TOUGHER penalties for using mobile phones while driving are being considered by the government after research showed that it slowed a driver’s reactions more than drink or drugs.
Only if one sets aside the somewhat obvious fact that when the call ends, the driver is sober. The article goes on to bury the lede;
For those on the drink-drive limit of 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood, reaction times were reduced by 13%. For those who had used cannabis it was 21%. Goodwill said: “I will see if we need to change the penalties.”
While legalizing pot.
But that’s the UK, this is Canada. So, note the spike in fatalities as cell phones became ubiquitous on our highways.
There’s a reason that the “distracted driving” campaign is driven by anecdote – the facts fail the narrative.
ah yes, another study were most, for or against, haven’t a damn clue as to what the truth is. As a dyslexic, my reaction time should be worst than some one blowing .80, it isn’t tho, it’s better than most ppl’s. After an couple of beer and on the bike, my reaction time increased as the dyslexic effect was subdued. Study all you want, most ppl can’t drive, and anything that takes their attention away from what they can’t already do is not good.
I understand your point and it is well taken. HOWEVER:
1. Fatalities is not equal to Number of Accidents.
2. And “texting” is far worse than just talking on a cell phone.
3. Distracted driving is worse when the driver is inexperienced. Statistics need to be broken down by age and by years of experience driving….. and probably by gender.
Ooopps. Should have looked closer at the link. Wish I could delete my comment.
None of this is to suggest that distractions don’t affect driving ability. Of course they do – but there’s a tradeoff. Driver fatigue and boredom kill a lot more people than texting.
The commentary is responding to the media/activist meme calling for ever more laws to control what people do inside their own vehicles.
It’s very difficult to remain perfectly still while driving – if you pay attention to what’s happening while on an extended drive, you’ll realize your hands move around, fingers will tap the wheel, sip coffee, etc. There is neurological purpose behind it all. The brain is trying to stay engaged with the tactile environment. The activities deemed distractions are strategies the brain employs to stay alert while the body is mostly at rest.
Correct
Also vehicles are much safer than they were 20 years ago
When did seat belt laws come into affect?
By the way drink is a drug.
Twice I have nearly been killed by a driver looking straight through me as he and she talked on a cell phone. Coincidence? Maybe.
Yep you and me both….no coincidence.
I ride a bike and beside being more alert about road surface I closely watch other drivers.
Once that saved me, when I noted the oncoming driver had grasped the top of the wheel, when he suddenly veered across the line I was ready and dodged. He was so intent on his little game he overlooked the fella with the funny painted car with roof lights.
No cell phone, he was just having fun….
That brings a whole new meaning to “defensive driving”.
We have never had a shortage of people that can’t walk and chew gum at the same time, which is why we have had distracted driving laws on the books for decades. Laws against texting is unnecessary as it was already covered. Laws against talking on cellphones is the typical overreach that demands you stay with the slowest ship in the fleet and is little more than a cash cow. None of these nanny state infringements were necessary as it was all covered under the distracted driver law. All it needed was enforcement.
If the facts supported their cause, those seeking to punish these small crimes, would use facts.
Instead, we’re left with constantly hearing how “I saw a guy run a stop sign while talking on his mobile”… I personally fell off my bike and smashed my face when I was 14. Should we ban bikes? sidewalks? Kate’s recent accident hasn’t brought about a demand to ban country roads?
Here’s a couple of reports on the idiocy of regulating idiocy, and note that the second of these two links discuss “accidents” not deaths, hereby sidestepping the issue of “cars are built more safe nowadays”.
http://driving.ca/auto-news/news/cellphone-bans-havent-made-roads-safer
The following quote is from the third to last paragraph in this longer report:
“We note that this research does not imply that cell phone use is innocuous. It simply implies that current cellular use by drivers does not appear to cause a rise in crashes. It is possible that drivers who use such devices compensate for the added distraction by driving more carefully.”
http://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/sds/docs/bhargava/BhargavaPathania2013_AEJ.pdf
Any kind of distracted driving is dangerous driving. The government will always look for an avenue to tax and control. Texting drivers are helping do that.
Thanks.
David, I think you were right the first time. There should be a column for non-injury collisions. The number of collisions could be rising while the number of injuries and deaths is decreasing due to the increase in the installation of airbags and the structural changes to cars in the past 20 years to create crumple zones and safety cages. Without all the data it is hard to determine. Also note the term ‘collision’ which is not defined. In Ontario if a single vehicle runs off the road it is an accident. Collisions are when the vehicle strikes a person whether they are walking, riding or in a vehicle.
Seatbelts have been mandatory in Ontario since the mid-70s and the driver must use a hands free device while on the phone. Most of the new cars on the market now will pair up to your cell phone via bluetooth so the driver can answer a call using buttons on the steering wheel. The new Hondas will even read your text messages aloud.
When facts clash with the PC progressive world we now live in facts and common sense always lose.
“most ppl can’t drive, and anything that takes their attention away from what they can’t already do is not good.”
Exactly… and when combined with most people’s inability to focus on more than one thing at a time, the root of the problem is obvious.
Most people are barely qualified to drive in traffic when not distracted or impaired. It’s made worse by the fact that the population addicted to cellphones is also the population most likely on some form of mood altering medication.
The only effective solution I’ve found is to drive defensively in a heavy truck.
