Study of cell-phone bansjust doesn't cut it

A new study out today irresponsibly suggests that laws banning cell phone use while driving have zero effect on the number of crashes on our nation’s roadways.

At this early stage in our work against distracted driving, no one should be discouraging strong nationwide efforts to make our roadways safer. When it comes to distracted driving, we are only at the starting gate.

Unfortunately, a study released by the Highway Loss Data Institute casts doubt on the reality of this epidemic. Not explaining likely reasons for the surprising data encourages people to wrongly conclude that talking on cell phones while driving is not dangerous!

Nothing could be further from the truth. Just ask Jennifer Smith and the founding board members of FocusDriven, who all lost loved ones in crashes caused by cell phone drivers. Ask Shelli Ralls, who lost her son Chance Wayne Wilcox on March 22, 2008. Ask any one of the hundreds of people who have poured out their stories of loss on Oprah, on websites, in blogs and newspapers around the country.

As Larry Copeland reports in USA Today:

"The Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) and auto club AAA said the study's implications were unclear. Both also said the findings should not be interpreted to suggest that banning texting while driving would be ineffective."

And if you need to see the evidence, please visit www.distraction.gov our one-stop resource for information about this deadly epidemic. Once you’re convinced, I hope you’ll join our effort and find ways to get involved.

Look, a University of Utah study shows that using a cell phone while driving can be just as dangerous and deadly as driving drunk.

And we know that by enacting and enforcing tough laws, states have reduced the number of crashes leading to injuries and fatalities.  We know that high visibility campaigns and enforcement, like Click It or Ticket and Drunk Driving: Over The Limit--Under Arrest have had a positive influence on driver behavior. 

That’s why seat belt use is at an all time high of 84 percent and drunk driving is declining. These improvements didn’t happen overnight. It took strong laws, enforcement, education and personal responsibility to bring us where we are today, and still there is more work to do.

If anything, the study suggests we need even tougher protections. Adrian Lund, president of both the HLDI and IIHS, said, "Drivers in jurisdictions with such bans may be switching to hands-free phones because no U.S. state currently bans all drivers from using such phones." But, he wisely cautions, "We know that people talking hands-free are really not much safer than people talking on handhelds."

And, as National Safety Council President Janet Froetscher said:

"HLDI findings support the need for a total ban on cell phone use while driving. There is a common misconception that hands-free is safer when the research tells us hands-free is just as dangerous as handheld. To accurately measure the reduction of crashes, it’s going to take states or municipalities passing legislation banning handheld and hands-free devices. And it's going to take effective law enforcement."

She's exactly right. Studies of cognitive distraction tell us that it's not about where your hands are, but where your head is.

And it's about where the enforcement is.

And it's also about where the public education is. The HLDI media release accompanying their study notes that, in North Carolina, teen hand-held phone use didn't decline in response to a ban because teens didn't think the law was being enforced.

Now, if we can get the drivers who may not be worried about the law to see the safety consequences of their behavior--as we have been able to do with decades of drunk driving and seat belt education--we can indeed make our roadways safer.

Comments

[OkiAndrew]

The real shame in all this is that it is probably very difficult to enforce these bans. If the average driver were responsible enough to not talk or text while driving (recognizing the fact that these actions are unsafe), we wouldn't need to have the bans in the first place.

[Allan]

It would be interesting if some of these laws had distinctions between highways and city streets. There seems to be a small amount to pay attention to on rural interstate highways whereas in a city, talking on the phone seems completely stupid.

Maybe some legislation that makes this distinction would be useful.

