Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Mike Elgan's picture
Mike Elgan

The World Is My Office

Why California's new cell phone law fails the logic test

SANTA BARBARA, CALIF. -- Starting tomorrow, it will be illegal in California to hold a cell phone up to your ear while driving. You'll still be able to use a headset -- or even text message. Here's why the law fails the logic test, and may increase highway accidents instead of reducing them.

Californians probably spend more time in their cars than most Americans. We drive everywhere. Traffic is horrible in L.A. and the San Francisco Bay Area. And everyone's obsessed with their cell phones. Traffic jams are the Great Equalizer in California, affecting rich and poor alike.

Politicians are well aware that there's a huge number of very powerful Californians who might pull major support from California politicians if they were to actually ban the use of cell phones while driving. Think Hollywood and Silicon Valley.

At the same time, California also has plenty of voters who believe strongly that cell phones cause car accidents.

Politicians face political pressure for the government to allow the use of cell phones in cars. And they've got political pressure on the other side pushing back and calling for a ban. What's a Governor and State Legislature to do?

Their solution is as useless as it is shameless, and may actually contribute to highway deaths.

Look, either taking one hand off the wheel to hold something increases the risk of driving accidents or it doesn't.

If it does, then taking one hand off the wheel or holding anything in the car should be banned. That would include cell phones, coffee, or anything else one might hold while driving. If two hands on the wheel are safer than one, then lawmakers should pass a law saying that you've got to keep two hands on the wheel.

If taking one hand off the wheel and holding something does not increase the chance of accidents, then it shouldn't be banned -- not cell phones, coffee or anything else.

Singling out cell phones as the one object that causes accidents as the result of taking one hand off the wheel is blatantly absurd.

If, on the other hand, the use of cell phones -- making and receiving calls -- distracts drivers in an unsafe way -- a more supportable assertion -- then it should be illegal to use a cell phone while driving, regardless of whether or not one uses a headset or whether Hollywood moguls or Silicon Valley tycoons contributed to your campaign.

Meanwhile, I've got a feeling that the ban may actually increase accidents, statistically speaking, because now drivers have yet another device to manage.

Worse, the law doesn't ban text messaging while driving for people over 18 (people under 18 won't be able to use a phone while driving for anything) -- at least until January 1. After that, people might still text message so they can communicate stealthily while holding their phone out of sight. It would be difficult for police to prove a driver was text messaging, and not just dialing the phone (which will remain legal). So people who don't have a headset handy now have a strong incentive to text instead of talk while driving, which is far more dangerous. People in their late teens and early 20s are at risk, because they're far less likely to own or use headsets, and far more likely to use text messaging as an alternative. 

The politically inconvenient truth is that bad drivers cause accidents, not cell phones.

If you can fog a mirror, you can get a driver's license in California. Instead of raising standards for getting and keeping a license, it's just easier for the state government to pass at best useless or at worse dangerous laws that do nothing except pad the resumes of those seeking further office. 

Lawmakers and the Governor wanted to go through the motions of doing something -- anything -- about those bad cell phone people. They needed a law -- any law -- that banned something relating to cell phones and driving. So they ignored overwhelming research that shows distractions -- not one-handed driving --contribute to accidents.

This is a politically motivated, inept and dangerous law, and should be repealed immediately.

What People Are Saying

California, what a state

Charlie Manson comes up for parole every two years. OTOH, fail to license your car in a timely manner, and you face the death penalty. It's only appropriate that the US's most dippy lawmakers come up with a regulation that addresses 1/10 of the cell-phone-impaired-drivers problem.

arguments against cell phone use + drive

Your argument draws an analogy between Manson penalties and dangerous driving. Please try to stay on point. Consider if the only stimuli important for driving safety is visual...

Cell phones in cars

I think having a law that bans holding a cell phone while driving is a good idea. However, I was pulled over by an officer and accused of using my cell phone when I was not. The officer did not believe me and he even said he saw me stash my phone. I was not using a cell phone and in fact when I was pulled over I did not even know where the phone was. I use it very infrequently. Also, I always use a headset when on the phone. The officer did not even see the phone after he pulled me over.

Police need to have video or photo evidence to prove you are using a cell phone. Otherwise it is their word over your word.

police

Your argument draws a hasty generalization. Please try to stay on point. Since you were arrested at the scene of a traffic violation, you generalize that cell phone use while driving is safe enuf. What are you smoking?

cell phone california law

Suppose you witness an accident or a crime? Time is of the essence. Perhaps there is someone needing urgent medical care and an ambulance needs to be called? Perhaps you could save a crime victim from bodily injury or property loss by calling the police? If it were me, I would want to have a driver use their cell phone to call for help.

accident witness - calling 911

Your argument doesn't fly - pull off to the shoulder and call. Please address the underlying issue..

