California Joins Growing List of States Against Mobile Use While Driving

[Mike Temporale]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/24310.html' target='_blank'>http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/24310.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"The law that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Friday banning motorists in California from holding cell phones while driving does not take effect until July 1, 2008, but the governor is urging drivers to begin complying now. "You can use a cell phone, but use a headset or use a speaker system and you will be fine," the governor said during a signing ceremony at a hotel in Oakland. State Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, predicted Senate Bill 1613 -- the law he pushed through the Legislature after four unsuccessful attempts -- will save lives by decreasing driving distractions."</i><br /><br />While I do applaud California for taking action aimed at making the roads safer, I still think that this legislation has missed the mark. First of all, the fines are too small - $25 for the first offense and $50 for each additional offense. If you really want to do something about it, how about $250 and $500 because that would make people think twice. However, the real issue is that driving and talking is no worse than driving and eating, or putting on make-up, or reading the newspaper. These are all common tasks done by people every day. Why not word the law to say anyone doing anything with their hands, other than driving, while behind the wheel will be fined. It's just that simple. :)

[Jerry Raia]

Sheesh Mike I'm glad you aren't the Governor of California! :lol:

[Tim Williamson]

Yeah, jeez, I wonder when headsets will be banned, then radios, and MP3 players? I wonder if the government can step into our lives even more. :?

[Jon Westfall]

There is actually some research suggesting that holding up a phone to the ear is better as it doesn't allow people to "forget" they're talking on the phone (a.k.a. they remember they divided their attention between road &amp; phone).

There is also research that individuals with more interhemispheric activity are the most at risk for cell-phone related accidents. With greater hemispheric activity, the right hemisphere (Which controls motor operations) and the left hemisphere (speach, language, logic) may experience more cross-talk than those without as much hemispheric communication. More crosstalk = more distractions to both cell phone conversation (left) and motor control (right).

There is also research that suggests that novice drivers and new drivers look away from the road for different lengths of time. New drivers may glance away from the road to, say call someone or adjust the radio, for as long as 3 seconds (if that doesn't sound like much, imagine going 60 MPH and closing your eyes for 3 full seconds), while novices may glance away for mere miliseconds.

Finally there is much anecdotal evidence that politicans proclaim to know much more than science does, especially when it comes to what they dub "common sense". While common sense may be right the majority of time, throwing away reliable valid empirical data or pretending that all humans are best served by a blanket law (to protect themselves from the minority of bad drivers) just to do what your gut tells you isn't smart - it's actually pretty stupid. Just ask anyone who persists in taking large amounts of drugs or engages in other distructive addictions ;)

- your friendly neighborhood cognitive psychologist,
Jon.

[Janak Parekh]

However, the real issue is that driving and talking is no worse than driving and eating, or putting on make-up, or reading the newspaper. These are all common tasks done by people every day.
Out of curiosity -- are there any studies that back up your assertion? :) I find that it's not the act of operating the cell phone, which is the same motor task as manipulating other things, but the actual conversation that one holds that is truly distracting.

(Mind you, I do think those should be punishable offenses too.)

--janak

[HalM]

All of the above may be true. However the real menace is alcohol and until local and federal authorities find the backbone to get serious about drinking and driving, banning cell phones and the like is pure politics.

[Mike Temporale]

Out of curiosity -- are there any studies that back up your assertion? :) I find that it's not the act of operating the cell phone, which is the same motor task as manipulating other things, but the actual conversation that one holds that is truly distracting.

(Mind you, I do think those should be punishable offenses too.)

--janak

Actually, I posted a study about a 1.5 years ago. (Sorry, I can't find a link right now. :( ) Basically it showed that other events are just as distracting. The conversation is part of the distracting, but it also limits your movements and blocks part of your vision. Eating and drinking can do the same thing. People will try and unwrap a burger and take both hands off the wheel. It only take a split second for something to go wrong.

[Mike Temporale]

All of the above may be true. However the real menace is alcohol and until local and federal authorities find the backbone to get serious about drinking and driving, banning cell phones and the like is pure politics.

Can't agree more. There's already laws for that. They just aren't strong enough. I can see this going down the same path. They need to be firm from the start. $25 is nothing.

