Advocacy & Safety - Government wants OUR comments on restricting in-car TEXTING + DIALING

This story was quoted from:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/16/us-usa-autos-distraction-idUSTRE81F14920120216

"(Reuters) - ...Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood proposed voluntary steps for automakers on Thursday that would establish new safety criteria for hands-free calling, navigation, and entertainment systems that have become common in new cars and trucks...

"Distracted driving is a dangerous and deadly habit on America's roadways -- that's why I've made it a priority to encourage people to stay focused behind the wheel," LaHood said."




For more on the issue of texting while driving, see this URL (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=texting%20driving):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=texting%20driving

For more on the dangers of hands-free telephone use while driving, see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22133330 and its related links (on the right side menu)
linkname=pubmed_pubmed&uid=22133330

The problem is not limited to "keeping eyes on the road". Both eyes and attention must be concentrated on both the road and the traffic situation.

I'm a little sick of hearing from special interests about what they think they NEED to do to "serve the customer"; there is NO ENTITLEMENT to access to cyberspace while driving! If you want to use the cell phone/text/surf the web/check your e-mail, GET A CHAUFFEUR! OTHERWISE, HANG UP THE PHONE AND DRIVE!

Because a citizen has money and wants a luxury, and is willing to pay XX for it, does NOT create an obligation for a business, or a special exemption from responsible conduct from the rest of society. "YOUR RIGHTS DO NOT OVERRIDE MINE" appears to be a lost bit of teaching........

IMO the simplest way to stop the use of any cell phone device in a moving vehicle is to install a jammer that disables any phone in that vehicle as long as the engine is running. This jamming device should be either a non-removable and non defeatable program in the cars computer or as an add on accessory.

You wanna talk or text you have to pull off the road and shut off the engine. Then gab your but off in safety...........

Yes, this may seem harsh but look how long it took to get tough with drunk drivers. Lot's of people died while politicians twiddled about drunk driving laws. Do we have to let more die while they twiddle over cell phones and driving??

IMO the simplest way to stop the use of any cell phone device in a moving vehicle is to install a jammer that disables any phone in that vehicle as long as the engine is running. This jamming device should be either a non-removable and non defeatable program in the cars computer or as an add on accessory.

You wanna talk or text you have to pull off the road and shut off the engine. Then gab your but off in safety...........

Yes, this may seem harsh but look how long it took to get tough with drunk drivers. Lot's of people died while politicians twiddled about drunk driving laws. Do we have to let more die while they twiddle over cell phones and driving??
My state still isn't "tough" on drunk drivers. The first conviction disappears if the drunk does a simple diversion class and the second conviction nets a small fine. The third gets something like a slap on the wrist.

The myth that we are dealing harshly with drunk drivers is just that, a myth.

Yes, this may seem harsh but look how long it took to get tough with drunk drivers. Someone got tough with drunk drivers???

First, let me say I am not in favor of distracted driving. My first impulse is to create laws against phone use while driving. But then I thought about it and changed my mind. Laws do not prevent speeding, drunk driving, or any other behavior until at least the first offense. The photo in the OP shows the fellow's device ON TOP of the steering wheel. If we pass strict laws against cell phone use guess what? He will be texting in his lap. Or under the dash. I would much prefer the device on top of the steering wheel where the operator MIGHT see me through the windshield.

There are plenty of studies claiming that phone use while driving is similarly risky as dangerous as driving legally drunk. Just enforce reckless operation laws or hand our DUIs to anyone who wrecks their car while yakking on the phone. The technology exists to do this.

Another idea, and I think Progressive Insurance Company is close to doing this, is to install an electric "tattle-tale" in automobiles voluntarily for people who want lower insurance rates. The tattle-tale electronics already keep track of enough driving habits to prove certain drivers are low risk (safer) drivers. Progressive rewards these drivers with lower rates. Cellphone use could just as easily be included in such a voluntary program. If you like to yak on the phone behind the wheel, you pay out the wazoo for car insurance, and get a nice DUI if you are involved in an accident while yakking - your fault or not.

I'm a little sick of hearing from special interests about what they think they NEED to do to "serve the customer"; there is NO ENTITLEMENT to access to cyberspace while driving! If you want to use the cell phone/text/surf the web/check your e-mail, GET A CHAUFFEUR! OTHERWISE, HANG UP THE PHONE AND DRIVE!

Because a citizen has money and wants a luxury, and is willing to pay XX for it, does NOT create an obligation for a business, or a special exemption from responsible conduct from the rest of society. "YOUR RIGHTS DO NOT OVERRIDE MINE" appears to be a lost bit of teaching........
+100

Just me, but if hands free is allowed with newer vehicles that have the feature as an option with the car itself, then I don't see any reason not to grandfather in a bluetooth headset or a gps that has bluetooth. Phones with voice activated dialing also would fall in this category of legality. For the most part though, dialing a number, texting, emailing, surfing the net, those should be illegal. My logic there, with a BT headset, to receive a call, I can do that with the same amount of effort as it takes to scratch my ear or pick my nose ? Sorry for being too gross, but you know what I mean in terms of the amount of distraction it is to a driver. It's not so much the occasional phone call that bothers me, but there are those that from the moment they get into their car and start driving, that they have to start calling any & everyone. Those people are the gross abusers that are either involved directly with accidents or causing them. At the very least they are delaying traffic as they don't pay attention and those individuals need to be banned from any cell phone usage period while they are driving.

