least of which are improved automobile safety equipment and better highways. Cars get better every year--better able to avoid a crash and better able to mitigate injuries in the event of a crash. Highway signage and road markings continually improve. And until last year, vehicle miles traveled increased, the number of vehicles on the road increased, the number of immegrant drivers increased, etc. And so far, very little has been done to help a car AVOID a crash, just mitigate them. The only factor that never really improves is the human being driving the vehicle. Even that isn't exactly correct. If you look at skills and training, things like hand eye coordination, opportunity cost of task switching, etc that doesn't seem to be the case. Aging hurts the process, but driving skills compensate to a degree. My argument is that the number of highway fatalities continues to decline IN SPITE OF poorer performing drivers. So why don't we do something about the poor performing drivers? What does that have to do with cell phones?
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Mar 09, 2009 6:18 pm) He ran a red light because he was texting and not driving the train. Rare occurence, yep, like a plain crash. While I realize you aren't bringing this up as a discussion point since its totally out or scope It's not out of scope, the FAA realized a long time ago, piloting heavy machinery requires a concentration to the task at hand. You still didn't respond to my observation/question, do you mind if the pilot or co-pilot texts or uses the cell phone while landing? I don't expect a response, because only a fool would say yes. (not a red herring either, very germane to the conversation) Its more that certain people think that everyone else is just like them, the same abilities and limitations If one wants to prove a point go to the racetrack. In the meantime, road safety and traffic laws have to be designed and built around the lowest common denominator. Even if it means trained race car drivers have to drive at the speed limit and not the speed they are capable of driving at. They believe what they want to believe, even with evidence to the contrary. So true. Then they complain about lack of data. I'm finding a solid basis of factual data never stops anyone from forming a conclusion. Do you? Then they complain when the data is presented. I would think most of the participants in this discussion would like to see a solid basis for a rational argument. Thankfully, this country allows everyone to express their views and opinions I heartedly agree.
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Mar 06, 2009 3:56 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Mar 08, 2009 8:27 am) |
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Mar 08, 2009 8:48 am) Safe enough? How long before another technology gadget is introduced and becomes popular and drivers will insist they absolutely have to use it while driving? They will say that it only partially distracts from driving and, after all, humans are equipped to "multi-task". No big deal. They will say, why don't police go after drivers who are "really" distracted, such as swatting kids, eating pizza, smacking a bee, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kdshapiro (Mar 10, 2009 5:17 am) It's not out of scope, the FAA realized a long time ago, piloting heavy machinery requires a concentration to the task at hand. You still didn't respond to my observation/question, do you mind if the pilot or co-pilot texts or uses the cell phone while landing? I don't expect a response, because only a fool would say yes. (not a red herring either, very germane to the conversation) It is an example of peak workload. I don't think I want someone cleaning reactors at a nuclear power plant on their phone either. I also noticed you completely ignored the rest of the flight time other than those 15 minutes at landing. If one wants to prove a point go to the racetrack. In the meantime, road safety and traffic laws have to be designed and built around the lowest common denominator. Even if it means trained race car drivers have to drive at the speed limit and not the speed they are capable of driving at. Speed limits are being addressed in a different forum. Laws have to be designed around the Constitution and Bill of Rights, that is what they are there for. If one wants to live in a Police State, Virgin Atlantic can provide a short journey "across the pond."
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Mar 10, 2009 2:53 pm) Actually included is takeoff also. However, a plane can be put on autopilot or even flown by copilot at cruising altitude. Can't put car on autosteer and autospeed. Driving a car is peak workload at all times behind the wheel. It is true that driving at 60 mph in packed freeway conditions demands a different type of driving then let's say 25 mph down an empty country road in clear conditions. Although you can still end up in ditch or hit someone or something driving 25 mph, if you give up your control of the vehicle by swatting the kids, eating pizza or losing yourself in a conversation on the ol' cell phone. Speed limits are being addressed in a different forum. Laws have to be designed around the Constitution and Bill of Rights, that is what they are there for. If one wants to live in a Police State, Virgin Atlantic can provide a short journey "across the pond." Talk about a red herring.  Our goverment can enact any laws they feel is justified. However the speed limit analogy was used to counter your analogy of peoples abilities.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: xrunner2 (Mar 10, 2009 7:25 am) Its not my perceived need. There is just not a lot of rationale for anything else. How long before another technology gadget is introduced and becomes popular and drivers will insist they absolutely have to use it while driving? They will say that it only partially distracts from driving and, after all, humans are equipped to "multi-task". So it is about fear, the unknown...what next? I am planning on waiting until we get there and seeing if its a problem before worrying about it. When cell phones came out, there was mass hysteria... then navigation systems came out, there was mass hysteria...that is why on an OEM system you can't put in the address while you're driving and all the aftermarket ones you can (at least with the Alliance members). Still, no end of the world, no day of judgment... |
|
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
