Advocacy & Safety - Note to Drivers: Lose the Cellphone, and the Lipstick

Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.




Blue Order
12-17-05, 06:33 PM
The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/01/nyregion/01cell.html?ex=1134968400&en=f8ad2d110809ee15&ei=5070)

October 1, 2005

Note to Drivers: Lose the Phone (and Lipstick)

By DAMIEN CAVE

GREENWICH, Conn., Sept. 29 - When a new state driving law goes into effect here on Saturday, Will Suarez will have to put down his Treo 650 cellphone and stop digging into his briefcase while cruising Connecticut's streets and highways in his Audi sedan.

The new law, one of the toughest in the nation, goes beyond just prohibiting drivers from using hand-held cellphones while behind the wheel. Those pulled over for speeding or other moving violations can be fined $100 for any behavior that distracts them from driving - glancing at a newspaper, typing on a BlackBerry, applying lipstick while looking in the rearview mirror or turning to yell at the kids in the back seat.

It is a prospect that Mr. Suarez, 42, like many drivers across Connecticut, can hardly believe is possible.

"I'm in sales, so I work out of my car a lot," he said Thursday, after driving into a parking lot here with his phone pressed against his ear. "It's an infringement of my personal freedoms."

Drivers nonetheless will have to get used to it. Four years after New York passed the nation's first cellphone ban, 22 states and Washington have limited cellphone use while driving. And in the last year, many of those states have gone beyond merely regulating cellphone use among drivers, cracking down on distractions inside cars.

Tennessee and Virginia, going further than most, have passed laws prohibiting the display of pornographic videos in vehicles. In Nevada, lawmakers recently increased penalties for drivers who kill someone while eating, putting on makeup or using a cellphone. In Washington, district lawmakers have banned driving while "reading, writing, performing personal grooming, interacting with pets or unsecured cargo" or while playing video games. At least a half-dozen other states, including Alaska, Louisiana, Delaware and Wisconsin, are considering bans on activities that pull drivers' attention away from the road.

"This is a trend that we're seeing in a lot of places," said Matt Sundeen, a transportation specialist at the National Conference of State Legislatures. "Since the introduction of the cellphone in cars, there has been enormous growing interest in distractions and now they are looking at all aspects of the issue."

Studies have shown for years that holding a cellphone to your ear while maneuvering a vehicle can be dangerous. One 2002 Harvard study estimated that drivers using cellphones may cause about 2,600 deaths a year nationwide and 330,000 injuries.

Hand-held cellphones are not the only problem either. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that distractions are a factor in up to 80 percent of all traffic accidents reported to the police. Even the use of a headset or other hands-free cellphone device can reduce a driver's concentration enough to pose a hazard, the agency found.

"It's the cognitive distraction of the conversation that causes problems," said Rae Tyson, a spokesman for the traffic safety agency.

Banning the use of hand-held cellphones will nonetheless make highways safer by reminding drivers to pay better attention, said Connecticut State Representative Richard Roy, Democrat of Milford, who had been pushing for a law against driving distractions since 1998.

"There's nothing worse than seeing someone driving down the road, on the phone or shaving or putting on make-up, and there's a child in the back seat," he said. "They'll say over and over that they love that child but they're putting the child in danger."

Mr. Roy said the law included a provision that allows the police to record which distractions are occurring most often. The Connecticut law includes a ban on cellphone use, even with a hands-free device, for drivers with a learning permit. Mr. Sundeen said that 10 states had recently passed laws limiting the use of electronics by teenage drivers.

In addition to Connecticut, only New York, New Jersey and a few cities, including Washington and Chicago, have outright bans on the use of hand-held cellphones by drivers.

In New York, the police can pull over and ticket a motorist just for using a hand-held cellphone.

In New Jersey, drivers spotted using a hand-held phone can be ticketed only if they are pulled over for a moving violation. But on Wednesday, the state's acting governor, Richard J. Codey, called for a law allowing the police to cite motorists solely for talking on a hand-held phone.

"Strengthening the ban will help us live better with technology," Mr. Codey said.

Connecticut's law follows the trend: drivers can be fined $100 simply for holding a cellphone "in the immediate proximity" of their ear. To be ticketed for other distractions, a motorist must first be pulled over for a moving violation.

Not that all drivers here are comforted by the distinction. Throughout Connecticut on Thursday, motorists said they supported outlawing hand-held cellphones, but had reservations about the law's language banning "any activity not related to the actual operation of a motor vehicle in a manner that interferes with the safe operation of such vehicle."

Mr. Suarez in Greenwich, who said that he also opposed mandatory seat-belt laws, called the new prohibition "way over the top."

