Oklahoma City (AP) - People who use cell phones while driving could face jail and a fine under legislation being proposed by state Representative Paul Wesselhoft.
The bill calls for 20 days in jail and a $1,000 fine for anyone who has an auto accident that's caused by using a cell phone.
School bus drivers would be fined $1,000 if caught using a cell phone while driving a bus. And anyone with a learner's permit would face a $500 fine for using a cell phone while driving.
The Oklahoma Highway Safety Office says about one-fourth of all auto accidents in the state occurred while the driver was talking on a cell phone.
The legislation would be named after Brittanie Montgomery who was a New Orleans Hornets cheerleader killed in an auto accident last December while she was text messaging on her cell phone.
I agree that something should be done, but 20 days in jail is a bit too stiff of a sentence I think.
I think any jail time, loss of liberty, is excessive for communicating while driving. Studies have shown a person is just as distracted when speaking to a passenger as when talking on the cell phone. It isnt the phone that's the problem, its the interaction.
Unless we are talking about dialing/texting while driving. Clearly that posses an additional hazard as your eyes are not on the road and/or hands on the wheel.
Furthermore, correlation does not equal causation. Just because 25% of the people were on a cell phone when they got into an accident does not mean 25% were CAUSED by cell phones. What percent of the driving population is on a cell phone - it would not surprise me if it approached the 25% mark.
If you want to talk about causation, lets see what this bill does for lying about talking on a cell phone. Who is going to prove that I was on a cell phone when I crashed? The person I ran into - then they should have been watching the road and not me talking on the phone.
The law is foolish, without adequate foundation, and cannot be readily enforced.
How about a law addressing general stupidity while driving.
When did they quit putting functioning turn signals on BMW's and Benz's?
Speaking of texting and driving......
http://www.azcentral.com/community/peoria/articles/0815fatal0815.html (//%22http://%22)
That's OK if they fine us for causing an accident while using a cell phone. However, nobody, I mean NOBODY, will stop me from reading the paper while driving to work. I have perfected my technique. However, it gets a little tricky when I have to answer my phone. [:D]
My favorite thing is eating a subway sandwich while driving. A big one of course, that requires two hands and special attention to make sure I dont drop any of that shredded lettuce or mayonaise all over myself.
quote:
Originally posted by YoungTulsan
My favorite thing is eating a subway sandwich while driving. A big one of course, that requires two hands and special attention to make sure I dont drop any of that shredded lettuce or mayonaise all over myself.
I just lay my newspaper down on my lap when I'm finished...a perfect napkin!
Im going to open up a driving school for those people who want to learn how to drive a slalom course by utilizing their legs only.
You can get a lot done in the car if you take my course.
No.
quote:
Originally posted by Rowdy
Oklahoma City (AP) - People who use cell phones while driving could face jail and a fine under legislation being proposed by state Representative Paul Wesselhoft.
The bill calls for 20 days in jail and a $1,000 fine for anyone who has an auto accident that's caused by using a cell phone.
School bus drivers would be fined $1,000 if caught using a cell phone while driving a bus. And anyone with a learner's permit would face a $500 fine for using a cell phone while driving.
The Oklahoma Highway Safety Office says about one-fourth of all auto accidents in the state occurred while the driver was talking on a cell phone.
The legislation would be named after Brittanie Montgomery who was a New Orleans Hornets cheerleader killed in an auto accident last December while she was text messaging on her cell phone.
I agree that something should be done, but 20 days in jail is a bit too stiff of a sentence I think.
A ridiculous law and one nearly impossible to prove. How do the police conclude a cell phone was the cause of a wreck? They don't.
Last year the legislature took away the ability of police to issue tickets for inattentive driving. Now, you can only be issued a ticket if your inattention leads to a collision. Although, it's a little too late then.
So, you can now read the paper, write in your journal, talk on the phone, put on makeup, eat dinner, ...... all while driving.
Wesselhoft wants to make a difference, correct that major mistake. We've got far worse problems then cell phones.
They already have the power to ticket people who are driving and not paying attention. I had a friend who got a ticket 5 years ago for "inattentive driving" because he was on his phone and drifting inside his lane. To outright ban phones while driving? Give me a break.
It will be the banning of cellphone use while holding it to your head but I dont see them banning cellphones altogether. Hands-free use and bluetooth should be acceptable.
I foresee in the not too distant future all new vehicles coming with bluetooth or like technology as a standard for phone use.
As I stated above, the problem when TALKING on a cell phone is not the cell phone, its the talking.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/01/030129080944.htm
Dialing, texting, answering and other activities are a different story. But those are not really helped by hands free either (most cell phones have voice dialing, as well as handhelds, so its even).
