Hungry for clarity in distracted driving debate
October 16, 2011
Something’s eating at me.
You may have heard that Oak Park, Ill., is considering a ban on eating while driving. Yes, that and sipping on drinks and putting on makeup and … texting and cell phone use.
“This isn’t government overreach; this is the government protecting people,” said Oak Park village trustee Colette Lueck, who floated the idea in the middle of debate over texting and handheld cell phones.
Actually, that would be government overreach.
Lueck, apparently, is dead serious. And the media has lapped up the story about banning eating while driving.
Critics of electronic distracted driving legislation — those addressing use of wireless communications devices — often cite “putting on make-up” or “eating while driving” as candidates for governmental sanctions. One guy brought up nose-picking.
These critics by and large are not serious. They argue against electronic distracted driving restrictions by summoning up specious dangers.
Last March, this blog reported the following exchange in Maryland’s distracted driving debate, after state Sen. Allan Kittleman playfully proposed a law against eating and while driving.
“You can’t tell me it is more safe to hold some French fries and a Big Mac and Coke than it is to look down and read some text messages,” Kittleman said to the sponsor of an anti-texting bill.
Sen. James Brochin, responded, dryly: “Eating is not a cerebral event. You just do it.”
What’s the harm in a larger debate?
Electronic distracted driving laws send a clear message about clear and present dangers brought on by a technological sea change. Diluting society’s directive that text messaging and operating mobile phones are potentially deadly behaviors can only add to the sickening body count. Young, inexperienced drivers don’t deal well with ambiguity and gray areas.
Newspapers nationwide are not printing obituaries for victims of drivers lost in enjoyment of their Slurpees. Safety experts do not come to high schools to demonstrate to students that they are impaired when changing radio stations. Putting on make-up has never been researched as a dangerous addictive habit.
Well-meaning legislators should focus on electronic distracted driving and leave the everyday inattentive behaviors to police and safety educators.
The current national debate needs to be about texting & talking while behind the wheel. Period.
As with driving, focus is everything.
TXT = OCD … or addiction?
October 10, 2011
The national need to text and talk on handheld portable devices seems to be only growing stronger, as smartphones become as common as watches.
Researchers now are talking about the handheld devices in terms of obsession and addiction — with the potential for disaster when combined with motor vehicle operation.
Brains of many cell-phone-using young adults react to ringing and vibrating smartphones as they would to the arrival of a loved one, a recent study in San Diego suggests.
The same researcher reports that the sound of a vibrating cell phone ranked third among the most powerful and affecting sounds of the modern world — after the Intel chime and a baby’s giggle. (Read the New York Times story on cell phone addiction.)
Perhaps you’ve heard the slang for Blackberry devices: Crackberries.
University of Arkansas researchers say, however, that the problem may not be addiction, but obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Management of objectionable behaviors linked to OCD and to addictions require totally different approaches, they said.
Professor Moez Limayem found that “the underlying motivation to use a mobile phone is not pleasure, as predicted by addictions studies, but rather a response to heightened stress and anxiety.”
That stress often results from feeling an exaggerated need to attend to a family life while in the workplace, and to respond to business demands while with family and friends, they said.
The Arkansas findings showed that “the most significant predictor of dangerous mobile phone usage was answering text messages while driving. Incoming alerts triggered dangerous usage. Conversely, initiating text messages was not a significant factor.”
That means that the driving force is to respond to a call or text, not to stay in touch at inappropriate times.
“The possibility that mobile phone usage is a compulsion rather than an addiction may suggest more effective legislative interventions and prevention tactics,” Limayem said.
That view supports education over punitive action such as tickets and fines, the Arkansas team said. Use of differing ring tones to separate important and less vital callers could help as well, they said.
Australia, New Zealand distracted driving news
October 6, 2011
New Zealand: More than 16,000 drivers were fined for illegal use of handheld cell phones in the first two years of the distracted driving law.
In Waikato region, New Zealand, about 650 drivers have been cited for violating the handheld cell phone law that went into effect in November 2009. Tickets run $80(NZ) plus 20 demerits. Police say the number of north island violations increased significantly in the past year.
A Waikato man is facing three charges of dangerous driving causing injury for causing a wreck while text messaging. It left a woman a quadriplegic. Trial is set for November.
New South Wales drivers have paid more than $13 million(AUS) in cell phone fines over the past 12 months, an insurance industry study reported in August 2011. More than 50,000 drivers were ticketed. Young adults were more than six times more likely to be distracted by a text message than older drivers, the Bingle insurance study found. Fines are $265 with 3 points against the driver’s license.
A New Zealand police officer has been cleared in the death of a teenager whom the constable hit and killed 23 seconds after receiving a text message. An investigation into the midnight accident ruled that Constable Jamie Anderson had no way of avoiding pedestrian Rawiri Wilson because the officer’s headlights were on low-beam. Anderson admitted he text messaged “whenever I felt like it” while on duty. Investigators agreed with the coroner, who said there remained an “aura” of suspicion that the officer was reading the text when he hit the teen on a rural highway in the summer of 2009. It was legal to drive and use a cell phone at the time.
New Zealand’s national police say 8,402 cell phone citations were issued between January and March 2011. New Zealand’s ban on text messaging and using handheld cell phones while driving went into effect Nov. 1, 2009. Use of cell phones with hands-free devices is permitted. Fines are $80 and include 20 demerit points. (More New Zealand information below.)
Drivers in Australia’s Capital Territory are now banned from holding cell phones, text messaging and emailing. The rules went into effect in mid-September 2010. Hands-free phoning is allowed, but not if the phone touches the driver’s body. Fines are set at $271 (Aus) with three demerit points.
Between Nov. 1, 2009, and Dec. 9, 2010, 182 crashes in New Zealand were caused by cell phoning drivers. Five people died and a dozen of the crashes resulted in serious injuries. The numbers were slightly lower than those recorded the year before. The New Zealand Herald reports that drivers are “flouting the ban.” Transport Minister Steven Joyce said in January 2011 that the distracted driving law was never expected to be “an immediate silver bullet.”
“There are a lot of other distractions while driving but hand-held mobile phone use has grown to become a significant problem,” Transport Minister Joyce said. The New Zealand Herald reported there 482 cell phone-related injury crashes and 25 fatal accidents between 2003 and 2008. The government has agreed to allow use of mobile phones as GPS devices while driving.
3 new distracted driving laws
October 1, 2011
Motorists in Nevada, Maine and Maryland are now subject to new distracted driving regulations.
Nevada’s ban on text messaging and using handheld cell phones will driving officially went into effect Saturday, Oct. 1. Violators won’t be punished for the next three months, though, as law officers are only issuing warnings until Jan. 1. Then it’s on to fines that start at $50 and go to $250.
In Maryland, legislators have completed their clean-up of the existing texting while driving law. As of Oct. 1, “reading” of text messages is illegal while driving in Maine. Previously, only the writing and sending of text messages (and email) were illegal. Also, the earlier state law allowed for texting at red lights, but that loophole too has been closed. Fines run between $40 and $100.
And Maine’s new law against texting while driving went into effect Sept. 28. At least, the reading and writing of text messages (and email). The sending of messages, curiously, remains legal. Tickets are now being written and fines start at a minimum $100.
Nevada became the 34th state to ban texting while driving.
Read more: