Using cell phones while driving

[doom dragon 105]

A cell phone requires you to respond and interact, drawing your focus and attention toward it. With other outside distractions (ie) radio, loud friends, hot chick in the car, you are not required to interact, thus less of your focus is pulled away from what you are doing.

same with the radio, and calibrating the speakers in your car. when doing that you have to concentrate and see what you have to do to make the speakers sound their best. when you have friends in the car that your talking to your in a conversation but more direct. a hot girl in a car next to you your probably trying to impress her so your attention is again directly divided.

 

[Modest_Egoist]

Are you saying that the presence of a distraction won't make a bad driver an even worse driver?

No. I've been cut off and almost hit by people talking on cells as well as people using hands-free devices. I also know people that can drive while talking on a cell or using a hands-free deviece. What I meant was that the bad cell phone drivers are just gonna become bad hands-free drivers.

 

[penguinman]

I am a firm supporter of them having to have a good driving record
to be talking on the phone as to save lives and give people a insentive to drive safely.

sort of reminds me of "allstate" car insurance...

 

[M@v]

I agree with the law. Not only do people call while they are driving, they text as well, which has to be one of the most dangerous things you can do. Im not sure on hands-free. I know I would be responsible enough to pay attention while talking, but I am not sure people in general would.

 

[mzink*]

same with the radio, and calibrating the speakers in your car. when doing that you have to concentrate and see what you have to do to make the speakers sound their best. when you have friends in the car that your talking to your in a conversation but more direct. a hot girl in a car next to you your probably trying to impress her so your attention is again directly divided.

Those things do not require your interaction. When you pick up a cell phone, you are committing your attention to it and agreeing to interact with that person. Telling your friends to be quiet or tuning them out would be like not picking up your cell phone when it rings in the car. You are refraining from directing your attention to it. Once you pick up that cell phone you are required to interact.

 

[Moy]

Driving while on a cell phone is still dangerous, and people should be able to wait until they stopped driving to have a phone conversation. You shouldn't be talking mindlessly on the phone while driving unless its an emergency.

 

[doom dragon 105]

Those things do not require your interaction. When you pick up a cell phone, you are committing your attention to it and agreeing to interact with that person. Telling your friends to be quiet or tuning them out would be like not picking up your cell phone when it rings in the car. You are refraining from directing your attention to it. Once you pick up that cell phone you are required to interact.

what your basically saying that you should not talk to friends in the car with you if your driving? and what about the speaker calibration?

 

[blazedaces]

Why is this a discussion about whether or not talking on the phone can increase the risk of an accident? Studies have already shown this to be true. There's also studies easily showing that states which have applied these anti cell phone while driving laws have drastically reduced the number of accidents on the road.

Stop speculating and comparing it to talking to your friends and the radio. I don't care whether they seem the same or not to you. The facts speak for themselves.

-blazed

 

[PRINCESS PEACH777]

Starting today (July 1), it's illegal to use a cell phone while driving in California unless you're using a hands-free device. This type of law has already been in place in other states for a while (i.e. New York).

Obviously, the intention is promote safety, but I don't think this will be effective. Primarily, I think that the danger raised by drivers on phones is not that they're driving with one hand, which is perfectly legal (i.e. people driving a stick). Rather, it is the presence of a distraction, one which still exists whether the driver is holding a phone or not

So the question is two-fold:
1) Should talking on the phone be illegal while driving?
2) If (1) is yes, then should hands-free devices be acceptable?


edit: clarifying that the "new" law is in California, I could've sworn I originally had this, but I didn't

Ok to answer you questions yes it should be illegal because where i live it is illegal
and of course the hands-free device should be acceptable because then the driver
can concentrate on the road and will not do a stupid mistake and most of the people
i know already have these devices in their cars.

 

[Firus]

I don't see how the law will really solve the problem, for reasons people have pointed out already. The best 'solution' that I can come up with is that if you're talking on the phone (or whatever), you should have to use the far right lane.

Or, if you're talking on the phone you could just...you know, pull over?

As just about everyone in the thread seems to think, I think that the distraction is the conversation itself, not holding the phone. There are people that may drive one-handed initially, just because they find it more comfortable. Holding the phone may be a partial problem, but not a huge one. The conversation is just too much of a distraction. Heck, sometimes I'll be on the phone with my friend while I'm playing a video game, and either I lose track of what my friend is saying or I mess up in the video game. And I'm pretty good at multitasking. I constantly eat while watching TV, with my DS in front of me. Conversations take a lot more effort, so much that you'll have a hard time focusing on both the road and the conversation. Are there other things that will hinder your driving? Yes. Can all of them be banned? No. But that doesn't mean there's no reason for this law to be put into effect.