[Michael E. Bailey]

Getting people to pay attention to the road and not be using a phone will take a major education effort, strong enforcement, and technological advances as well as state laws. The California law looks like it has been successful in its first full year. But rarely now, you can still see someone driving along and holding a cell phone talking. But before the law came in, everyone was doing it and many people were making dumb mistakes while they were doing it. So there is little doubt that the California law has gone along way in changing how drivers act behind the wheel. The law still allows use of hands free phones, but now you see less use of them too. People maybe getting the message. But this is a study that sounds like it was done by someone in the Rocky Mountain West who is determined to text and drive no matter what or by someone who was paid by the cell phone industry to produce a study that would supply the right conclusions to benefit that industry. Best wishes, Michael E. Bailey.

[HFI guy]

In a bit of irony, the DOT's distracted driving web site is crawling with headlines (on its news scroll) that say, in effect, Cell Phone Laws Don't Reduce Accidents.

[Tim Brown]

Cell phone laws don't by themselves reduce crashes, modified behavior does. It is as simple as doing the math. We are used to driving in MPH. To convert MPH to feet per second, multiply the speed by 1.466 or 1.5 to round it off. What this means is that if you are driving 65 MPH, you drive approximately 97.5 feet for every second you take your eyes off the road. So if the road curves, the car in front of you hits the brakes or someone pulls in front of you, your chances of crashes are great. Alot can happen in a second or two.

[Sally Flocks]

As a pedestrian, I'm more frightened by people using hands-free cell phones than hand-held devices. At least with motorists holding cell phones, I can anticipate they'll be unaware of their surroundings and proceed accordingly (banging on windows, waving my arms in front of windshield, etc.)

Hands-free devices can also enable additional distractions. People using bluetooth technology can use their hands to take notes while driving.

[Karen Rison]

I really would like to see the drivers' education in high schools and various driving schools across the country show how dangerous it is in using cell phones while driving. With all of the modern day technology available, maybe using virtual computer driving programs could assist in this education. Educating the young driver is extremely important before they develop bad habits. For those of us out of school, and as Tim Brown said above, modifying behavior is key. It took a long time for people to get use to using seat belts again when they were made mandatory and the results of changing this behavior and stricter laws have yielded better results. I believe that working on changing people's unconscious behaviors will take a lot more education. Let's put more effort in educating people on the dangers and change the unconscious mind to the conscious mind to get people thinking about what they are doing AND the penalties BEFORE they reach for their cell phone. Education first coupled with stricter laws and much tougher enforcement are going to be needed if we hope to change the public on their perceived "need" to use a cell phone while driving. I truly hope that our society works diligently to change the minds and actions of people. Too many lives are at stake here to ignore this problem or to excuse it with poor data collecting and supposition (IMHO) at the HLDI!

[Michael Henderek]

I deeply appreciate Secretary La Hood weighing in on the issue. This isn't about texting or hand held vs. hands free. All the research has demonstrated that using any of these devices while driving creates cognitive distraction. It is the cognitive distraction which creates the risk. The same research has demonstrated that listening to the radio or speaking to someone in the car does not increase cognitive distraction. It is critical that all States ban the use of all electronic devices while driving : texting , hand held, hand free, online computers and laptop usage. These all can be used safely by pulling over to a safe parking location.

Mike Henderek

[Darren Turner]

I'm a Canadian from British Columbia province which has just passed laws banning use of ANY electronic devices by car drivers. They made a specific exemption for hands-free mobile phone operation though.

The reality is that ANYTHING which distracts the driver's attention from the road is potentially dangerous.

Banning cell phone use may help, but the bigger problem is people just don't take their responsibilities behind the wheel seriously enough.

Darren Turner
Kelowna, BC., Canada.
http://www.darrenturner.ca

[Jeanne]

This is something we(wireless industry and auto industry) have done to ourselves. Those industries need to be part of the solution to fix it. When I think of all the ways cell phones might kill us, I think the cell industry wants to solve this sooner rather than later. Bans might not be effective, it just means enforcement, punishments and outreach need to be increased. Mr. LaHood I'm a big fan.

[Jay Anderson]

A typical distraction lasts 3 seconds, that's long enough for a vehicle going 45 mph to travel more than half the length of a football field (66 feet per second). Combined with an average reaction time of 1.5 seconds, that 4.5 seconds becomes a recipe for disaster.

