By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
"Hands Free Devices" is a misnomer. There is no regulation on what is specifically a hands-free device and this is a giant loophole. Is the crummy ear piece that came with my phone "hands free?" Even though I still have to hold the phone to dial? Is a blue tooth car kit hands free? I would argue no on the first one and yes on the second one, an integrated car kit is hands free since it offers dialing, call pick up, and call termination without touching the phone itself.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
and that is a very poor way to set up the law. It should require some level of integration and be able to support hands-free dialing as well as call pick up and termination.
Those crummy ear pieces that come with the phone are harder to use than just having the phone to your ear. Also, most people don't put them in their ear before they drive, so when the phone rings instead of just fumbling for the phone, they have to find that and the stupid ear-piece.
Its another case of panic and create legislation, then understand the problem.
And a law nailing them to the wall if the screw up would help too
Education on how to use the cell while driving seems a lot more practical that trying to throw money and man power at the problem in an attempt to make everyone into what some would consider a responsible driver.
You have far more faith in humanity than I, but my career is to support the LCD.
With hands free it would be all but impossable to prove the driver was using the phone if there were a passenger in the car at the same time. With or without blue tooth.
Integrated blue tooth systems can have a flag in the vehicle's black box, so it would actually be easier to see if the phone was in use during or immediately prior to a collision or air bag deployment.
Just how would that flag tell if the passenger was on the phone as opposed to the driver.
In New Jersey does that law say you can't remove your hand to shift or tune the radio?
Are we talking about radios and manuals or cell phones? The last I heard, rowing the gears was an okey-dokey thing to do by the government. :confuse
Even with education and tv spots, there will be a number of people that will still use cell phones irresponsibly while driving. A ban is needed just like there is a ban on open liquour in the car. Society just could not trust poor judgement of people to drink responsibly while driving and thus there was a total ban on open liquor in vehicles.
Arguing for cell phone use while driving could be similar to asking for new laws to allow having only one cold can of beer while driving. After all, on a hot day, what would be more refreshing than a can of cold beer while driving home from work. Why should one be denied this pleasure after a hard day. And, one can certainly would be well below the .08 limit. Those who like wine, could buy a small container of cold white wine for consumption while driving home. If this makes sense, then driving and using a cell phone also make sense.
This gets at tolerable risk. Should we also outlaw radios in cars? I think most of the driving population has a different view of tolerable risk, so bans are unlikely, and education and secondary enforcement are key.
Arguing for cell phone use while driving could be similar to asking for new laws to allow having only one cold can of beer while driving. After all, on a hot day, what would be more refreshing than a can of cold beer while driving home from work. Why should one be denied this pleasure after a hard day. And, one can certainly would be well below the .08 limit. Those who like wine, could buy a small container of cold white wine for consumption while driving home.
While this is a very emotionally charged issue, the above is a logical flaw - the slippery slope fallacy. It goes both ways, should we outlaw small children in cars because they are a distraction? I would argue no, but the above argument is no more valid.
That's the conspiracy theory rearing it's ugly head. I'm not debating the merits or demerits of shifting or what constitutes a lawyers dream case, just talking about the facts.
BTW, most officers testimony in court is taken as expert witnesses, so I don't think that is an issue.
From practical experience I can say my cell phone has saved me fuel and wear and tear on my car. It has save me time in traffic and the trouble of driving to places I didn't have to. Was that simply convenience? Maybe it was but I wasn’t driving as many miles or exposed to as many other drivers because of it. To be absolutely honest my Cell phone use has gone up since I got the new phone and they passed the cell phone restrictions in my state. My miles traveled have gone down and I am saving 30 to 50 bucks a week on fuel. If brought to a vote I for one would never vote for a total ban.
LOL! Hilarious! You tell 'em boaz. :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Still cell phones can save us time and money and fuel if used wisely. It is simply another tool in our tool box and one that most of us will gladly fight in the courts and through legislation for years to come. With all of the other crimes going on in the cities and states it is simply hard for me to imagine the police spending much of their day looking for cell phone abusers . This technology isn't going away anytime soon. Once the majority of people start using cell phones to replace hard lines, I already have friends that no longer subscribe to a land line service, they will simply become the majority and vote out cell phone laws or refuse to vote in additional cell phone laws. There has not been one anti cell phone commercial I can remember seeing in my state once the Governor announced that hand held unit law to come into effect in 2008. People are losing interest and finding other things to worry about. There doesn't seem to be a giant ground swell of support for us to retreat into pre cell phone technology. If I can get On-Star in just about every GM car on the lot I can't see hands free cell phones being discontinued during my lifetime.