DX-Man has the right idea though, ban it all and that's fair for all.

Because a citizen has money and wants a luxury, and is willing to pay XX for it, does NOT create an obligation for a business, or a special exemption from responsible conduct from the rest of society. "YOUR RIGHTS DO NOT OVERRIDE MINE" appears to be a lost bit of teaching........

If the government does not put the obligations on businesses, the environment will continue to be destroyed at an ever increasing rate. Businessmen just want to get rich as quick as they can and they flood the media with advertising to artificially increase demand. Mankind does not need all this so-called technology. Putting this technological junk in a car is just a way to increase demand.

Everyone here makes great points. And yes, it has definitely been shown that texting is far more dangerous than drunk driving. And I think the test of this was done with someone with a BAL way over .08. So clearly, texting penalties should actually be harsher than DUI penalties.

California is so so with DUIs. You don't absolutely serve time until your third. Those with less money may serve a short amount of time for the 2nd. The classes get longer with your second DUI along with suspension of license.

As for texting laws, we suck! Last I heard, it was a $25 fine or something ridiculous like that.

I've read that Utah carries penalties for cell phone use that are similar to penalties for a DUI, but correct me if I'm wrong. I never in my life thought I'd say I'd like to emulate UT but here goes.

I'm not so certain that texting is more dangerous than driving under the influence, even with the study. I'd like to see the statistics on injuries/deaths from each. To me, they are equally as dangerous, the ultimate injury is death, both texting and driving intoxicated has more than likely resulted that both can occur. And regardless of either, when a car is in a collision with others, the injuries are pretty much the same if a fatality doesn't result. I'm more inclined to believe that the two have very similar erratic driving behaviors from a standpoint that a vehicle doesn't maintain it's lane, doesn't maintain speed limits and whatever else is deemed as dangerously erratic driving ?

Why stop at driving? I have been bumped or run into many times in the last year by e-comm device zombies while walking. It used to be easy to spot the mentally ill and very old infirm folks. Nowadays it's common to see folks talking to themselves waving their hands wildly or shuffling along with their heads down, shoulders hunched over.

This need to be connected has transcended basic needs. It is now an addiction, with every thing that goes with it; self-destructive behavior, withdrawal symptoms, etc., and nobody takes it seriously. It is illegal to text while driving here but I see this behavior frequently on my commutes. If so common, why do LEOs not pull more people over? Actually, I have seen a few LEOs texting while driving as well.

Follow the money: E-comm is big business. We've been enabled to the point of addiction and an incredible amount of cash is flowing. Do you really thing the govt. is ever successful in slowing down or stopping this sort of thing? There is a lot of huffing and puffing about doing something, but it's all just mist.

-G

This is stupid. If someone is in a car accident and the car engine is still running after the accident, they won't be able to call for help. Motorists just need to change their behavior. They already put their lives at risk by being stupid around cyclists. They don't need a government mandate to the car companies that could potentially yet indirectly kill more people than it is meant to help. If I were to be biking by a local gas station where a car with that technology had just crashed into the gas pump but the engine was still running, I wouldn't be able to call 911 without being a long way away. Then when the dispatcher were to ask me details, I would not be able to tell them.

Why stop at driving? I have been bumped or run into many times in the last year by e-comm device zombies while walking. It used to be easy to spot the mentally ill and very old infirm folks. Nowadays it's common to see folks talking to themselves waving their hands wildly or shuffling along with their heads down, shoulders hunched over. ...
-GBecause I am mean, I have fun with these folks on the bike path. They seem to always be walking on the wrong side of the bike path, so I just stop and wait while they almost walk into my front tire. As soon as they see the tire one foot in front of them with their head down position, they are startled into thinking the are being run over. Their reaction is priceless. Not sure it teaches them anything.

This is stupid. If someone is in a car accident and the car engine is still running after the accident, they won't be able to call for help. It would be easy to also design the feature to allow for the phone call if the vehicle has been in anything more than the most minor collision. They know how to set off air bags with a collision, right?

I really do think that texting is far more dangerous than drunk driving unless the driver is very drunk. But, if this isn't true or that study was off, well...studies often are. Anything can be twisted.

Love the e-comm comments! People are so attached they are in full withdrawal from reality and yes...big business and the government may want it this way. Conspiracy theory would tell you the government wants you as mindless and apathetic as you can be, but I digress.

I run a lot also, so I'm always on the lookout for cyclists. You won't catch me running into your front tire, but you may catch me flipping you off if I'm all the way to the right as far as can be and you purposely spook me, like cars do to cyclists and pedestrians. But drivers are the worst by far as I've seen in terms of f'ing with you for fun.