As for the law's effectiveness, it's been implemented (hands-free devices are okay) in my state for quite some time now. Honestly, every day I see at least 3 people driving with a Cell Phone up to their ear, and 90% of them are doing something stupid, most likely because they're distracted by their conversation. I have yet to see someone get pulled over. Then again, I also see about 3 people a day not stopping at stop signs and never getting pulled over, so maybe that's just the drivers and police in my state.

 

[pockyD]

No. I've been cut off and almost hit by people talking on cells as well as people using hands-free devices. I also know people that can drive while talking on a cell or using a hands-free deviece. What I meant was that the bad cell phone drivers are just gonna become bad hands-free drivers.

right, and the proposal here is to outlaw phone communication outright

 

[Modest_Egoist]

The reason I believe this shouldn't be a law is that there are accidents that are caused by things other than cell phone usage. They include failure to merge or yield, speeding, racing, aggressive driving and failure to exercise care in passing. My friend almost got into an accident because a wasp got in the car and freaked her out. No matter how safe they try to make the roads, accidents will still occur.

 

[arrowhead]

The reason I believe this shouldn't be a law is that there are accidents that are caused by things other than cell phone usage. They include failure to merge or yield, speeding, racing, aggressive driving and failure to exercise care in passing. My friend almost got into an accident because a wasp got in the car and freaked her out. No matter how safe they try to make the roads, accidents will still occur.

doesn't mean you can't try to reduce the number of accidents

 

[pockyD]

The reason I believe this shouldn't be a law is that there are accidents that are caused by things other than cell phone usage. They include failure to merge or yield, speeding, racing, aggressive driving and failure to exercise care in passing. My friend almost got into an accident because a wasp got in the car and freaked her out. No matter how safe they try to make the roads, accidents will still occur.

You realize that the vast majority of the things you listed are already illegal, right?

If cell phone usage falls in the same category as those, then by all means, it should be outlawed.

 

[Modest_Egoist]

You realize that the vast majority of the things you listed are already illegal, right?

I should have said "include but are not limited to" in that sentence. There are other causes besides the ones I listed, such as driver fatigue, passenger distractions, rubbernecking, looking at scenery, adjusting the radio, drunk driving, not adjusting to changing weather conditions, retrieving a dropped item, poorly maintained roads, malfunctioning traffic signals, and other highway defects. There have even been accidents involving people using hands-free devices as well.

I live in Connecticut, a state that has had a cell phone ban since October 2005. The police don't enforce it. The one time they really do crack down on cell phone use is during limited time campaigns during big travel weekends. It's just that I feel this law hasn't really done much in deterring people from using their phones while driving. Unless the law is enforced, people will ignore it.

 

[pockyD]

Well, I can speak for myself and say that the law has prevented me from using the phone while driving (and since I haven't bothered to go get a hands-free device yet, from using it at all while driving). I've never been in an accident before, so whether or not it's making me substantially MORE safe is a little bit debatable I suppose, but it is definitely an effective deterrent to a good amount of the population.

What exactly is your argument? Are you saying that it shouldn't be banned because it's hard to enforce? Perhaps, but its mere existence is already a deterrent that wouldn't exist if the law weren't there. Even if the state literally commits nothing to its enforcement, I am almost certain that at least a few accidents have been averted.

It shouldn't be banned because people already drive unsafely due to other factors? This is preposterous; in this case, we should be looking at the "other factors" to see what else can be "reasonably" banned, not just accepting that since people will be unsafe anyway, they should be free to do what they want. Let's legalize drunk driving too!

 

[Modest_Egoist]

The thing is, you can't reasonably ban everything without infringing on people's rights.

 

[Firus]

I should have said "include but are not limited to" in that sentence. There are other causes besides the ones I listed, such as driver fatigue, passenger distractions, rubbernecking, looking at scenery, adjusting the radio, drunk driving, not adjusting to changing weather conditions, retrieving a dropped item, poorly maintained roads, malfunctioning traffic signals, and other highway defects. There have even been accidents involving people using hands-free devices as well.

The thing is, even if the ban only prevents one accident there's no reason to not do it. There's no reason for you to be on a Cell Phone while you're driving. If you absolutely HAVE to take a call, then pull over. Unless it's a very important call, there's no reason you can't wait and call them back. It's entirely possible for other things to cause accidents, but that's not the point. If you argue all or nothing, then ban driving in rain or snow, ban any more than one passenger per car...there are too many things you'd have to ban. And if you vote nothing, then drunk/high driving would be allowed. I'd rather not have that happen.