Nancy Neumann, 40, who was shopping on Thursday for a hands-free device at a Verizon store in Trumbull, said the police should not have the right to penalize drivers for eating, drinking or talking to people in the back seat.

"You can grab a soda without even looking and you can swat your kids in the backseat without even looking," said Ms. Neumann, a mother of three.

Kelli Bussan, 36, a stay-at-home mom in New Canaan, said some distractions were impossible to avoid.

"My kids are always dropping their cups," she said, while rearranging toys in her parked gold 2004 Lincoln Navigator. "I have to turn around and get it unless I want them screaming the whole way home."

And what about, some people asked, more personal vehicular occurrences, like kissing or drumming on the dashboard to Bruce Springsteen's "Born to Run." Leigh Owen, standing near a Starbucks in Greenwich, said she wondered how the police would handle her own recent embarrassing car crisis: a giant spider camped out just above her head.

"I was screaming 'Oh my God, Oh my God, I'm going to die,' " she said. "I had to jerk the wheel to pull over. Would I get a ticket for a spider?"

Mr. Roy, the representative, said the police will have a lot of discretion in enforcing the law. Several officers in Bridgeport emphasized on Thursday that the law will not be used as an excuse for intrusion.

Kim Nikola, 39, an officer with the Bridgeport police, said that the no-cellphone law will be "just one more thing to keep in our minds."

And for some drivers, the law's extension beyond just talking was a welcome reminder that sharing the road requires concentration. Efrain Rosario, 22, an account manager for a Verizon Wireless store in Trumbull, said that on Aug. 10 he drove his 2005 Scion tC into the back of a Honda while reading a text message from a friend. If the law had been in place, he said, maybe he would have thought twice about looking down to read "What's up?"

"That 25-cent text message cost me a thousand dollars in damage," Rosario said, "and it ruined my night."


Blue Order
12-17-05, 06:34 PM
I didn't notice this posted before, but if it was, my apologies for posting it again.

EricDJ
12-17-05, 06:42 PM
Someone around LA has their license plate as "hang up", they went further and made the top of the trim cover say "shut up" and the bottom says "and drive". Very cool when read together


michaelnel
12-17-05, 07:18 PM
I wish they had a law like that in Kalifornia. But if they did, they wouldn't enforce it.

Bikepacker67
12-17-05, 09:45 PM
"I'm in sales, so I work out of my car a lot," he said Thursday, after driving into a parking lot here with his phone pressed against his ear. "It's an infringement of my personal freedoms."


Do these folks even realize how self absorbed they sound?

Blue Order
12-17-05, 09:48 PM
That was the quote that grabbed me too. "It's an infringement of my personal freedoms." Boo ****ing hoo. Self-centered a-hole.

khuon
12-17-05, 10:06 PM
The problem with these types of laws is that it's like the anti-bacterial soap problem. The laws attempt to eliminate distraction through legislation instead of dealing with the root cause of the problem. That is that the average motorist is ill-equipped/ill-trained to deal with a driving environment that is full of both intentional and unintentional distractions. Vehicular operations require task management and prioritisation. Simply saying that by enacting a law, we can eliminate distraction-induced accidents is nothing short of white-washing the issue. I would like to see more effort be placed on more thorough driver education/training and rigorous testing. If this means that more people have to actually spend more time increasing their driving skills through training and education, the better off the roads will be. If this means that those who simply cannot pass muster and no longer fit the requirements of "you must be this tall to ride this ride" and end up losing their driving priviledges then so be it. Would it not be better to raise the bar rather than continuing to admit those who cannot exhibit proper decision-making processes like knowing when to use a mobile phone or take a sip from their coffee? Playing whack-a-mole with driving distractions simply is not a scalable nor complete solution.

Blue Order
12-17-05, 10:19 PM
I'm not at all clear on how training would equip someone to drive better if they're being distracted while driving. Now, if you mean that drivers should be trained to recognize distracting activities as distracting activities, and thus, avoid distracting activities while they're driving, I see no harm in that. I also see no harm in making drivers pay the price for their inattention.

khuon
12-18-05, 11:47 AM
I'm not at all clear on how training would equip someone to drive better if they're being distracted while driving. Now, if you mean that drivers should be trained to recognize distracting activities as distracting activities, and thus, avoid distracting activities while they're driving, I see no harm in that. I also see no harm in making drivers pay the price for their inattention.

