Legal Restrictions on Cellphone Use Gain Traction 526
Carl Bialik writes "The Wall Street Journal is reporting that States are scrambling to impose tougher restrictions on cell phone use by drivers, addressing what safety experts say can be a deadly distraction. From the article: 'Twenty-six states and the District of Columbia have written legislation on the issue, mostly since 2003, [...] This year, other legislatures are tackling the subject, and two states have passed laws on it. [...] While no state has banned talking on a cell phone while driving, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and Washington, D.C., have the most restrictive laws: Except in emergencies, motorists in those states can use cell phones only with hands-free devices, such as earpieces. Restrictions vary across other states. Some prohibit teenagers, bus drivers and drivers with learning permits from using cell phones -- even with earpieces.'"
try children (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:try children (Score:4, Funny)
Re:try children (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:try children (Score:3, Insightful)
I've seen three year olds break out of restraints and jump up and down in the back seat while two adults sit in the front seat and do nothing about it except the usual "sit down" [or else]" routine.
In any case, it's very unfair to a child to take them on a long, boring trip where they are obliged to do the one thin
Re:try children (Score:5, Informative)
Airbags and carseats don't tend to mix very well. That's why you'll see most car seats strapped in the back.
Re:try children (Score:2)
Well, I didn't need it as a kid, nor did my friends it turns out. Must be a parenting thing.
I was just talking about this to friends the other day...I don't have kids, but, they do, and I didn't realize that by LAW in many places, a kid has to be strapped to a kid seat, etc. When I grew up, the backseat was my area. On long trips, I s
Re:try children (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:try children (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyway, just was something I was pondering with a friend of mine the other day, about how things were so much different than when we were kids.
The biggest one that got me was....that no one hardly seems to let their kids play OUTSIDE. Hell, during the summers, I'd leave home in the morning, and not come home till lunch, then out again till dinner. All my friends in the neighborhood ran like this together....each families house was all of our homes, and we'd all generally be at one of our houses....at the neighborhood swimming pool, or out biking, skateboarding, building forts in the wooded area beyond the developing subdivisions. All I hear today is "you can't let kids out, the predators will get them". I just have to wonder, are there really that more predators out there? Or do we just hear about it more as sensationalized news by 24/7 news stations that have to put something on the air?
Also, when did kids get stupid? I was raised to where I did not trust strangers at all...and neither myself nor any of my friends would have been 'kidnapped' like you often hear of today.
I dunno, like I said, I don't have kids...so, kind of like an unmarried marriage counselor talking here, but, it just seems to me that kids of today, don't get to be kids anymore and have the fun we used to have? We were all in good shape physically, because we stayed out playing every day during the summer, and after school. Hell, I was talking with a friend of mine, and kids in very low grades had homework that took HOURS after school and required parental attention...where did that come from?
I just seems sad, that all kids have today are video games at home, and orderly outdoor activities like soccer teams and the like. It seemed so much more fun in my day to run with the kids in the neighborhood, figuring out stuff to do (some of it mischevious, but, not bad)...and doing physical exhertion activities while at the same time building social skills, and in many cases....making lifelong friends.
Re:try children (Score:4, Funny)
2) Wait up the moment they are too distracted to pay attention to you.
3) Push the brakes Really Hard.
4) Say "Shut up".
Re:try children (Score:3, Funny)
Re:try children (Score:3, Funny)
1) Check the rear mirror to see if nobody's tailgating you.
2) Wait up the moment they are too distracted to pay attention to you.
3) Push the brakes Really Hard.
4) Say "Shut up".
5) Listen to the children chant "Do it again!" for the rest of the trip.
The best way to get the kids to listen is to simply enforce your threats. Mention that they get no dessert (or whatever) unless they calm down. It won't work immediately, but after a few lost treasures, they will start to figure it out. Also, reminding them of th
Ban annoying ring tones (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Ban annoying ring tones (Score:2)
Okay, now I see your point.
Stupid drivers w/ cells (Score:2, Interesting)
I ctually saw thing dingbat once driving her gigantic SUV, putting makeup on, and talking on her cellphone. I was running beside the road and she swerved, almost hitting me!
90% of the time when I see someone doign something REALLY stupid on the road, they're on the cell!