So once again, talking on cell phone with or without hands free units is equally dangerous. Its the distraction of conversing, not the phone.
Thus, it wont help.
quote:
Originally posted by PreserveSouthTulsa.com
quote:
Originally posted by YoungTulsan
My favorite thing is eating a subway sandwich while driving. A big one of course, that requires two hands and special attention to make sure I dont drop any of that shredded lettuce or mayonaise all over myself.
I just lay my newspaper down on my lap when I'm finished...a perfect napkin!
When I was in high school, the basketball coach/driver's ed instructor lived in my neighborhood. I would pass him going down Lewis in the mornings and there would be Coach with the sports section spread across his steering wheel while he was tooling along. Great lesson!
One of the reasons cell phone usage while driving is so dangerous is because many people hold them in their left hand, which reduces visibility greatly to the left side. They can't see their outside mirrors, and their peripheral vision is compromised.
Add that to being more interested in the conversation, and it's a deadly mix.
People should not use cell phones while driving. Get a hands free unit or pull over and talk.
I hope they outlaw it.
quote:
Originally posted by tulsa1603
They already have the power to ticket people who are driving and not paying attention. I had a friend who got a ticket 5 years ago for "inattentive driving" because he was on his phone and drifting inside his lane. To outright ban phones while driving? Give me a break.
Like I said, this law was changed last year which revoked any ordinance/statute and removed 'inattentive driving' from the books. Now, police can only issue this ticket if the 'inattentive driving' results in a collision.
I disagree that talking on the cell phone is no more distracting than talking to a passenger. Maybe if you're on hands free, but no other time. I can drive while talking to people all the time but if I get a cell phone call, I drive worse than some preschoolers. Having one hand tied up a big kicker. Not to mention that texting is becoming infinitely more popular.
I also don't think 20 days is excessive for people who not only were using the phone, but had an accident because of it.
Are accidents caused by cell phones any worse than those caused by applying makeup, shaving, singing/seat dancing, arguing, changing clothes, or other unmentionable things that I've seen people doing while driving?
The thing is, they all cause the driver to lose focus and lead to accidents. If you are going to punish one act that leads to an accident, then punish them all. Don't just punish YOUR pet peeve.
If the cellphone is in a cradle or on your hip with bluetooth, then this becomes a moot point. If someone talks on the cellphone while driving with both hands on the wheel versus someone sitting next to them, I see no difference. If anything, having someone next to you is more distracting due to movement and the occasional eye contact one makes while driving.
I guess they should outlaw verbal communication while driving then.
And require everyone in moving vehicles to wear helmets too. Helmets are proven to saves lives, and prevents holding a phone up to their ears at the same time. Kills two birds with one stone.
Somehow, people who wear helmets with or without intercom headsets or operate hands free communicators... all manage to have combat dogfights, battlefield conversations, fly commercial jets, drive squad cars, taxis, and helicopters without running into other vehicles.
They perform their multi-tasking successfully with wired and unwired conversations without gathering attention from our grandstanding legislature.
Could it be our drivers? The cell phones, cigarettes, breakfast burritos are all just co-incidental? There are two classes when it comes to cars. People who know how to drive a car (a process that requires skill, intelligence, patience) and people who know how to "operate" a car (passed drivers license test).
I think part of the problem with cell phones, as opposed to eating, putting on make-up, numerous other things, is that SO many people use cell phones they get complacent while driving. I've seen the occasional girl (or guy) putting on make-up while driving and darn near run off the road. Judging by the looks of the driver, it is an everyday task they do. I can say that most of the drivers that don't yield to me while driving emergency are on the phone. The look on their face is priceless when they are staring at the grille of the truck and realizing they were the only one that pulled into the intersection while the whole time they don't DARE move the phone from their ear.
Now I'm not saying I don't personally talk on the phone while driving on occasion, but when I have to concentrate on driving I will either tune out whoever is talking to me or put the phone down for a moment. I can always ask them what they said afterwards. I would believe this is where the problem lies and the difference is determined with talking on cell phones while driving. Just like the difference in how to 'drive' a car and how to 'operate' a car, some people know how to talk while driving and others know how to drive while talking.
I guess this could be nothing, but I was trying to think if more attention is given to a cellphone call than the average person sitting next to the driver. I stated previously that there would be occasional eye contact as well as seeing the person next to you in your peripheral.
However I wonder if those who talk on the phone seem to put more attention to the call due to the person not physically being there. In other words, when we talk to people in person in a room, we look at them and talk with various hand gestures. We basically don't move our bodies out of position. But I have noticed many people when talking on the cellphone at the office or pretty much anywhere wander around aimlessly while talking. I have seen people do circles for 20 minutes or figure eights while in a call.