If you have ever seen how operators of other vehicles are trained... especially those of commercial vehicles, you'll see that such training includes things like how to properly use navigation and communications equipment, how to avoid distractions and prioritise their tasks, how to handle emergency situations. Some operators must also undergo phsychological testing. The standards are far too low today for allowing an individual to get behind a device capable of imparting more kenetic energy damage than a round from an M-16.

o-dog
12-18-05, 11:56 AM
"It's an infringement of my personal freedoms."

what about the personal freedom of others not to be killed or injured by distracted drivers?

ChroMo2
12-18-05, 12:18 PM
try driving a 5-speed and drinking coffee. that's legal! it doesn't matter if someone doesn't have the common sense not to drive and talk on a cellphone, because there's always the alcohol impaired operator or the druggie or the mental incapacitant. it's a shame no one has the right of way anymore. no wonder so many deaths and injuries occur on our nations roadways. i'm glad i'm a biker. it's nice to travel where motorized vehicles can't!

Slow Train
12-18-05, 01:38 PM
>>
Kelli Bussan, 36, a stay-at-home mom in New Canaan, said some distractions were impossible to avoid.

"My kids are always dropping their cups," she said, while rearranging toys in her parked gold 2004 Lincoln Navigator. "I have to turn around and get it unless I want them screaming the whole way home."
<<

This is exactly the type of driver that caused me, years ago, to radically alter my commuting route. I came across way to many SUV's driven by distracted parents swatting at their kids. One time I even had to dive off the road as the vehicle coming at me was zig zaging from left to right.

trackhub
12-18-05, 02:01 PM
"It's an infringement of my personal freedoms."

Well, I don't know about the rest of you folks, but I am damn tired of these morons using that argument. :mad:

peregrine
12-18-05, 02:10 PM
*sigh* I know. Why can't some people understand the damage distractions while driving can cause and the seriousness of it?! It's frustrating!

khuon
12-18-05, 03:13 PM
>>
Kelli Bussan, 36, a stay-at-home mom in New Canaan, said some distractions were impossible to avoid.

"My kids are always dropping their cups," she said, while rearranging toys in her parked gold 2004 Lincoln Navigator. "I have to turn around and get it unless I want them screaming the whole way home."
<<

This is exactly the type of driver that caused me, years ago, to radically alter my commuting route. I came across way to many SUV's driven by distracted parents swatting at their kids. One time I even had to dive off the road as the vehicle coming at me was zig zaging from left to right.

I had a similar thing happen to me...

http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=109791&postcount=11

UmneyDurak
12-18-05, 03:53 PM
Her reply also shows another problem, kids are too damn spoiled. Parents are letting them get away with too much crap.

sbhikes
12-18-05, 04:05 PM
The laws attempt to eliminate distraction through legislation instead of dealing with the root cause of the problem. That is that the average motorist is ill-equipped/ill-trained to deal with a driving environment that is full of both intentional and unintentional distractions. Vehicular operations require task management and prioritisation. Simply saying that by enacting a law, we can eliminate distraction-induced accidents is nothing short of white-washing the issue.
I think enacting the law is step one in educating motorists of the seriousness of distracted driving. And if any of them actually obey the law, maybe the driving environment will be quiet enough for them to recall the driver training they actually did have all those long years ago.

As for these "I work out of my car I have to talk on the phone" people, maybe they should go work out of an Internet cafe instead.

And that parent--oh boo hoo your kids will scream all the way home. Let them. Maybe it'll teach them to stop spilling stuff. Oh, and maybe if you didn't give them drinks in the car there wouldn't be this problem to begin with. Sheesh!

Sasquatchula
12-18-05, 04:46 PM
[QUOTE=Slow Train]>>
Kelli Bussan, 36, a stay-at-home mom in New Canaan, said some distractions were impossible to avoid.

"My kids are always dropping their cups," she said, while rearranging toys in her parked gold 2004 Lincoln Navigator. "I have to turn around and get it unless I want them screaming the whole way home."

Hmm, no toys or food allowed in your death-trap? Hey, two problems solved! Personal responsibility, learn to live with it.

michaelnel
12-18-05, 05:21 PM
Her reply also shows another problem, kids are too damn spoiled. Parents are letting them get away with too much crap.

Agreed. I think the baby boomer and later generations are the worst parents the world has seen yet.

oboeguy
12-19-05, 09:05 AM
Wow, every single quote from a driver is negative and pathetically self-centered. It's too bad, though, that these laws won't make a bit of difference. Here in NY where it all started, NOBODY ever gets a ticket for it.

Crazy Cyclist
12-19-05, 09:46 AM
>>
Kelli Bussan, 36, a stay-at-home mom in New Canaan, said some distractions were impossible to avoid.

