NHTSA Suppressed Report Calling for Total Ban on All Phone Use While Driving

[digamma]

So you're saying it's bad that I play Scrabble on my blackberry while I'm driving?

[Kodos]

I may have to reconsider giving myself a sponge-bath while driving.

[MikeVic]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I may have to reconsider giving myself a sponge-bath while driving.

Install a garbage disposal system on the passenger side and go to town with dishes as well.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

The difference between, say, eating or changing the radio and using the cell phone or driving drunk is that eating / changing the radio tend to be short bursts of inattention while cell phone use and drunk driving impair you for long stretches. That's why the odds go way up.

It could sure as hell just be my personal opinion, but I couldn't disagree more with this.

[Logan]

Hey if I pop in a CD where I know the words to every song, and sing along to the whole thing, how distracted am I?

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

If we're banning cell phones, then we should also force old people to re-take a driver's test. Maybe I just haven't been paying a ton of attention, but the majority of "what the fuck is this car doing?" responses form me end up being an old person at the wheel.

That would be an illegal law sturck down in teh courts in seconds. However, you could force every driver to retake tests every so often. That'd be fine.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Logan

Hey if I pop in a CD where I know the words to every song, and sing along to the whole thing, how distracted am I?

bout three fiddy

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

The difference between, say, eating or changing the radio and using the cell phone or driving drunk is that eating / changing the radio tend to be short bursts of inattention while cell phone use and drunk driving impair you for long stretches. That's why the odds go way up.

Obviously, individual habits will vary wildly on this, but last time I heard data about it, the average phone call was on the order of 3 minutes.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by molson

Bringing a picture of a cop on a cell phone will say nothing about your own guilt or innocence, and it wouldn't be admissible. And the cop could very well be setting up a witness/victim meeting. They're trained, professional drivers, and have more leeway when it comes to thinks like obeying traffic rules, when they're carrying out their duties.

Eating while you're driving isn't per se illegal anywhere. But if you do it in a dangerous manner, and a cop sees you, he can cite you with carless driving. Because you're being careless - while you're driving. Same as if you're turned around talking to your kids. There's no specific crime targeting that behavior, but it's also careless driving.

It's much more difficult to make such case-by-case decisions regarding cell phones. You either have to ban 'em all, or make 'em all legal.

That's something I would like to see.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

That's something I would like to see.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

That's something I would like to see.

.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Obviously, individual habits will vary wildly on this, but last time I heard data about it, the average phone call was on the order of 3 minutes.

It's still 3 solid minutes of inattentive driving, compared with say 5 seconds to hit a radio button or 2 seconds once a minute or so for 10 minutes to take bites of your meal or swig a drink.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

It's still 3 solid minutes of inattentive driving, compared with say 5 seconds to hit a radio button or 2 seconds once a minute or so for 10 minutes to take bites of your meal or swig a drink.

5 seconds to hit a radio button? What are you, part sloth?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Where do you live that eating while driving is illegal? I've never heard of it being so, and if it is, why are drive throughs legal? It would also be the least enforced law on the books.

Tacoma, WA would be one place apparently
11.05.130 Driving while eating or drinking.
It is unlawful for any person to operate any vehicle
upon the public highways of the City of Tacoma
while eating any food or drinking any beverage.
(Ord. 25247 § 2; passed Dec. 22, 1992: Ord. 25208
§ 3; passed Nov. 24, 1992: Ord. 18595 § 7; passed
Jun. 4, 1968. Formerly 11.12.010)

Road Page - Drinking and driving outlawed in Tacoma. Eating, too. | The News Tribune | Tacoma, WA

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Mustang

5 seconds to hit a radio button? What are you, part sloth?

Apparently I have to explain it slowly so people won't get diverted with stupid frivolities:

With
a
cell
phone
you
pay
attention
for
an
extended
period
of
time.

With
the
other
mentioned
activities
you
have
long
stretches
of
paying
attention
to
the
road
and
short
bursts
of
not
paying
attention.

Therefore
the
danger
from
cell
phone
use
is
much
greater
due
to
the
length
of
time
involved.

[Mustang]

Ahh.. nevermind. Wrong animal. You're part ass.