Re:Stupid drivers w/ cells (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree. Most times when I've been cut up or another driver has made a major foul-up, they're chin-wagging down a mobile. Talking on a phone not only distracts you from keeping track of hazards, it compromises control of the vehicle something rotten. One wonders how some of these characters are deemed fit to roam free with such a cavalier attitude, let alone take charge of a motor vehicle.
Re:Stupid drivers w/ cells (Score:2)
I beleive that use of mobile has to be a weightening factor when accident happens. When driver gets into something while talk
Re:Stupid drivers w/ cells (Score:2)
Because you're already multitasking whilst driving normally. You're required to control the car, watch the road, wathc other traffic, plot your course, anticipate traffic, obey signs, etc, etc, etc...
And secondly, no one can multitask. There are simply people who can very poorly perform many tasks at once.
Re:Stupid drivers w/ cells (Score:2)
No doubt!! I mean, it is hard enough to drive, change cd's, and shift as it is without spilling your beer. Having to hold to a cell phone just make it all the more difficult...
Stupid drivers with hands-free, too (Score:3, Insightful)
That's true, but in tests leading up to the UK ban, it was found that drivers using hands-free kits are almost as dangerous as those on hand-held phones. The distraction is the main problem, not the fact that you've only got one hand on the wheel. It's not the same as someone sitting next to you, because usually someone sitting next to you can see both you and the road ahead, a
Hands free? (Score:4, Insightful)
I thought it was the distraction of talking to someone whom you cannot see that was the problem - most drivers can steer the car with one hand.
So what now, ban drinking coffee in cars, applying lipstick while driving? After all, this also causes the driver to take one hand off the wheel.
Don't they *think* before making these laws?
Re:Hands free? (Score:3, Informative)
One woman [bbc.co.uk] recently came to light in the national press
Re:Hands free? (Score:2)
Or with no hand at all... That's what you knees are for ;-)
ban drinking coffee in cars,
No, that one is only to protect Mc Donalds against frivolous lawsuits.
Re:Hands free? (Score:5, Informative)
that one is only to protect Mc Donalds against frivolous lawsuits.
Oh, Lord - not again. Please educate yourself [osmond-riba.org]. You need to find a better example of a frivolous lawsuit.
Re:Hands free? (Score:2)
The fact that McDonald's had been told to turn down the heat multiple times, and ignored these requests, does not make the lawsuit any less frivolous. Coffee by definition can get no hotter than 100 degrees celcius at standard atmospheric pressure. Lots of people boil water in a kettle, then pour it into a mug and make tea. It is not unreasonable to expect coffee to be hot, particularly at a drive-thro
Re:Hands free? (Score:2)
Yes you can drive with one hand, though obviously you can steer faster with two hands than one, and in fact hold yourself back better than you could if you had to brake harshly whlie holding the phone.. handsfree kits are the sensible way to go if you need to use the phone a lot (and are kind of necessary if yo
Re:Hands free? (Score:3, Insightful)
I actually tend to think that this is more dangerous. You see, there is actually two problems with cellphones and driving:
A. One hand is taken. That forces the driver to use a pretty uncomfortable position to be able to drive and hold the phone at the same time.
B. Talking to someone you can't see over a link that is not great. This is much harder that talking to someone in your car. And if you're really into the conversation, your reflexes are just numb.
handsfree kit
Re:Hands free? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hands free? (Score:3)
The problem is that people are incompetent, and don't take driving seriously. The combination is no good. Make it harder to get and keep a driver's license, and the problem will take care of itself - but that won't happen becaus
Re:Hands free? (Score:2)
Wow, thought you were talking about someone failing the practical 4 times there.. drivi
Re:Hands free? (Score:2)
Anyway, I think that if you're too fragile to withstand the forces your car will exert upon you via the seatbelt while you're braking, you're too fragile to safely drive (elderly or not). That nonwithstanding, if you're holding yourself back with the steering wheel instead of the belts, you're not in control of the vehicle - presumably at a time when you mo
Hands free != accident free (Score:2)
I don't know how this myth [straightdope.com] got started ... perhaps it's just a convenient way for law-makers to appease people while still letting them have cell phones, perhaps it's just cluelessness, and perhaps it's the hands-free kit manufacturers.
