I cannot be the only person who noticed this. The study relied on in this article apparently tells us that cell phone use in cars is dangerous because the phone conversation distracts the driver's brain---and not that manipulating the phone causes the problem.

If true, this doesn't support an argument for banning cell phone use while driving. It supports a ban on participating in a conversation while driving. So, contrary to the author's suggestions, carpools are bad, family vacations (in the car) are bad, and having a conversation with your significant other while driving to dinner is bad.

Further, the technology solutions suggested by the the author and some fray-sayers would defeat cell-phone use by drivers and passengers (even passengers riding the train to work). Software that tracks the velocity of the phone cannot distinguish between a driver, and any kind of passenger. So along with carpools, please disregard the author's suggestion that people use mass transit.

What intests me is a subject this study and the author fail to mention. Why does cell phone use really warrant a ban. Is it comparatively that much of a problem. Personally, I'm never more distracted while driving than when the baby is upset in the back seat. Yet, you'd be considered an idiot to suggest banning driving with a baby in the car---additionally, we knowingly REQUIRE the baby be put in the back seat for the baby's safety. Ever consider the safety trade-off of requiring the driver (often mom) to turn around to make eye contact with the baby in the back---or how often is the driver reaching back between the seats to hand something to the child in back? I'd wager baby in the back seat is ten times more distracting than a cellphone conversation.

Also, I suspect I'd be less of a hazard driving drunk, talking on the cellphone, and looking at my kid in the back seat than my 76-year old mother--on a good day.

Probably a better driver than that lady who's running late for work and fixing her make-up while driving (oops that's my wife!).

Probably better than the bachelor who got off work late and is scarfing down a BigMac on his way to the company softball game.

I also suspect I'm a better driver than that 16-year old high-school kid who just got her license, and the 42 year-old guy who just immigrated from SriLanka neither of whom have any experience driving on our roads.

It's all a matter of degree. Cell phones do not create some new frightening risk. They're just the flavor of the day--and an easy target. There are risks inherent in driving or riding in a car. It's part of life. Deal with it.

I completely agree with your conclusion. I can think of any number of things that can distract you while driving, and am sure that if properly funded i could run a study proving that we'd have less traffic accidents/deaths if said things were banned while driving. They include talking, listening to a passenger talk, driving with a baby/small child in the car, listening to the radio, eating, appying make up, looking in the vanity mirror, etc, etc. No study proves that any of these things, or cell phone use should be banned as Salateen suggests. There is inherit risk in driving (and actually in pretty much everything we do). We can greatly limit these risks by limiting freedoms. Doesn't mean limiting freedoms is the right answer. It depends on the scale...how big of an impact would limiting that freedom have. Honestly i was not that impressed by the numbers provided. Considering how prevalent cell phone use is, if it were such a dangerous thing to talk while driving i would think the stastics would be higher. Ticket people for driving erratically. If they are operating the cell phone and you can't tell any difference simply by watching them drive, then let them continue.

No. Read the studies linked to in the October '08 Slate piece I referenced. Cell-phone conversations degrade driving much more than conversations with fellow passengers do.

Come on fellows, You don't have to go to Alaska to know its cold there in the Winter. How many times have you driven behind someone who is driving erratically, pass them, and find that they are talking on their cell phone or been in a car and have the driver on the cellphone miss or almost miss the red light.

You don't need to be in touch all the time your not that important.

Glad you referenced that, "Salateen" - it's the first thing I thought of.

Come on fellows, You don't have to go to Alaska to know its cold there in the Winter. How many times have you driven behind someone who is driving erratically, pass them, and find that they are talking on their cell phone or been in a car and have the driver on the cellphone miss or almost miss the red light.

And how many times have you been driving alongside a perfectly competent driver who happened to be talking on his cell phone? For that matter, how many times have you been driving alongside a terrible driver who wasn't at all distracted? Of course using a cell phone is going to make your driving worse, ceteris paribus, but unless you know how much worse, it doesn't tell us anything about how to deal with the situation.

"You don't need to be in touch all the time your not that important."

This single sentence reveals so much. The reason that people are so willing to ban cell phone use (but not children, radios, etc.) is because they don't like the people that use phones in the car.

When a mom gets into an accident because she's trying to break up a fight between two kids in the back seat, we all sympathize. When a guy gets into an accident because he's on the phone, we're all outraged. Both put us in equal danger, but we're intolerant of the cell phone driver because we think he's some self-important egomaniac who thinks he's got to be wheeling-and-dealing all the time.

Do I need to be "in touch all the time"? Well, let me answer that question by telling you why I bought my first cell phone.

