Posted on 02/25/2007 8:36:32 AM PST by jazusamo
Sunday, February 25, 2007
I yield to no man in my devotion to multitasking or my aversion to government poking its nanny-state snout into my business, OK? So if I could do something to keep the butt-inski state out of my life, I'd be right there -- especially if I could accomplish another task or two at the same time. But this conservative favors the proposed ban now before the Legislature on using cell phones while driving.
I have come to understand the wisdom in Petrula Betsis' definition of multitasking: "screwing up a lot of things all at once."
Silly me, I don't want some driver screwing up my life or the lives of my family and friends -- or strangers -- because he's yakking on the cell phone.
Yes, I know, this is something of an intrusion on personal liberty. "Something of" because driving is a privilege, not a right. It's inevitably a public act. After all, every driver is responsible for almost two tons of rolling steel moving along our public roads. The state intrudes plenty on drivers already, and should. Some of the same people who cry "nanny state" over the proposed cell-phone ban have no problem with the seat-belt mandates. Somehow it's enlightened government policy to have laws protecting drivers or passengers who may not want to buckle up, laws protecting people from themselves. But it's the height of government intrusion to ban an act that can endanger other motorists and pedestrians, not to mention the driving-while-cell-phoning drivers and their passengers? Please.
Most drivers know on some level that cell-phoning drivers are a menace on our roads. They'll either acknowledge their own problems driving while cell-phoning or, more likely, hold forth on other drivers' problems.
Not until last spring did I realize how serious the problem was. I started riding a scooter. (Stop laughing.) Scooter riders must always assume other motorists don't see you. And many don't see you because they're blabbing on cells while coming at you at high speed. As an exposed scooter rider, you notice this more and it's mildly unnerving.
But isn't cell-phoning just one of many drive-time distractions that aren't outlawed? What's next for busybody legislators -- outlaw talking to passengers or listening, say, to "books on tape" in the car? Legitimate questions.
Happily, there are research-based answers. Studies by University of Utah researcher Frank Drews make clear that these activities are dramatically different than talking on a cell phone while driving.
A 2001 study he did found that listening to a book on tape had no impact on driving. In a new study now under review for publication, Drews looked at three groups. One group had drivers without cell-phones or passengers. A second had drivers talking to passenger-friends. A third group had drivers on cell phones talking to friends. All drivers were tested on a driving simulator. They were to exit the highway at a roadside rest area.
Ninety percent of those without cell phones or passengers exited successfully. Drivers talking to passenger-friends had an 88 percent success rate. And the drivers talking to friends on their cells? Less than 50 percent successfully left the highway, with some driving for miles and researchers having to step in and stop the test. "This tells you something very different is happening," says Drews.
When a driver talks on a cell phone, the person on the other end of the conversation -- and studies show the problem is the conversation and not the device (hand-held or hands-free) -- has no clue what the driver's facing on the road. When driver and passenger are talking in a car, however, the passenger is engaged in conversing and driving because that he has eyes to see and skin in the game.
"It's clear that if you have a driver and passenger," Drews says, "you have a situation where you have four eyes and have the attention of two driving."
I'm not optimistic this Legislature will pass SB293. Too much cell-phone industry clout. Too much misinformation and misapplied libertarianism. And too many cell-phone addicted multitaskers trooping to Salem along Interstate 5. But the day will come as the accidents pile up.
Until then, next time you call someone on their cell, first ask if they're driving and tell them you'll call back if they are. That is, if you care about them, their passengers, other motorists or nearby pedestrians. Or we vulnerable citizens of Scooter Nation.
David Reinhard, associate editor, can be reached at 503-221-8152 or davidreinhard@news.oregonian.com.
It's against the law in New York [one of the few laws of the kind I agree with], except it allows a "hands free" exception [which is stupid, but hey, it's New York]. Unfortunately, the law is not enforced. I see idiots on the road all day yacking away at 65 mph.
I've seen drivers text messaging, while pretending to drive.
I agree wholeheartedly with him.
Hiya, jaz! Agree completely.
Some folks here are for more laws, as long as they are their kind of laws...
I drive and talk all the time and have done so for a decade or more with no incidents or close calls. I have some level of sympathy for those people who would like to ban the practice, as I've seen more drivers going 55 in the fast lane seemingly b/c they were too engaged in conversation to pay attention, and a fair amount of swerving. I wish people were smarter and realized that talking on the phone was, at best, their second priority while driving. But come on, you can't illegalize stupidity.
Why are hands-free setups stupid?
I'm kind of mixed on this one. I know I shouldn't drive and cell phone but my ex-girlfriend seemed to do it with ease.
Maybe if I was a heart surgeon or president of the United States, I'd feel differently. But as important as I may think my job is, people who want to reach me are just going to have to cool their heels every now and then.
I've been told the owner of the company I work for does CW (morse) while driving but I've never actually seen him do it so it might be a joke.
Obviously you never worked in Mission Control. :-) LOL!
To me, the problem is someone driving who is [in theory] trying to concentrate on the conversation he/she is engaged in while trying [hopefully] to concentrate on their driving. A handset is an additional distraction, but the conversation is the key problem [IMO].
Good for you. But I don't. I drive while talking on my cell and I have never been pulled over. I asked my neighbor (a police officer) about it and he said that it wasn't worth a cop's time for something so petty. So I (and MANY others) will keep on talking, and no one is going to do a thing about it. Can we discuss more serious stuff?
I couldn't agree with you more, I don't even have a cell phone. My kids and grandkids think I'm living in the dark ages but if anyone wants to talk to me they can call me when I'm home.
This is likely no joke. Mobile CW used to be pretty popular. Some guys even drive 5-spds with the paddles hooked up next to the shifter. Sending accurately in that environment has to be very difficult.
"I yield to no man in my devotion to multitasking or my aversion to government poking its nanny-state snout into my business, OK?"
But apparently he does. Reinhard is the Oregonian's sorry excuse for a conservative columnist. Most of the time he's just right of center enough to annoy liberals but never to do right by the right. He's useless
So a ban on passengers engaging the driver in conversation would be ok with you?
It would be more than fine with me but my wife would not like it AT ALL.
FWIW, I see the one-handed driving as the problem. I have a great deal of experience with designing, installing and using many different types of hands-free systems and believe that one that is properly designed and configured creates no undue distraction for the driver....IMO.
Unfortunatley, 99% of drivers don't use them or don't want to take the time to set one up. Too bad, because a properly designed system is a real joy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.