Two questions everyone should ask themselves before you allow yourself to drive distracted: 1) IS IT NECESSARY? 2) IS IT WORTH THE RISK?

It is all about altering driving behavior and breaking poor habits.

Remember: SAFE DRIVING IS NOT EXPENSIVE, IT'S PRICELESS!

www.sajd.org

[Tom West]

I'll never forget the young male driver on the Oprah Winfrey show who killed someone while texting and driving saying that no-one had ever told it was dangerous. That is why driver education is important - there are too many drivers who simply don't know enough.

[Elizabeth Gray]

This effort is long overdue!! Everyone has a story: I was hit on my bike by a cell phone driver. I am looking for ways to get involved, but I don't see any clear links/suggestions.

[m]

I have to disagree with the masses here. I don't know the details of the study, but its results do not surprise me. I don't believe that phones make bad drivers. I believe that bad drivers happen to use phones. The problem with distracted drivers isn't the distraction; it's their lack of respect for the power they hold and the lives at their hands. Taking away one of their focuses won't make them respect the task at hand any more. Better driver education and stricter licensing policies are the only way to fix the problem.

Phones, when used appropriately, can greatly improve productivity and even safety on the road. Isn't productivity the whole reason we have roads? If we weren't in a hurry, couldn't we just walk everywhere? I use my phone while driving nearly daily. Doing so allows me to maintain relationships that would otherwise be neglected. It also helps to reduce fuel use and hurried, unsafe driving by giving me a way to learn of last minute destination changes. It even provides me a chance to stimulate my mind to keep from becoming too relaxed and inattentive on those long, empty highways. There are appropriate ways and inappropriate ways to use a phone on the road. I believe that the difference depends on the road, the driver, the traffic situation, the car, and the weather conditions. It is a driver's responsibility to make those decisions. A blanket ban unnecessarily eliminates the benefits along with the problems.

[GardnerWhite]

We completely concur which is why we are honored to be underwriting the full hour repeat of Oprah's show No Phone Zone this Saturday night, Feb. 6th at 7 pm on Channel 7 @wxyzdetroit in Detroit, Michigan.

We would appreciate any additional support/advice/ideas you have so we can work together to get the word out about this repeat in order to maximize viewership in "Motor City" on Saturday night.

We are on twitter as @GardnerWhite and on Facebook as: http://facebook.com/GardnerWhiteFurniture.

If you would like to contact us directly, pls. DM us on twitter.

Thank you for caring so much about this very important issue. Our store has been in Detroit for 97 years and we care deeply about this issue, too, on behalf of our employees,customers -and their families.

[Dave]

I keep thinking...isn't there a big role the auto insurance companies could responsibly play in all this? Insurance companies already penalize drivers for anything they can legally discriminate against; it would make sense they should consider that while laws against cell phones may or may not have an impact, the use of a cell phone while driving most certainly does increase the probability of a claim.

If police were able to indicate whether cell phone usage was involved in an accident, this would give insurance companies a way to identify and surcharge distracted drivers. There might be many reasons NOT to support such an approach, but it is an idea that would achieve faster compliance than laws alone.

[Mouhiamad A. Nabouls]

The problem with this study is that like the other studies that are supported by the Insurance Industry and the National Safety Counsil are holding back on information that are critical to sort through the fog of self interest.

Just because Accidents did not decrease does not mean that cell phone related accidents did not decrease. Lumping all accidents into one report, then pinning the blame of one type or another is ethically and intellectually weak.

As for enforcement effect, that is another issue and the driver will continue to violate the law because they are not willing to give up their newly discovered connectivities and the technologies being made available to them do not make Hand free (the laws in question) a viable option yet.