[Janak Parekh]

All of the above may be true. However the real menace is alcohol and until local and federal authorities find the backbone to get serious about drinking and driving, banning cell phones and the like is pure politics.
Unfortunately, I think the liquor lobby is too powerful for this. My opinion? If you're caught driving drunk, minimum one year jail time. ;) I have no respect for drunk drivers whatsoever.

(One of the things I love about NYC: readily available mass transit 24/7. I drive in Manhattan only very rarely.)

--janak

[iclark]

SMS and driving kills - Fact not opinion.

Spend 30 seconds and watch this video.

http://www.tacsafety.com.au/upload/mobile.mpg

I can not understand how anyone can believe that while using a phone / GPS / PDA while driving behind the wheel of a car they are still 100% as capable if they were not using the device.

Check out the link to the studies below on how many seconds your eyes are looking away from the road ahead.

Since 1989 Victoria, AUSTRALIA (where I live) has had an integrated approach to address the cost of road accidents (deaths and injuries). It has been very successful. The road toll has halved and over 30% reduction in serious injuries. This is something like 200 plus lives saved in our little state every year.

Imagine if one of those saved was your Mother or your son or daughter.

Is making us pull over to send an urgent SMS such a big price to pay. Are our lives so rushed that we willingly increase the risk of road accident to ourselves and others by using our phones while driving. Is life that time pressured ?

Study by British Medial Journal on the effects of SMSing whilst driving http://www.bv.com.au/change-the-world/10731

Press article about a court case of a SMS fatality http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/10/1068329475481.html

[iclark]

Definately agree with the previous posts about Alcohol being a bigger issue than SMS but this is not the biggest issue.

WHAT ABOUT DRIVING WHILST UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF DRUGS

"In 2003, a total of 31 per cent of drivers killed in Victoria tested positive to drugs other than alcohol". That is almost 1 in 3.

In response

"Under laws that came into effect on December 1, 2004, Victoria Police have the power to conduct random roadside saliva testing to detect drivers travelling under the influence of illicit drugs."

As drugs and technologies (GPS, MP3s PDAs etc) become more common legislators must also come up with new ways to PROTECT the public from people how choose to take their lives and other peoples into their own hands.

Unfortunatley it is not until a tragic accident happens that people realise the error of their belief that they were not a risk factor.....

[iclark]

If you are interested in a great blue tooth car kit I can recommend the Parrot brand:

Parrot CK3300 with built in GPS (albeit I have never used the GPS features). I think they have a CK3000 which is the same without GPS.

www.driveblue.com

I use an imate SP5.

Brilliant combination.

Just received my new car and upgrading to the CK3400 and a line-in module from the SP5 to pump my audible player (www.audible.com) into my car stereo

[Damion Chaplin]

However, the real issue is that driving and talking is no worse than driving and eating, or putting on make-up, or reading the newspaper. These are all common tasks done by people every day. Why not word the law to say anyone doing anything with their hands, other than driving, while behind the wheel will be fined.

Because while these activities may be just as distracting as talking on the phone, they are much less common. I am a pedestrian. I watch people driving all the time, mostly because I'm afraid they're going to kill me. In the San Francisco Bay Area, at least one out of every 5 drivers are talking on the phone at any one time. I rarely see anyone eating or reading the newspaper. Putting on makeup I've seen slightly more often.

In any case, it seems like every time I see someone do something stupid on the road they're on the phone and not paying attention to what they're doing (driving!). If you ask me, eating, drinking, smoking, fiddling with the radio, putting on makeup and yelling at other drivers are all distracting activities, but so far they've not reached epidemic proportions (and people have been doing those for decades). I do not fear for my life because of people eating Big Macs. I fear people driving while talking on the phone.

For once, Ahnuld, I agree with you. 2008 is way too far away though... :?

[Tim Williamson]

I find eating in the car to be slightly more involved and distracting than talking on a phone. Once you're on the phone you never have to take your eyes off the road, but when eating sometimes to drop some food or need to glance down at your sammich.

[Sven Johannsen]

Is making us pull over to send an urgent SMS such a big price to pay. Are our lives so rushed that we willingly increase the risk of road accident to ourselves and others by using our phones while driving. Is life that time pressured ?
Of course it is. Otherwise push e-mail wouldn't be such a holy grail of mobile computing.