I live in Connecticut, a state that has had a cell phone ban since October 2005. The police don't enforce it. The one time they really do crack down on cell phone use is during limited time campaigns during big travel weekends. It's just that I feel this law hasn't really done much in deterring people from using their phones while driving. Unless the law is enforced, people will ignore it.

You're right, the police don't enforce it at all (although someone I know got a ticket for it. Go figure, the people you know are the only ones caught when there are a million and one others breaking the law). However, that's no reason to say it shouldn't be banned. Some people are definitely dishonest about it, but I know more than a few people who would probably talk on their phone while driving but don't because it's against the law. So it's going to stop some. Not a whole lot, necessarily, but some. Plus, I have an inkling that it's just the police in Connecticut that are bad about enforcing any rules of the road since no one ever stops at a stop sign, as I said; all the more reason not to use it as the example for all states.

 

[HyugaRicdeau]

Or, if you're talking on the phone you could just...you know, pull over?

Yes, but I meant short of that.

The thing is, you can't reasonably ban everything without infringing on people's rights.

What about the rights of other drivers to be free from the recklessness and endangerment of others? Two "rights" are competing with one another. We have to pick one. We already know what the answer is in the case of drunk driving. If driving while using a phone has been shown to be of comparable level of impedence, then shouldn't the answer for phones be the same?

 

[Modest_Egoist]

Firus, I just find it perplexing how a law with lower fines can reduce cell phone usage in one state, yet a law with higher fines not have much improvement in another. Perhaps I'm venting my frustration with the CT police's lax enforcement of the law in the wrong way.

Regarding the "all or nothing" remark, I wasn't going to that extreme with it. I looked at the law, and it allows texting which is much worse than just talking on a cell. If there's a cell phone usage ban in place, how come people can still use their phones to text? Even with a hands-free device, you still have to use one hand and look away from the road while you text. It seems contradictory to me.

Hyuga, I was talking about the government going to extremes banning other distractions such as the radio and other passengers, which would just be ridiculous.

 

[Firus]

Firus, I just find it perplexing how a law with lower fines can reduce cell phone usage in one state, yet a law with higher fines not have much improvement in another. Perhaps I'm venting my frustration with the CT police's lax enforcement of the law in the wrong way.

Regarding the "all or nothing" remark, I wasn't going to that extreme with it. I looked at the law, and it allows texting which is much worse than just talking on a cell. If there's a cell phone usage ban in place, how come people can still use their phones to text? Even with a hands-free device, you still have to use one hand and look away from the road while you text. It seems contradictory to me.

Hyuga, I was talking about the government going to extremes banning other distractions such as the radio and other passengers, which would just be ridiculous.

Well, I'm inclined to blame that on CT more than the law. CT drivers are pretty bad and the police don't seem to be very good at enforcing...anything.

So let me get this straight; calling is banned, but texting is NOT? Wow, that's the most idiotic thing I've ever heard. It's difficult to walk and text, probably much more with driving (I've never personally tried texting while driving...doesn't seem like a smart idea). That really ought to be fixed. If there's one thing that should be banned, it should be texting.

 

[1337marth]

Shouldn't be a law. I understand the distraction of a cell phone while driving and how it can be detrimental, but the same can be said about radios, GPSes, and children. Will those be banned too?

I have to agree with you. You can't ban children. Also there could be emergency's, or anything. Actually Radios was banned before, but it was in Kentucky in my area for a year almost 2, but they could not even tell if it was on or not. I think they are just thinking of pity laws to pass. I think it is not safe to be texting, but calling is ok I think.

 

[ComradeSAL]

With texting there's no social obligation to stay on the phone. You can fire off a 10 character response during a red light and put the phone down. With a cell phone you have to keep talking until the conversation is over.

According to this article, you're 3 times more likely to crash when you're talking on a cell-phone than when you're not. That seems a little steep to just be "ok."

I don't buy the "what if you're a good driver" argument. It's conceivable that a very good driver could drive safely while drunk, but that doesn't mean we should allow drunks on the road. The point is that alcohol is clearly linked to car crashes, and now cell phones are too. The radio argument seems a bit of a moot point, because I doubt you'd be able to find a study that links radios/GPS/children to car crashes as clearly as cell-phones are.

 

[Modest_Egoist]

With texting there's no social obligation to stay on the phone. You can fire off a 10 character response during a red light and put the phone down. With a cell phone you have to keep talking until the conversation is over.

Not everyone is a fast texter, nor has the common sense to wait till they stopped to text. The thing is, it most likely is harder to catch someone texting while driving since they could hold their phone out of view. Perhaps that's why it wasn't included, not because it's safer.