NSC calls for full ban on cellphone use while driving
January 12 2009 - 1:15 pm ET | Jeffrey Silva | RCR Wireless News
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety highlights which states have statewide hand-held cellphone bans.
Cilck here for full details on cellphone bans as outlined by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
The National Safety Council has called for a wholesale ban on motorist use of wireless devices, creating a public-relations dilemma for a cellphone industry that advocates safe driving and no longer opposes state hands-free prohibitions, but likely would oppose more sweeping legislation.
“Studies show that driving while talking on a cellphone is extremely dangerous and puts drivers at a four times greater risk of a crash,” said Janet Froetscher, president and CEO of the NSC. “Driving drunk is also dangerous and against the law. When our friends have been drinking, we take the car keys away. It’s time to take the cellphone away.”
California, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Washington and the District of Columbia outlaw driving while talking on handheld mobile phones, while numerous other states have targeted laws outlawing cellphone talking and texting by teens and bus drivers. The NSC said an across-the-board ban is necessary because government and university studies show hands-free wireless gadgets do not improve driver concentration and could make matters worse in some cases.
In December, RCR Wireless News first reported the NSC was poised to address the wireless driver-distraction issue head-on in a story on Public Citizen’s lawsuit against the Bush administration to obtain withheld records on traffic deaths associated with cellphone use by drivers.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which says use of hands-fee devices is just as dangerous talking on a handheld phone while behind the wheel, did not have a comment on the NSC’s proposed ban.
“It may be hard for some people to imagine how certain laws, such as those concerning drunk driving, teen driving, seatbelt use and booster seats, can be enforced by observation alone,” Froetscher said. “Smart people in law enforcement get together to address such issues. They develop creative and successful measures to identify violators, such as high-visibility enforcement strategies. … The change we are looking for, to stop cellphone use while driving, won’t happen overnight. There will be a day, however, when we look back and wonder how we could have been so reckless with our cellphones and texting devices.”
Plan of attack
The NSC said it will pursue a three-prong approach to curbing cellphone conversations and texting by drivers through advocacy of legislation, education and supplementing distracted-driving content in training of 1.5 million people annually in defensive driving. One option for the NSC is to lobby Congress to tie transportation funding to state passage of laws totally banning handheld phone use, texting and hands-free device by drivers.
The NSC, though, likely will face an uphill battle in getting states to enact the kind of overarching restrictions it proposes.
The Governor Highway Safety Association said it believes the NSC is going too far, but it applauded the high-profile attention given to the problem.
“While the effectiveness of banning cellphone use is subject to debate, what is not debatable is that using any type of cellphone is distracting to drivers,” the GHSA stated. “Numerous studies have concluded that hands-free phone use does not mitigate crash risk. In a study released last year by Carnegie Mellon University, researcher Marcel Just stated that listening to a cellphone while driving can reduce by 37% the amount of brain activity associated with driving. This can cause drivers to weave out of their lane, based on the performance of subjects using a driving simulator. Just last month, another study from the University of Utah reaffirmed that hands-free phones are as distracting as handheld models.”
The GHSA said that while it does not support a legislative ban on all cellphone use for all drivers, it backs a ‘no-use’ message when it comes to mobile phones and driving. As such, the GHSA recommends that states ban all non-emergency cellphone use and text messaging for new drivers as well as for school bus drivers. (Presently, only 17 state states and the District of Columbia have enacted these laws); that states include a category for cellphone/electronic equipment distraction on crash investigation forms. (Currently, 29 states collect this information); that the federal government continue to fund its media campaign to alert the public to the dangers of distracted driving; and that the private sector take a leadership role such that employers prohibit text messaging and cellphone use by drivers except in emergency situations.
Federal funding of wireless driver distraction is relatively miniscule, likely far less than what the mobile-phone industry spends on driver safety.
Going too far?
The cellular industry said it believes NSC’s approach is draconian and fails to take into account practical considerations — like an adult driver taking an important call from a child — and the widespread use of mobile phones by drivers to make 911 emergency calls.