I still however would want to option to safely use a cell phone if I needed, taking an acceptable risk to do so. Of course, if I miscalculate I lose big time. NJ gives those drivers the options and gives law enforcement tools to make sure the roads are kept as safe as possible.
State senator rear-ends Vallejo woman while talking on cell phone (Vallejo Times-Herald)
Further proof that laws are needed to ban cell phones while driving. Too bad the CA law is so weak. Even NY did better on this one than CA.
It would not be that hard to do. In my area, state or local police randomly set up checkpoints near intersections in low speed areas looking for seat belt violations. They swoop down with a number of police and merely point to driver violators to pull over on the shoulder and then give out tickets.
Any state or city having a cell phone law to not use while driving could easily pick up a lot of abusers with tactics similar to seat belt check. Since cell phone driver users are in a trance during use, they would not be able to, nor smart enough, to put the phone down and would be easy pickings for the police.
LOL. That reminds me of a time a few years ago before NY banned cell-phone use in cars.
I was at a farmers market in a parking lot and a pedestrian lane ran down the middle blocked off by orange cones. Suddenly a car knocks over the cones and proceeds to drive through the market scattering women, children and farmers. Someone banged on the hood of the car and yelled "Sir, you can't drive through here!" in an attempt to avoid mayhem. The car window came down and a very angry man yelled back "Hey can't you see I'm on the phone?" :confuse:
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Maybe one day they will pass a law similar to the open container law - if there is a cell phone anywhere in the passenger compartment, it's fines fines fines! :-P
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
In a separate incident, notwithstanding the 100-Car Naturalistic Study, which in essense says most accidents occur within 3 seconds of a distraction, I was glad the young lady yakking on the headset had more than 3 seconds to react. She was in the middle lane, which had suddenly stopped from about 40 mph. I was in the right lane next to her and my heart was pounding as I wondering why she wasn't stopping. Was she going to wake up at the last minute and crach into me, rear-end the car in front of her, crash into the vehicle in the left lane. I'm sure all the drivers were hoping she read the 100-Car Naturalistic Study. Yes sir, she did. She jammed on her non-abs brakes sending up a plume of smoke and and sending her car into a skid causing traffic around her to scatter. The hapless sucker in front of her was glad she had four seconds to react, coming within a few inches of him.
This type of driving behavior is seen over and over again, even if it does not result in an accident or death. I don't think people should be penalized points unless accident, injury or death is involved.Instead extremely hefty fines should be imposed to distracted drivers on cell phones, pdas or text messaging.
With the open container law analogy, the cell phone would have to be turned on "and" transmitting/receiving. If it is off, it is considered just like a closed bottle of wine being brought home from the liquor store.
What we need from scientists/engineers is a device that police can use that will detect cell phone use in a car, namely those that are transmitting/recieving. Something in a similar vein are devices that can scan your house structure in winter and locate places, with intensity shown, of significant heat losses.
Just think of the revenue that state and local police districts could garner, assuming first that proper laws are in place, with a cell phone "usage" detector. Of course, the primary motivation would be to make our roads safer, not in collecting more revenue.
I know, I know, many will say that police person power should be put to better use. But, with the revenue generation possible, many more enforcement officers could be hired and trained and vehicles and equipment could be purchased. Besides cell phone abuse in cars, these officers would also be looking for other extreme traffic hazards such as gross speeders, intimidators and road rage idiots.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Agressive speeders should be ticketed. Not those going with the flow of traffic. I'm hoping that is what you meant. Although speeding is speeding.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
CANANDAIGUA, N.Y. (AP) -- Text messages were sent and received on a 17-year-old driver's cell phone moments before the sport utility vehicle slammed head-on into a truck, killing her and four other recent high school graduates, police said.
Goodman's inexperience at the wheel; evidence she was driving above the speed limit at night on a winding, two-lane highway; and a succession of calls and text messages on her phone were cited Friday by Sheriff Phil Povero as possible factors in the June 28 crash in western New York.
"The records indicate her phone was in use," Povero said. "We will never be able to clearly state that she was the one doing the text messaging. ... We all certainly know that cell phones are a distraction and could be a contributing factor in this accident."
