Alberta passes distracted driving law

[Antithesis]

I don't think the answer lies in removing people's ability to use technology while in a vehicle as much as making the penalties more onerous (as Ontario seems to have done) in situations where it is called for and perhaps having some leniency in other situations.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Burninator

So instead of texting in their lap people would be leaning and texting from the passenger seat.

I also think it's a dumb idea, just saying... it wouldn't be overly hard to implement if they wished that.

[Yasa]

Originally Posted by AcGold

It's pretty simple to me, if your car is moving your eyes are on the road.

The issue is rarely with men though, and I hate to say it, but I've never seen a male blindly texting while moving. Every time it's been a female, my little sister included here as she had her eyes on something in her car and got into a fender bender. Ex girlfriend totalled 2 cars, on her phone both times. Obviously I'm not saying men are innocent it's just the trend I've subjectively experienced where women more consistently do not look at the road when they are driving. Maybe it's just a limited sample size and the trend is the opposite, please don't flip out. I just think it needs to be stressed to women more that driving safely happens from looking out the front window and not inside the car, maybe I'm just a horses ass so take it with a grain of salt.

That's dumb. I do a lot of driving, men are equally responsible. It's not a gender thing, it's an education and naivety thing.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

"Social media life" has nothing to do with it. By shutting down any "distracting parts" while a vehicle is in motion, now your passenger can't listen to music, use GPS, kids in the back can't watch Netflix. And why would this only work in a car? If it's based on speed, now it limits functionality on the C-Train or bus or anything else that moves. And what constitutes distracting apps? Shut down the music player at speed in case someone tries to switch songs? It's never going to happen.

Wow, your truly sucked in.

"now your passenger can't listen to music" .. ever heard of a car stereo?

"use GPS" If your car doesn't have one, ..pull over and use your phone or maybe try to remember how to get where your going.

"kids in the back can't watch Netflix.".. the poor kids, how about a portable DVD since you can't keep them happy yourself.

What did the world ever do without smartphones?

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by T@T

Wow, your truly sucked in

Frankly I'm not even a fan I smartphones and don't think they've made society better, but please continue to tell me how I'm sucked in.

Roll your eyes all you want, but a lockdown of smartphones for an entire vehicle including passengers, is never going to happen.

I do use a car stereo, and generally know where I'm going before I leave. And I don't have kids to watch Netflix in the back seat but they're all valid arguments IMO.

Point is, forcing everyone in a vehicle (or bus or train or ferry, since how these devices are going to be able to differentiate that you're in a car hasn't been addressed) to not use a smartphone/tablet/e-reader is absolutely absurd, no matter how horrible texting while driving is.

[calgarywinning]

You think the bus driver and ferry drivers should be able to use a smartphone/table/e-reader? You are working backwards on this. Passengers should be able to use these devices, but operators of vehicles that put other peoples lives in danger should not.

The fact is raising fines would be okay, but enforcing the message to the vehicle operators is the problem. I would like to see raised fines/raised enforcement.

The fact is there is tech and solutions that can be developed and would finally stop operators of vehicles from putting other peoples lives in danger.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

You think the bus driver and ferry drivers should be able to use a smartphone/table/e-reader?

I'm confused who said they should be able to.

[ken0042]

He took your "everybody in a vehicle" literally. Most of us understood you meant everybody except the driver.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by T@T

Wow, your truly sucked in.

"now your passenger can't listen to music" .. ever heard of a car stereo?

"use GPS" If your car doesn't have one, ..pull over and use your phone or maybe try to remember how to get where your going.

"kids in the back can't watch Netflix.".. the poor kids, how about a portable DVD since you can't keep them happy yourself.

What did the world ever do without smartphones?

But what if you've eliminated those outdated devices from your life? I don't own a portable DVD player because an iPad does the same function, plus countless other things. And it can hold more than one movie. My phone IS my GPS because having a standalone unit is redundant and the maps are not updated instantly. My phone and my data plan have completely replaced my need for satellite and terrestrial radio, not to mention CDs.

If you want to live in 1992, go ahead, but I'm not going to ditch one device so I can buy a few more that are already obsolete.

[Thor]

Driving while on the phone, texting, is a plague in Iceland. I cannot tell you how many times I've seen distracted driving here and how often its been near misses of people driving off the road, slamming on breaks when they look up and all kinds of nonsense.

I installed a hands free bluetooth to answer my phone, which I rarely do when driving, and I will not look at my phone unless I'm at a complete stop. I think the severity of how bad this really is on the road is lost on the generation growing up with these technology, my nieces are just scary bad at this and I try to gently remind them of the danger's when I see them do it.

[polak]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Let's explore these things:

read ads- You mean billboards? That is a head's up move- you are looking at your surroundings instead of down on the phone. There are also regulations and debate about what you can have on billboards.

drink coffee- covered under distracted driving

check on kids- agree that is a distraction. I would argue that is often necessary. What would you recommend- kids aren't allowed in cars? I don't know of a "solution" that doesn't sound extremely harsh

change songs- Every car I have ever owned since the mid 80s had quick access buttons. I would say texting is a closer analogy to reprogramming your radio presets or creating a playlist. Once again, this is more of a "heads up" type of thing to be doing.

fiddle with AC- Same as adjusting radio, you can only do 6 things. Hotter or colder; more or less fan; and vent adjustment (counting that as two as well) The fan and temp are quite simple, and I can do them in my vehicles without looking. I would draw the analogy of you only ever sending 6 different one character texts; without having to read the incoming text. I say that because you are either too hot or too cold, or need the air going a different direction. The latter is often due to window fogging up; or back to too hot or cold. And my dog can tell me if he is too hot or cold. (not complex thinking; like a question in a text.)