The growing evidence for those that actually read studies on this show no measurable difference between hands-free and holding a phone. The issue is apparently not one of dexterity, but one of concentration. That's why drinking a s
Re:Hands free? (Score:2)
It's an election year, and it's a "hot-button" issue. They don't need to think beyond "how can I use this in my campaign?"
We already have laws covering inattentive driving, cell phone use is already covered under that. This is purely a law to help small municipalities generate revenue (it's a $100 ticket in NY, and you can't bargain it down or get the charges reduced) and get incumbents re-elected.
BTW, the one time I actually did pull to the shoulder to make/tak
Re:Hands free? (Score:2)
Now, I know that this is just one man's anecdotal eveidence, but I have noticed that the biggest danger to me (when i am out walking, jogging or cycling) are women in giant SUVs on the phone. (My wife is one of them) I have seen other scary drivers on cells, but in my area, it is the giant SUV women who are the worst. They seem to pay NO
Re:Hands free? (Score:2)
How do they shift?
It's the brain, not the hands (Score:2)
The problem with talking on a cell phone is not that it takes your hands off the wheel, but that it takes your brain off of the traffic around you. A fair number of studies have been done that show cell phone use has an effect akin to being drunk in some instances.
When you begin a conversation on a cell phone while driving, your primary cognitive centers focus on the conversation because of the immediacy of the contact and the relative complexity of the conversation. The big p
Re:Hands free? (Score:3, Insightful)
That you think applying lipstick is currently an acceptable act to perform while driving just reinforces my opinion of you.
Re:Fix the real problem (Score:5, Insightful)
It's most certainly NOT the same as drinking coffee of listening to the radio...
Your brain tunes out the radio when you need to concentrate, but it makes more effort to keep up with the conversation when you are talking... and it's worse when you're on the cell phone because you're not hearing the other person with as much clarity as you would if they were sitting next to you, so your brain has to divert even more resources to deciphering what the other person is saying.
Applying make up and doing some other things are certainly worse, because applying makeup typically requires looking in the mirror; but eating or drinking, while not completely safe, are at least safer than either make up or talking on the phone.
I'm sick of people claiming it's not dangerous because they do it and haven't had an accident. That doesn't mean it's safe! I also get annoyed when someone claims that they are a better driver while on the phone than a lot of other people who are concentrating on the road; even if it's true YOU are still a better driver while YOU are concentrating on the road.
Wrong, treat the disease, not the symptoms (Score:2)
No, you are absolutely wrong - driving while talking on the cell phone is extremely dangerous, hands-free or not. Just because you haven't been in an accident yet doesn't mean it's not dangerous.
Driving while drinking coffee is extremely dangerous. Just because you haven't been in an accident yet doesn't mean it's not dangerous.**
Driving while applying make-up is extremely dangerous. Just because you haven't been in an accident yet doesn't mean it's not dangerous. p>Driving while talking to your kids in
Re:Fix the real problem (Score:3, Insightful)
Bullshit. In both cases, you take your eyes off the road to either line up the coffee cup to your mouth OR to fiddle with the options on the stereo. You can shake your head all you like, but there were plenty of studies showing the dangers involved with both of the cases you described.
Re:Fix the real problem (Score:4, Insightful)
If you seriously need to look to bring a cup to your mouth, you need to work on your coordination...
Re:Fix the real problem (Score:2, Insightful)
So you're suggesting that the law should be based on someone's evaluation of their own capabilities?
"I think I can handle talking on the phone while driving, therefore it's legal. It's those other scatter-brain guys who are the problem."
"I think I can have five drinks and still drive home safely, so it's legal. It's those other guys who can't
Re:Fix the real problem (Score:2)
No, I think that when someone is involved in an accident, *of any magnitude*, if the cause of the accident is determined to be because the driver was not paying attention to the road, they should have their license revoked for a period of time.
There is currently no incentive for these people to change. They hit another car, their insurance goes up a few bucks, whoopdie-do, what do they care, they're loaded. Take their license away for a few months - that will change their tune.