"My kids are always dropping their cups," she said, while rearranging toys in her parked gold 2004 Lincoln Navigator. "I have to turn around and get it unless I want them screaming the whole way home."
<<

This is exactly the type of driver that caused me, years ago, to radically alter my commuting route. I came across way to many SUV's driven by distracted parents swatting at their kids. One time I even had to dive off the road as the vehicle coming at me was zig zaging from left to right.

Thank god she is a stay at home mother, I wouldn't want her out on the streets around me.

noisebeam
12-19-05, 11:24 AM
Drivers should at least put down the cell phone if taking a drag while running a red light:
http://kpho.static.worldnow.com/images/incoming/images/ss_redlite_smoke.jpghttp://kpho.static.worldnow.com/images/incoming/images/ss_redlite_closeup.jpg

See more red light runnng photos here:
http://www.kpho.com/Global/link.asp?L=86906

Al

lsits
12-19-05, 11:47 AM
Tennessee and Virginia, going further than most, have passed laws prohibiting the display of pornographic videos in vehicles.

:eek:

UmneyDurak
12-19-05, 12:30 PM
Drivers should at least put down the cell phone if taking a drag while running a red light:
http://kpho.static.worldnow.com/images/incoming/images/ss_redlite_smoke.jpghttp://kpho.static.worldnow.com/images/incoming/images/ss_redlite_closeup.jpg

See more red light runnng photos here:
http://www.kpho.com/Global/link.asp?L=86906

Al
This is just scary.

Slow Train
12-19-05, 04:44 PM
Drivers should at least put down the cell phone if taking a drag while running a red light:
See more red light runnng photos here:
http://www.kpho.com/Global/link.asp?L=86906

Al
That's funny! No hands on the wheel while running the red light. This girl should be the poster girl for why we need distracted driver laws :D

trackhub
12-19-05, 05:46 PM
Does anyone have any factual information on the requirements for getting a driver's license in countries such as Germany, Holland, or England? I have always heard that it's much harder to get and keep a license in those countries, but I've never seen any actual requirements. How about Canada?

I swear, MA will give a license to just about anyone who applies. They might as well just give the blasted things away in breakfast cereal. And if by chance it does get suspended or revoked, hey no problem. Drive anyway, everyone else does it. You might get a dope slap on the wrist and a fine, but so what?

I don't know what happens in other states, but here in the people's republic of Massachusetts, any attempts by legislators to toughen the requirements for getting a license are vigorously fought tooth and nail. What has happened in the past is that any legislation simply expires, and any legislators who supported it either don't run again, or just don't get re-elected. There appears to be a lot of truth to that saying that "Americans vote with their right foot".

khuon
12-19-05, 05:55 PM
Does anyone have any factual information on the requirements for getting a driver's license in countries such as Germany, Holland, or England? I have always heard that it's much harder to get and keep a license in those countries, but I've never seen any actual requirements. How about Canada?

I did a project in Dubai (United Arab Emmirates) some years ago. I remember our hosts telling us that it took people on average about two years of instruction in order to receive a driver's license. Apparently their tests are pretty difficult. However, despite that, I was hit in a three-lane roundabout a few nights later by a driver attempt to proceed straight through from the inside lane. I was in the middle lane continuing on in the circle. The inner lane is not allowed to go straight through. The other car clipped the front quarter of my rental and knocked the entire front axle out. The driver did not stop. The police told me that it was most likely a drunk driver as it happened at 2AM on a thursday night (that's their weekend). He also said that if they caught the driver, he/she would most likely lose their driving priviledges for life as well as facing some severe charges.

genec
12-19-05, 06:29 PM
An old shipmate of mine went to live in Australia... took him two years to get a regular license.

A visiting engineer from China, while unable to get a license in his home country, was able to get a California license in just days here. He is still studying the Chinese material to get his license there someday.

Yeah, frankly I think there are too many "D" and "F" students out there behind the wheel right now.... and the darn state is too easy to let them keep driving... granting too many licenses for repeat offender DUIs for example.

The Seldom Kill
12-20-05, 02:07 AM
If standards haven't changed much in the ten years since I got my UK license then my opinion is that the testing is fairly good here. There is a Draving Standards Agency (DSA) leaflet that is actually entitled "Most people fail their driving test..." and it goes on to say that the pass rate is 43% and even lower for 1st time candidates.

The DSA encourages people to log at least forty hours worth of lesson time with an instructor before attempting a test.

Actually, in the UK we've even had a reality show that followed people learning to drive, including a couple of habitual failures. There was even a quasi game-show called Britain's worst driver which rewarded improvement in driving with a brand new car.