[Huckleberry]

I found it humorous that he explained it more slowly after you asked him if he was part sloth.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Apparently I have to explain it slowly so people won't get diverted with stupid frivolities:

With
a
cell
phone
you
pay
attention
for
an
extended
period
of
time.

With
the
other
mentioned
activities
you
have
long
stretches
of
paying
attention
to
the
road
and
short
bursts
of
not
paying
attention.

Therefore
the
danger
from
cell
phone
use
is
much
greater
due
to
the
length
of
time
involved.

But
you
change
driving
positions
and
move
your
body
much
more
frequently
if
you
change
channels
ten
times
versus
picking
the
phone
up
once
and
talking...


Punish the crime, poor driving, and quit trying to eliminate causes.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

Agreed - how is this any different than talking on a hands free device? In fact its probably safer since there's no ability to look over at the person you are talking to. I'm all for banning the non-hands free and certainly for banning texting but you mean to tell me that people can have conversations with the person next to them, listen to the radio (and continuously look away from the road to change stations) and listen to a backseat full of screaming children (and sometimes all three at once) and drive safely but they can't have a conversation on a hands free cell phone?

I know. It's absolutely absurd to think that the person sitting next to you would not have any regard for their safety and will keep on talking to you when they see the semi you're about to hit. That's right. They'd be no more concerned for their safety or aware of their surroundings as the person blindly talking to phone to the driver would be. They wouldn't have a better chance to see any oncoming danger than someone sitting in their office in Podunk Iowa would. THat much is clear.

I see you taking the drivers doing other unsafe things as a justification for this particular dangerous activity. Since others will do these things it's unfair to ask cell phone users to be safe.

Hey, I agree. I'm for dropping all the anti drunk driving laws too. I mean, as long as some people play with the radio it's unfair to take a dim view of the drunks.

That's really what people do. They take a very selfish view of their own activities and absolutely exaggerate their importance in the schemes of things to justify what they do. They'll draw the line and heap scorn to those who are a bit higher on the spectrum involved and point to the flaws of those lower on the spectrum to justify their own behavior.

I'm against that hypocrisy. Since we can't realistically stop the radio changers lets just quit trying to make the roads safe since clearly we can't affect the danger until we can figure out how to stop the radio folks. Nothing at all wrong with drunk driving or texting or hell, making a sandwich while driving. Not until we can stop every behavior that might cause problems. Once we can do that, we can talk about these issues again.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Where do you live that eating while driving is illegal? I've never heard of it being so, and if it is, why are drive throughs legal? It would also be the least enforced law on the books.

I know. I mean, no one would ever consider grabbing food and taking it home and eating it. That's just silly. Oh maybe one or two would but everyone else simply rips into the bag before even leaving the parking lot. I mean, who'd even consider the silliness. Taking food home. The thought. I agree, in states with laws against eating they should make drive through restaurants illegal.

But,

you do know that they have drive through liquor stores in states that make drunk driving illegal? I'm thinking someone has thought this out and thought of some other reason for buying liquor than immediately drinking it in your car. Odd how some people think isn't it?

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

How about talking to a passenger riding beside you?

Came here to say this.

What about singing along to a song on the radio, or listening to news/talk radio? Unless you're just letting the noise wash over you and not really listening to what's being said, you've got the same distractions. Just in different form.

Mandate hands-free, but if you ban cell phones entirely, you'd better be prepared to ban CD players/changers, iPods/mp3 players, car radios, and passengers.

Also pets/children riding along, right?

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Axxon

I know. It's absolutely absurd to think that the person sitting next to you would not have any regard for their safety and will keep on talking to you when they see the semi you're about to hit. That's right. They'd be no more concerned for their safety or aware of their surroundings as the person blindly talking to phone to the driver would be. They wouldn't have a better chance to see any oncoming danger than someone sitting in their office in Podunk Iowa would. THat much is clear.

You really think passengers in a car pay more attention than the person driving? The passenger is less likely to be looking down at their phone, reading a magazine, gazing out the window?

I think it's funny that on here you have one group that is trying to explain that while cell phones are by definition a distraction, there are tons of others distractions while driving...and another refusing to acknowledge that anything that distracts for even a couple seconds is a legitimate distraction that could kill you.

Oh well.

