Wouldn't they just lie about what was distracting them then? And how does that work against some distractions such as kids in the back seat?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Nationwide Hands free Cell Phone Ban for Drivers Urged
- Thread starter MacNut
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wouldn't they just lie about what was distracting them then? And how does that work against some distractions such as kids in the back seat?
Texting is a whole different situation. I would be for a ban on texting while driving since it requires continued viewing of your phone instead of the road (both to read a text and type a response) and both hands at least partially off the wheel to type the message in.
If you get enough citations for distracted driving, I'm sure the court won't care if it is always something different. That would be enough probable cause to subpoena your mobile call records to see if they correlate with your citations. And couldn't you just lie that you were not talking on the phone (especially if you have some sort of hands free system)? Without probable cause (like viewing someone actually driving distracted), I don't think the police would be able to write a ticket for using the phone while driving if a driver does not admit to it. If you are distracted by kids in the back seat the judge would have to find a way to say something like "cannot be lone adult driving with minors in the back seat". I'd hope if it happened once and a parent had to go to traffic school and found out they were endangering their children, they would voluntarily be more conscious of not doing it again. It would hopefully be a case of not realizing they were driving in a distracted way that they would want to stop doing.
No all distraction are NOT the same. Some distraction take more of your attention off of the road than others. Plan and simple. Studies have shown cell phones are 37%
It goes down to a numbers game. What is one of the largest if not THE largest distraction we deal with in our cars......... Cell phones.
Eatting is not as high on the list because general most people do not do it in rush hour traffic. But they will talk on a cell phone.
They've already been posted in this thread. There is plenty of evidence that cellphones distract drivers, and that distractions lead to unsafe driving.
I talk to my GPS all the time. It's a bluetooth version which allows me handsfree cellphone use.
um ok. i think you knew what i meant....
for your viewing pleasure as well as for context...
we are talking about gps as a gps device, not an extension of ones phone.
Aside from using my gps as a handsfree unit...
It also verbally tells me the streets coming up, in addition to where I need to turn and the distance I must travel. Although not my model, I believe other models also allow the user to speak directions into the device for navigation.
It also verbally tells me the streets coming up, in addition to where I need to turn and the distance I must travel. Although not my model, I believe other models also allow the user to speak directions into the device for navigation.
The study focuses on formulating thought and conversing remember
Link?
Even so, most get directions prior to driving. Additionally, saying where one wants to go is alot shorter than a standard phone call. However this is all beside the point
The fact is this: (not directed at you FTD, just in general)
Cell phones in use while driving have been proven to impair ones ability to drive akin to a dui and present a huge unneeded risk on the road. Numerous links have been provided in this thread already
Are there other distractions? yes. Should they be banned? I wouldn't be opposed.
However, I am not going to oppose a ban of a known dangerous, unneeded habit if by outlawing it, would lead to decreased accidents and deaths. I don't need to see an all or nothing ban to see how even just one ban will make the roads safer.
Some then argue its unenforceable largly when dealing with hands free. Yea probably, but I know alot of people, myself included who will respect the law regardless. that in itself will have an effect as well as the enforcing that the cops will most likely do as well, even if its not much.
I'm more surprised at people who value their convenience over other people's safety. I don't care how competent one thinks they are at driving as everyone thinks they are a better driver than everyone else. Increased risk is increased risk and any measure to decrease it that is out of my control I favor greatly
What does it take for some people? To see a loved one die as a result of a moron talking on his phone before they suddenly support banning phones, or until they severely hurt a person as a result of his recklessness due to answering a phone call and no fault of the individual's?
Remember, driving is not a right and neither are actions you do in your car while driving. Stop treating it as such
No. Enough of the conflation. There is plenty of evidence that there are many things which potentially cause distractions while driving, including cellphone usage, tiredness, prescription drugs, eating, drinking, children in the rear seat, argumentative passengers, GPS systems, radios, smoking, people tailgating, thinking about tax returns, business worries, the onset of a cold, sneezing, pets behaving badly, eye-candy at the roadside, other peoples' accidents. The key is better driver training and the enforcement of penalties for driving without due care and attention. It should also be considered that the amount of care and attention due varies tremendously. There is little risk involved in talking on the phone while in a traffic jam, checking the map while at the lights, and so on. Simply circumscribing everyone's lives ever more by needless regulation is unnecessary and an abrogation of personal judgement and personal responsibility.
Formulating thought and conversing is not an act directly related to a phone. It's the act of having a conversation, period. You do this when someone is sitting in the passenger seat, except you may occasionally glance over at them in that case. With a cellphone, your eyes never leave the road.
Here are some easy links that appeared by typing "GPS Speech Recognition" into Google. Easy enough...
http://www.google.com/search?q=gps+...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
The first three...
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/reviews/4243529.html
http://gpstracklog.typepad.com/gps_tracklog/2007/02/magellan_maestr.html
http://www.pcworld.com/article/136607/tomtom_gps_now_offers_voice_recognition.html
Don't forget that a GPS is a lot more than mobile mapquest. I can also use it while driving to find out where the nearest restaurant is, where gas is available, what the traffic is like on my route, play music, and a whole host of other options! You should look into one.
