Should cell phone use while driving be banned?

[Tobra]

Got a fair idea what folks here would say, but what does every one think about cell phones and driving?

[MP525i]

talking on the cell phone while driving is banned here in nj... and rightly so. as one person put it, driving in nj is like playing tag in a minefield. so i say the less distractions the better.

-mike

[legion]

I voted "okay to use without restrictions".

That being said, I wish LE would throw the book at people who can't drive and talk.

Some people can drive and talk, some can't. People who can't should get tickets for existing laws. (Erratic lane changes, blowing red lights, etc...)

I personally avoid talking on my cell phone and driving. I will frequently not answer calls and call people back later. I will use it on the interstate in relatively unpopulated areas. I will also use the walkie-talkie mode, but there are also natural breaks in conversation in that mode and it is significantly less distracting.

I just don't like blanket laws. Some people can talk on cell phones and drive fine...most can't.

I'd really hate to have my doctor pulled over for giving instructions to a nurse on the way to the ER to treat me...

[asphaltgambler]

Banned in DC as well

[RoninLB]

left lane cell use is a distraction when speeding so they are good bait to follow behind 1/4 - 1/2mi.. better when she's doing her make-up at the same time.

[techweenie]

Well, of course, all of US know that we can multitask and exceed the speed limit without reduced competence -- unlike everyone else. And I suspect most of us will agree that there should be a law allowing us to make citizens arrests of SUV-driving bimbos and apply a good spanking, if they're cute.

[VINMAN]

Banned!

[legion]

Originally posted by VINMAN
Banned!

Who?

[Moses]

Originally posted by legion


I just don't like blanket laws. Some people can talk on cell phones and drive fine...most can't.

I'm with you. Too damned many laws as it is. I voted for the hands-free option, but I should have voted the way you did.

The law should require that you are in proper control of your vehicle at all times. If you can accomplish that while on a cell phone and eating a cheeseburger it's nobodys business.

[VINMAN]

Originally posted by legion
Who?

I meant driving while using a cell.

[masraum]

Originally posted by legion
Some people can drive and talk, some can't. People who can't should get tickets for existing laws. (Erratic lane changes, blowing red lights, etc...)

I think that's a load of crap. That's like saying that some people can drive after they've been drinking so they should be able to drink and drive. I'll admit that I've been on the phone in the car. I try to keep it to a minimum, and I try to make sure that if either of the two take a back seat, it's the phone, but I'll also be the first to admit that any talking on a cell phone while driving distracts the driver from driving and makes that driver more likely to make mistakes or react too slowly to situations. Cell phones and talking should be globally banned.

[dd74]

I try not to do it, and when I do, I tell the person I'm driving a stick shift car that is loud, so they usually hang up rather than shout. No one seems to understand that I have to concentrate on driving. But then few seem to concentrate on driving in this city...

Nevertheless, I think it should be banned as well.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

That's simply a typical "dumbed down response" kind of solution and unfortunately the kind that appeals to politicians.

I say do it like they do in a lot of European countries for driving or right here in the U.S. for flying privileges - make it performance based and require a special endorsement. If you can demonstrate competence on a DMV practical test every couple of years and are willing to pay an extra fee (with proceeds going into a fund to help pay for victims of "distracted driver-related accidents), fine. Otherwise, clam it until you're parked.

They do the same thing now for vehicles requiring special handling (larger trucks, air-brake equipped vehicles, busses, etc.) How is this so different?

By making it performance-based it also sets a good precedent to restrict future similar technologies. Make people prove they can park without their rearview cameras and navigate without being "heads down in the cockpit" looking at their GPS street map first - then if they can demonstrate they're competent with the technologies, fine.

This would also have the added benfit of education since a lot of the "it's the other guy, not me" types would flunk the practical test and maybe learn that, gee-whiz, it really does impair peoples' driving and in their case that they actually ARE the "other guy".

