Effectiveness of drivers' cellphone ban is debatable

[one...two...tree 2,762]

that sucks! last time i was over there a lady driving an suv was reading a newspaper while driving and not looking where she was going (obviously), almost drove right into us and scared the living hell out of both of us! what is wrong with people?? is it the straight roads that do it?

GPS's are starting to be a real distraction too. People are following the little pointer on their LCD display instead of actually watching the freaking road and traffic. Saw a guy in front of me the other day, and I could see the GPS through the rear window and you could tell he was completely fixated on the GPS and only the GPS. His driving was erratic and I made sure to stay way clear.

That's why I've got mixed feelings about making these laws. What about men who shave in their cars on the way to work or women who put on make-up? A parent distracted by their unruly children in the car? There are all kinds of ways a driver can be more dangerous. It would make more sense to enact a law that prohibits a driver from not paying attention to the road, but make it so that it's only punitive in the event of an accident - if the evidence is there that the driver was in fact deliberately distracted.

How would police determine if the driver was deliberately distracted? Unless the police acquire cell phone records (which they can do), they're out of luck. In additon, it'd be nearly impossible to prove someone was distracted by an LCD screen, shaving, putting on makeup or dealing with their children.

Speaking of children, you mentioned "deliberate distraction," correct? I can't imagine dealing with a child while driving would be considered a "deliberate" act by the driver. He or she never asked their kid to act up and I doubt the child would have had an underlying agenda.

There are ways to determine whether a driver was dangerously distracted and think about it - if a driver veers off the road, hits and kills a pedestrian, are they going to say they were paying attention and saw the pedestrian?

[DeadPoolX 9]

that sucks! last time i was over there a lady driving an suv was reading a newspaper while driving and not looking where she was going (obviously), almost drove right into us and scared the living hell out of both of us! what is wrong with people?? is it the straight roads that do it?

GPS's are starting to be a real distraction too. People are following the little pointer on their LCD display instead of actually watching the freaking road and traffic. Saw a guy in front of me the other day, and I could see the GPS through the rear window and you could tell he was completely fixated on the GPS and only the GPS. His driving was erratic and I made sure to stay way clear.

That's why I've got mixed feelings about making these laws. What about men who shave in their cars on the way to work or women who put on make-up? A parent distracted by their unruly children in the car? There are all kinds of ways a driver can be more dangerous. It would make more sense to enact a law that prohibits a driver from not paying attention to the road, but make it so that it's only punitive in the event of an accident - if the evidence is there that the driver was in fact deliberately distracted.

How would police determine if the driver was deliberately distracted? Unless the police acquire cell phone records (which they can do), they're out of luck. In additon, it'd be nearly impossible to prove someone was distracted by an LCD screen, shaving, putting on makeup or dealing with their children.

Speaking of children, you mentioned "deliberate distraction," correct? I can't imagine dealing with a child while driving would be considered a "deliberate" act by the driver. He or she never asked their kid to act up and I doubt the child would have had an underlying agenda.

There are ways to determine whether a driver was dangerously distracted and think about it - if a driver veers off the road, hits and kills a pedestrian, are they going to say they were paying attention and saw the pedestrian?

There's a difference between being "dangerously distracted" and "deliberately distracted." The former implies that the distraction was dangerous (which it probably was) while the latter says that whatever distracted the driver was done on purpose (i.e. a deliberate action).

Edited January 4, 2009 by DeadPoolX

[one...two...tree 2,762]

that sucks! last time i was over there a lady driving an suv was reading a newspaper while driving and not looking where she was going (obviously), almost drove right into us and scared the living hell out of both of us! what is wrong with people?? is it the straight roads that do it?

GPS's are starting to be a real distraction too. People are following the little pointer on their LCD display instead of actually watching the freaking road and traffic. Saw a guy in front of me the other day, and I could see the GPS through the rear window and you could tell he was completely fixated on the GPS and only the GPS. His driving was erratic and I made sure to stay way clear.

That's why I've got mixed feelings about making these laws. What about men who shave in their cars on the way to work or women who put on make-up? A parent distracted by their unruly children in the car? There are all kinds of ways a driver can be more dangerous. It would make more sense to enact a law that prohibits a driver from not paying attention to the road, but make it so that it's only punitive in the event of an accident - if the evidence is there that the driver was in fact deliberately distracted.

How would police determine if the driver was deliberately distracted? Unless the police acquire cell phone records (which they can do), they're out of luck. In additon, it'd be nearly impossible to prove someone was distracted by an LCD screen, shaving, putting on makeup or dealing with their children.

Speaking of children, you mentioned "deliberate distraction," correct? I can't imagine dealing with a child while driving would be considered a "deliberate" act by the driver. He or she never asked their kid to act up and I doubt the child would have had an underlying agenda.

There are ways to determine whether a driver was dangerously distracted and think about it - if a driver veers off the road, hits and kills a pedestrian, are they going to say they were paying attention and saw the pedestrian?

There's a difference between being "dangerously distracted" and "deliberately distracted." The former implies that the distraction was dangerous (which it probably was) while the latter says that whatever distracted the driver was done on purpose (i.e. a deliberate action).

True and actually now that I think about it, a driver can and will be cited in an accident if there is indication that it was their fault. But the notion that we'll just continually pass laws restricting the use of gadgets in a car seems redundant when the real culprit is being distracted to the point that it is dangerous. There could be punitive charges for accidents where the driver was determined to be culpable for being distracted to the point of endangering themselves and others.