[Axxon]

Originally Posted by Logan

You really think passengers in a car pay more attention than the person driving? The passenger is less likely to be looking down at their phone, reading a magazine, gazing out the window?

I think it's funny that on here you have one group that is trying to explain that while cell phones are by definition a distraction, there are tons of others distractions while driving...and another refusing to acknowledge that anything that distracts for even a couple seconds is a legitimate distraction that could kill you.

Oh well.

Never said passengers pay more attention than the person driving. I said that the passenger is far more attentive to their surroundings than a random person that the driver is talking to on the cell phone. I didn't think that would be even questioned.

Of course, on the second paragraph that's why I said to allow all distractions. Period. They all can kill you and since cell phone users are specifically saying that since other distractions occur then theirs should be legal. I agree. So should the drunk driver. After all, studies now suggest that it's no more dangerous than cell phone usage. It's just one among a myriad of distractions, all of them exactly equal and none deserving any prudence or special treatment.

So far, not one cell phone user has agreed with me since I proposed this. It's all about let me do what I want and make sure the other guy can't do what I don't want him to do. Nice hypocritical position cell phonies.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Axxon

Of course, on the second paragraph that's why I said to allow all distractions. Period. They all can kill you and since cell phone users are specifically saying that since other distractions occur then theirs should be legal. I agree. So should the drunk driver. After all, studies now suggest that it's no more dangerous than cell phone usage. It's just one among a myriad of distractions, all of them exactly equal and none deserving any prudence or special treatment.

If the only two choices you're proposing are allow cell phone usage, eating, tuning the radio, et al and drunk driving OR disallow them all, then I'll bite: allow them all.

Of course, those aren't the only two choices and not the optimal combination but if you asked me to pick one batch or the other then I'd allow them all without hesitation.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

I found it humorous that he explained it more slowly after you asked him if he was part sloth.

At least CU Tiger is trying to debate the point, not pick on details and throw names around in place of coming up with an intelligent counterpoint.

Let me see:

*     *      *     *     *
**************************

one star = inattentiveness / risky behavior. Which line is more dangerous to the folks around you? As to CU Tiger's point, it still takes you less time to find a radio station even if hitting the button periodically than it does with a typical phone call, and your attention is on the road in between, not to mention the scan button.

As has been pointed out, you can't take away all risky behaviors, but you can legislate the key ones. And talking on a cell phone in a car is an extremely risky behavior to all those around you. The problem isn't that during normal driving you'll be erratic, etc, it's that you won't see a problem until it is too late. Your reactions will be much slower while you are on the phone. By the time a police officer would see the reckless behavior, the accident has probably already occurred.

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by Axxon

I know. It's absolutely absurd to think that the person sitting next to you would not have any regard for their safety and will keep on talking to you when they see the semi you're about to hit. That's right. They'd be no more concerned for their safety or aware of their surroundings as the person blindly talking to phone to the driver would be. They wouldn't have a better chance to see any oncoming danger than someone sitting in their office in Podunk Iowa would. THat much is clear.

I see you taking the drivers doing other unsafe things as a justification for this particular dangerous activity. Since others will do these things it's unfair to ask cell phone users to be safe.

Hey, I agree. I'm for dropping all the anti drunk driving laws too. I mean, as long as some people play with the radio it's unfair to take a dim view of the drunks.

That's really what people do. They take a very selfish view of their own activities and absolutely exaggerate their importance in the schemes of things to justify what they do. They'll draw the line and heap scorn to those who are a bit higher on the spectrum involved and point to the flaws of those lower on the spectrum to justify their own behavior.

I'm against that hypocrisy. Since we can't realistically stop the radio changers lets just quit trying to make the roads safe since clearly we can't affect the danger until we can figure out how to stop the radio folks. Nothing at all wrong with drunk driving or texting or hell, making a sandwich while driving. Not until we can stop every behavior that might cause problems. Once we can do that, we can talk about these issues again.

You're seriously going to say that drunk driving is the same thing as talking on a cell phone? There's a world of difference between driving when your attention may not be solely devoted to the road vs driving when you have lost proper functioning of your mind and body. Lets just ban cell phones and alcohol period in that case that way nobody will ever be able to sneak into a car with either one and endanger the lives of everyone they pass on the road.