For a solution to compliance, please visit our website (More then 10 years of R&D around this issue) at http://actplace.net

Best regards
Mouhamad A. Naboulsi
manaboulsi@actplace.net

[Real Estate Agent Lee Newark]

It has less to do with the action talking on the phone, but it's the "content" of the phone conversation that distracts the drivers and make it dangerous.

[Carroll]

Driving is a prevlege and a responsibility you should not be TALKING ON THE PHONE, TEXING, PERIOD. you should be FOCUSED FULLY ON THAT ROAD....

[Mouhiamad A. Nabouls]

Lumpin all crashes into one report shows a less then respectful behavior toward the public and is reckless with respect to treating a life and death problem.

This is exactly what this report is about. Misrepresentation

[Biletul Zilei]

PLEASE get a grip! We talk ALL THE TIME in cars. Talking on a cell phone in a car is no different than talking to a human in the same car. Maybe even safer than a human since you don't turn to look at the person on a cell phone. I agree to hands free but a complete ban is insane. Have you people lost your minds? Think, or introduce a bill to limit car occupancy to 1 person per car or a law against talking to anyone in a car with you

[Rob]

Mr Lahood,

Your position, while laudible when it comes to peoples families who have been directly impacted by an accident involving a cell phone, is highly ignorant of other issues. How about the person eating a donut, drinking a cup of coffee, changing the radio station, looking at their GPS, getting change for the next toll. Your taking the data about distracted drivers without knowing exactly what that data actually represents.

The real issue, which has been pointed out by at least one other person here, is that we have many poor drivers in the country and that is the real problem. If you are a good driver, then you are comfortable with your vehicle in all situations and are able to handle unexpected situations cooly. This is not the same thing as the person who never speeds, never rolls through a stop sign, ect. That person would be law abiding driver, but is not necessesarily a good driver.

While I agree with the idea that texting and holding a cell phone to your ear is taking your concentration away from the road, you are completely ignoring many other things that cause the EXACT SAME THING!

So how about working on improving drivers skills instead of legislating more laws that will be virtually un-enforceable? And yes, many of them are already...

Stop using hype and hysteria to push through a political fix that will not work in the real world and is only worth political points in a legislative agenda.

[pariuri sportive]

What a picture!, it should be presented as a driving lesson

[James]

This is just another attempt in the federal government trying to intrude on its citizens personal lives once more. Please don't mistake my comments as advocating "distracted driving". I drive 52 miles round-trip everyday I go to work and see my fair share of distracted drivers, most attempting to text while driving. This is a poor decision on their part and one that they must pay for should an accident occur. That is where laws exist and should be enforced. If someone causes an accident, they pay the price. I see this as another ploy to milk the taxpayers of even more money and increase their dependence on the federal government because if this movement gains momentum, there will be all sorts of commissions and study groups formed to deliberate on what should be done; at a cost to the taxpayers, of course. This is akin to not allowing children and adults to participate in athletics because they could hurt themselves or heaven forbid, someone else. I am not joking, athletes die in direct relation to participating in athletics just like drivers die in direct relation to driving a vehicle. You, sir, make this statement directly taken from your blog above:

"And we know that by enacting and enforcing tough laws, states have reduced the number of crashes leading to injuries and fatalities."

Yet, you have no statistical evidence to support your claim. You and most of your Congressional cronies are just determined to push your socialist agenda onto this nation, using your media martyrs like Shelli Ralls and Jennifer Smith, to spread your poison. You attempt to circumvent, change, or blatantly disregard the precepts on the proper role of the federeal government as delineated by the US Constitution to line your pockets with more taxpayer money and subjugate the citizens of this great country. The founding fathers are rolling over in their graves so stop the abuse of federal power, let the states govern themselves, and stop driving this country to bankruptcy.

[GRE Exam Blogger]

It's really not about the motion of texting and talking on the phone, it's the content of the conversation that distracts people. Drivers can still think about random things while they drive and be careless on the road without phones. It's true that using phones will increase the probablity of being distracted though.