As for me, I passed first time after about fifteen hours with a driving instructor and a couple of hours practice with my dad. I failed one question on the theory test which was an underestimate of the legal blood alcohol level. In ten years I've never been fined or had points on my license, I've never even received a parking ticket. Excuse me, I'm off to polish my halo.

meatwad
12-22-05, 01:05 AM
http://www.cartalk.com/content/features/Drive-Now/bumper-sticker.html

Blue Order
12-23-05, 01:56 PM
Nearly got run down today by a driver who was not talking on his cellphone, or doing anything else but driving. I was at a crosswalk, with a guy in a motorized wheelchair, and crossed when the light changed. As we were both about halfway across the walk, with the wheelchair between me and oncoming traffic, a car making a left turn in our direction drove straight at us at a moderate rate of speed, without stopping, until I raised my hand like a crossing guard, looked directly at the driver, and shouted "Hey...hey...hey!" Then he stopped, about 10 feet short of hitting us. Unbelievable.

khuon
12-23-05, 02:29 PM
Nearly got run down today by a driver who was not talking on his cellphone, or doing anything else but driving.

Inattentiveness is inattentiveness. I'm fairly certain the number of accidents attributed to distracted/inattentive driving will not in fact drop if a cellphone ban goes into effect. Rather you'd start hearing excuses like, "I was lost in thought." You'll get people too busy thinking about what they will say once they're able to use a phone or some conversation they had just before they got into the car.

The other problem is that many motorists "don't expect."

"I didn't expect there to be someone riding their bike this time of the year."

"I didn't think the kid would dart out like that."

"I didn't think he was there..."

When drivers say they "didn't see" it's partially true because in general, many people see only what they want to see. Teaching people to be more aware and to manage their mental faculties while driving would go a longer way than pulling at the low dangling fruit and exclaiming, "hey... now that we've banned cellphones, the roads are safer" because I really have doubts about that statement.

vegcrow
12-23-05, 02:46 PM
Inattentiveness is inattentiveness. I'm fairly certain the number of accidents attributed to distracted/inattentive driving will not in fact drop if a cellphone ban goes into effect.
Re-post from another thread:


You can kill a cyclist by being distracted with adjusting your stereo, changing a CD, yelling at the kids in the back seat, lighting a cigarette, reaching for your purse, talking to a passenger... I do not think it's feasible to ban everything that can cause driver distraction.

Blue Order
12-23-05, 02:50 PM
I agree that it was inattentiveness. I don't agree that it follows that reducing the number of distractions in a vehicle will not result in a reduction in inattentive driving.

khuon
12-23-05, 03:06 PM
I agree that it was inattentiveness. I don't agree that it follows that reducing the number of distractions in a vehicle will not result in a reduction in inattentive driving.

A driving environment is a very complex one. What is distracting to one person may not be distracting to another. There in fact very few universal distractions. Additionally, a distraction is an event... not an object. Banning a cellphone is not distraction reduction, it's a restriction on a potential cause for a distraction. If one goes that route then as another person (as have I) have said, one would have to start banning all causes of distractions. Would you now say that people should be banned from working because them thinking about that big project they just got assigned before leaving work will cause them to drive inattentively? Long ago, the aviation community realised that the operation of a vehicle in a complex environment is prone to distractions. Even without distractions, there are unexpected events/emergencies. This is all on top of a large common workload already present. Pilots are taught how to maintain their situational awareness, task management/proritisation, emergency and condition prediction, etc. They are grilled on emergency procedures which they practice ad nauseum so that things become automatic. They are required to continually demonstrate knowledge of those procedures. They are required to perform regular self-analysis of themselves to determine if they are "fit for flight." I have always liked the slogan in Flight Training Magazine that says, "A good pilot is always training." The assertation that a pilot is always a student pilot is a good one. I would like to see such an attitude develop in the driving community. By contrast, most people think that once they've gotten their driver's license, they "have arrived" and no longer need the knowledge and skills (which I would argue are limited at best) they were taught in driver's ed much less consider themselves to be in constant learning mode.

Blue Order
12-23-05, 03:09 PM
I totally agree with you about training. No argument there. I also think that distractions that we can control through regulation should be prohibited. I don't think they're mutually exclusive solutions. I also think that the driver's license should be something that can be lost, sometimes permanently, for serious offenses.

vegcrow
12-23-05, 03:17 PM
Maybe drivers should be required to play more video games (not GTA though). They improve mental multitasking, object recognition, and reflexes. Coincidentally, my wife hates computers and never plays games, and she's also the worst (most inattentive) driver I know with the worst sense of timing. (She's gonna kick my butt if she ever reads these forums.)