Believe it or not, many people are capable of both driving and talking on the phone at the same time. By the same standard, some people are either terrible drivers or just plain assholes behind the wheel even if there's not a single distraction (phone, radio, food, GPS). I see a vast majority of people talking on phones and not smashing their cars into everyone else every single day on my long commute. I think getting rid of the shitty drivers (you know, the ones who we come to find out after an accident have a sheet of infractions a mile long and probably have a suspended or non-existant license) would make the roads much safer than telling people they can't talk on the phone - especially if its a hands free device.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

You're seriously going to say that drunk driving is the same thing as talking on a cell phone? There's a world of difference between driving when your attention may not be solely devoted to the road vs driving when you have lost proper functioning of your mind and body. Lets just ban cell phones and alcohol period in that case that way nobody will ever be able to sneak into a car with either one and endanger the lives of everyone they pass on the road.

Believe it or not, many people are capable of both driving and talking on the phone at the same time. By the same standard, some people are either terrible drivers or just plain assholes behind the wheel even if there's not a single distraction (phone, radio, food, GPS). I see a vast majority of people talking on phones and not smashing their cars into everyone else every single day on my long commute. I think getting rid of the shitty drivers (you know, the ones who we come to find out after an accident have a sheet of infractions a mile long and probably have a suspended or non-existant license) would make the roads much safer than telling people they can't talk on the phone - especially if its a hands free device.

Do a quick Google search, and you will see a lot of studies that claim driving while talking on the phone is the same as drunk driving. Most of these Google searches show articles referencing the studies and not the studies themselves, so I won't make any claims on the validity of the studies. Seems like there are enough of them, though, that outright dismissal isn't warranted.

As far as your comment of "I see a vast majority of people talking on phones and not smashing their cars into everyone else"...the same can be said for drunk drivers. I don't think we'd even want to know how many people drive drunk and get home without incident. Just because you see people doing something and they don't crash, doesn't mean that they aren't still impaired.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Axxon

Never said passengers pay more attention than the person driving. I said that the passenger is far more attentive to their surroundings than a random person that the driver is talking to on the cell phone. I didn't think that would be even questioned.

Of course, on the second paragraph that's why I said to allow all distractions. Period. They all can kill you and since cell phone users are specifically saying that since other distractions occur then theirs should be legal. I agree. So should the drunk driver. After all, studies now suggest that it's no more dangerous than cell phone usage. It's just one among a myriad of distractions, all of them exactly equal and none deserving any prudence or special treatment.

So far, not one cell phone user has agreed with me since I proposed this. It's all about let me do what I want and make sure the other guy can't do what I don't want him to do. Nice hypocritical position cell phonies.

This isn't solely directed at you, but it is a convenient jumping off point.

Why is it that people debating on the Internet always have to take everything that is even remotely similar and call them all equal? Changing the radio station is as distracting as talking on the phone which is as distracting as drunk driving? That is a crazy assertion on its face. Heck, two drunk driving incidents aren't the same risk if one driver is at .08 and the other driver is at .20. Equating absolutely everything is a poor debate tactic. There is some amount of distraction in drunk driving, talking on the phone, and doing anything else in the car while driving. The point isn't to identify everything that can cause any amount of distraction and ban it. The point is to decide which activities add sufficiently to the distraction level to cause enough risk to be worth banning.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

You're seriously going to say that drunk driving is the same thing as talking on a cell phone? There's a world of difference between driving when your attention may not be solely devoted to the road vs driving when you have lost proper functioning of your mind and body. Lets just ban cell phones and alcohol period in that case that way nobody will ever be able to sneak into a car with either one and endanger the lives of everyone they pass on the road.

Believe it or not, many people are capable of both driving and talking on the phone at the same time. By the same standard, some people are either terrible drivers or just plain assholes behind the wheel even if there's not a single distraction (phone, radio, food, GPS). I see a vast majority of people talking on phones and not smashing their cars into everyone else every single day on my long commute. I think getting rid of the shitty drivers (you know, the ones who we come to find out after an accident have a sheet of infractions a mile long and probably have a suspended or non-existant license) would make the roads much safer than telling people they can't talk on the phone - especially if its a hands free device.

What he's doing is pointing out the ridiculousness of the people arguing that talking on a cell phone is similar to listening to the radio or talking to a passenger.