Banning cellphones is a stupid idea. It's just one thing of many done in a car. Having a loud and short attention span friend in the front passenger seat would certainly be worse than a phone. And what if I'm driving at 4 AM at the end of a 10 hour drive and am really, really tired with 50 miles left to go before I finally get home? To stop and rest for the night at a public stop, or to get a hotel would be dumb, given the location. Talking on the phone with someone could help keep my brain stimulated and alert for the last remaining moments of the drive. Luckily I have a cellphone so I can call someone and chat for a bit.
Well the counter for the needless regulation argument is lets just point to seat beat laws and drinking and driving laws.
How is this any different than those. Both of those laws show to save lives. Talking on a cell similar to driving while drunk.
your analysis needs to consider probability...1 second or 30 seconds distraction, they are not equally likely to cause an accident. One could argue quite successfully that the latter is 30 times more likely to cause an accident based solely on the length of the distraction and the correlation between the distraction and any external event that might lead to an accident.
SO it does matter actually, quite a bit...
7 Years ago I got into an accident, the reason, I was tuning the radio. The car ahead of me stopped suddenly and I hit him. If I was on the phone I would have been looking at the road. I was distracted for a second, that was all it took.
But you get stopped for drunk driving because the result of your inebriation draws the attention of an observer. If you are over the limit but not involved in any incident and not weaving about on the road, you will generally escape detection. Using a handsfree phone, drinking non-alcoholic drinks, eating, being tired, and so on, should be dealt with in the same way: any incident or erratic behaviour which can be shown to be due to or exacerbated by distraction or inattention should make the driver liable to be charged with driving without due care (or worse). Preemptive punishment is unnecessary.
It all comes down to money not safety. They will say it is to keep drivers safe, but in reality it is easy to spot and write a ticket. Governments say we need a way to get more money, everyone is on a cell phone lets do something about it.
They will never be able to find an excuse for smoking or catch you for changing the radio. But cell phones can be targeted.
How many millions will they make off of cell phone fines?
They will never be able to find an excuse for smoking or catch you for changing the radio. But cell phones can be targeted.
How many millions will they make off of cell phone fines?
Again, you're not considering probability. With longer distractions you are more likely to cause a collision. That's not to say shorter distractions cannot result in an accident, but it is far less likely.
Then why, pray tell, are there laws specifically forbidding DUI? Why isn't DUI enforced equally to all other distractions?
There simply aren't enough officers on the road to catch every dangerous driver. In lieu of this option, it seems reasonable to ban specific activities or devices that statistically lead to dangerous driving and collisions.
Tell me, why would a officer devote his/her time and energy into $20-$50 cellphone fines when they can just as easily site drivers for speeding, with tickets in the hundreds of dollars? We need not invent laws to create revenue, but simply enforce those already in effect.
What do you think a speed trap is? Regardless of the motivation for either, I assure you the speed trap will generate more income than a cellphone checkpoint.
Besides, that's a false dichotomy. There's no reason why a checkpoint cannot both increase safety and generate revenue. It's killing two birds with one stone, no?
I bet your friends will really love it when you call at 4am to have them keep you awake
Well, driving in that state is likely more dangerous than driving while talking on a cell phone anyway.
If I have a passenger who is distracting me more than a mobile phone conversation would, I tell them to shut up. If they don't listen, I stop the car and tell them to either shut up or leave.
But when you said stopping 50 miles from home is dumb: Continuing to drive when you are close to falling asleep, is dumb, dumb, dumb beyond belief. You are confusing your wish not to give up, not to be embarassed, to be a tough man, with not being "dumb". Knowing your limits and stopping before you exceed them in a dangerous way is clever.
I noticed that most of the agruments against the ban are very limited cases like changing radio (which for vast majority of people does not require looking with the programmed stations) to a stupid passenger who in numbers are very limited.
Just pointing out the argument for the ban are pretty much stronger than the ones against.
I use pointed out the DUI and seat built ones and really no counter to those.
Remember the seat beat and DUI laws save us all a lot of money by lower insurance rates. Rates in the states that have seat belt laws are lower than those that do not.....
Just pointing out the argument for the ban are pretty much stronger than the ones against.
I use pointed out the DUI and seat built ones and really no counter to those.
Remember the seat beat and DUI laws save us all a lot of money by lower insurance rates. Rates in the states that have seat belt laws are lower than those that do not.....
I think people should be allowed to use cell phones while driving BUT a series of tests concerning your IQ level/mental capacity and ability to multitask should be given. You fail the tests you dont get to use a cell phone while driving if found you get a ticket, after 3x you get your cell phone taken away.
Don't penalize me over some bimbo blond soccer mom crashing her brand new Tahoe into someone because she lacks the mental capacity and ability to multitask.
Don't penalize me over some bimbo blond soccer mom crashing her brand new Tahoe into someone because she lacks the mental capacity and ability to multitask.