“There is no question that irresponsible use of a wireless device is on the long list of potential driving distractions, including the NHTSA-documented No. 1 driver distraction of drowsiness,” said John Walls, VP for public affairs at cellular association CTIA in a blog posting. “The industry agrees with the National Safety Council and numerous other well-regarded safety organizations on several safety issues, such as bans on text messaging while driving and restricting cellular use by teen or inexperienced drivers. But when looking at the implications of a total ban, it’s important to look at all of the situations that can occur and consider the ramifications of a total prohibition.”
January 13, 2009 05:59 am
Well, Ain't that special.As a former employee of a cellular company(yeah times are tough), I can see both ways. I also agree with Denise. I have actually witnessed police officers chatting away on their cell phones,, But wait ( they must be trained drivers on a professional course).
January 12, 2009 01:20 pm
I saw a Dateline about this sometime in the last year, and the same study that said that just listening to a cell phone reduced driver attention by 37% also said that conversing with a passenger in the car could reduce attention by almost 50%, and fighting kids in the backseat reduces attention up to 80%. So while you're outlawing my cell phone and my husband, could you get rid of those pesky kids too? I'm so tired of turning around on the highway, while doing 90 mph, and saying "If I have to put down my cell phone, cigarette and makeup to come back there, somebody's gonna be sorry!!!!!"
January 12, 2009 01:20 pm
What they fail to mention is the fact that cell phones has reduced road rage. People setting in traffic with nothing to do ends up becoming anxious therefore pressing people in the front and to the side. I actually seen a reduction in road rage in heavy traffic after people had something to occupy their minds other than setting wating for the cars to move forward.
January 12, 2009 01:20 pm
I don't believe anyone can argue that driving and talking on a cell phone can be a distraction. How ever the NSC approach is unrealistic. I believe in rewarding the behavior you want. What if you cause a serious accident by talking on a cell phone you get nailed with big fine $1500 and your auto insurance triples. Instead if you mount your phone, use it handsfree and responsibly you qualify for a break on your insurance. This does not prohibit the use but there is a serious consequence if you can't use it safely and responsibly.
January 12, 2009 01:20 pm
If it is distracting to talk on the phone with a hands free device, it must also be distracting to talk to passengers in the car. Let's outlaw passengers.
January 12, 2009 01:20 pm
You know... that's how Osama Bin Laden will ultimately be caught. He's going to get laxed and be talking on his cellie when BAM, a NJ State Trooper will pull him over.Yeah I'm all for it.
January 12, 2009 01:20 pm
"I would just like to say that I feel the NEED for more legislative control in my life. I am a total and complete idiot, and can't make a single decision on my own, without the government to tell me how to think or act". Is this truly the thought process of the American public? I see no difference between a conversation with a passenger in my vehicle and a conversation with someone on a hands-free device. Until the automotive industry brings a totally driver free car to market, distractions will always kill. Lets get a grip!
January 12, 2009 01:20 pm
At least one state I have lived in and I am sure many others have a law on the books (to paraphrase) "Failing to Give Full Attention to Driving" This can be interpreted to mean any number of distracting behaviors including shaving, eating, reading, applying make-up, rooting around in the back seat or floorboard, etc... The enforcement of this law is discretionary and is usually only used when an accident has occurred. I see no reason to have these specific laws targeting cellphones when one would suffice. If you are involved in an accident and you are on the phone, you could be cited for failing to give full attention to driving. An officer would be unlikely to ticket someone for taking a sip of coffee or speaking on a phone but this law could be enforced if an officer saw someone swerving in their lane from a phonecall, or fries in one hand and a whopper in the other.
January 12, 2009 01:20 pm
Texting is bad. Satan's work.Phones cause cancer, they kill people who drive and ruin families communication.I say ban cellphones altogether, that and written language because dear god I get distracted by words written on a sign, AND HOT WOMEN, please remove them so I don't look at them instead of driving.Distractions are a way of life, focus on the road if something happens drop your PHONE on the ground and grab the wheel. Be smart everyone, don't text and drive and you're fine.
January 12, 2009 01:20 pm
The idea of creating a law for every potential danger is childish. There will always be bad decisions, we cannot legislate for all of them. The nanny state is out of control already. Do not support any more of these junk laws.