Study: distracted driving laws don't stop crashes

[Peikko 1,575]

lol don't tell my boss that he's had 3 fines in a year!

I'm actually for these laws btw IF lawmakers and police use common sense.The fact of the matter is using a phone in a car is more dangerous then driving drunk and ironically our laws weigh one as a misdomeanor and the other is a petty fine.

However, a lot of laws can get really twisted, such as the teen sexting cases which can turn woman taking photos of their own bodies into sex offenders that effectively ruins their lives (not sure how these cases are turning out)

Or the stupid "zero tolerance" policies that lack common sense when young children bring something fairly innocent to school and get expelled.

I am not sure that using a phone in a car is more dangerous than drunk driving is reality. I would think the truth is, more people currently believe that they are the ones that can text/use a phone and drive without risk. There was a time when this was equally true of drunk driving. As a result of raised awareness (making drink driving a crime) and a steady increase in peer pressure that opinion is not the prevelant one, although obviously some people still believe it which is why people do still drink and drive.

As for the other unexpected results of ill thought out laws, true, but I can't see what is ill thought out about fining those who are caught doing something that endangers the lives of other road users.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

The operative question being, is what he believes happened, is in fact the whole truth.

I think there is a very good chance he is correct btw. I know I wouldn't bother fighting 60 quid if I new I was wrong. Heck I'm not sure I'd bother even if it were the whole truth.

I do get what your saying though, the media often latches on to a story but lacks onto an important detail that basically changes everything.

[Ali G. 37]

County of Hawaii new handsfree law took effect 01/01/10. I wish they would just call it what it is. A cash grab for cash strapped county. $97 for first offense. There are plenty of laws on the books to charge people who are driving in a dangerous fashion, or driving inattentively. Handsfree law just makes it easier to make a quick $97 without having to prove that someone was in fact a risk on the road.

I'm no safer on the road than I was on 12/31/09.

Is that a joke? Unanimous international research illustrates that someone talking on the phone is four times more likely to get into an accident, 8 times more likely if they are texting. I wonder if you felt the same after a tractor trailer rammed you, because they were on the phone, crippling you for life.

Hawaii is a different story anyways,. You have interstates on an island. Just saying..

PS You have to be the American spouse right? Your comments don't sound like something from an educated Canadian.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Booyah

[Peikko 1,575]

County of Hawaii new handsfree law took effect 01/01/10. I wish they would just call it what it is. A cash grab for cash strapped county. $97 for first offense. There are plenty of laws on the books to charge people who are driving in a dangerous fashion, or driving inattentively. Handsfree law just makes it easier to make a quick $97 without having to prove that someone was in fact a risk on the road.

I'm no safer on the road than I was on 12/31/09.

That's a prime example of why traffic laws are not taken seriously in the US. They are seen as income generation (not taking into account the fact that the behaviour is in itself risky, whether or not an accident occurs and that if one doesn't engage in risky behaviour you will NEVER GET FINED) and some kind of threat to personal responsibility. In the meantime, everyone gets to behave irresponsibly and riskily and get patted on the back for being cool.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I am not sure that using a phone in a car is more dangerous than drunk driving is reality. I would think the truth is, more people currently believe that they are the ones that can text/use a phone and drive without risk. There was a time when this was equally true of drunk driving. As a result of raised awareness (making drink driving a crime) and a steady increase in peer pressure that opinion is not the prevelant one, although obviously some people still believe it which is why people do still drink and drive.

As for the other unexpected results of ill thought out laws, true, but I can't see what is ill thought out about fining those who are caught doing something that endangers the lives of other road users.

Just did a bit of google research and found this:

http://www.hfes.org/Web/Pubpages/celldrunk.pdf

so yes mobiles aren't quite as dangerous but they are pretty close

[NickD 203]

They claim an IFR rated pilot can manage to operate a cell phone while driving, which is me, but no exemptions are offered. But no way in hell would I attempt to send a text message while driving, that's tantamount to suicide especially in heavy traffic with idiots jumping in front of you.