It doesn't matter how safe of a driver you are while talking on a cellphone, Gary. There's numerous studies that have shown that hands free devices do absolutely nothing for safety and talking on a cell phone impairs a driver in ways similar (and sometimes worse) than alcohol does.

For someone to defend cellphone use in car by saying they, as an individual, drive fine while talking completely misses the point. The point is the entire habit of talking while driving is unsafe. Your anecdotal evidence doesn't compare to the number of studies done on it that have time and time again shown that .

Here's an article to read

Hands-free cellphone use while driving won't make the roads safer, studies show. Why? Brain overload. - Los Angeles Times

The irrational attempts to justify an unsafe act in this thread is amazing.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Am I the only one who has been told by a habitual drunk driver that they drive fine when drunk? Hell, I've even been told by someone that they're a better driver that way.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Atocep

The irrational attempts to justify an unsafe act in this thread is amazing.

Nothing at all irrational about determining that the practical reality & benefits outweigh the risk. It's not as though I've seen anyone say "it's 100% perfectly safe" (nothing is), it's that a significant number of people feel the benefits outweigh whatever risks exist.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Am I the only one who has been told by a habitual drunk driver that they drive fine when drunk? Hell, I've even been told by someone that they're a better driver that way.

Yes, despite what any study says people think that what they do is safe and will use completely irrational arguments and anecdotal evidence to justify their actions.

People may think they're driving perfectly fine, but odds are they're too impaired to realize the stupid shit they're doing or how bad they're actually driving.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Nothing at all irrational about determining that the practical reality & benefits outweigh the risk. It's not as though I've seen anyone say "it's 100% perfectly safe" (nothing is), it's that a significant number of people feel the benefits outweigh whatever risks exist.

You might be one of the first people in this thread to talk about cell phone risk and benefit and trying to weigh the two against each other.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Nothing at all irrational about determining that the practical reality & benefits outweigh the risk. It's not as though I've seen anyone say "it's 100% perfectly safe" (nothing is), it's that a significant number of people feel the benefits outweigh whatever risks exist.

Saying that hands free devices are ok and that you're ok with a law requiring them despite the fact that study after study has shown they don't increase safety is irrational.

Saying that you drive perfectly fine and the problem is other drivers when the studies have shown talking on a cellphone while driving is comparable to driving drunk is irrational.

Comparing talking on a cellphone to talking to a passenger or singing along with the radio is irrational.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Saying that hands free devices are ok and that you're ok with a law requiring them despite the fact that study after study has shown they don't increase safety is irrational.

I'm not "ok" with hands free devices being required frankly, so let's not put that one on me.

Saying that you drive perfectly fine and the problem is other drivers when the studies have shown talking on a cellphone while driving is comparable to driving drunk is irrational.

Not if you value the benefits more than the risks concern you.

Comparing talking on a cellphone to talking to a passenger or singing along with the radio is irrational.

Actually, I'd say the passenger comparison is quite rational, especially if you've ever watched someone argue with someone in the car or tend a fussy child while driving.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Not if you value the benefits more than the risks concern you.

There is no benefit that outweighs the risks and actual incidents of killing other people let alone yourself.

[Daimyo]

Personal anecdotes don't really help much in this discussion. These types of decisions require data. No one (in this thread at least) has presented any data on the dangers of changing the radio station, eating, or talking to passengers while driving, only anecdotal evidence.

On the other hand, we do have data that shows talking on the phone is very dangerous and that's really all that's relevant here. I don't know if anyone has done a study to determine the economic impact of banning cell use while driving, but that would be the only other thing that should matter to the decision.

If you want to make the argument that talking to a passenger or eating is as dangerous as talking on the phone show the data -- otherwise you're just attacking a straw man.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

There is no benefit that outweighs the risks and actual incidents of killing other people let alone yourself.

This implies that, as a society, we should never put an economic value on a human life. In that case, we would need to change a lot of other things in our society before banning cell phones in cars.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

This implies that, as a society, we should never put an economic value on a human life. In that case, we would need to change a lot of other things in our society before banning cell phones in cars.