When it comes right down to it, vehicles should only allow one passenger, have no entertainment devices at all, and drive up food windows should be illegal. If you have ever seen someone arguing with a passenger, getting involved in a broadcast sports event, fussing at the kids in the back seat (where they are required to be in many places), and certainly those feeding, you will agree that lots of stuff distracts drivers. We can either criminalize it all, or criminalize the effect. People are all different. Some can do a dozen things at once well, and some can't walk and chew gum. You can descend to the lowest common denominator or make people responsible for their actions, rather than their potential failings.

I'll freely admit that I am distracted while talking on the phone in my car, and I have an integrated handsfree set that I use without ever touching the phone, dialing, conversation and hangup are all done totally by voice. If I have to dial a number normally, I have to look at the phone a lot, but I know teenagers who can dial, heck, they can text, with the phone in their pocket or behind their backs. Dialing may or may not be the biggest distraction depending on the individual. If my right hand is holding the phone or around my girls shoulders, I'm driving with one hand, so what is the difference. It is the fact of the conversation that distracts me.

So should the phone conversation or the fact that I am holding the phone be discouraged. If the conversation, how is the phone conversation any different than any other conversation, or any other distraction. I just think you cannot continue to limit the ability of everybody to do stupid things, or you will eventually limit the ability of anyone to do anything, lest they hurt themselves or someone else.

[iclark]

sven wrote
So should the phone conversation or the fact that I am holding the phone be discouraged
If the conversation is distracting you from driving the car safely then the answer is both.

It does not matter if you are programming your desintation into GPS, having a distracting conversation, sending an SMS, writing a song, drinking a coffee - if your action limits your ability to control the vehicle you are increasing your risk of causing or being in an accident. What right does any driver have to increase the risk to other road users.

Road laws are not about restricting your rights they are ensuring that we can safely use the roads.

Just because a driver thinks that they are competent to do something (eg drive and watch TV) does not give them the right to share our roads. I am sure that some people think that speed limits are too low and they are quiet capable to drive faster.

Until they have to react and can not adequately maintain control over the vehicle.

If the studies did not show it was unsafe
If the courts / prisons did not contain people who had killed or injured others
If you did not see people in near misses every day

from using you phone in your hand while driving then it would not be a problem.

Unfortunately it is a proven problem.

Our legislators have two choices - Watch the problem from the sidelines or action a known problem. Arnie in California has gone the middle ground and probably achieved little.

BTW - Even in our very progressive / well educated about road safety state using a phone whilst driving is still the third most common on the spot fine issued to drivers.

[Janak Parekh]

Because while these activities may be just as distracting as talking on the phone, they are much less common. I am a pedestrian. I watch people driving all the time, mostly because I'm afraid they're going to kill me. In the San Francisco Bay Area, at least one out of every 5 drivers are talking on the phone at any one time. I rarely see anyone eating or reading the newspaper. Putting on makeup I've seen slightly more often.
As both a pedestrian and a driver in NYC, I've got to agree. I drive mostly on LI, and about 90% of the time I see someone do something clueless or boneheaded, they're on the phone.

--janak

[Janak Parekh]

When it comes right down to it, vehicles should only allow one passenger, have no entertainment devices at all, and drive up food windows should be illegal.
Oh, come on, this is ridiculous and you know it. Radios can easily be turned down (or tuned out conceptually) in certain situations -- it's not bidirectional, so one doesn't have to maintain mental state to formulate a response. Front-seat passengers are usually attuned to the road and will either stop talking or alert you to things that are going on during exceptional conditions. Backseat attention on the part of the driver is indeed an exceedingly bad thing, and should certainly be prosecuted, but it's far rarer.

People are all different. Some can do a dozen things at once well, and some can't walk and chew gum. You can descend to the lowest common denominator or make people responsible for their actions, rather than their potential failings.
You absolutely must descend to the lowest common denominator, becuase 90% of people I've seen are terrible judges of themselves. My dad is terrible at using the cell phone and driving at the same time. I yell at him about it, and yet he won't change -- he insists he's fine, even though I can see him driving much worse. I fear sitting in the passenger seat when he gets a phone call, so now, I just insist on driving. But he still does it. Criminalizing the behavior might be the one thing that gets him to stop.