“None of these nanny state infringements were necessary as it was all covered under the distracted driver law. All it needed was enforcement.
Posted by: peterj”
Quite true. Better enforcement and confiscation of cell phones used while driving.
When out and about in traffic the Pareto Principle applies – 80% of the drivers out there are muppets. Defensive driving is a misnomer – the key is to drive assertively (not aggressively) so others are well aware of what your intentions are. Vigilant situational awareness is paramount – that’s what mirrors are for. I’ve yet to be an MVA after driving for 50+ years.
Professional NASCAR drivers get it with left foot braking – cuts their reaction time by some 10%
Wonder what reaction time of people on methadone is? They exist
And as near as I can tell, condoned by SGI
What I want to know, is what the hell is going on in Saskabush? You’re more than twice as likely to be in a fatal out there as anywhere else in Canada! You guys even got New Brunswick beat!
Not only do NASCAR drivers brake with their left foot, they talk on the cell-phone (their headsets) with their pit crew. I know it’s hands free, but it is a rather stressful situation. Mind you, NASCAR naysayers like myself would say they are only turning left. If they were truly good drivers, they could do some racing that involved righthand turns as well as driving in the rain. Also, rally drivers, maneuver tight situations at high speed with one hand on the wheel and the other on the handbrake. So much for needing two hands on the wheel.
I would say that driving with a poodle on your lap with a cigarette in one hand and a Timmy’s coffee in the the other is far worse than talking on the cell-phone. Just sayin.
Mind you as per the first comment from NME666, most people can’t drive very well and some should’t be allowed a radio or passengers, let alone a cellphone, but you should regulate everything.
“Vigilant situational awareness is paramount – that’s what mirrors are for. I’ve yet to be an MVA after driving for 50+ years. ”
yup, I’ve got the same experience with assertive driving for about the same time frame. Assertive is ma better label than defensive.
“What I want to know, is what the hell is going on in Saskabush? You’re more than twice as likely to be in a fatal out there as anywhere else in Canada!”
Long, straight roads with boring vistas, plus driver inattention.
“NASCAR drivers brake with their left foot, they talk on the cell-phone (their headsets) with their pit crew. I know it’s hands free, but it is a rather stressful situation. ”
They are conversing about the race, not what Kimmy K wore to the latest gala celebrity party.
Most cell phone conversation is inconsequential bullshift. It’s mostly insecure people who can’t handle a minute of silence not talking with someone, and who need constant validation from their friends for everything in their lives.
Oh by all means let’s go full throttle into more victimless crime profiteering, courtesy of media panic over another swatch of incomplete pseudo science. Revenues have never been better since we outlawed and put a price tag on stay of incarceration of pre-crimes. Orwell was, again, right.
Rally car drivers not only use the e brake,the shift,break,talk,and listen to the navigator while breaking and accelerating with both feet not to mention swear the car as well. Don’t give me the bs about cell phones Ect Ect , stupid is as stupid does. Lots of crashed vehicles from animal strikes ,sleeping at the wheel,all kinds of things these laws are just a cash grab.
And this should make you laugh!!
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/83470383/
Its another police con. These now Tax collectors make 250 dollars, fining parking now. Handicapped parking particularly is a Nice haul. These fines go right into police coffers ( after the municipalities take a cut) , than their Unions. Now even standard parking is automated.
Watch as they increase fines for sundry other prohibitions in private parking areas like stores. The police , today’s replacement for the highway man robber.
Next it will be even having a coffee. They are invading any space we have left with even more laws. All for our own good of course.Plus the revenue.
Police wonder why no one wants to be a cop except the psycho’s.
From the best to the lowest in one generation. Oh but they now have “Diversity” & “inclusiveness”. Always on the watch for 5 year old’s drawing guns on chalk board.Hate crimes with words.
Gasp even the sight of a toy gun drives them to use a swat team, or tazer a sick drunk guy already passed out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFkcAH-m9W0
Hmm, here in BC, they found distracted driving kills more people than drunk driving.
http://www.theprovince.com/news/Distracted+driving+kills+more+than+drunk+driving+considers+higher/9694064/story.html
I don’t have a problem with bans on distracted driving and I think many people living in urban environments would feel the same based on their experience. You can call that anecdote, I guess, but I see it all the time myself.
Distracted driving and driving under the influence are legitimate for the government to go after as these cause harm to others.
However, I do have an issue with seatbelt and helmet laws as these are personal choices that have no effect on the safety of others.
using the left foot for the brake pedal will get ya failed in a drivers test…civilian or military.
Problem is in an emergency, you will push hard with BOTH feet and you have a miss-guided missile.
It’s like a lotta bike riders shut down using the key rather than the kill switch….in an emergency they freeze with a death grip unaware of the kill switch….by using the kill switch, it becomes a reflex action.
Something is wrong with the graph. FATALITIES (Thousands of persons)—-Fatality Rate (per 10,000 motor vehicles registered).
According to graph in 2010 approximately 1,000 fatalities for 10,000 motor vehicle registered. Or reduced to simpler numbers 1 Fatality for every 10 vehicles registered. Is my math wrong or is 10% of my neighbors going to die in a car accident.
You are right. Those stats look like they were put out by the IPCC.
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/road-traffic-accidents/by-country/