Rant: Cell phone drivers are a SOLVEABLE PROBLEM!
So, I got to watch some of the spectacular side effects of driving while cradling a cell phone on the way home yesterday. You know, the mile-long backup from a trivial accident, and the countless near misses behind it as drivers with cell phones change lanes without warning or signaling, don't maintain reasonable following distances, etc. You know, typical road-rage material.
And I decided that either I'm missing something, or it's a problem that just shouldn't exist anymore.
First, I don't think trying to ban cell phone usage while driving will work. It won't get enforced adequately, it won't get obeyed adequately, and it will just annoy a lot of people.
What I'd like to see is a basic effort from car makers, phone makers/carriers, or better yet BOTH to just fix it.
We've all seen these cheap, clunky solutions to hands-free cell phones - car/radio adapters that are awkward to mount, might require a battery, might not have great pick-up, etc. Why can't the car manufactures build this stuff in? GM already has On-Star - use the mic/speakersystem from that, if you don't want to pump it through the stereo system. You don't have to invent the countless adapters to plug into every phone's aux jack; just make some standard mini-stereo inputs, and let the phone/carrier/aftermarket accessory industry produce adapters. You already have a widely-accepted standard for DC power, why not mic/speakers as well?
I'm convinced that the problem is NOT people talking on their cell phones; rather, it's people holding a cell phone while trying to drive. Up to your ear, or even out in front of you, you're keeping at least one hand busy, and moving/turning your head less, etc. THOSE are the behaviors that are problematic (especially if, like me, you have a manual transmission).
I've tried one of those cheap radio hookups, and it just didn't cut it. I've tried a earbug/mic attachment, it didn't cut it either (bad pickup, short cord, etc.), and that's still technically illegal (if you didn't know, drivers cannot legally wear any sort of headphone in most states at least; playing your music as loud or louder from external speakers is just fine, of course!). But if you could talk and listen the same way you'd talk/listen to a passenger in the car, the problem would essentially go away. Dialing/answering is no worse than fiddling with the A/C or the radio (granted, there are countless accidents caused by these activities, but you don't generally see folks fighting to ban the use or adjustment of a radio in a moving car).
So, which is it? Am I missing some good reason why there isn't a broader effort to make cars cell-phone-friendly? Yeah it'll tack on a few dollars to the price of a new car, but cell phone usage is nearly ubiquitous now, which means it's something a very high percentage of new-car customers would likely be interested in.
I'm generally against government 'nannying', and it seems like a lot of the regulations with automobiles can stray into this territory. But if safety is such a big deal, and if things like Daytime Running Lights and tire-pressure sensors can become federally mandated, why not a standard 2-way audio interface for phones while you're at it? I'd bet the cost/benefit on that would compare favorably with either of the other required features I just mentioned...
Comments
- Anonymous
June 17, 2005
I would tend to agree with you, although bluetooth aor some wrieless interop would seem more logical. However, from waht I have gathered from people who actually study this stuff, the evidence suggests that the problem is more related to the driver being distracted by the conversation itself, not the hand holding. I do not have any links at hand, but that is what I remember which also jives with the studies that suggest teen drivers are much safer without other passengers in the car.
Regardless of the safety issue, there should be a standard for cell phones to operate through the systems already built into the automobile.
I am not sure about how this should be regulated. Perhaps the mere spector of a govt-mandated spec will get the major players off their heels. - Anonymous
June 17, 2005
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
June 17, 2005
It's not just drivers, but pedestrians too - people strolling along chatting away on their 'phones, oblivious to the outside world, weaving all over the pavement... - Anonymous
June 17, 2005
I tend to agree. Hands free should be a requirement for driving. Not talking on a cell phone would be better, but at least keep both hands on the wheel. My wish would be that cell phone makers standardize hands free stuff. It often seems like an afterthough. (The Audiovox SMT 5600, for example, requires you to use the phone to voice dial when using the included ear buds. Alternately, locking the phone on the Audiovox disables the bluetooth voice dial functions. Ugh) - Anonymous
June 17, 2005
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
June 17, 2005
The whole argument that holding a cell phone must be a major distraction has a major fallacy: how do you account for drivers, like myself, who drive a stick shift?!
gasp
U DON'T HAVE 2 HADNS ON TEH ST33RING WHEEL U MUST BE TEH D3V1L!!1
Bah humbug.
A lot of studies over the last few years have shown that hands-free kits do not make safer drivers. Why? The problem with talking to ANYONE while you're driving is that you're not concentrating on your driving, whether that anyone on the other end of your cell phone, in the car to your left, or sitting in your passenger seat.
If you're going to rant about cell phone use why not rant about EVERY OTHER DISTRACTING BEHAVIOR:
- Eating chips
- Fiddling with the radio
- Programming your navigation system
- Reaching to get a child something in the back seat
- Putting on make up
- Ogling other drivers
- Looking at scenery
- etc.
Here in Chicago they just passed a bill prohibiting cell phone use without a hands-free kit. It's silly. An alderman tried to derail the bill by attaching any unsafe behavior (see above list) to it but it passed anyway.
If you're going to outlaw one you need to outlaw the other. A distraction is a distraction. They're not any different. - Anonymous
June 17, 2005
Dan, I - and lots of research I've read and heard - agree with you that it's the distraction of cell phones that's the problem, and that hands-free kits won't solve the problem. I do disagree, however, that a "distraction is a distraction". Eating a chip and having a conversation - especially a important conversation - require much different levels of focus on the distraction in question. When drivers are talking to passengers or people on the phone they tend to concentrate more on their conversation than the road, especially when interest in the subject matter is peaked.
Banning mobile phones in cars may be a bit of overkill, but I think that stiffer penalties should be attached. I, too, have seen studies reporting that such drivers are more dangerous than drunk drivers, so perhaps the penalty for causing an accident while on the phone (just pull the LUGS) should be stiffer than drunk-driving accidents, too. That should help prevent responsible drivers from doing it. The irresponsible drivers may ignore any ban anyway. - Anonymous
June 17, 2005
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
June 21, 2005
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=585&e=3&u=/nm/20050621/sc_nm/health_cellphones_dc - Anonymous
June 24, 2005
Interesting study Dan, though I'd question the ability to draw such extensive conclusions from such a focused experiment.
Many many activities require both visual and auditory focus - driving! (granted, it's MOSTLY visual), video games, any team sport - the list goes on.
This study has as much to do with why cell phone driving is bad as it does to do with why listening to the radio while driving does, at least for people who are actively listening (favorite songs, talk radio, etc.), and as I've said before, you don't see that many folks up in arms about listening to a radio or cd player or talking to someone else physically in the car (though there are still any number of accidents as a result).
I wish there was hard data on how the act of physically holding a cell phone impairs driving ability - did those 'cell phone users are as bad as drunk driver' experiments test talking on the cell phone, or just holding one?