This need to be connected has transcended basic needs. It is now an addiction, with every thing that goes with it; self-destructive behavior, withdrawal symptoms, etc., and nobody takes it seriously.

Follow the money: E-comm is big business. We've been enabled to the point of addiction and an incredible amount of cash is flowing. Do you really thing the govt. is ever successful in slowing down or stopping this sort of thing? There is a lot of huffing and puffing about doing something, but it's all just mist.

-G

+1 Well said.

It would be easy to also design the feature to allow for the phone call if the vehicle has been in anything more than the most minor collision. They know how to set off air bags with a collision, right?

But air bags are inclusive in the car. Proposed technology shutting off cell phones when an engine is running is not exclusive to cars, and could disable cell phones that are in close proximity. When those same disabled phones not involved in the accident could actually be used to call 911.

Why stop at driving? I have been bumped or run into many times in the last year by e-comm device zombies while walking. It used to be easy to spot the mentally ill and very old infirm folks. Nowadays it's common to see folks talking to themselves waving their hands wildly or shuffling along with their heads down, shoulders hunched over.

I've got half a mind to whip out my own phone as I approach someone like that, bump into them kinda hard, and apologize profusely, "Oh my God, I'm sorry, I didn't see you. I was texting with my dog sitter. Man, I feel awful. Are you OK? Sorry, I'm just being dumb today..."

In jurisdictions where cell phone use and texting are already banned in cars, I would like to see laws that require cops to check the phone use history of every driver involved in an accident. If they were talking or texting at the time of the accident, prosecute them to the maximum extent of the law. Laws against talking/texting will reel in some of the bad behavior, but only if there is a credible threat that they will be enforced.

Why? Are they too stupid to figure out that you shouldn't be on the phone while driving?

Big company.....Voluntary?....Have to spend money?..........Oh YEAH! THAT"S GOING TO HAPPEN.......LOL!!!!!! They had to be forced into putting seatbelts in cars.

Cell phone=baby sitter for adults

Common sense is dead.......

I think its pretty obvious that the automobile industry is really desperate for some kind of coercive way to force people to buy new cars. Its what they dream about at night.

What i see happening is a push towards autonomous driving as a way to get more life out of our existing highways (saving the government money, but costing people a huge amount because everybody who wants to keep driving on highways will have to buy a new expensive drive by wire car)

Then people can text all they want, surf the web, catch up on sleep, do yoga, whatever. Driving will be a spectator sport, done by computers.

Oh, and bicycles and pedestrians will be banned.

They might get what they want, but that will backfire on them, because a good chunk of those who still have a job at that point (the absolutely indespensible, maybe one out of ten current workers) will probably at that point have little disincentive to not just start telecommuting via cheap "telepresence robots (http://spectrum.ieee.org/geek-life/hands-on/a-diy-telepresence-robot)".

http://spectrum.ieee.org/image/1700863

Even a telephone is a primitive "telepresence robot"

I think the golden era of the car lifestyle is behind us, because the whole reason for the massive rush hour traffic jams etc, was the need for people to all go to and leave "work" at the same time during our industrial heyday.

Building more highways now would be a little like cargo cultism.

http://www.myloadtest.com/images/cargo-cult.jpg

Highways wont buy us the situation that existed in the past - right after a world war destroyed 3/4 of the world's manufacturing capacity, or turn back the clock to the years before networked microprocessors made work so efficient and productive, and paradoxically, reduced the demand for labor, making it cheaper.

More and more people can't afford the automobile and fossil fuel driven lifestyle of the past.

In the dot com post bubble (bust) era, the number of cars on Silicon Valley highways dropped considerably. I think we can expect a gradual lessening of traffic as the economy shifts away from wage labor and towards investment/inherited income dominance.

Shhhh!

Studies have shown the risk of getting in an accident goes up something like fiftyfold when people are distracted by telephones or texting. I'm not kidding. Its a huge amount.

And thats in controlled environments, (simulators) its probably even worse in real life.

ironically, the only people who can handle it seem to be the very young. (not because they have more practice, its because their brains are more agile multitaskers at that age.)


I really do think that texting is far more dangerous than drunk driving unless the driver is very drunk. But, if this isn't true or that study was off, well...studies often are. Anything can be twisted.

Love the e-comm comments! People are so attached they are in full withdrawal from reality and yes...big business and the government may want it this way. Conspiracy theory would tell you the government wants you as mindless and apathetic as you can be, but I digress.

I run a lot also, so I'm always on the lookout for cyclists. You won't catch me running into your front tire, but you may catch me flipping you off if I'm all the way to the right as far as can be and you purposely spook me, like cars do to cyclists and pedestrians. But drivers are the worst by far as I've seen in terms of f'ing with you for fun.

If the company owns the car and the cell phone, in the United States, unlike the EU, they seem to now have a legal entitlement to use their property to track and perhaps, even monitor the conversations of workers.

If they could just invent a means of real time voice communication, we could end all of these senseless texting induced collisions....

I'll bet that if you went back in time and told Henry Ford about texting and how people do it while driving, he'd look at you and go, ".... What the HELL are they thinking?!?"