Premier eyes cellphone ban

[Resolute 14]

Passengers can also point out dangers on the road. That is the key.

Plenty of studies have shown that using a cell phone and driving are highly dangerous. Some even stating it is as bad as driving drunk.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1209113320.htm

http://www.livescience.com/technolog...ll_danger.html

"If you put a 20-year-old driver behind the wheel with a cell phone, their reaction times are the same as a 70-year-old driver who is not using a cell phone," said University of Utah psychology professor David Strayer. "It's like instantly aging a large number of drivers."

http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=062206-1

June 29, 2006 -- Three years after the preliminary results first were presented at a scientific meeting and drew wide attention, University of Utah psychologists have published a study showing that motorists who talk on handheld or hands-free cellular phones are as impaired as drunken drivers.

[Thunderball]

"If you put a 20-year-old driver behind the wheel with a cell phone, their reaction times are the same as a 70-year-old driver who is not using a cell phone," said University of Utah psychology professor David Strayer. "It's like instantly aging a large number of drivers."

So are we banning 70 year old drivers next? Cause that's essentially what this quote is suggesting... logically its saying we should ban cellphones cause they are dangerous, because they lower reaction time to that of older drivers that we freely allow to drive?

June 29, 2006 -- Three years after the preliminary results first were presented at a scientific meeting and drew wide attention, University of Utah psychologists have published a study showing that motorists who talk on handheld or hands-free cellular phones are as impaired as drunken drivers.

Funny that they mention hands-free... since that is essentially like carrying a conversation with another person in the car. I guess it brings new meaning to the term "drunk with talk"

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Why don't we ban billboards on all roads, or ban people from driving their crying/bratty kids, or ban scantily clad women from walking along roadways, cause those are all empirically proven distractors too...

Are we children that the government needs to coddle and instruct on every little thing?

My thoughts aswell....but just by my own observation, I can tell that people can't make the decision for themselves.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

I'm usually opposed to the government legislating how we live our lives, but this is safety issue, not a life style issue. Kind of like seat belts and bike helmets. So go for it Ed.

You have very much a valid point with this. Hopefully if this law DOES go through, people will start using a handset.

Still pretty sad that the government has to step in and fix the problem.

[peter12]

Great idea. Some on a cell phone blew threw a redlight and smacked my brand new car.

If you're doing something pro-active in your car, that makes you more of a danger to others besides yourself, the government has to step in. Even for the libertarians out there (myself halfway included), this is an acceptable role for government.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Well, really, its a slippery slope. There are a TON of distractors in driving each very capable of causing a dangerous accident, and we can't seriously ban them all. Here's the five things that distract me the most in my car:

1. Other passengers
2. Radio Controls
3. Climate Control
4. Other Drivers
5. Advertisements/Billboards

Are we gonna ban these?

The problem is with all of those things you mentioned, they stop being a distraction when the road conditions suddenly change. A person on the other end of a cell conversation can keep supplying you with distractions even when you need to be concentrating.

Me, I rarely use the cell phone in the car. And my conversations are either short (ie I'm running late), or they are somebody giving me directions. Now that I walk a couple of kms to work everyday, I see people using cell phones as a form of in car entertainment. Instead of listening to the radio, they call up a friend and gossip. This is where the problem lies.

They did a Mythbusters episode on this, and found that it causes a greater impairment to drivers than most other things; including alcohol.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by Azure

You have very much a valid point with this. Hopefully if this law DOES go through, people will start using a handset.

Still pretty sad that the government has to step in and fix the problem.

Yes, it is sad that the government has to legislate the obvious. However, there are too many people who can't seem to figure it out independently. The dumb part is that headsets and Blue Tooth should make this a non-issue in the first place.

[CrusaderPi]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

So are we banning 70 year old drivers next? Cause that's essentially what this quote is suggesting... logically its saying we should ban cellphones cause they are dangerous, because they lower reaction time to that of older drivers that we freely allow to drive?



Funny that they mention hands-free... since that is essentially like carrying a conversation with another person in the car. I guess it brings new meaning to the term "drunk with talk"

Wouldn't be a bad idea. Neither would making the drivers test more difficult. Neither would having to retake it every five years.

Without any statistical data, and going by nothing but my own eyes, I'd say a tenth of drivers shouldn't be allowed to drive. Add in the percentage of people who don't bother with liscenses, registration, or insurance and I've just solved Alberta's traffic problems.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Funny that they mention hands-free... since that is essentially like carrying a conversation with another person in the car. I guess it brings new meaning to the term "drunk with talk"

No, it isn't.

Another person in the car is also looking out of it, and noticing the same things the driver is: hazards, upcoming exits, etc. The person on the phone can't do that.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by CrusaderPi

Wouldn't be a bad idea. Neither would making the drivers test more difficult. Neither would having to retake it every five years.

Agreed. It's been 20 years since anybody tested my ability to drive. It has always amazed me that 15 minutes of your life at age 16 gives you the privilege of driving for the rest of your life.

