"Hands free" laws?

[The Annoyed Man]

seem to be getting popular.  CA has one in effect July 1, but I'm skeptical and don't think it will do much good.  People will still be talking while driving, and the problem is not the one hand holding the phone.  The problem is that the talking driver's mind is not on driving-it's completely involved with the subject of the conversation.

In fact, I would submit that it's more dangerous than no law at all.  At least other drivers are put on notice when they see some bozo driving while talking.  You know to keep an eye on or move away from a talking driver.  After the law, you'll have no idea who only looks like they're there but are actually in another time and place.

Now, if they want to pass a law that prohibits cell phone use altogether while driving, I'd be in favor of that.  But this is only 'feelgood' b.s. IMO.

Check out the photo in this link.  Looks like soccermom is about to get t-boned by the Von's truck:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24580099/

[Manedwolf]

Now, if they want to pass a law that prohibits cell phone use altogether while driving, I'd be in favor of that.

What is it with you and your love for nanny-state laws? Do you not even realize what you say?

And the reason for handsfree is simple.

You should have both hands on the wheel, not one holding a phone to your ear. If you're driving a manual, you need two hands for that, too, which means you're letting go of something, perhaps the wheel, to shift. And that's not okay, that's stupid.

Many people, myself included, can talk on a handsfree with both hands on the wheel and all attention on the road, talking just as if we were talking to someone in the car. You might be familiar with a long-predating-cellular concept of handsfree communication, since another group whose attention is even more focused on their immediate actions has had no problem with it.



You want to ban talking to your passenger, too, since it might be distracting? How about putting the driver in a soundproof bubble?

[RoadKingLarry]

It is a little unsettling but I agree with Paddy on this issue.
As a motorcyclist with 30+ years on the road I'm all for making the highways safer. And I don't think it is particularly Nanny-ish. We kill more than 45,000 people a year (on average) in MV collisions ( I don't call them "accidents" for a reason.) with 100,000+ injured, maimed and crippled. Our culture is so screwed up when it comes to driving, Accidentally shoot your neighbors tree and you've got a pretty good chance of going to jail. Have an "accident" with your car and kill a family of four, and unless you were under the influence there is a good chance you will get the sympathy nod for having to live with that terrible tragedy

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

if you are gonna chose pilots as an example you might wanna remember that if there are 2 polots one handles the radios  for a reason.

[Manedwolf]

It is a little unsettling but I agree with Paddy on this issue.
As a motorcyclist with 30+ years on the road I'm all for making the highways safer. And I don't think it is particularly Nanny-ish.

Yes, it is nanny-ish. You're asking for more laws, more Big Government to protect people from themselves by dictating their behavior.

But then, I live in a state that has no seatbelt or helmet laws, as it seems to regard adults as adults. Odd thing, that.

if you are gonna chose pilots as an example you might wanna remember that if there are 2 polots one handles the radios  for a reason.

On a solo flight? That's a neat trick!

[The Annoyed Man]

You should have both hands on the wheel, not one holding a phone to your ear. If you're driving a manual, you need two hands for that, too, which means you're letting go of something, perhaps the wheel, to shift. And that's not okay, that's stupid.

And that's where the 'handsfree' laws make no sense.  If it's about driving with both hands, what about eating while driving, etc?  Why only prohibit talking while driving? 

Many people, myself included, can talk on a handsfree with both hands on the wheel and all attention on the road, talking just as if we were talking to someone in the car.

I can, too.  But I keep any calls short and explain to the caller I'm on the road and will call back later (if it looks like the call will take more than a minute).  Or, I'll ask the caller to hold while I exit from the freeway and park.  Unfortunately, Manedwolf, there seem to be just enough dumbasses out there who can't drive and talk at the same time.  Their little pea brains are only capable of one simple activity at a time.  That's why it's necessary to pass laws to protect the rest of us from them. 

[Manedwolf]

Again, as others have said, if the answer is "more government", it was a really stupid question.

[The Annoyed Man]

The pilot's conversations all directly relate to the opeation of the aircraft.  The radio conversations are not taking his brain away from flying.  He's not arguing with his wife/girlfriend, making a sales call, lying to his boss, etc. et yada.

See the diff?

[AmbulanceDriver]

I may not have as much experience driving as RKL, but I have to weigh in on this.  I think I may have earned the right since I've been in collisions about 5 times or so, and before you even ask, not one was my fault.  Mind you, I also drive an emergency vehicle, so I have a little extra training as well, and spend a LOT of time driving.