I say factor it in to insurance rates too - ditto with other distracting crap in vehicles like DVD players and other doodads. Same for having more than a certain number of small children in the vehicle at the same time - I see a lot of distracted "soccer moms" out there trying to manage their screaming brats. The faster we can get people to realize that they ARE the "other guy" and make 'em pay for it, the better. Some people cope with distraction better and can function better and the rates/policies should reflect this, but in general I say get people to look out the damn windows once in a while and pay attention.

There's a related discussion buried in here about why we ought to really make eliminating traffic-related delays a priority. People are more prone to daydreaming or viewing driving as a "waste of time" if it is. Get everything moving along at reasonable speed and people will actually pay attention, IMHO.

[Moses]

Originally posted by dd74

Nevertheless, I think I should be banned as well.

Wrong thread.

[Evans, Marv]

I would think the hands on option should be OK like Moses mentioned. There was a news item last week about a study indicating talking on a cell phone was the equivalent to being mildly intoxicated - performance wise. What really pisses me off are women weaving through traffic while talking on the cell phone, putting on makeup, curling eyelashes and sucking on a Starbucks. I usually only use mine when I have a lot of room on the road, & then I use it very seldom.

[Scooter]

They should ban all the following, because they are distracting to drivers:

1) Cell phones
2) Talking to passengers
3) Pasengers
4) All drinks (yes, that includes your morning Starbucks)
5) Radio adjustments
6) Singing with the radio
7) Radio
8) All makeup application
9) Flip down mirror on the visors
10) Manual transmissions (both hands should be on the wheel at all times)
11) All adjustments in the car (i.e., heat, air, power window, etc.)
12) Billboards
13) All roadside signs
14) People walking on the sidewalk
.....

Aw, just forget it, let's get rid of cars entirely, as they are inherently dangerous.

[cashflyer]

Originally posted by techweenie
Well, of course, all of US know that we can multitask and exceed the speed limit without reduced competence...

I, for one, do not believe that my driving skills are so good that I should sacrafice some part of my attention to using a cell phone.

I say BAN completely the use of cell phones while driving, and issue tickets that carry points deductions so that they feel the sting in increased insurance for the next 3 years.




A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk Driver
AEI-Brookings Joint Center Working Paper No. 04-13

Abstract:
We used a high-fidelity driving simulator to compare the performance of cell-phone drivers with drivers who were legally intoxicated from ethanol. When drivers were conversing on either a hand-held or hands-free cell-phone, their braking reactions were delayed and they were involved in more traffic accidents than when they were not conversing on the cell phone. By contrast, when drivers were legally intoxicated they exhibited a more aggressive driving style, following closer to the vehicle immediately in front of them and applying more force while braking. When controlling for driving conditions and time on task, cell-phone drivers exhibited greater impairment than intoxicated drivers. The results have implications for legislation addressing driver distraction caused by cell phone conversations.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=570222

[onewhippedpuppy]

I was tempted to vote yes, then took the high road and voted to legalize drunk driving as well.

Really though, where do you draw the line? Until you can remove all of the ****** idiots that are out there, will banning cell phones make that big of a difference? How about banning idiots reading while driving, or adjusting the radio, or nav systems, or makeup? The real answer not just automatically giving everyone a license, actually making a driving test a test as they do elsewhere. That's how the autobahn is able to have a similar death rate to our interstates despite it's high speeds, there's no soccer moms in Suburbans talking on the phone and reading a book while putting on her make up.

While we're at it, can we ban old people too? I'd take a 16 yr old with a cell phone any day over an 80 year old driving the wrong way down a divided highway. At least the 16 year old would realize it when she hit something. True story, a lady that used to work with my wife had a neighbor in her 80s, poor health, that still drove. She isn't able to see the behind her, so when she backs out of a parking space she honks her horn so that hopefully others will move. Appearently she goes about 2 down her street so she can find her driveway. Still driving.......

[ROSSINNI]

Don't punish everyone for a few people that are incapable of doing two things at once!!

[teenerted1]

nothing bettter than 3am drunken phone calls to an ex-girlfriend, lost on a back road somewhere