Taking that first step to the darkside.. (Score:2)
Much like Anakin Skywalker, this person has taken the first step. 15 seconds, eh? Can't be bothered to make this call at his desk before he leaves, while walking to the car (a few minutes is many times 15 seconds over!), or while in the car, but with the car not turned on yet?
The only situation I could see this happening is
Re:Fix the real problem (Score:2)
-
D00d, these addicts aren't squeezing anything except my patience. I overhear their conversations on the train all the time -- how can I not, as they scream above the train's own clamor to make themselves heard? Not to get all in-my-day-uphill-in-the-snow on you here, but the cell addicts don't *need* to be on the horn co
Re:Hands free? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think this more of a problem of societal norms than anything. Most people are raised to try to multitask, and be as efficient as possible in our society. This is not to say that it isn't irresponsible, or that these people are blameless, but it does give us insight into the question fo "Why?"
Re:Travelling for Business and Pleasure (Score:3, Insightful)
Then again, philosophical consistency doesn't seem to be widespread among drivers in general. Take this statement:
"I value the of other peo
Sleeping and driving?!?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmm, so the driver got into an accident while he was:
Now, in you're opinion which combination should be outlawed? Driving and Breathing? -> Don't think so! ...) I don't really think that this accident should be hold up as an example for the dangers of driving while phoning! I don't argue that phoning may distract you, but please, if you want to illustrate that point, please use an example where there weren't any other more likely causes! If anything, the phone keeps you awake!
Driving and drugs? -> Makes more sense already.
Driving and sleeping? -> Makes lots of sense!
Driving and yucking on the phone? Hmm, with all the other stuff going on here (drugs, sleep,
Re:Sleeping and driving?!?!? (Score:2)
Re:Sleeping and driving?!?!? (Score:2)
Re:Sleeping and driving?!?!? (Score:2)
But possibly, the sleeping was the consequence of drug abuse.
Re:Sleeping and driving?!?!? (Score:2)
I suppose it could even be the result of a very very boring phone call.
Without more information, it's hard to say.
I know! I know! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Sleeping and driving?!?!? (Score:2, Interesting)
1) Yakking like idiots on a cell phone. (Yes this really is #1)
2) Screaming at their kids
3) Stuffing their fat faces
4) Putting on makeup
5) "Rocking / Jamming / whatever" out (mostly younger drivers)
You'd be suprised at the attention you can gather with a 120 decibel European Hi/Lo horn. Funny thing is then they a
Re:Sleeping and driving?!?!? (Score:5, Informative)
Highlights:
At first safety experts focused on the problem as part of the larger one of driver distractions in general. These can include anything that reduces driver concentration on road hazards from drinking coffee to talking with another passenger. Now there is increasing evidence that the dangers associated with cell-phone use outweigh those of other distractions. Safety experts also acknowledge that the hazard posed by cell phone conversations is not eliminated, and may even be increased, by the use of hands-free sets.
Motorists who use cell phones while driving are four times as likely to get into crashes serious enough to injure themselves, according to a study of drivers in Perth, Australia, conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The results, published in July, 2005, suggest that banning hand-held phone use won't necessarily improve safety if drivers simply switch to hands-free phones. The study found that injury crash risk didn't vary with type of phone.
A government study released in June 2005 indicates that the distraction of cell phones and other wireless devices was far more likely to lead to crashes than other distractions faced by drivers. Researchers for the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) tracked 100 cars and their drivers for a year and concluded that talking on cell phones caused far more crashes, near-crashes and other incidents than other distractions.
A study from the University of Utah published in the winter 2004/2005 issue of Human Factors, the quarterly journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, found that motorists who talked on hands-free cell phones were 18 percent slower in braking and took 17 percent longer to regain the speed they lost when they braked. An earlier University of Utah study by the same researchers found that drivers talking on hands-free cell phones were less likely to recall seeing pedestrians, billboards or other roadside features.
How is this the fault of talking on the cell? (Score:3, Insightful)
So this kid took drugs and fell asleep while driving, and somehow the cell phone is to blame? I think I'm confused...
Just a couple of thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just a couple of thoughts (Score:2)
I think the difference here is intent. Much easier to prove intent if you point a gun at someone... afterall why do you have a gun unless you plan to use it (I live in Australia).