Feel text messaging is stupid anyway, so much easier to leave a voice message, and if you don't want to talk to a person why in the hell do you want to take the extra time to text them? My cell does have that command voice thing with a speaker, so can already use it hands off, think all those phones have that now. And yes, I use it for quick calls, even shorter than to ATC when flying a plane, not the best place to discuss a movie or the weather. Something like, be there in ten minutes, bye.

Text messengering is fairly new, well not quite exactly new, but certainly gaining in popularity, last week, our state made it illegal to text message while driving, took them awhile to even learn about text messaging. But what's next in the line of electronic goodies? Do we really need all these new laws, the books are already huge.

Is pounding off illegal while driving? Not that I engage in that sport, but wondered about it. Or is that too vulgar to make a law against that?

[Peikko 1,575]

I think there is a very good chance he is correct btw. I know I wouldn't bother fighting 60 quid if I new I was wrong. Heck I'm not sure I'd bother even if it were the whole truth.

I do get what your saying though, the media often latches on to a story but lacks onto an important detail that basically changes everything.

Whether I would do it or not, my belief is you should indeed fight a fine that you believe to be incorrectly applied because you just might be a victim of police abuse. That said, I also find it hard to believe that police officers have the time to just stop people for blowing their noses in a parked car without there being something else that caught their attention, something that was potentially, if not actually more worrysome. The truth is though, I can only speculate on this but I don't see it as a reasonable reason for not implementing laws against those who act irresponsibly and cause accidents.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[MrsCat 6]

Is that a joke? Unanimous international research illustrates that someone talking on the phone is four times more likely to get into an accident, 8 times more likely if they are texting. I wonder if you felt the same after a tractor trailer rammed you, because they were on the phone, crippling you for life.

Hawaii is a different story anyways,. You have interstates on an island. Just saying..

PS You have to be the American spouse right? Your comments don't sound like something from an educated Canadian.

First of all, there is no Interstate in County of Hawaii, that is on the island of Oahu. This is the island of Hawaii otherwise known as the Big Island. Clearly you are the uneducated immigrant who does not know much about the 50th state.

And yes I am the educated Canadian with a BA and an LLB. Having an LLB would probably suggest to some that I am capable of assessing laws on the books and determining whether there is already a statute for which someone could be prosecuted against.

While I think you believe that posting the word unanimous must end all debate about a subject, the conclusions about hands-free laws is not unanimous. There is some agreement that handsfree devices are safer than using a phone, however reduction in crashes is not 100% correlative with simply banning use of cellphones. There is a greater correlative effect with the use of handsfree devices in adverse road conditions, higher density of traffic, as well as factoring in the age of the driver. Again, the laws on the books which preexisted the new law, can handle a case such as this, whereby someone is inattentive on the road which have adverse conditions or high density. An outright ban on cellphones (especially in light of the County of Hawaii with limited adverse road conditions, light traffic, and limited speeds) does not make much sense.

I'll repost at the end of 12/31/10 and see how many traffic fatalities and serious injuries were reduced. My bet is that the # is not going to be statistically significant.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Out here in WA I see many people driving with a phone up to their ear even though it's against the law. I don't think there is much enforcement. I even use a hands-free device in house for multi-tasking.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Reasonable reason, I like that.

Btw pardon my really bad grammar today, I meant to say: the media often latches onto a story but lacks an important detail..... not sure where the second "onto" in my original post came from.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Sousuke

[Peikko 1,575]

They claim an IFR rated pilot can manage to operate a cell phone while driving, which is me, but no exemptions are offered. But no way in hell would I attempt to send a text message while driving, that's tantamount to suicide especially in heavy traffic with idiots jumping in front of you.

Feel text messaging is stupid anyway, so much easier to leave a voice message, and if you don't want to talk to a person why in the hell do you want to take the extra time to text them? My cell does have that command voice thing with a speaker, so can already use it hands off, think all those phones have that now. And yes, I use it for quick calls, even shorter than to ATC when flying a plane, not the best place to discuss a movie or the weather. Something like, be there in ten minutes, bye.