Five years ago, my niece was in the hospital. She was dying. We didn't know when she would pass away or if she might someday come home. But we knew there was a good chance she could take a turn for the worse. I had long resisted getting a cell phone because I didn't really think I needed one and I was fine with the fact that people couldn't always reach me. But I broke down and got one because of the situation. When my niece took a bad turn, my sister (her mother) called me. She was able to get in touch with me immediately because of that phone. I was at the hospital in 15 minutes. My niece died less than half an hour later. I was glad that I got to say goodbye to my niece and be there for my sister and brother-in-law in their time of need.

There's a chance that someone saw me take that phone call and thought, "you're not that important." But it wasn't really about me. Don't be so quick to judge. There are a million good reasons that people take phone calls in their cars, many of which more than outweigh the relatively minor risk of talking on a phone.

I appreciate the overall thesis of your post, but I would point out the utter banality and needless chatter I am forced to listen to in resturaunts, movies, libraries,etc. makes me wonder if these devices are as much curse as blessing.

Because people never would have pointless conversations in public without cell phones.

As a frequent bike rider, I am very much aware of how much cell phone usage increases the danger on the road. Springfield 123 misses a crucial point about in-car conversations, etc-- the people you are with are in a shared environment. Your traveling companions will be monitoring thew road and your driving while you are conversing with them.

Hang up the pone and drive, I say!

Nobody suggests banning babies in cars because it would be impossible to live our lives if our children couldn't travel anywhere, but if you're concerned about the convenience and 'freedom' then sure we could remove the laws requiring infants in car seats, and let the mothers carry them in their laps breast feeding while driving. But of course we won't do that because the obvious obsurdity of how dangerous that would be is evident. The evidence is in, cell phone driving is extremely hazardous. There will always be exceptions and emergencies, but the vast majority of people aren't on phone calls for reasons of dire need, and operated just fine in their cars without them before. We want to talk on our phones in our cars, but just desiring it doesn't make it a good choice, and once the bad choices of a large number of people reach the point of making that activity a quantifiable everyday danger, it's time to restrict that choice.

I am truly sorry about your niece. I am glad that your were able to use the cellphone in such a situation and that it provided a great service to you and your loved ones in your time of need. Now turn it off when you are driving now that the emergency is over. If everyone used it only in those types of situations, we wouldn't have a problem.

"Now turn it off when you are driving now that the emergency is over."

Good advice, in theory. But how do you ever know when the emergency is over? When I get a call on my phone from a family member, are they calling just to chat? Or did my elderly Mom just have a heart attack? Is my friend calling to invite me to a movie? Or to tell me that he's in the hospital?

Unfortunately, you don't get advanced notification from God that an emergency is scheduled to take place at 2:15 p.m. on a Tuesday afternoon so you can prepare.

No, the mother who causes an accident because of her children receives no special treatment from me. Let the kids fight. I doubt they can do to each other what my car could, if the idiot behind the wheel were to run a light and cause me to hit them.

In the case of your call from your sister you still could have pulled over, taken the call, and arrived no more than a minute later. In such extreme emotional distress, you especially should have been off the road. Please note that I don't mean to be heartless, and I'm sorry for your loss. I don't even blame you for driving and talking in this case; I would have done the same. Anyway, your case is far from the unimportant everyday chatter that goes on most of the time, which is what we're mostly talking about here.

A friend of mine was stabbed, and his brother raced him to the hospital as fast as he could, yet arrived too late, unfortunately. However, it should be obvious that this is not a good reason to eliminate speed limits.

enfermot!!:

In the case of your call from your sister you still could have pulled over, taken the call, and arrived no more than a minute later.

I have *never* been in a situation where you could find a place to pull off, pull off safely and immediately, and gotten back on instantly. I wonder if anyone else has.

enfermot!!:

Anyway, your case is far from the unimportant everyday chatter that goes on most of the time, which is what we're mostly talking about here.

No, what we're talking about here is banning ALL calls, worthy and unworthy. I'm against that.

enfermot!!:

A friend of mine was stabbed, and his brother raced him to the hospital as fast as he could, yet arrived too late, unfortunately. However, it should be obvious that this is not a good reason to eliminate speed limits.

Apples and oranges, and you know it. Besides, he ignored the speed laws, anyway. Most people would do the same and ignore the cell phone law, just like they ignore the speed limit (i.e. go speed limit + a # they're comfortable with, or "with the flow of traffic"), and many people ignore the drunk driving laws.

I wonder what's the real point. Even the study or whatever at

<link>

states that while talking, reaction time is slowed, but drunks display aggressive driving habits. And I don't know about you, but I pay a lot less attention to stuff when I'm drunk than normal.

That's why I never think about getting behind the wheel if I had a drink.