Actually, those types of

Actually, those types of cell phone calls are fully permitted under the current law in California, even using a hand held device, so no problems here.

To address all those who say

To address all those who say that this article is wrong or illogical:

[I am not using EXACT quotes, i'd like to think i'm stating them a little more eloquently.]

-"The difference between the hands-free cell phone use and regular cell phone use is that using it without the hands-free will impair vision on your left-hand side."

Maybe if you're doing the old hold-phone-between-ear-and-shoulder routine, because it won't let you turn your head entirely. If you're not, then it's not impairing your vision. And what about sunglasses? Benefit: reduces glare and protects your eyes from the sun. Bad news: Can impair your side vision. Should we be banning sunglasses?

-"Talking on the cell phone distracts you because you get involved in conversation with the other person, and your attention is not on the road. You're having to concentrate on what they're saying, and you have to think about what you're going to say."

The problem of that remains- you're still going to get lost in conversation, whether you have a hands-free or not. And i completely disagree that it's different if the person is in the car with you. I've been yelled at by drivers that i'm riding with so many times because i was talking to them, therefore distracting them. Plus, don't most people have the tendency to look over at the other person?

So if it's the talking that's distracting you, and since it's the same, whether the person is in your ear or in the car, then wouldn't you have to ban all talking? And if it's the listening that's different, shouldn't we ban any music, since you're listening to that?

-"With regular, non-hands-free cell phone use, you have to be dialing, turning the cell phone on or off, or muting."

1. You still have to dial with a hands-free set. Unless you've got a fancy voice-activated one, but those are fairly expensive, right? Plus, you'll have to hold some button down and say the name, and you might have to say it a few times.
2. Turning a cell phone on or off nearly always involve just holding a button down. With a hands-free, it's the same- you have to hold the button down, except now it's on your ear.
3. Well, i don't know why you'd really need to mute, but anyways, you can still do that with a headset. I have a Jabra Bluetooth headset, and there's a mute button, as well as a power button and volume control. The volume control is really annoying because i can never find it, so i have to take it off, look at it, figure out which side of the button to press, and fit it back onto my ear.

-"Having a hand on your cell phone and having a hand on something else are completely different."

Have you ever tried to drink a cup of really hot coffee while driving, and concentrating on not spilling it? Actually, any drink will work for that. Whether it's hot or not, you're not going to want to drop it or spill it. In fact, i'd be a lot more comfortable dropping my cell phone in case i realllly need both hands suddenly. Dropping a cup of something or some food is kind of like having to pee in your pants in public for some reason- even if you know you've got to do it, it'll take some serious concentration, because you're going to automatically NOT do it.

Slowly our personal freedoms are being taken away, and it is under the guise of our own 'safety'.

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed- and hence, clamorous to be led to safety- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

-H.L. Mencken, American journalist and satirist

I find it ridiculous to have everyone be restrained under this law because of stupid drivers. Stupid, reckless, irresponsible drivers are always going to be stupid, reckless, and irresponsible, whether they have a cell phone in their hand or not. And because of these jerks, people who are perfectly able to safely and responsibly drive with cell phones are having their freedoms taken away. Everyone's comfortable with these laws because they believe they'll be safer. That danger of accidents will always be there, cell phone or no cell phone. The American people are oppressed under the corrupt tyranny of our 'government', and they're just fat happy consumers who think that it's A-OKAY for our freedom to be taken away because they've been convinced that we're all too stupid and dangerous to take care of ourselves, so we should put our rights in the hands of overly-paid greedy capitalist corrupted pigs.

ANYWAYS, a little off-topic there. Stupid law, defies logic, nothing that we'll be able to do about it, so bitch and moan and rant and then lay down again and be waled all over, just like you've always done and will always do, unless a violent revolution starts and the oppressors can be taken down. But since all forms of communication are controlled because we let THAT happen too, we'll just continue to be the overly-drugged, over-worked, over-taked, under-paid consumer serfs.

-bozthefreak@hotmail.com

I agree 100%

Cell phone should not be banned, bad drivers should be banned.
I've owned a cell phone for over 6 years, and I've been driving for over 8 years. During the 6 years driving with cell phone, I did not get any ticket because I was distracted by talking on the cell phone. I can talk on my cell phone, and still do everything right in a car.
The only accident I've gotten into in the 6 years with cell phone I was not even talking on a cell phone.
People should be punished for their behaviors, not for any material possessions they owned.
Women who are doing their makeup while driving should be severely punished. That is much more dangerous, because they were not even looking at the road.

The bottom line, if a person cannot focus while driving, he or she should not be driving at all.

cells

Your comment, in contrast to so many others, is right on point.