I just think you cannot continue to limit the ability of everybody to do stupid things, or you will eventually limit the ability of anyone to do anything, lest they hurt themselves or someone else.
Of course there's a line that needs to be drawn. I've seen a lot of empirical evidence, though, that suggests that the current line needs revision. There have been studies about people in conversations, even with hands-free kits, and they do drive like drunk drivers -- even the ones that judge themselves to be very good at multitasking.

What gets me is that for most of my life we lived without cell phones. If people wanted to reach someone else, they'd call, leave a message, and wait. Would it hurt people to not answer 99% of phone calls? Of course not -- and that's what I do when driving.

--janak

[PantherShade]

I recall a study done a couple years ago that examined accident reports to find the most common causes of accidents, determined by what the drivers were doing at the time of the accident.

Was mobile phone use at the top of the list? Nope. (I think that it was number 5.) "Changing the radio station" was #1, and even eating &amp; drinking beat out mobile phones.

Are they making laws about radios?
No, they're creating more stations with HD &amp; satellite radio! 8O

[SteveHoward999]

So just because some of you think you can drive safely wile using your phones, you think that the lives of the rest of us should continue to be at risk by the people who cannot drive safley while on the phone?

This attitude of "freeddom to do whatever the heck you like, regardless of the expense to others" is selfish and dangerous. We would all love a world without rules, but most of these rules are there to protect us all from each other and ourselves.

Frankly I find the vehemence whith which people pretect their right to use their phones any time, any place, anywhere regardless of perceived or actual risk to others completely rediculous.

But then who am I anyway? :-)

[iclark]

What I find strange is how we tend justify their right / use of a phone while driving by saying that other things are worse (eating, changing the radio, putting on make up etc).

This approach does not justify using a phone as being okay. It simply highlights that other things also impede driving.

Road laws already cover careless driving so we have a penalty for the result of these activities if it adversely impacts your driving.

Should we have a law to protect us against changing the radio station or something as similarly simple as this. If studies show that it is a big enough problem and it is killing people and causing accidents left right and centre then the answer is unfortuately yes. What alternative do we have.

What if we were talking about a presciption drug that had adverse side effects in some people. If we pointed out that other drugs had worse side effects would be happy to leave it on the market knowing that it only impacted a few of us. Of course not. Why are in car devices any different.

In some ways I see them as worse because the idiot using the device who causes the accident may take you (the innocent bystander) in the process...

[SteveHoward999]

What I find strange is how we tend justify their right / use of a phone while driving by saying that other things are worse (eating, changing the radio, putting on make up etc).

This approach does not justify using a phone as being okay. It simply highlights that other things also impede driving.

Road laws already cover careless driving so we have a penalty for the result of these activities if it adversely impacts your driving.

It seems like the laws discussed here are essentially American road laws. Different States have different laws that complicate the issue. Other countries already have laws that outlaw distracting activities like eating etc.

In Britain the law essentially says that anything that prevents you having both hands free for driving is a distraction that is not permitted. Of course in Britain, most cars do NOT have automatic transmission, so one hand must be available for gear changes whilst the otehr hand deals with steering.

In America the reverse is true, most cars DO have automatic transmission, so the general perception is that it is OK to use only one hand for driving, while the other dangles out of the window or drapes over the passenger seat.

Of course that still makes eating, drinking and using the phone dangerous, but a core of American drivers just cannot see that.

[Janak Parekh]

I recall a study done a couple years ago that examined accident reports to find the most common causes of accidents, determined by what the drivers were doing at the time of the accident.
We need to find a link to one of these studies, because otherwise we're debating emptily (i.e. that's not what I heard :|). One thing I'd like to note, though, is that the timeliness of the study is important, as mobile device adoption has grown significantly over the last few years.

--janak

[iclark]

From my earlier post

http://www.bv.com.au/change-the-world/10731

[maxnix]

Most states require you to have two hands on the steering wheel to be in control of your car. If you do not, then you could be found to be contributorily negligent in a subsequent civil suit. So most people holding a handset while operating a motor vehicle are either in violation of the law or subject to an unfavorable finding in a civil suit in case of invovement in an accident, or both.

Also, many states ban the wearing of headsets by drivers if they isolate or otherwise interfere with hearing sirens, vehicle horns, railroad crossing alarms and other traffic signalling devices.