You are correct, I am exaggerating. I'd like to know what phone call you have is so important that you need to significantly raise the risks to folks in your car and in all the cars around you. If it's a true emergency call, get off the phone quick and go take care of it. Yapping with your friends or even taking a work call is NOT worth the risk, period.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

There is no benefit that outweighs the risks and actual incidents of killing other people let alone yourself.

Umm ... applying that philosophy would definitely eliminate a lot of jobs.

For starters, the fishing industry would be toast. As would the airline industry, the logging industry, any construction involving iron & steel, trash collection, farming, electrical line workers, roofers, and commercial drivers.

I'm just wondering how they're supposed to make the bubble wrap we should be walking around in for safety reasons if there's no electricity.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I'd like to know what phone call you have is so important that you need to significantly raise the risks to folks in your car and in all the cars around you.

Any of the ones I choose to answer. Or make for that matter.

[molson]

It's such a weird idea that if one thing is going to be illegal, then everything that might be just as dangerous must also be illegal first.

The world isn't that simple. You also have to consider practicality, and the law, and public support. A cell phone ban is a practical idea that has growing support - that's why we talk about it, and not banning fishing, or logging, or talking to other people in the car, or any other wacky idea that's being thrown around here.

A lot of people hate people who chat on their cell phones while driving. It's very dangerous. That adds up to the reason for a ban. If you can rally half the country against fishing, you can probably get that banned too (good luck).

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

A lot of people hate people who chat on their cell phones while driving.

A lot of people voted Obama last year too and they're far more dangerous, far more irresponsible, and far more unjustifiable than anyone who uses their cell phone or drives with a blood alcohol level of .99 (which would be a helluva trick in it's own right). Maybe we can start with banning those & then move on to the infinitely less serious threats.

[Logan]

/thread

[molson]

I played a little game this weekend while driving back and forth between Idaho and Vegas, counted the number of people who couldn't manage to stay within their lanes on the highway, and then looked to see if they were talking on their cell phone. 7 out of 8 were (the 8th appeared to be a 110-year old woman).

Just my little anecdotal evidence, of course, but it just added to my own personal beliefs about the selfishness of those who endanger others in this way.

[k0ruptr]

Originally Posted by molson

I played a little game this weekend while driving back and forth between Idaho and Vegas, counted the number of people who couldn't manage to stay within their lanes on the highway, and then looked to see if they were talking on their cell phone. 7 out of 8 were (the 8th appeared to be a 110-year old woman).

Just my little anecdotal evidence, of course, but it just added to my own personal beliefs about the selfishness of those who endanger others in this way.

not trying to be a dick, but do you think by playing this game, and physically looking, and trying to figure this out, it took any of your concentration on the road away?

[panerd]

Am I the only one who can't stand the increasing popularity of the cell phone? I hate talking on the phone especially to my girlfriend and a friend of mine who I can't get rid of. I used to be able to go online and have my home phone disconnected and not have a cell phone to contact me either. Somehow I lived. Now people will fight the government tooth and nail to be able to talk in their cars. Count me as one who wouldn't mind this conversation...

Girlfriend: "Why didn't you call me after the Mizzou game to tell me you were on your way home?"

Me: "It is illegal in Missoui to use my cell phone in a car. I didn't want to get a ticket. Now please proceed in telling me all the pointless blather I just avioded hearing about for the last 2 hours while in my car"

[molson]

Originally Posted by k0ruptr

not trying to be a dick, but do you think by playing this game, and physically looking, and trying to figure this out, it took any of your concentration on the road away?

Nope. My concentration was on the road, where it needed to be, with the cell phone assholes being unable to maintain their lanes.

I know there's two distinct camps on this, and nobody's ever going to change either side's mind. But I think the pendulum is definitely swinging, generally, into more awareness about how dangerous this can be. And I know some people can be relatively responsible and try to keep calls in cars short, and only break out the phone if they really need to, it's really the lengthy chatter that's just passing time that goes into the level of selfishness/recklessness to me.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by molson

I played a little game this weekend while driving back and forth between Idaho and Vegas, counted the number of people who couldn't manage to stay within their lanes on the highway, and then looked to see if they were talking on their cell phone. 7 out of 8 were (the 8th appeared to be a 110-year old woman).

Just my little anecdotal evidence, of course, but it just added to my own personal beliefs about the selfishness of those who endanger others in this way.