5 dead teens
SACRAMENTO -- Two dispatchers with the California Highway Patrol initially dismissed 911 calls that came in reporting a fire on the south rim of Lake Tahoe, causing a seven-to-nine-minute delay in their response, according to recordings of the 911 calls that were released Friday.
On the tape, taken from five calls answered by the CHP Truckee field office, dispatchers tell callers the smoke they are seeing is from a controlled burn in the area. The smoke actually came from a fire that ultimately destroyed 254 homes and burned 3,100 acres of mountain wilderness.
http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/article/2007107160027
That story was on Fox last night on O'Reilly's Factor. That was a horrible crash. One hopes that some good might come out of it such as a national campaign on tv and other media to publicize the dangers of using cell phone and/or text messaging while driving. Every high school and middle school in the US should cover this topic when schools reopen this August/September. These schools should show pictures of the accident scene to the extent of not violating any privacy of the victims' families.
Understand that in this case, police could not accertain if driver or passenger was using the cell phone.
We need explicit laws against both cell phone conversations and text messaging by driver. Penalties ought to be just as severe as DUI. Law enforcement needs the tools and technology to catch violators.
Actually, it wasn't an accident, an accidents is a chance occurrence and implies the driver had no affect on the outcome. This was a Crash. Someone was taking too many risks at one time, and several others had to pay for that act.
Actually, the sheriff implicated several possible factors. Here is the article:
Goodman's inexperience at the wheel; evidence she was driving above the speed limit at night on a winding, two-lane highway; and a succession of calls and text messages on her phone were cited Friday by Sheriff Phil Povero as possible factors in the June 28 crash in western New York.
kdshapiro: We'll never know, but I have a feeling the records will show text messaging was in progress and diverted attention was the issue.
Actually, we do know, as we have a record of when the message was sent.
Text messages were sent and received on a 17-year-old driver's cell phone moments before the sport utility vehicle slammed head-on into a truck, killing her and four other recent high school graduates, police said. (emphasis added)
If the text message was sent "moments" before the accident, she wasn't text messaging when she pulled into oncoming traffic to pass another vehicle.
The records show that the cell phone was in use prior to the accident; that a text message had been sent from her phone moments before the accident (which would have given her time to send the message, and then prepare to pass the other vehicle).
Bottom line is that this girl wasn't paying attention in general, which isn't too surprising, having seen teenagers in action behind the wheel.
Want to ban teenagers from sending text messages when behind the wheel? Fine with me. But given the other circumstances of the accident - a car full of teenage girls on a winding, two-lane country road, trying to pass several slower moving vehicles - I can't say that this wouldn't have happened without the text messaging.
And just another sign of the lack of personal responsibility. Crash is a term that more accurately depicts what happened.
Accident: anything that happens by chance without an apparent cause
Crash: undergo damage or destruction on impact; break violently or noisily; smash
Since the causes of this crash are pretty clear, I don't think it could be considered and "accident."
Okay that's what I said.
"Actually, we do know, as we have a record of when the message was sent."
You are right, text messages were being sent and received.
"If the text message was sent "moments" before the accident, she wasn't text messaging when she pulled into oncoming traffic to pass another vehicle"
I see where you are going, she was reading the text messages. It's not that she wasn't paying attention in general, it's more than likely she wasn't paying attention in particular because she was reading the messages on her cell phone. Reading the messages on the cell phone caused a loss of attention to the road, which ultimately caused this horrible crash.
"Want to ban teenagers from sending text messages when behind the wheel?"
Already a done deal on some states.
What we need is a motion sensor built into the gizmo that cuts off cell transmissions when you are going over 5 mph.
I will vote for that in a heart beat. I don't want to be the victim of a head on by some jerk on a cell phone. The real victim in this tragedy is the truck driver that will have nightmares of this crash. The 4 teens made the decision to ride with this flake who was not supposed to have passengers in the car. I would hold the parents of the driver fully responsible.
I'll bet it already exists but I think that's a great idea. The phones that have GPS builtin could do that with programing at the cell phone providers.
I'll bet it would hurt cell phone sales and sale phone usage. It'll never be done without legislation to force the cell phone providers to provide safety.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Who defined that? Did they have any background in language, engineering, a technical field? Did they have any credentials at all?
Back to the phones, let me know when the gizmo is enabled so I can sell a bunch of last years phones to those who want to drive and talk. :P
To me that falls in the same category as the aftermath of hitting a deer.