But, along the same lines, take two people with similar illegal levels of alcohol in their blood. They both drive home. They both run a red light. In running the red light, one of them runs down and kills a pedestrian.
Assuming both were drunk en
Re:Just a couple of thoughts (Score:2)
It does. Alcohol has different level of impact on different people. One might steer clear of the pedestrian, the other did not. We'll never know if the first one would, because with that "luck" no pedestrian happened. The other certainly didn't.
One introduced certain, unknown though pretty high level of danger to the roads. He will be punished by suspending his driver and by a high fine. He will try to be more cautious and not d
Re:Just a couple of thoughts (Score:2)
Re:Just a couple of thoughts (Score:3, Informative)
Not exactly. I've spent some time accompany police on their shifts, and if you knew what they do while driving, it would scare the bejeezus out of yo
When do they legislate muzzling the kids? (Score:2, Insightful)
It's not the cellphones (Score:5, Informative)
Extra legislation????? (Score:3, Insightful)
Many countries already have offences such as Driving without Due Care and Attention. This is fairly non-specific and can be used against any driver who endangers others by performing a non-driving activity (such as having their groin scalded by superheated coffee) whilst nominally in control of a moving vehicle.
The same problem is had by those who fiddle with their GPS while driving, or even the entertainment system. Must we introduce specific legislation for each device?
It should be noted that I do agree with the clampdown which is already in place in much of Europe. Handsfree units are convenient and quite comfortable to wear now, especially the lightweight BT varieties such as the Plantronics 640 [plantronics.com] which even my wife wears without problems.
If you don't like the cost of BT, there are still wired headsets which often ship for free now or are a very low cost extra.
Re:Extra legislation????? (Score:2)
Re:Extra legislation????? (Score:2)
There's been a lot on the news lately on people being distracted by navigation systems while driving. As these things can see if you're moving or not, they could be made in such a way that they don't accept input while driving. Anyway, if people were really honest to themselves, they would see that they're not driving as good while using their o
Whatever (Score:3, Funny)
The penalty... (Score:2, Interesting)
The penalty for using a cell phone while driving is worse then the cost of a hands free set.
Pick you're choice.
Re:The penalty... (Score:2)
The penalty for getting caught using a cell phone while driving is worse then the cost of a hands free set.
You see, that little "getting caught" part is the real wild card. Do you pay up the $$$ up front, or take your chances that you won't be snagged by law enforcement? Here in the US, most people exceed the speed limit - some by a large amount, but on an infrequent basis. Despite the knowledge that an extra 15 or 20 mph might only g
Re:The penalty... (Score:2)
lots of emergencies in DC (Score:2)
I'm in DC all the time, and from the number of drivers I've seen with a phone up to their head, there must be many many emergencies happening..ALL the time. Even though there's a fairly stiff fine, people seem to ignore this law, by and large, and from what I've heard, the cops do nothing to enforce it.
Re:lots of emergencies in DC (Score:2)
Re:lots of emergencies in DC (Score:2)
Even though there's a fairly stiff fine, people seem to ignore this law, by and large, and from what I've heard, the cops do nothing to enforce it.
I think part of the reason for that might be that the laws are not as restrictive in the surrouding states - it's fairly easy to start a conversation while it's technically legal (as far as I know) to do so in Virginia, but be in DC before you finish.
Personally, i've had one situation where I got lost rather badly going somewhere in northern
Why bother? (Score:2, Interesting)
Cellphones almost as bad as alcohol (Score:2)
I think i
The bans are useless (Score:5, Informative)
A study that proves it [bmjjournals.com]
All the current bans are useless. We need to ban USE in the car, not USE WITHOUT A HEADSET. Hands Free doesn't help.
--Michael
Re:The bans are useless (Score:2)
I do it all the time (Score:2)
Cell Phones and Drunk Driving (Score:5, Funny)
Of course, the first thing I thought when I saw this wasn't "Oh, wow, cell phones are dangerous". It was "Well... Driving drunk is no more dangerous than driving while talking on a cell phone, and I do that all the time!".
~Will
What about accident rates? (Score:2)
States without laws? (Score:2)
There are states without laws? Huh. I thought all states had at least a few anti-sodomy laws or similar on the books. But no laws at all. Weird.