I refrained from posting earlier because Logan's threadkill was just too perfect, but I don't understand why this automatically means we need to ban all cell phone use.

Originally Posted by Molson

Eating while you're driving isn't per se illegal anywhere. But if you do it in a dangerous manner, and a cop sees you, he can cite you with careless driving. Because you're being careless - while you're driving. Same as if you're turned around talking to your kids. There's no specific crime targeting that behavior, but it's also careless driving.

It's much more difficult to make such case-by-case decisions regarding cell phones. You either have to ban 'em all, or make 'em all legal.
...
It's the same with speeding. Some people can drive safer 15 mph over the speed limit than others can drive 15 under. But it's not possible to make those kind of case-by-case judgments, so we just pick a workable number and go with it.

Why is it so difficult to make case-by-case decisions? You saw 8 people swerving in and out of lanes - so cite those 8 people with reckless driving.

I'd buy these arguments a lot more if the # of reckless driving or improper lane use citations were even a significant fraction of the citations issued for speeding. It may have the ancillary benefit of making the roads safer, but banning all cell phone use or giving out speeding tickets is done because it's easy and it generates revenue. I've received 9 or 10 citations now for speeding (of which I've beaten every single one I showed up in court for), all on multiple lane highways and all at off-peak hours for going somewhere between 65-80 mph. Yet I've never been in or caused an accident, and every day I deal with idiots who can't stay in their lane, change lanes without signaling or stay in the left lane while driving the speed limit. Anecdotally, the only time I've heard anyone get pulled over in a situation like that the officer immediately accused them of being drunk and then let the off once they passed the tests/breathalyzer.

If it was actually about safety on the roads, officers would be enforcing lane discipline and handing out citations for the things I mentioned regardless of whether the person was drunk, on a cell phone, tired, etc. rather than focusing on the low-hanging fruit that's easily provable in court like speeding and drunk driving (although if police cars now have cameras in the dash, it should be pretty easy to show if a car changed lanes without signaling or wasn't staying within the lines.)

Another fun anecdote is that it says on my license I can't drive without "corrective lenses". I wear contacts almost all the time when I drive (and obviously glasses the other part) but when pulled over I've never once been asked whether I had contacts in or to do some sort of an eye test. Whether or not I can see the road would seem to be an extremely important thing, but it's apparently not even on the list of things to check.

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Am I the only one who has been told by a habitual drunk driver that they drive fine when drunk? Hell, I've even been told by someone that they're a better driver that way.

You're definitely not, and while I would never agree with the latter statement, the former has always intrigued me. I drive drunk all the time with my golf cart on our secluded island in Maine, and based off that and how many college acquaintances drove drunk habitually I'd love to see some simulator or closed course where people actually drove drunk and saw the results, either to shut them up or shut the other side up. (It's also my idea for a reality game show - if NBC is showing America's Worst Drivers, people wouldn't tune into Drunk Driving Olympics?)

EDIT - long post short, people jump all over drunk drivers, speeders and now cell phone users because it makes them more likely to drive recklessly, but yet we rarely enforce the actual laws on the books regarding reckless driving.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by panerd

Am I the only one who can't stand the increasing popularity of the cell phone? I hate talking on the phone especially to my girlfriend and a friend of mine who I can't get rid of. I used to be able to go online and have my home phone disconnected and not have a cell phone to contact me either. Somehow I lived. Now people will fight the government tooth and nail to be able to talk in their cars. Count me as one who wouldn't mind this conversation...

Girlfriend: "Why didn't you call me after the Mizzou game to tell me you were on your way home?"

Me: "It is illegal in Missoui to use my cell phone in a car. I didn't want to get a ticket. Now please proceed in telling me all the pointless blather I just avoided hearing about for the last 2 hours while in my car"

I don't know how I'd live at this point without a cell phone for setting up pick-up games/meeting up with friends at night, but you really haven't figured out how to effectively lie here yet? Turn it off and use "The battery died", just ignore it and go with "I set it on vibrate (or silent) and forgot to change it back". "I wasn't getting service" is a bit cliche, but I did manage to convince my mom and anyone else I didn't want to deal with I didn't get cell phone reception in my dorm room or off-campus apartments for 5 years. Come on, use a little imagination.