That all being said, we make driving entirely too easy in this country.  Personally, I feel that 16 is too young to be driving, and that what little training people get is usually just a parent teaching them the basic mechanics of how to operate a vehicle.  Very few people get any actual training in how to handle a vehicle, and even less training in how to handle an emergency.  And responsible vehicle operation?  What's that?  And yes, I know about driver's ed programs.  And I also know that most of the kids aren't exactly paying attention to the instructor.

The problem isn't cell phones.  The problem isn't a passenger.  The problem isn't the radio, or the makeup application, or the fast food meal you just grabbed in the drive-through.  All of those are a symptom of the problem.  The problem is between the ears of the person operating the vehicle.

RKL, I tend to agree with you that we have a very skewed system in how we deal with "accidents".  Frankly, I think that it would be appropriate to involve criminal charges when you do something stupid and it causes someone a loss.  And I bet that if Suzy Soccermom knew she might get jail time if she rearended someone while yakking on her cell phone and slurping her soy-milk latte, it might make her think twice about what she was doing.

[RoadKingLarry]

It is a little unsettling but I agree with Paddy on this issue.
As a motorcyclist with 30+ years on the road I'm all for making the highways safer. And I don't think it is particularly Nanny-ish.

Yes, it is nanny-ish. You're asking for more laws, more Big Government to protect people from themselves by dictating their behavior.

But then, I live in a state that has no seatbelt or helmet laws, as it seems to regard adults as adults. Odd thing, that.

I disagree, it would be nanny-ish if it was protecting the user from himself (seatbelt laws, helmet laws). It protects me from the clueless dolt with the cell phone much like DUI laws.  On the other hand, I'd be all for a law that really held drives responsible for their actions. Here in OK we have been working to get a law passed that would allow for a suspension of drivers license when the driver was found negligent in a court of law in the death of another road user. The response we get is that lawmakers don't want to take away somebodys ability to drive to work to make a living for their family. Never mind the fact that their negligence took away some one elses ability to live.

[Manedwolf]

The problem isn't cell phones.  The problem isn't a passenger.  The problem isn't the radio, or the makeup application, or the fast food meal you just grabbed in the drive-through.  All of those are a symptom of the problem.  The problem is between the ears of the person operating the vehicle.

There will always be people who will even admit that when faced with a likely accident, they'll scream and close their eyes, no longer in control of their vehicle, not even trying to evade.

The answer is not more big government, unless you want to mandate driving simulator tests with emergency response judgements, and actually ban probably 40% of the population from driving due to an inability to respond to the unexpected with decisive action behind the wheel.

[RoadKingLarry]

The answer is not more big government, unless you want to mandate driving simulator tests with emergency response judgements, and actually ban probably 40% of the population from driving due to an inability to respond to the unexpected with decisive action behind the wheel.

I have NO problem with that at all!

[AmbulanceDriver]

The answer is not more big government, unless you want to mandate driving simulator tests with emergency response judgements, and actually ban probably 40% of the population from driving due to an inability to respond to the unexpected with decisive action behind the wheel.

I have NO problem with that at all!

Heck, my wife falls into that 40%.  When faced with a crisis situation, she freezes.  But training CAN overcome that problem.  When I first started my EMT training, I tended to freeze up during our practice sessions.  But with training, I learned what I was supposed to do.  Same thing with driving.  Heck, I learned to maneuver a 10,000 lb ambulance through spots I wouldn't possibly have tried with my 3,000 lb Camry before the EVOC I did (Emergency Vehicle Operator's Course).  You use the simulator to identify problems, and then you train to correct them.  Once they have undergone the training necessary to exercise proper judgment and take correct action in emergencies, they get their license.

[Leatherneck]

The pilot's conversations all directly relate to the opeation of the aircraft.  The radio conversations are not taking his brain away from flying.  He's not arguing with his wife/girlfriend, making a sales call, lying to his boss, etc. et yada.

Not necessarily. Often there is a need to provide information that doesn't directly relate to the operation of the aircraft (i.e., "flying"). In those cases, i have no problem with "Stand by, Center.") And they won't press it.

But I do believe that the average driver cannot afford the mental distraction from keeping position in most traffic situations. How many times have we witnessed delayed starts when a light turns green, wandering wheels in a multi-lane situation, etc etc, showing a distracted driver. How well will they be able to react to an emergency?

I support banning driver cell phone use at all unless stopped. It's me the idiots may hit.

TC

[Tallpine]

So what about being able to dial 911 to report a drunk or otherwise unsafe driver, or to report that somebody is stopped along the road and needs help?  (the latter for all the people who say they won't stop to help somebody but will just call the HP, etc ...)