In the UK (Score:4, Informative)
In the UK, for at least a year or so (probably more - my memory is flaky - there was a massive advertisement campaign from the government telling people how it was going to work for MONTHS on end, months before it became "law"), it's been illegal to operate any phone while driving - that means that the ONLY legal way to make/take a phone call in a car is with a hands-free kit that DOES NOT require the driver to push any buttons etc. to dial/recieve a call (i.e. voice activated dialling/answering with a hands-free earpiece / car stereo integration) and even that is greatly discouraged by the police.
Needless to say, there's always someone who will wedge it between their shoulder and their ear but THAT'S always been illegal in the UK as far as I know (usually charged as dangerous driving - like the woman who was booked for doing her lipstick as she drove). However, now it's a specific "rule" that it's an offence to even USE the phone in the car unless you can do so 100% without removing your hands from the full control of the wheel (i.e. without touching the phone or any hands-free component (e.g. buttons, switches, wires, etc.))
It's only common sense - look at the number of people who near-miss you every day on the roads and then count how many of them were on the phone / playing with their laptop on the passenger seat etc.
Great, but what about... (Score:3, Insightful)
But that's not politically safe to talk about.
How about minimum driving ages being changed? It shouldn' surprise anyone that kids under the age of 18 account for a HUGELY disporportionate piece of the accident pie. How about something like a learners permit (requiring a licensed driver in the car until 17 instead of 16. How about a restricted license (to work and back, etc...) until 18. Give these kids a chance to learn how to drive before we shove them off on their own. Seriously, now we give them a permit at 15.5 yrs and by 16 we shove em out of the driving nest to fly on their own. Them we get outraged at the damage they cause.
But that's not politically safe to talk about either.
How about some real draconian legislation to end drunk driving. If you are drinking and driving in this day and age, you, sir, are a fucktard. Seriously, have NEVER seen an afterschool special? Is your head planted so firmly in your own buttocks that you failed to hear the upteen warning shouted from every media outlet we can bring to bear on the topic? Of course not. That's why if you drink and drive, giving you any "1st offense" effect is a waste. You knew. You did it anyway. Manditory jailtime. Manditory removal of license...not restricted license, REMOVED license. It's a priviledge and you just lost it. STFU and pick up a bus schedule on the way home from the jail when you get out.
But that also is not politically safe to talk about.
How about serious legislation to curb car use in general. Something to give commuters and travellers a real alternative. People will bitch, though, because God forbid (no, literally God forbid---I mean car use is a right spelled out in the King James Bible, right?) anyone points out just how many lives are lost every year because the bar is so low on who we are willing to let careen through our neighborhoods behind the joystick of a 2+ ton screaming fast hunk of metal.
But that's DEFINATELY not politically safe to talk about.
Americans need to end their love affair with their cars.
But I guess cell phones are a good start.
Tom Caudron
http://tom.digitalelite.com/ [digitalelite.com]
Re:Great, but what about... (Score:2)
Re:Great, but what about... (Score:2)
I live in a rural area... and yes I do bike to work. However, there are some mornings that 35 minutes of biking can't replace the 12 minutes of driving. (Yes... I can hold 20+mph on a bike)
I would love to live in an area with mass transit... but I hate cities and thus a small conflict appears. I would love to ride my bike every day... but time and Michigan weather prohibit that quite often. I wo
Good (Score:2)
Go ahead and eat french fries, sip coffee, listen to the radio while you're driving. None of these require your undivided attention. Talking to another person who is not in the same car *is* distracting and does require some significant part of your attention. It's extremely dangerous and should be illegal. Any competent driver knows this and can corroborate this statement.
You're moving at 45 mph. Your primary mission
Where's the dramatic increase in auto accidents? (Score:5, Informative)
Answer... there hasn't been. In fact, the number of deaths continues to fall [cnn.com] in part due to safer cars, but also the number of accidents [iii.org] is falling too. Huh? I thought cell phones were such a serious problem that we have to pass laws to keep people from using them while driving? I'm sorry, but the data DOES NOT support such a conclusion. Incredible increase in cell phone usage. Small decrease in accident rates.
I just don't get it. Law makers need a boogey man to go after... to make it look like they're doing something.