Perhaps this transfers to the same type of pattern while driving. Just a thought.
Talking on a cell phone while driving is distracting, dangerous and inconsiderate. A law against using cell phones while driving would not ruffle my feathers one bit. The law would be difficult to enforce because at least 25% of the people on the BA every morning and afternoon are on their phone (I'm being conservative here). It would be a field day for those "fund raising days" the TPD seem to have every month. We could pay for the river development just enforcing this new law.
It is very irritating when someone is in the fast lane going 45 MPH holding up traffic and when you finally get around them see they are in their own world - chatting on the phone. How inconsiderate!
People seem to think they have a "right" to talk on their cell phone anytime and anywhere - no matter how annoying, irritating, loud, or dangerous it might be.
There is a time and place for everything. Driving demands a lot of attention and concentration. Driving an "at-least-a-ton" of steel, iron and plastic at any speed is not the appropriate time to become a one-armed driver with divided attention.
ODOT should at the least provide TV and while-you-wait-at-the-movies public spots on the dangers of "celling while driving" to create awareness.
When my daughter is of driving age, if I ever know she is celling while driving, she will lose the privilege of driving for a while.
How can anyone think that it is OK to multi-task while driving? Celling and driving is stupid and unnecessary.
/off soapbax
quote:
Originally posted by AMP
And require everyone in moving vehicles to wear helmets too. Helmets are proven to saves lives, and prevents holding a phone up to their ears at the same time. Kills two birds with one stone.
This day is coming. Seatbelts will soon be replaced with a seat harness. A $50.00 helmet can save a driver thousands in medical bills in the event of a crash. A race car drive won't dare race without a helmet. The head & face are most prone to injury in a crash... That will be the goverment's line of sale to push helmets on the public. Like seatbelts it'll be only a $5.00 fine at first and a secondary offense-- then slowly it'll become primary offense with a fine of $100.00 or more for not having your helmet on. In time on ALL states will have car helmet laws. Motorcyclists don't get helmet laws because they are a vocal bunch, they raise a fuss every time a state starts talking about helmet laws & they fight it, car drivers sit back and don't do nothing so they pass law after law restricting a drivers rights. Here's my guess- I'd bet it'll start with laws requiring all children riding in cars to have on a helmet on. Then it'll expand to require the driver and other adults in the car to wear a helmet. I'd bet with-in 10 years it'll start. Car helmets are a certain thing it's just a question of when.
quote:
Originally posted by sauerkraut
quote:
Originally posted by AMP
And require everyone in moving vehicles to wear helmets too. Helmets are proven to saves lives, and prevents holding a phone up to their ears at the same time. Kills two birds with one stone.
This day is coming. Seatbelts will soon be replaced with a seat harness. A $50.00 helmet can save a driver thousands in medical bills in the event of a crash. A race car drive won't dare race without a helmet. The head & face are most prone to injury in a crash... That will be the goverment's line of sale to push helmets on the public. Like seatbelts it'll be only a $5.00 fine at first and a secondary offense-- then slowly it'll become primary offense with a fine of $100.00 or more for not having your helmet on. In time on ALL states will have car helmet laws. Motorcyclists don't get helmet laws because they are a vocal bunch, they raise a fuss every time a state starts talking about helmet laws & they fight it, car drivers sit back and don't do nothing so they pass law after law restricting a drivers rights. Here's my guess- I'd bet it'll start with laws requiring all children riding in cars to have on a helmet on. Then it'll expand to require the driver and other adults in the car to wear a helmet. I'd bet with-in 10 years it'll start. Car helmets are a certain thing it's just a question of when.
I think you're on the right track, but the reality is, we'll all be on space-cycles by then, so helmets would be mandatory.
Another attempt by a lawmaker to ban cellphone use while driving, but with the promise it would not apply to the use of Bluetooth technology that would allow for hands-free operation to communicate while driving.
http://newsok.com/oklahoma-state-senator-files-legislation-to-ban-texting-while-driving/article/5380419
But the bill doesnt mention that exemption:
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16%20INT/SB/SB67%20INT.PDF
'I wasn't texting, I was looking at my phone!' Shocking moment distracted Missouri COP drives straight into cyclist
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6004697/Shocking-moment-distracted-Missouri-COP-drives-straight-cyclist-waiting-stop-sign.html
New law, same result.
Texting, answering, and dialing is distracting. TALKING on the phone or talking to your passenger is equally distracting - again, per all the research. It also stands to reason: while holding a phone to your head is distracting, so is turning to look at your passenger. Using electronic in your car is dangerous (navigation systems or otherwise). Having emails read to you is distracting. Going through dialing lists on your dashboard menu. Eating or drinking. Distracted driving is a problem, and it always has been. But will banning cell phone use help?