So I'd agree there are different distractions, and they have different degrees of distraciveness. Texting is the worst of them. And that's why I want the fine higher, to discourage me from doing it.

All of those things take just as much attention at a red light as me firing off a text. Literally 2 seconds.

[ken0042]

So you would amend the law so that if a text takes less than 3 seconds it is allowed?

First of all, I would suggest that if reading and responding to a text only takes 2 seconds, it could have waited. But secondly the traffic laws are set so that either most people can follow them; or at least lowest common denominator can. As an example, many people with a newer vehicle could easily handle driving 150 km/h on Stoney. However the speed limit is 100 to account for vehicles that cannot go that fast safely, as well as drivers.

I will also stand by my previous point; the problem with texters being oblivious to the issues they cause is that they are oblivious. Meaning that they often have no idea they are doing anything wrong, and are looking at failing to crash as an indicator of their "safe driving."

[Arya Stark]

Originally Posted by polak

All of those things take just as much attention at a red light as me firing off a text. Literally 2 seconds.

Yes maybe if every single one of your texts is literally "k".

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by polak

All of those things take just as much attention at a red light as me firing off a text. Literally 2 seconds.

You literally are oblivious.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by ken0042

First of all, I would suggest that if reading and responding to a text only takes 2 seconds, it could have waited. But secondly the traffic laws are set so that either most people can follow them; or at least lowest common denominator can. As an example, many people with a newer vehicle could easily handle driving 150 km/h on Stoney. However the speed limit is 100 to account for vehicles that cannot go that fast safely, as well as drivers.

But reading a text at a red light while fully stopped isn't comparable to going 150 in a 100 zone. It would be more akin to driving 51 in a 50. Both are technically illegal, but neither is likely to cause an event that the laws are in place to prevent.

Sure, that 1 kph could be the difference between life and death. As could letting your eyes wonder for two seconds while fully stopped to that text, billboard, pretty lady, squirrel, etc. But we're talking very, very long odds.

[Flash Walken]

Even if it is just as distracting as adjusting your radio or climate, which is false anyway, it's ANOTHER distraction on top of those ones, and it has no impact on your driving the way doing those two activities do.

At a red light, you are still operating a motor vehicle and are part of the flow of traffic, therefore any actions you undertake while in operation of said vehicle have an impact on your fellow commuters.

Any distraction can have negative impacts on others.

If you want to drive, drive. If you're doing anything else while driving, you're being unsafe and inconsiderate. Considering driving is already one of the most unsafe activities we as humans engage in on a daily basis, it can't be stressed enough how selfish it is to put your own fleeting desires ahead of the safety of others.

If you can't accept that, I think it behoves you to really examine how you live other aspects of your life.

If it takes 2 seconds, which is again untrue, then it's not important enough to do while in operation of a vehicle.

And then, there is what we know about people in general:

In our test, neither subject had any idea that using his phone would slow down his reaction time so much. Like most folks, they think they’re pretty good drivers. Our results prove otherwise, at both city and highway speeds. The key element to driving safely is keeping your eyes and your mind on the road. Text messaging distracts any driver from that primary task. So the next time you’re tempted to text, tweet, e-mail, or otherwise type while driving, either ignore the urge or pull over. We don’t want you rear-ending us.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...results-page-2

Even anticipating answering a text message at the next red light makes you a distracted and unsafe driver.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

Yes maybe if every single one of your texts is literally "k".

I will check my text at a red light, if it's something that I can respond to with a quick answer I will, if not then I don't. I guarantee you I'm no more in danger when I do that stopped than you are at a red light even if you're not checking your phone. Everyones attention wanders for brief moments at a red light and 99.99999999% of the time, nothing happens because of it. The cop dressed as a civilian walking up to the car parked at a red light is probably far more dangerous then my glance.

I can't believe how ridiculous this is getting. Do all of you really believe you sit at full attention throughout every red light you sit at? Give me a break.

[lazypucker]

Why don't the phone manufacturers design a phone that will have texting, e-mail, calls, etc. automatically disabled when a person is in a car driving? I think if the technology is available, the different governments can make that into a law...

[Addick]

Originally Posted by polak

I guarantee you I'm no more in danger when I do that stopped than you are at a red light even if you're not checking your phone. Everyones attention wanders for brief moments at a red light and 99.99999999% of the time, nothing happens because of it.

Someone's attention momentarily wondering while they are driving is vastly different to someone changing their focus from driving to completing another activity.

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

Why don't the phone manufacturers design a phone that will have texting, e-mail, calls, etc. automatically disabled when a person is in a car driving? I think if the technology is available, the different governments can make that into a law...

My phone has a driving mode that can turn on automatically, based on it detecting it has made a bluetooth connection to the car.

That's not going to help the polaks of the world though, they think their need to read meaningless messages is much more important than the safety of both themselves and others.