Question of the day
Wednesday, Feb 14, 2007 - Posted by Rich Miller
The Rockford Register-Star editorialized today in support of a hand-held cell phone ban for drivers.
We support a proposal advanced by Rep. Jim Sacia, R-Pecatonica, to ban the use of hand-held cell phones by drivers in this state.
There is ample scientific research to support the anecdotal conclusion that a whole lot of drivers are guilty of what has been called DWY — driving while yakking. Likewise, it’s just obvious that dialing, groping for cell phones in pockets and purses, and talking on them while behind the wheel can be unsafe distractions.
The Insurance Information Institute issued a report this month saying that 231 million Americans subscribe to wireless communication devices such as cell phones. Back in 1990, when the technology was in its infancy, only 4.3 million people had cell phones. The current report cites research showing that 73 percent of those cell- phone owners talk on them while driving and that use, not surprisingly, is highest among young drivers.
There’s no disputing that cell-phone use while driving can be a distraction, although not the most dangerous one. For instance, reaching for a moving or falling object in a car increased the risk of a crash or near crash by nine times, while cell- phone use increased the risk by 1.3 times, according to a 2006 study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
I’ve seen other reports that claim all cell-phone use, hand-held or hands-free, is a distraction.
Either way, though, read the whole editorial and then come back and debate the question: Should hand-held cell-phone use by drivers be banned in Illinois? Why or why not?
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 9:12 am:
By outlawing hand held cell phones a new market opens for auto makers and supplier to equip cars with hands free cell phones. Most new GM cars come equipped with this already.
Pass the law. We no longer need hand held cell phones in cars.
- Blackberry - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 9:17 am:
I’m emailing you from my car while I’m stuck in a snow drift. Thank God I have a hand held in my car or I’d be here until Spring.
- grand old partisan - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 9:18 am:
To answer the specific question: No. Why? Because it that law is uselessly narrow.
What about checking e-mail on a Blackberry? Or looking at your appointment calendar on your Palm? Women putting on lipstick or guys eating a Double Whopper with cheese? I’ve seen cab drivers in the loop reading the Sun-Times while driving. Isn’t this all equally dangerous?
Why not write a law that says ‘drivers may not engage in any activity un-related to the operation of their vehicle,’ and call it a day?
- Wumpus - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 9:20 am:
This does not go far enough. We need to have new car equipment that handcuffs your hands to the 10 and 2 positions on your wheel. We also need to ban eating, doing make up, disciplining children and other activities while drivinf.
- Anon - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 9:23 am:
I have a cell and a BB. Had an accident using hand held cell. Now I use a one sided headset and a boom mic. Look like an old geek, but no more accidents…..an no BB either!
Good idea and the GA should doing something smart and add on motorcycle helmets too while they are at it…..Let’s save lives….
- He Makes Ryan look like a saint - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 9:30 am:
Had an accident when my cell fell on the passenger side floor, I bent over to get it and wham, prior to that, I had a clean record. Pass it….Especially for kids!!
- So-Called "Austin Mayor" - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 9:32 am:
Against it.
The problem distracted driving, not the nature of the particular object that is distracting the driver.
- Skeeter - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 9:37 am:
The article was interesting in that it noted that a cell phone in the hand is as bad as hands-free. Apparently the problem is with the conversation. The only logical conclusion from the lack of distinction between hands on and hands free is that talking is the distraction.
With that in mind, if we are going to ban cell phone use, perhaps we should go after the real culprit — talking in the car.
- respectful - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 10:13 am:
With all respect to Rep. Sacia, this bill isn’t based upon the research. If it were, the bill would prohibit all talking on the cell phone, whether hands-free or hand-held. The distraction is the culprit, not the lack of two hands on the steering wheel.
Chicago has an ordinance like the Sacia bill. Before adopting it statewide, let’s look at how poorly that ordinance is enforced and whether it has made any difference in traffic safety.
- nieva - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 10:32 am:
If you could see this issue from a flagmans view you would vote to ban cellphone,food,smoking,ect. When people are distracted for whatever reason there driving becomes dangerous. Several times I have had my paddle run by cellphone users. When I ask them why they all say I did’t see you. A 260 lb guy in a lime green vest is hard to miss!!
- Jaded - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 10:36 am:
Against it. Read the editorial and it didn’t tell me anything I haven’t already read regarding this issue.
