Traffic Rant Gonna get them cell phone drivers!!!

[glhs837]

What with those really punitive fines of $83, $140 and topping out at a whopping $160 bucks, I predict great success at "changing driver behavior". Texting is a point on your licence, but I"m not sure they really enforce that, since proving it would require searching someones cell phone. Sad this enforcement is limited to "waves" and not everyday enforcement.

‘Buckle Up, Phone Down’ campaign begins in region - The BayNet

Not using seat belts and texting while driving could mean big trouble for motorists this year.

www.thebaynet.com

 

[stgislander]

One day there will be technology installed in vehicles so when in motion, a cell phone jammer is energized and no incoming or outgoing calls or texts.

 

[Grumpy]

One day there will be technology installed in vehicles so when in motion, a cell phone jammer is energized and no incoming or outgoing calls or texts.

Doesn't seem like it would be hard to do, I wonder why it hasn't been done already?

 

[RareBreed]

One day there will be technology installed in vehicles so when in motion, a cell phone jammer is energized and no incoming or outgoing calls or texts.

There are apps that do that. Sense when you are driving. That should come standard and non-uninstallable on phones. If the call is so important, you can pull off and park somewhere.

 

[glhs837]

My car allows hands-free calls and also can read my texts to me and reply via speech to text. So no, don't restrict me.

 

[stgislander]

My car allows hands-free calls and also can read my texts to me and reply via speech to text. So no, don't restrict me.

But it's for the children!!!

 

[GWguy]

One day there will be technology installed in vehicles so when in motion, a cell phone jammer is energized and no incoming or outgoing calls or texts.

Doesn't seem like it would be hard to do, I wonder why it hasn't been done already?

I'm thinking it has already been done.

 

[RoseRed]

What about passengers?

 

[nutz]

My car allows hands-free calls and also can read my texts to me and reply via speech to text. So no, don't restrict me.

Hands-free is supposed to be ok. The ones holding their phone, talking, texting, reading the paper and drinking are supposed to be the bad drivers (sarcasm). But somehow, the police officer/deputy gets a laptop, cellphone, radio and a gun plus drink holders ( because they get special multitask training?)

 

[glhs837]

The studies I've seen were pretty skewed regarding handsfree vs handheld. No discrimination was allowed, you were required to respond to a message or spoken words within a certain time or the data was tossed. I dont know about anyone else, but I start any call with "I'm driving, so expect me to be focused on that".

 

[GWguy]

I can hold a pretty normal conversation with handsfree, but there is absolutely a distraction factor no matter what anyone says. The autonomic diving skills (after 50 years of driving) kick in and and you can "drive" and react, but the ability to focus is diminished. I've proven it by completely missing my turn while talking, on a road and turn that I take frequently, so it's not like I had to think hard about where I was going.

Our old forum buddy APS used a term for this, "Telepresence". You're here in the car driving, but your mind is actually somewhere else with the call.

 

[vraiblonde]

This is a stupid law because people ignore it and it's unenforceable.

If we actually hard punished those who cause problems with their obliviousness, we'd see it decrease. And that's for anything - talking on the phone, applying your makeup, eating ramen, whatever you're doing instead of being an attentive driver. In fact, I'd say if you cause an accident that injures or kills someone, you should lose your license for life. And if you drive anyway, you'll be strapped to the chair.

No kidding, if I were Supreme Emperor I could reduce crime within a few years, and not by decriminalizing everything.

 

[glhs837]

I can hold a pretty normal conversation with handsfree, but there is absolutely a distraction factor no matter what anyone says. The autonomic diving skills (after 50 years of driving) kick in and and you can "drive" and react, but the ability to focus is diminished. I've proven it by completely missing my turn while talking, on a road and turn that I take frequently, so it's not like I had to think hard about where I was going.

Our old forum buddy APS used a term for this, "Telepresence". You're here in the car driving, but your mind is actually somewhere else with the call.

And thats what training does. Allows you to remain task focused on priorities while shedding less important tasks. Aviate/Navigate/Communicate. Same thing with passengers, shut them out when more attention is required for the road. I'm with Vrai, make individuals responsible for their actions.

 

[BernieP]

This is a stupid law because people ignore it and it's unenforceable.

If we actually hard punished those who cause problems with their obliviousness, we'd see it decrease. And that's for anything - talking on the phone, applying your makeup, eating ramen, whatever you're doing instead of being an attentive driver. In fact, I'd say if you cause an accident that injures or kills someone, you should lose your license for life. And if you drive anyway, you'll be strapped to the chair.

No kidding, if I were Supreme Emperor I could reduce crime within a few years, and not by decriminalizing everything.

Being oblivious can't be defined and enforced.
Only physical actions can be enforced, operative word is "CAN". Whether LE chooses to or not is the question.
There is no reason to give you "n" MPH over the posted limit except to save the government the money of endless trials to prove the accuracy of the reading. Base Police have long maintained they will write a ticket for 1 MPH over because their equipment is check, and they have challenged driveres to come out and compare their odometer to the radar.
They can and have checked phones, the problem is if you have hands free and your phone reads text messages and you can do a verbal reply, it only shows that you recieved and responded to a text message - good luck proving you didn't touch the phone (which has yuur finger prints on it).
Even checking your phone for the time at a traffic light is chargeable.. If you are on the road.
BTW, some of us use the phone as our GPS, jam the cell signal and we aren't navigating. The makers of TomTom, Garmen and other stand alone navigation systems would love that. Switch yoiur phone to airplane mode and try to use it with say Google Maps. Good luck.

 

[RoseRed]

I can hold a pretty normal conversation with handsfree, but there is absolutely a distraction factor no matter what anyone says. The autonomic diving skills (after 50 years of driving) kick in and and you can "drive" and react, but the ability to focus is diminished. I've proven it by completely missing my turn while talking, on a road and turn that I take frequently, so it's not like I had to think hard about where I was going.