There are thousands of miles of roads out here where you hardly see another car.  I don't see anything wrong with cell phones and driving under those conditions, though good luck getting service.


Hey, I have a novel idea ... why don't we punish people for actually causing an accident/harm, instead of for what they might do ?   

[Manedwolf]

I've got a handsfree with voice command.

To make a call, I pat the earpiece and say "call" whomever. The phone asks for confirmation of the name, I say "yes" or "no", and then have a conversation as if the person was in the car. Eyes remain on the road the entire time.

I've also called highway patrol to report an accident and objects in the road while driving at speed.

[The Annoyed Man]

Heh... most calls I get while driving are responded to with "I'm on the road, I'll call you later". However, there are times when a call in necessary. And before y'all start with "then pull over", I've used a cell several times (and will again) to get directions to a new place while driving: have something of a conversation while looking for the next landmark, and get the next set of directions. It's actually safer than having directions written down...

[yesitsloaded]

I'll put in my two cents (now worth 4 cents in actual worth thanks to metal prices) in. I don't care if you are driving naked, stoned, drunk, high, on the phone, steering with your knees, or have your eyes closed. The crime is reckless endangerment, the tool doesn't matter. I'd rather drive in front of someone who is competently able to multi task and drive while on the phone that get nailed by fatso that didn't see me because he was too busy eating his big mac while driving.

[quiet]

seem to be getting popular.  CA has one in effect July 1, but I'm skeptical and don't think it will do much good.  People will still be talking while driving, and the problem is not the one hand holding the phone.  The problem is that the talking driver's mind is not on driving-it's completely involved with the subject of the conversation.

In fact, I would submit that it's more dangerous than no law at all.  At least other drivers are put on notice when they see some bozo driving while talking.  You know to keep an eye on or move away from a talking driver.  After the law, you'll have no idea who only looks like they're there but are actually in another time and place.

Now, if they want to pass a law that prohibits cell phone use altogether while driving, I'd be in favor of that.  But this is only 'feelgood' b.s. IMO.

Check out the photo in this link.  Looks like soccermom is about to get t-boned by the Von's truck:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24580099/

The same CA law you are talking about bans people under 18 years old from driving and using a cell phone at the same time, even if the cell phone is being used with a hands free device.

[Soybomb]

I can only speak for myself but I've been more distractred fiddling with my phone and headset than I ever have been just holding a phone.  I wish legislation could make safe drivers, good parents, and non-abusive spouses but it doesn't.

[The Annoyed Man]

Sure blackcash: pick one up for me. I mean, since you think so highly of them, you MUST be willing to put the cash up.

 In case the sarcasm doesn't come through: a GPS unit is NOT in the budget anytime soon. But a simple phonecall IS, since I've already got the phone...

 It can also be argued that paying attention to a GPS unit means not paying attention to the conditions of the road and the actions of the idiots. If I'm being "talked-in" by someone, I'm still paying attention to the road...

[xavier fremboe]

Hey, I have a novel idea ... why don't we punish people for actually causing an accident/harm, instead of for what they might do ?   

Like DUI?  Sorry, I'm with Paddy on this one.  I've had to evade too chatty soccer moms drivers to think that operating a motor vehicle with a handheld cell phone is a right.

[The Annoyed Man]

Suggestion: don't assume you know what another poster can afford, or make judgment calls on how they spend their money.

 For the record, I just started a new job that hasn't really gotten off the ground yet (working for a new magazine). That means money is tight, and even "under $300" is probably stiffer than I'm able to spend for something that, honestly, is just a convenience.

 Ph yes... I DO indulge in smokes. And yes, I WOULD be healthier and wealthier, right up until I got my 20-life for strangling someone...

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

ahh  to be young and all knowing. i remember it well

[lupinus]

Like DUI?  Sorry, I'm with Paddy on this one.  I've had to evade too chatty soccer moms drivers to think that operating a motor vehicle with a handheld cell phone is a right.

And a person stopped at a roadblock who was and would have continued driving perfectly safely, but is slightly over an imaginary line in the sand a lawmaker drew in the sand, is a win right?

The point is I don't care why you drive like a moron.  If you drive in an unsafe manner it doesn't matter why, what matters is that you did and did not control your vehicle properly.  Hell I don't really care if you drive with your feet while you use both hands to hold a phone in each ear, if you pay attention to the road and drive safely there is no problem.

Why should I be subject to punishment for doing something I can safely do, just because someone else can not?