Text messengering is fairly new, well not quite exactly new, but certainly gaining in popularity, last week, our state made it illegal to text message while driving, took them awhile to even learn about text messaging. But what's next in the line of electronic goodies? Do we really need all these new laws, the books are already huge.

Is pounding off illegal while driving? Not that I engage in that sport, but wondered about it. Or is that too vulgar to make a law against that?

There are other laws that they can get you on, indecency being the one that springs to mind, should you get caught of course. The point is, that all distracting behaviours are risky and drivers should be aware of that. However, it's the number of people that believe that they are in complete control of their vehicle while they are on the phone/texting that is the problem and hence responsible for a lot of accidents therefore the need to raise awareness to engage peer pressure as the means to reduce accidents.

[Ali G. 37]

First of all, there is no Interstate in County of Hawaii, that is on the island of Oahu. This is the island of Hawaii otherwise known as the Big Island. Clearly you are the uneducated immigrant who does not know much about the 50th state.

And yes I am the educated Canadian with a BA and an LLB. Having an LLB would probably suggest to some that I am capable of assessing laws on the books and determining whether there is already a statute for which someone could be prosecuted against.

While I think you believe that posting the word unanimous must end all debate about a subject, the conclusions about hands-free laws is not unanimous. There is some agreement that handsfree devices are safer than using a phone, however reduction in crashes is not 100% correlative with simply banning use of cellphones. There is a greater correlative effect with the use of handsfree devices in adverse road conditions, higher density of traffic, as well as factoring in the age of the driver. Again, the laws on the books which preexisted the new law, can handle a case such as this, whereby someone is inattentive on the road which have adverse conditions or high density. An outright ban on cellphones (especially in light of the County of Hawaii with limited adverse road conditions, light traffic, and limited speeds) does not make much sense.

I'll repost at the end of 12/31/10 and see how many traffic fatalities and serious injuries were reduced. My bet is that the # is not going to be statistically significant.

No kidding.. You certainly do not sound like someone from Canada. The interstate just popped up when you mentioned Hawaii, as I still find it bizarre. What do you exactly mean by the age of the driver? Research tend to show that it has more to do with biological differences rather than anything else. People are just not wired up to be able to do multiple things at once well. It's also a myth that you can simply learn to do so. It's akin to a someone drinking and driving because they have done so for years.

While a total ban on cellphone use is not feasible, people should be banned from texting and holding it to their ear. The majority of times I come a cross a driver who is driving erratically, they will have the phone to their ear.

PS Like I mentioned to Slim regarding guns, it takes a while for legislation to take effect. Without proactive policing, it takes even longer.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Booyah

[Tygrys 143]

Is that a joke? Unanimous international research illustrates that someone talking on the phone is four times more likely to get into an accident, 8 times more likely if they are texting. I wonder if you felt the same after a tractor trailer rammed you, because they were on the phone, crippling you for life.

Hawaii is a different story anyways,. You have interstates on an island. Just saying..

PS You have to be the American spouse right? Your comments don't sound like something from an educated Canadian.

As a very educated Australian, you should know that Hawaii County is Big Island only and there are no interstates there. Additionally, anything assembling freeways are only on Oahu, and even those are marked as H1, H2..., and not I1, I2... etc.

[Peikko 1,575]

Of course, automatic cars seem to make people think that driving doesn't require any thought. Perhaps that's why I have a perception that those who drive manual cars are better drivers? Who knows?

[Ali G. 37]

As a very educated Australian, you should know that Hawaii County is Big Island only and there are no interstates there. Additionally, anything assembling freeways are only on Oahu, and even those are marked as H1, H2..., and not I1, I2... etc.

Tell me you are joking. A hell of a lot of Americans probably couldn't even point out Hawaii on a map, yet you expect me to know the nuances of a group of islands, in a country I was not born in, and have never been to.

Of course, automatic cars seem to make people think that driving doesn't require any thought. Perhaps that's why I have a perception that those who drive manual cars are better drivers? Who knows?

Don't laugh but I would believe that. Then again, after driving a manual for a while, it becomes second nature and you don't even remember changing the gears.

Edited January 29, 2010 by Booyah