It's not the phone... it's the driver. Some can handle a small level of multi-tasking... some can't. So the answer is to punish everyone and give the police something else to distract them from actually fighting crime and dealing with the truly dangerous people in our society.
-S
Re:Where's the dramatic increase in auto accidents (Score:5, Interesting)
That would sufficiently piss off and scare people into
I swear half of the errors I see drivers make is simply because they forgot the lessons taught in drivers ed. Like checking before switching lanes, turning into the proper lane from a turning lane, not speeding, not tailgating, etc...
Driving isn't hard once you get the feel for the wheel. It just takes vigilence to actually keep up on "10 and 2", checking the blind spots, etc, etc.
Tom
Re:Where's the dramatic increase in auto accidents (Score:2)
Mythbusters tested this... (Score:5, Informative)
I know Mythbusters' results aren't highly regarded in the Slashdot community, but a recent episode [tv.com] they did showed that (at least for them) talking on a cell phone degraded their ability to drive in a similar manner that driving under the influence of alcohol did.
They (Adam and Kari) basically drove a road course sober, with no distractions to establish a baseline driving skill level with such things as obstacle avoidance, reaction time, and parking being tested. They were graded on both time and accuracy. Then they attempted to talk to Jamie while driving, and were evaluated. Then they drank enough beer to be just under the legal blood alcohol limit in California (greater thanBecause we all know that..... (Score:2)
Because we all know that it's having our hand on the cell phone that causes the distraction versus concetrating on the discussion being conducted on the phone (usually work related) instead of the road.
If they really want to make is safer, since people will continue to use cell phones, hands free or not, they should lower the speed limits. That way, the
Company rules (Score:2)
Shell allowes only hands free calls but advises against any calls, BP bans all type of radio or telephone use while driving.
I agree, people can wait for your answer till you are at a stop.
Another good reason to have you're hourly coffee break :)
Any distraction should be illegal (Score:3, Funny)
Cell Phone as bad as drunk driving. (Score:5, Insightful)
I've heard that comparison several times and I thought it was just wrong. After all, I talk on the cell phone and my driving is pretty good. That is what I thought at least, until I started riding a motorcycle on the street. You notice everything when on a bike in the middle of a bunch of distracted car drivers, and soon I started noticing several patterns. The biggest was that people talking on a cell phone can be spotted easily.
You all can tell yourselves that you don't do that. That YOU ARE a good driver, and you probably normally are. But so am I.. And so are probably 50% of the people I spot weaving and hitting the brakes 1 second later than they should.
Re:Cell Phone as bad as drunk driving. (Score:5, Insightful)
I used to ride a bike to school all the time. I was careful about it, and unlike most cyclists I actually obeyed traffic laws. Even so, there were several times that I had near misses. Every single one was a driver talking on a cell phone, and most of the times were at an intersection, and the driver wasn't paying enough attention to notice me -- maybe they would have noticed a car even though they're on the phone, but for a bike they wouldn't even stop.
I also noticed a lot of symptoms like the ones you describe -- you very quickly learn to spot and avoid the cell phone drivers, because they won't respond as quickly as a normal driver.
Maybe there are some people who can do it safely, just like maybe there are some people who can drive well after a few drinks. But you don't get to drive a dangerous machine because "maybe" you're one of the small minority that can do it without impairing your driving.
Re:Distractions Schmaction (Score:2)
Re:If they are going to ban talking whilst driving (Score:2)
Re:Lonely, hungry, ugly drivers... (Score:2)
If you ever had a conversation with someone inside your car, you know that the conversation suddenly stops when something more or less dangerous might happen. Not to mention that a passenger can help point out stuff that you may have missed.
Re:TWO HANDS ON THE WHEEL (Score:2)
Unfortunately, common sense isn't really all that common.
Re:Look at the states who passed the laws first... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Problem not cellphones... (Score:3, Insightful)
The whole idea is to prevent the accidents in the first place. Because they are preventable. No one can legislate against acts of God, brake failure or people mis-judging things, but this is 100% in the hands of the people doing it. They can't claim an accident if they weren't paying full attention to the road.
As for idiots and bears, well they're the ones that get eaten, not