genec

https://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090520/...riving_texting

Americans still texting while driving despite bans


I don't care if you take the lane, ride in a bike lane, have a thousand blinkies, wear the brightest clothing or whatever... if drivers are NOT watching the road, you don't have a chance.

daven1986

there is no sense of responsibility

uke

Not all bike lanes are on the road. It's pretty hard to get hit by a drive-by-texter while riding on a segregated lane.



In the US, the closest equivalent we have to them are MUPs--which are why I ride those whenever I can.

skijor

Is she one-hand-texting?

genec

And just so you know, those are usually called bike PATHS... not bike lanes.

These days I prefer a good path too... too bad they are so few and far between.

uke

BTAIM, if you're on them, driving texters aren't a problem. If you use the road, you take the risk of being run down. That's a given.

skijor

Text-drivers are more of a hazard than the occasional elderly driver you hear about plowing through the front window of a McDonalds or farmers' market.

John E

The solution is simple -- check the telephone log of everyone involved in a traffic collision. Anyone using the phone is prosecuted as a drunk driver, with even stiffer penalties for anyone caught texting.

-=(8)=-

Its easy enuff to make carmakers install OEM scrambling devices that energize once a
cars ignition is turned on. Im sure some cell fone advocacy lobbyists will say ppl
need to be able to drive and talk for some reason, or check to see if the cop thats
pulling the over is "real", but that minutiae can be worked out later given the urgency
of the matter.

genec

I tend to agree, but I know of few places in the US where you can get from A to B using paths alone.

genec

I often talk, and even browse the web while my wife drives... a scrambling device would make that impossible.

Sixty Fiver

"I don't care if you take the lane, ride in a bike lane, have a thousand blinkies, wear the brightest clothing or whatever... if drivers are NOT watching the road, you don't have a chance."

And that is the risk we take every time we take to the road... legislation will not stop people from doing this.

-=(8)=-

Unfortunately, laws are made when people do stupid stuff to other people, en masse.
Texting/driving has become a huge problem. People have to weigh whether the need
to use the web and ability to have a passenger talk supersedes the problem.
Going into AngryOldeMan mode, I did cross country trips regularly in different eras
and never remember a phone factoring into 'necessity' items for those trips. Even
during the CB craze of the 70's, I dont remember people hitting other stuff for imitating
big rig drivers

daven1986

It often amazes me that people MUST do things when they drive, even if it means the possible death or injury of someone else. You don't HAVE to do things when you drive, just concentrate, have we all become so attention deficit that we cannot concentrate on something for a few minutes / hours?

When I am cycling I cannot think about other things, I can begin to think about them but then the road takes all my attention away from it because I know that I could get seriously hurt if I am not paying attention. All these airbags etc. are doing more harm than good, it makes people feel invulnerable. Like someone on here said, put nails in their steering wheel and people will NEVER crash, they will be very attentive and never lose concentration

genec

Sure, and during even the '80s while bike touring, I never had a cell phone, and I was able to keep in touch just fine.

But have you looked for a pay phone lately?

The problem is that Texting, unlike CB for instance, requires you to take your eyes off the road... and now at higher speeds. (back in part of the 70s, the national speed limit was 55MPH... today I ride local arterial surface streets with a 55MPH speed limit... )

cudak888 

Nonsense. It only takes around 2-3 seconds for someone to hop a curb onto a sidewalk due to needless distractions, whether by virtue of a cell phone conversation, texting, or general inattentiveness.

-Kurt

uke

But how often does this happen in comparison to hitting and killing cyclists on the road?

cudak888 

On "famed" Calle Ocho down here (8th Street, for you gringos), one driver or another - roughly once a month if not more frequent - will hop the curb and and slam into something. Often a human being, amongst other objects.

Case in point, a '95 Town Car once jumped said curb, and ended up dragging a homeless woman under, from the sidewalk bus shelter. Needless to say, the fellow also dragged half of the bus shelter, a hedge, and a fire hydrant under him as well. Suffice it to say that everything in the path of that automobile was flattened.

There have been others, though this is the only fatal example that I, personally, witnessed.

-Kurt

dirtyhippy

I'm glad you aren't in charge of legislating my area. The world is an uncertain and sometimes dangerous place. Any number of accidents may occur, and there is no way to prevent all of them. Heavy-handed attempts at "accident prevention" like what you are suggesting have enormous social costs and can even wind up increasing the number of injuries. Off the top of my head, here are some problems with radio scramblers in cars:
Would prevent passengers from safely using these devices.
Would interfere with systems such as OnStar
Would interfere with people using their phone to call 911.
Would be difficult/impossible to contain radio jamming to the car. Nearby pedestrians on phones would be affected as well. A crowded freeway packed with these devices would be a nightmare in this regard.
These devices would probably be very easy to disable.

My point is not that we should simply accept all accidents as inevitable, but that we need to maintain a sense of personal responsibility. Blanket restrictions/technological solutions will not solve this problem.

genec

Yeah but the question that was posted was "How often does this happen compared to hitting a person ON THE ROAD?"

Sure, cars hop curbs from time to time, and even drive through store windows... but how often does this occur, compared to the 45,000 motorist deaths, 1400 pedestrian deaths and 700 cyclist deaths that occur annually?

genec

The real problem is that all too often these are not "accidents," but easily preventable "collisions."

dirtyhippy

Yeah, my choice of language there was poor. Regardless, my point stands.

StrangeWill

Must we go over the ridiculousness of this statement.

If you go with that, NOTHING is an accident, ever. This ****ty argument over semantics just makes cyclists look ********.


Anyway, **** it, lets integrate TTS, speech to text and MMS messaging with vehicles, eliminate problem completely.

genec

Fine call it a semantic argument, but even police reports are discontinuing the use of the term "accident" over "collision."

An accident is when unavoidable events occur. There is a difference when the events are not "unavoidable."

An accident is when two vehicles collide in an uncontrolled parking lot. A collision is what happens when someone chooses to pay attention to a device instead of driving.

uke

Also agreed. The path is great where it exists, but there are still too many places it doesn't reach for me to ever be able to use it completely for practical rides; I imagine most paths are like these.

Thank you.