[CrusaderPi]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Agreed. It's been 20 years since anybody tested my ability to drive. It has always amazed me that 15 minutes of your life at age 16 gives you the privilege of driving for the rest of your life.

Yeah, my wife was forced into parallel parking recently. Needless to say, hilarity ensued. Not outloud mind you. But, my Lord, was it funny on the inside. Good thing we weren't late for anything important.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

So are we banning 70 year old drivers next? Cause that's essentially what this quote is suggesting... logically its saying we should ban cellphones cause they are dangerous, because they lower reaction time to that of older drivers that we freely allow to drive?

Oh man, I wish!

But seriously, when you get up to a certain point, you probably should be tested frequently for driving ability. More times than I can count, I've seen an elderly person drive as if they had absolutely no idea where they were going, change lanes nearly into some, and look generally lost.

So maybe more frequent testing among all ages to weed out the undesirables would be helpful.

Also, I admit I'm a terrible driver with other people in the car. Cellphones I can do with, but if someone tries to have a conversation with me while driving, it doesn't work very well.

[Devils'Advocate]

Told to me by a co-worker:
This co-worker was at home when her sister called while on the highway. Someone drifted into her lane and she had to slam on the breaks. The sister says, "An ignoramous driver on a cell phone just cut me off! They should ban those damn things!"

Everone who uses cell phones while driving think that EVERYONE ELSE using a cell phone is dangerous - but not themselves.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Of course, with safety belts and helmets, one can argue that the person is only endangering themselves with their own idiocy, so why should the government have to regulate it?

With Cellphones its a different issue. It can definitely be a distractor, but so can a myriad of other things... most of these things are built standard into a vehicle. Unlike drunk driving, which is a proven danger pertaining to a statistical majority. Like I said before, the biggest distractor is passengers... people that you may or may not otherwise love pointing out things and asking questions and shouting out things, and gasping out "oh god" when they remember something, all the while serving as a massive distraction to the driver. Things like this should just fall into the "people should know better" category, not the "government micromanagement" category... but why think when the government will eventually do it for you?

Well, the counter to that would be that I am indirectly paying the additional medical costs for you to be a complete moron and drive without a seatbelt.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

I mean, a lot of people are just bad drivers, irregardless of whether or not they are on a cellphone or not. Taking away the phone will not make them a better driver. There's many distractions to take their place and cause as many accidents as before.

Well, if this is true the studies will show just that and there won't be a ban anyway.
My guess is taking away one of their biggest distractions will absolutely reduce accidents.

[Flames in 07]

This is a no brainer. You get fired from my company if you are talking on the phone while on business in your car.

15 years from now we will all shake our heads that it took so long for this law to be enacted. Just like the new smoking laws.

[Engine09]

Maybe people will start signalling again.

Everyone thinks they're a damn brain surgeon and cannot be out of touch for even a minute, always blathering on the phone with one hand on the wheel and oblivious to what's going on around them.

And then there is texting, hahaha. Yeah, not a big distraction.

[Resolute 14]

I've been in a car with someone who is a serial texter while driving. I actually thought it would be safer to open the door and jump out of the vehicle at 100kph than to stay in that car. I insisted on driving the first time we stopped.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Of course, with safety belts and helmets, one can argue that the person is only endangering themselves with their own idiocy, so why should the government have to regulate it?

With Cellphones its a different issue. It can definitely be a distractor, but so can a myriad of other things... most of these things are built standard into a vehicle. Unlike drunk driving, which is a proven danger pertaining to a statistical majority. Like I said before, the biggest distractor is passengers... people that you may or may not otherwise love pointing out things and asking questions and shouting out things, and gasping out "oh god" when they remember something, all the while serving as a massive distraction to the driver. Things like this should just fall into the "people should know better" category, not the "government micromanagement" category... but why think when the government will eventually do it for you?

For F's sakes, I've lost count of how many things in this post annoy me ... where to start.

There have been dozens of studies that show that driving while on the phone is equivalent to being 1.5 to 2.0 times over the legal limit. Bluetooth is about 1.0 to 1.5. In all studies it shows that cell phones are different than passengers in terms of its impact to your driving because passengers react with what is going on, on the road. Be it pausing when needed or relevant inflictions in their voice that recognizes what is going on around the driver ... obviously on a phone that is impossible. Passengers are an extremely small distraction compared to being on the cell phone.

You ask why the government should regulate it, I can only assume you figure the gov't should care about human life and protecting dumb people from themselves, and if you do, at the very least thing of hte cost damages and the time of public resources, like the EMS folks who have to scrape these people, and their victims off the road.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Azure

Does the government have to control every aspect of our lives? What happened to people taking responsibility upon themselves when they drive...and pulling over when someone calls? Just like many have said they do here in this thread.

What about the person who takes zero responibility for his driving habits?

If people were responsible drivers we wouldn't be thinking of such a law.

The fact is someones irresponsibilty is causing accidents and taking lives.