by minimus 140 Replies latest jw friends
Great articles Cassiline, thanks for sharing.
Cell phone conversation draws attention away from the processing of the visual environment," said David Strayer of the university's psychology department, one of the study's three authors. "We found a 50 percent reduction in the processing of visual information when you're driving and talking on a cell phone
'nuff said. For us non-deliberately obtuse types anyway.
Reply----When someone is seated next to me and is talking and trying to hold a conversation, they expect you to look at them, react to THEM, etc. I find talking to people personally in a car much more demanding than talking on a phone. Some of your arguments are based upon the perception that everyone feels as you do and that you know what's best for us. And just because YOU don't think a comparison is apt, so what? I do.
Your comments have become completely knee-jerk here min. I'm done.
I say make hands free devices mandatory in cars.
According to the Canada Safety Council, a 2001 AAA study said, "Distracted drivers account for 9% of serious crashes. Of that number, 1.5% were using or dialing a cell phone. In comparison, 11.4% were distracted by adjusting a radio, cassette, or CD and almost 30% were distracted by an outside person, object or event." There's my knee-jerk reaction.
I have seen studies for and against and some that can?t come up with a conclusion on the cell phone issue. Without a doubt, our cars are becoming more filled with technology then ever before. Most of which is a distraction to the driver. It?s not wipers and AM radios anymore, it?s DVD players, G.P.S. systems, complex car stereo equipment along with CD/MP3 players and a host of other distractions. It?s also, driver stupidity. Driver?s in North America are a stupid lot of people, we don?t understand common sense road rules, we all speed and drive well with a me first attitude. At one intersection here in town which happens to be a four way stop and to make matters worse, a school zone, no one knows who goes first, so many close calls have happened there, non of which have to do with cell phones, rather, stupid drivers.
I agree, hand held cell phones are an issue, and I am all for hand free units, while driving, I use one. With the advent of cheaper voice activated cell phones, which dial on voice command you can?t get much better. Yet if for you, it is a distraction that impairs your driving, use common sense, then again use common sense if you are distracted by passenger or your radio.
It all boils down to driver responsibility in their own vehicles, knowing common road rules and applying them, as well as stop being an aggressive driver and start being an aware driver. Law can not replace common sense, it can only make a poor attempt at trying to compensate for the lack of it. If today it is cell phones, tomorrow it will be a new technology, we can continue to make rules or we can start being responsible for ourselves now.
Jahna
Jahna, good post but your comments will be viewed as stupid here, I'm afraid. You see you have to answer a series of detailed questions or else be considered emotional and selfish.
If the stats show that cell phone use while driving causes accidents, the insurance lobby will see to it that they are outlawed.
Dollars and cents, is what will decide it in the long run, like everything else.
There, min, a whole new point of view that condemns no one's attitude. ;)
Talesin, you are 100% correct. Most of the laws lately are made because of special interest groups. "Show me the money" is how and why things get done.
My answer to the original question - yes. They are here in the UK anyway, and of course it is a good idea - that's just common sense, isn't it?
Minimus said:
Reply----When someone is seated next to me and is talking and trying to hold a conversation, they expect you to look at them, react to THEM, etc. I find talking to people personally in a car much more demanding than talking on a phone. Some of your arguments are based upon the perception that everyone feels as you do and that you know what's best for us. And just because YOU don't think a comparison is apt, so what? I do.So your argument is that "talking to people personally in a car" is much more demanding than talking on a phone. DanTheMan accused you of knee-jerk responses, to which you "backed up" your comments with concrete "facts" based on a study:
According to the Canada Safety Council, a 2001 AAA study said, "Distracted drivers account for 9% of serious crashes. Of that number, 1.5% were using or dialing a cell phone. In comparison, 11.4% were distracted by adjusting a radio, cassette, or CD and almost 30% were distracted by an outside person, object or event." There's my knee-jerk reaction.Where is the mention of that person in the car distracting the driver? Can you please direct me to the words that say that? Afterall, that was your argument, wasn't it? And that is why you quoted the above, to substantiate your claim, wasn't it? I mean, you couldn't have lasted over 10,000 posts here without at least an average ability to make some form of logical sense and form a decent argument, could you? Using a cellphone whilst driving increases the chance of having an accident. It is not necessary to illustrate this here with studies that prove this, the UK government has already done that, and, based on those studies, thought it necessary to ban the use of mobile phones whilst driving. But we don't need governments to do studies - most of us have a brain to tell us that. I'm sorry if you don't put avoiding the potential loss of human life (even your own) before having a chat on your cellphone, but I do. And I hope nobody here has paid a lot of attention to your nonsense. Joe