Luckily, we aren't the first to try this. Unfortunately, the states that have tried it have not found any safety benefit from their bans:
http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2014/07/17/no-evidence-california-cellphone-ban-decreased-accidents-says-cu-boulder
Another study by Virginia Tech and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found the same thing:
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/sr/statusreport/article/49/8/1
So we are proposing a law to make more things illegal which we already know won't do what we want it to do. We could ban cup holders, eating, navigation, all phone use, and talking - but people would still oogle that cute girl in the lane next to them.
If we have no reason to believe the law will work, then it shouldn't be a law.
I think we should make car stereos illegal. They distract drivers too.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on January 06, 2015, 01:32:01 PM
New law, same result.
Texting, answering, and dialing is distracting. TALKING on the phone or talking to your passenger is equally distracting - again, per all the research. It also stands to reason: while holding a phone to your head is distracting, so is turning to look at your passenger. Using electronic in your car is dangerous (navigation systems or otherwise). Having emails read to you is distracting. Going through dialing lists on your dashboard menu. Eating or drinking. Distracted driving is a problem, and it always has been. But will banning cell phone use help?
Luckily, we aren't the first to try this. Unfortunately, the states that have tried it have not found any safety benefit from their bans:
http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2014/07/17/no-evidence-california-cellphone-ban-decreased-accidents-says-cu-boulder
QuoteIn a recent study, a researcher at the University of Colorado Boulder found no evidence that a California ban on using hand-held cellphones while driving decreased the number of traffic accidents in the state in the first six months following the ban.
The findings, published in the journal Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, are surprising given prior research that suggests driving while using a cellphone is risky. For example, past laboratory studies have shown that people who talk on a cellphone while using driving simulators are as impaired as people who are intoxicated.
"If it's really that dangerous, and if even just a fraction of people stop using their phones, we would expect to find some decrease in accidents," said Daniel Kaffine, an associate professor of economics at CU-Boulder and an author of the study. "But we didn't find any statistical evidence of a reduction."
QuoteSo we are proposing a law to make more things illegal which we already know won't do what we want it to do. We could ban cup holders, eating, navigation, all phone use, and talking - but people would still oogle that cute girl in the lane next to them.
If we have no reason to believe the law will work, then it shouldn't be a law.
We truly live in the age of instant gratification.
Just because there was a ban on using hand-held cellphones while driving doesn't mean people stopped using them while driving.
It would be interesting to compare with anti drinking and driving laws during their first 6 months and the levels of enforcement of each.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on January 06, 2015, 01:52:55 PM
I think we should make car stereos illegal. They distract drivers too.
And children in cars
Self-driving cars will fix all these problems.
Quote from: DTowner on January 07, 2015, 12:30:16 PM
Self-driving cars will fix all these problems.
Car chases will never be the same
(http://i1311.photobucket.com/albums/s669/photos20131/Movies/MINORITY-REPORT-3_zps5f148743.jpg)
Quote from: Red Arrow on January 06, 2015, 09:18:03 PM
Just because there was a ban on using hand-held cellphones while driving doesn't mean people stopped using them while driving.
It would be interesting to compare with anti drinking and driving laws during their first 6 months and the levels of enforcement of each.
Driving While Texting bans arent taken seriously because they exempt people who are among the most at risk:
http://www.mystateline.com/fulltext-news/d/story/eyewitness-news-investigates-distracted-deputies-p/19847/jINt7SHbnkyqY0ABiT-sYw
http://www.businessinsider.com/police-officer-will-not-be-charged-in-killing-of-napster-executive-2014-8
Secrecy sought in Illinois trooper crash case
http://www.lawreport.org/ViewStory.aspx?StoryID=5515
Quote from: Red Arrow on January 06, 2015, 09:18:03 PM
We truly live in the age of instant gratification.
Just because there was a ban on using hand-held cellphones while driving doesn't mean people stopped using them while driving.
It would be interesting to compare with anti drinking and driving laws during their first 6 months and the levels of enforcement of each.
The study explains why they choose to review those time periods. The primary reason is to control, as much as possible, for other possible factors such as changes in technology, speed limit/road changes, weather changes, etc. By placing the time periods as closely together as possible they were able to minimize other variables.
There are other studies referenced, I cited the most recent study.
Nonetheless, you stated it perfectly - "just because there was a ban. . . doesn't mean people stopped using them while driving." Which is, after all, both the point of my post and the conclusion of the study. Ergo, the law did not and does not do what it is intended to.