Our old forum buddy APS used a term for this, "Telepresence". You're here in the car driving, but your mind is actually somewhere else with the call.

I can do that without any distractions!

 

[LightRoasted]

If I may ...

I can hold a pretty normal conversation with handsfree, but there is absolutely a distraction factor no matter what anyone says. The autonomic diving skills (after 50 years of driving) kick in and and you can "drive" and react, but the ability to focus is diminished. I've proven it by completely missing my turn while talking, on a road and turn that I take frequently, so it's not like I had to think hard about where I was going. Our old forum buddy APS used a term for this, "Telepresence". You're here in the car driving, but your mind is actually somewhere else with the call.

Exactly. And for the exact same reason we all tend to turn the radio volume way down, [Come on. You know we all do it.], when we are slowing down while navigating someplace we are not familiar with. Same as saying, "Quiet! I can't think", when others are in the car talking while trying to find what you are looking for.

 

[Goldenhawk]

I think the fact that we still have regular drunk driver crashes is proof that legislation (either "don't do it" or "we'll put you in jail") won't fix this problem. It's becoming stigmatized, just like alcohol and driving, but the cell phone is just another addictive thing that demands indulgence. People still do it and crash cars and kill themselves and others.

We haven't fixed drunk driving yet, so why would we believe we can fix this either?

Elon Musk may be the only one with the right idea: just take away the steering wheel.

Tesla unveils car design without a steering wheel, coming within 2 years, says Elon Musk

Tesla CEO Elon Musk said that the automaker will deliver a car without a steering wheel within 2 years –...

electrek.co

Given the demonstrated safety improvement, I wouldn't be surprised to see manual driving outlawed in my lifetime.

 

[glhs837]

I think the fact that we still have regular drunk driver crashes is proof that legislation (either "don't do it" or "we'll put you in jail") won't fix this problem. It's becoming stigmatized, just like alcohol and driving, but the cell phone is just another addictive thing that demands indulgence. People still do it and crash cars and kill themselves and others.

We haven't fixed drunk driving yet, so why would we believe we can fix this either?

Elon Musk may be the only one with the right idea: just take away the steering wheel.

Tesla unveils car design without a steering wheel, coming within 2 years, says Elon Musk

Tesla CEO Elon Musk said that the automaker will deliver a car without a steering wheel within 2 years –...

electrek.co

Given the demonstrated safety improvement, I wouldn't be surprised to see manual driving outlawed in my lifetime.

You think we haven't fixed drunk driving, and thats true to a point. We haven't fixed AIDs or cancer either. Some things you cant fix, all you can do is improve, and the fact that you cant eradicate them shouldn't mean you don't try to reduce them. What the below data doesn't do is speak to the reduction in fatalities per mile traveled and how that affects the number. Also, the reduction in fatal accidents vs non-fatal due to increased safety of the vehicles is a factor. But yes, we have made a huge dent in drunk driving, and I would attribute that to the social stigma that now accrues to it. Lets do the same for using a cell phone while driving.

NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT)

report.nih.gov

​

​ Alcohol-Related Traffic Deaths​ YESTERDAY ​ In the mid 1970s, alcohol was a factor in over 60% of traffic fatalities. Traffic crashes were the leading cause of alcohol-related deaths and two-thirds of traffic deaths among persons aged 16 to 20 involved alcohol. At that time, preventive measures consisted primarily of efforts to reduce harm from alcohol by identifying and treating middle-aged individuals convicted of driving under the influence with established or advanced cases of alcoholism. TODAY ​ Since the early 1980s, alcohol-related traffic deaths per population have been cut in half with the greatest proportional declines among persons 16-20 years old. Reductions in driving after drinking saved more than 150,000 lives between 1982 and 2001 — more than the combined total saved by increases in seat belt use, airbags, and motorcycle and bicycle helmets. Today alcohol is involved in 37% of all traffic deaths among persons aged 16 to 20.

 

[Clem72]

stgislander said:
One day there will be technology installed in vehicles so when in motion, a cell phone jammer is energized and no incoming or outgoing calls or texts.

Grumpy said:
Doesn't seem like it would be hard to do, I wonder why it hasn't been done already?

I'm thinking it has already been done.

Unlikely. First, how do they know if it's the driver or passenger. Second, and more important, it's illegal to "jam" (physically intefere with the radio) cell phones as this would interfere with the ability to make emergency phonecalls (this is a law, but i'm too lazy to look it up).

Just imagine the lawsuit that would follow the first time the new iJam and blocks a young mother trying to dial 911 while attempting to escape from her abusive husband who is trying to run her and their kids off the road.

Unless you don't actually mean jamming, and rather just an App that selectively disables all but emergency services.

 

[GWguy]

Unlikely. First, how do they know if it's the driver or passenger. Second, and more important, it's illegal to "jam" (physically intefere with the radio) cell phones as this would interfere with the ability to make emergency phonecalls (this is a law, but i'm too lazy to look it up).

Just imagine the lawsuit that would follow the first time the new iJam and blocks a young mother trying to dial 911 while attempting to escape from her abusive husband who is trying to run her and their kids off the road.

Unless you don't actually mean jamming, and rather just an App that selectively disables all but emergency services.

I never said jam. Just that's there is tech to prevent cell phone use. As far as isolating the driver, you really need to Google before you say things. BlueTooth is being used widely. As a rule, only the driver is bluetooth'd into the car and can be isolated. There is also tech that simply uses sound to determine a person's position in the vehicle and blocks them. There is a hardware device that can be placed on the windscreen that can block texing without falling into the category of "jamming".

It's not perfect, but far better than unlikely.