Let’s face it, one size does not fit all when it comes to this kind of thing. There are people who can talk on the phone, and drive safely, and there are people who can’t. Dialing is a bigger problem than talking. Also, there are people who can eat and drive and people who can’t. There are people who get distracted searching through their cd carrying case for their favorite cd, or just operating the cd player/radio. I am far less distracted driving by myself talking on my cell phone, than when I am driving with my young kids. Also, I have seen people both walking and driving using a bluetooth paying no attention whatsoever to anything else going on around them, so “hands free” is not necessarily the answer. Finally, I think it is totally different driving down 55 or 39 with little or no traffic and driving during rush hour in the Chicago area.
Another overkill bill.
- Mr. Ethics - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 11:00 am:
We can not arrest our way out of this problem by out right banning cell phones while driving.
How about requiring an SR22 if you cause an accident while blabbing on a cell phone. That law would have bite.
- i d - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 11:46 am:
We don’t need individual laws for thing already covered by broad laws. Please, just enforce the laws already on the books. And leave the teens alone. At 18 we allow them to join the military and defend us so it seems that they should be capable at 16 to drive home after ten o’clock from a job or school event.
- Just Wonderin' - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 1:07 pm:
Is this a problem because so many people now own cell phones? The reason I ask is that there have been two-way radios (CB, Ham, Police, Emergency, etc.) in vehicles for years, and I don’t recall hearing such a fuss when CB radio was the rage. Why ??
- Distracted driver - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 1:13 pm:
I read the studies and I can say from experience that matches their results, having a phone conversation of any type while driving is a significantly worse distraction than a car radio.
You are using more and different parts of the brain while conducting the conversation than when listening to music or whatever on a car radio. And it makes a BIG difference in your reaction time. When a 1-second reaction delay translates at highway speeds to additional 100 feet or more in stopping distance or avoidance distance, that’s significant. And too often, deadly. Just because you’ve done it and gotten away with it for now, doesn’t mean you’re not gambling with death each time you do ths activity. Yours, or some innocent’s.
A headset or speakerphone law will help keep two hands on the wheel, which is progress, but unless it also requires voice dialing, it doesn’t really solve the problem of taking your eyes off the rod to call, nor does it moderate the distraction from the actual driving.
I will admit to taking calls while driving, but I keep them as short as possible, usually under a minute, and I don’t make them unless I can pull over somewhere safely.
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 1:20 pm:
Well, the ban has done wonders in Chicago, you never see anyone here using their hand-held cell phones anymore. Everyone is complying, just check the police statistics on the number of tickets they’ve issued. Hardly any, so therefore everyone is clearly following the ordinance.
- C$ - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 1:29 pm:
Let’s ticket the dangerous action, not the propensity to create a dangerous action… So give people who are driving badly while talking on a phone a ticket for improper lane usage or reckless driving. If you aren’t driving dangerously while you talk on your phone, why should we care???
- FightforJustice - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 1:31 pm:
Distracted driver speaks the truth, as any of us know who use cell phones while driving. It’s not just “the other guy” who — while yakking on the phone — swerves out of his or her lane, drives under the limit, or commits a stupid driving error.
That doesn’t mean Sacia’s bill is a good idea. If it changed behavior, you’d have more people using earphones and likely spending more time on the phone since their arms wouldn’t get tired.
- Robbie - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 2:08 pm:
I agree with many of the comments above. I want to present a different angle. How enforceable would this law be? Many people have mentioned that it is busy traffic areas that really needs this rule, but how many officers will have time to check for people on cell phones? I’m a downstater and have only travelled to Chicago about 15 times and driven maybe 10 of those times. But in my limited experience, it is the easiest place to break traffic laws because of all the people. I rarely see police sitting in the median or on the side monitoring traffic. TO contrast, jus tabout every time I head up I-74 to the QC or down it to Peoria, I see troopers just waiting for someone to speed.
Has cell phone driving increased accidents? Most likely. Is there a decent way to police it? Not in my opinion. As far as compliance, my take is that the @sshat that drives like crap while talking is most likely the last person willing to comply. Meanwhile, me and the people that can talk responsibly will be the first scared into compliance. It will be another law that was supposed to help, but really just hurts people that weren’t abusing the priveledge in the first place.
Then again I don’t think I should have to wear a seatbelt unless I want to. So I am pretty dumb anyways.
- C$ - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 2:18 pm:
“Then again I don’t think I should have to wear a seatbelt unless I want to. So I am pretty dumb anyways.”
Not dumb… Free. And it feels damn good to be free.
- Bears - Wednesday, Feb 14, 07 @ 2:29 pm:
This coupled with no one under 25 in the military would save more lives