Alberta passes distracted driving law

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Mad Mel

If the enforcement and penalties are there, yes. Of course a cultural mindset shift has to take place, and that takes time. This is what happened with drinking and driving, when I was a young driver, it was illegal, but still socially acceptable. Everyone did it. Now, only jackasses do it.

So with this law you believe that the penatlies are sufficent?

Yes there are fewer drunk drivers now but there are still A LOT? It is not like it is a rare occurance.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Mad Mel

No, because anyone with a brain can deduce that reducing driving distraction will reduce accidents.

Thank you.

[Mad Mel]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Mel, can you debate without getting like this? The studies that have been posted already show that trying to remove distractions in this manner does not remove them. It forces people to be even more stupid. It really is no different than any other stupid behaviour. Drugs, tobacco, taxes, ect. It just forces people into a underground type of behaviour.

I agree that something needs to be done but I don't agree that this is the law that will do it.

Then don't start out with time machine comments. I have actual, real-life experience witnessing the effect of these laws. I ride a motorcycle every day, believe me, I keep a very defensive eye on what is going on around me on the road. When some texting ###### mashes me into the SUV in front of me, I die. I pay attention to these things. Maybe people here are just much better drivers than Canadians. Or maybe it's because the distraction laws work. Either way, those laws aren't hurting anything, other than some knob's immutable desire to twitter the tremendously important fact that he's sitting in the car to all his friends.

Drinking and driving laws have worked. Not completely (as with any law), but the incidence of drinking and driving accidents is far lower than it was years ago. Those laws had no effect at first. After seatbelt laws came in, lots of people didn't bother wearing them for a few years. Everyone does now. It takes time to change behaviours. Some study examining the effect of a law that was brought in within the last year or two is meaningless.

[Mad Mel]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

So with this law you believe that the penatlies are sufficent?

Yes there are fewer drunk drivers now but there are still A LOT? It is not like it is a rare occurance.

In 2007, 1054 Canadians died in traffic accidents due to alcohol. In 1982, it was 2501. While still too many, the laws have been effective, since 1450 fewer Canadians are dead each year because of those laws.

http://madd.ca/english/research/lives_saved.pdf

edit: had the numbers backward at first.

[flamesfan6]

are there actually people arguing against this?

[TopChed]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

Taxi drivers are notorious for talking on their cels and not watching where they're going.

If I'm a customer, I should be able to tell 'em to hang up and drive.

My cab driver in Seattle almost smoked a stationary garbage truck because he was busy messing around with his GPS. I had to yell at him just in time for him to swerve. No tip for that dude.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by flamesfan6

if you can change it through the car (like steering wheel) you can. but if you can't use the actual ipod to change the song.

Sorry but that is fata-ing stupid. I'm not allowed to press 1 button on my iPhone, but some ###### can sit there changing radio stations and adjusting his heat, and thats just fine? The gov't really fata-ed this law.

[flamesfan6]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

Sorry but that is fata-ing stupid. I'm not allowed to press 1 button on my iPhone, but some ###### can sit there changing radio stations and adjusting his heat, and thats just fine? The gov't really fata-ed this law.

the heat, radio, etc is part of the car, it would be hard to implement a rule to deal with that. But with an external device there's more that can go wrong. If there is a screen lock you have to do that, if you want to change to a different song then it's harder than pressing a button or the steering wheel or a simple button or turn knob built into the car.

allowing ipods and such similar would open to worse potential than heat and car built in radio. Ipods allow you to search for music/select certain albums/artists and so on. This takes your mind off driving more than the built in car functions.

So your point is not really valid. The car stuff was designed for easy change while driving, an external item is not.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by flamesfan6

the heat, radio, etc is part of the car, it would be hard to implement a rule to deal with that. But with an external device there's more that can go wrong. If there is a screen lock you have to do that, if you want to change to a different song then it's harder than pressing a button or the steering wheel or a simple button or turn knob built into the car.

allowing ipods and such similar would open to worse potential than heat and car built in radio. Ipods allow you to search for music/select certain albums/artists and so on. This takes your mind off driving more than the built in car functions.

So your point is not really valid. The car stuff was designed for easy change while driving, an external item is not.

If I'm on a playlist I can change the song with three taps of my finger. To change the radio station until I find something that isn't commercials takes about the same. Basically because I don't want to fork out $300 for a new stereo in my car, I'm no longer allowed to listen to my ipod? Thats pretty frickin stupid in my eyes. The cops should be able to show discretion on this law because if this is set in stone its ######ed.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

Sorry but that is fata-ing stupid. I'm not allowed to press 1 button on my iPhone, but some ###### can sit there changing radio stations and adjusting his heat, and thats just fine? The gov't really fata-ed this law.

Two things. Operating the climate controls are an essential part of safely operating a car. And when you're adjusting your sound system, you need to be careful doing it, it can be a dangerous distraction.

Plus, how many people only press 1 button on their iPhone? You can do a hell of a lot more on an iPhone than a standard car stereo, which means more potential distraction. How about this, people stop dicking around with their gadgets and drive properly.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by zamler

Two things. Operating the climate controls are an essential part of safely operating a car. And when you're adjusting your sound system, you need to be careful doing it, it can be a dangerous distraction.

Plus, how many people only press 1 button on their iPhone? You can do a hell of a lot more on an iPhone than a standard car stereo, which means more potential distraction. How about this, people stop dicking around with their gadgets and drive properly.

Exactly, so why make it legal to change your sound system no matter what but unable to touch your iphone at all.

Well while I'm driving and I have a song I'm sick of on my playlist I press home button twice then press on the arrow and im done fiddling with it for most likely the rest of the trip.
EDIT: I fully understand the purpose of this law, and I can see it working, I just disagree with how some things are allowed, but some similar things aren't. Also what about GPS apps on iPhones/HTC/whatever vs. in car GPS units?

[zamler]

No law is perfect, but you have so start somewhere. I don't mind this law, but I'm under no illusion that it will make our roads any safer. I hope it will, but I doubt it just the same. Enforcement of traffic laws is all about revenue streams, not actually making safer drivers. If we truly wanted people to be better drivers, we would spend the collected revenue to educate people.

For example, when a traffic accident occurs, what do we hear? How many cars crashed, where it happened. How many people were injured or killed. Are we told how it happened? Are we told how to avoid such situations? If that interestion ever made safer? Very rarely. No education is involved, so much for learning from our mistakes. Why do officers site just over the crest of a hill when setting up speed traps. Does that makes drivers safer? Does it prevent accidents? Of course not, it's put in the most advantages spot to make the most revenue.

Now Photo radar is the biggest chicken shi* system there is. If speeding is really killing people, then pull the person over, give them a ticket, put some fear into them. Getting a ticket in the mail has ZERO incentive to stop speeding, aside from the financial aspect. So instead of us slowing down, we drive exactly the same and hope we don't get nabbed. Or we are on the look out for a van on the side of the road, see one and slam on the brakes.

How about this, next time I see a photo radar van, I put a big sign a few hundred meters up road that says, "SLOW DOWN PHOTO RADAR". I bet you every single person will slow to the speed limit. Safety first! Everyone slows down, the roads are safer. Exactly what the system is there for, right? Oh but sorry, no revenue so if I did that, I'd be arrested.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Mad Mel

In 2007, 1054 Canadians died in traffic accidents due to alcohol. In 1982, it was 2501. While still too many, the laws have been effective, since 1450 fewer Canadians are dead each year because of those laws.

http://madd.ca/english/research/lives_saved.pdf

edit: had the numbers backward at first.

That wasn't what I was debating and I think you posted exactly what I suggested about drinking and driving soooo? And you still havent come back with a study saying this type of law works. The punishment for DUI is much more severe than a $175 ticket.

But whatever, your life experience is what counts when it comes to evidence so lets just go with that.

[Mad Mel]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

But whatever, your life experience is what counts when it comes to evidence so lets just go with that.

Good. I'm glad this has been educational for you. I always welcome the opportunity to help the ill-informed.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by jammies

Notice how the driver is on the right hand side in the other car?

Damn...been driving on the left for too long.....ooops

[GreenTeaFrapp]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

Exactly, so why make it legal to change your sound system no matter what but unable to touch your iphone at all.

Well while I'm driving and I have a song I'm sick of on my playlist I press home button twice then press on the arrow and im done fiddling with it for most likely the rest of the trip.

For one thing, car stereos have physical buttons while an iPhone only has one button and you can't do anything with only pressing that one button. You have to divert your attention from the road to figure out where on your iPhone you have to press that arrow.

[SeeBass]

Do people still have to play with their radios on the console?

Good god people get a grown ups car and have it on your steerring column.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

Do people still have to play with their radios on the console?

Good god people get a grown ups car and have it on your steerring column.

YA but which Knob? AAAHHHHHHHH.....

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

Do people still have to play with their radios on the console?

Good god people get a grown ups car and have it on your steerring column.

Curse me for going to University and not being able to afford a car with radio functions on the steering wheel. Frankly I don't think that people will get pulled over because they change the song on their ipod or anything like that, unless they are swirving over the road and the police see that.

I do text when I am at a red light, is that allowed seeing as though it isn't a safety issue considering the vehicle isn't moving.

[The Goon]

Ironically, both jolinar and Mad Mel had their earlier debate while street racing.