Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Study: Law banning cell phones while driving doesn’t reduce accident rate
Hotair ^ | 07/25/2014 | Mary Katherine Ham

Posted on 07/26/2014 11:43:42 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

Most Americans admit to being fry-dipping, cell-phone-gossiping, mascara-applying distracted drivers. A 2011 poll, reported in USA Today, showed 86 percent of us eat or drink in the car, more than half talk on the phone, and about 40 percent admit to the offenses of setting the GPS or texting. Many Americans, even in a state as conservative as Texas, want to be saved from their bad behavior by a ban on cell phone use in the car.

But are they really saving themselves? Though the laws are largely noncontroversial, they’re also hard to enforce, and increasingly look ineffective, according to studies of their real-life track records. A new study of California’s six-year-old cell phone ban, peer-reviewed and published in the journal Transportation Research examined crash data for the six months prior to California’s cell phone ban and the six months after.

“Our main result was that we found no evidence that the California cellphone ban decreased accidents,” Colorado University economics Professor Daniel T. Kaffine, one of the lead autors of the study, said in a statement. “This is surprising, because a lot of prior studies had shown that people who talk on cell phones, while driving, are just as impaired as people who are intoxicated.”

Along with Colorado School of Mines mathematician Bob Yu and Rand Corporation analyst Nicholas E. Burger, Kaffine looked at the six months from January 1 to June 30, 2008 as the “before” period and July 1 to December 31, 2008 as the “after period” to avoid overlap with a ban on text messaging that took effect on January 1, 2009.


(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: accidents; cellphone; driving; law

1 posted on 07/26/2014 11:43:42 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Because stupid gonna be stupid.


2 posted on 07/26/2014 11:53:15 AM PDT by prisoner6 (Stop the Stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bamahead

ping


3 posted on 07/26/2014 11:55:08 AM PDT by Perdogg (I'm on a no Carb diet- NO Christie Ayotte Romney or Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yeah we have had this law in California for quite some time and I have yet to see any reduction in people using cellphones while driving, or driving stupid.


4 posted on 07/26/2014 11:59:41 AM PDT by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
That's because passing a law against some behavior does not reduce that behavior.

The only purpose of laws is so that the authorities can find something to selectively enforce against you when you piss them off.

5 posted on 07/26/2014 11:59:44 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The man who damns money obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it earned it." --Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I don’t think cell calls while driving is as bad as made out. No doubt somewhat distracting however. Texting, on the other hand, has got to be downright dangerous. While texting, people walk off cliffs, into traffic, run into others, etc. This is well documented.


6 posted on 07/26/2014 12:01:41 PM PDT by umgud (I couldn't understand why the ball kept getting bigger......... then it hit me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Hang up and drive.


7 posted on 07/26/2014 12:07:31 PM PDT by upchuck (It's a shame nobama truly doesn't care about any of this. Our country, our future, he doesn't care.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

They’re not enforced.


8 posted on 07/26/2014 12:08:39 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mastador1
Yeah we have had this law in California for quite some time and I have yet to see any reduction in people using cellphones while driving, or driving stupid.

Great point. I ride a motorcycle. It's hard enough to get California drivers to notice and/or see me w/o having the added distraction of them being on their damned phones.

9 posted on 07/26/2014 12:11:21 PM PDT by South40 (Hillary Clinton was a "great secretary of state". - Texas Governor Rick Perry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

RE: They’re not enforced.

In my part of the world, they’re enforced haphazardly.
You can get away with it by proving that the call was very important and could not wait.


10 posted on 07/26/2014 12:12:45 PM PDT by SeekAndFind (If at first you don't succeed, put it out for beta test.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

the researchers are showing the evidence that, anecdotally, made my arguments on the subject over a decade ago

- a cop can always stop and ticket ANYONE for driving in a negligent or reckless manner and that negligent/reckless manner, no matter the cause, is the only legal cause the cop needs, and so the only necessary law is/was already on the books

so how often is someone stopped for driving while eating or drinking, loading/unloading their CD, adjusting their radio or GPS, putting on their makeup, putting on or taking off a shirt, or sweater, or jacket or a zillion other things that can lead to major driving errors - not very often

but just let someone be seen using their cellphone, no matter how responsibly, and THAT’s a legal issue

it’s not about insane driving practices, there are dozens of them; its about insane utopian laws that pretend to do what they cannot - stop stupid from being stupid


11 posted on 07/26/2014 12:13:08 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Agree 100%. AND - cops are the most pissed off people around. They take their frustrations out on all of us. Unless, of course, you're in the protected class: cop, cop spouse, judge, judge spouse, athlete, famous entertainer, union/govt, . If you are, they are the biggest, most fake a$$-kissers around. Thanks a lot - you got me started.... geez.
12 posted on 07/26/2014 12:18:39 PM PDT by kdot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: umgud

My personal experience isn’t documented, but I can tell you that if I see a driver weaving back and forth or driving very slowly-—sometimes in the passing lane-—it’s almost a given that the idiot is yakking on a phone. Yesterday a moron was slowly cutting in and out of lanes, once in front of a huge truck, without giving his signal. I knew he was on the phone-—and when I passed him, sure enough.

That doesn’t include the times I’ve almost been hit by people who can’t put the phone down long enough to drive.


13 posted on 07/26/2014 12:19:42 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males---the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I've been watched police roll along behind me in traffic and counted over a dozen cars I passed with the driver using the cellphone and the officer didn't bat an eye. If it's even enforced haphazardly here it must be on the Interstate now and then because where there's traffic, it's ignored.

I've even gone through a license check point with everyone in front of and behind me that I could see chatting away as the move up in line, not a one of the folks ahead of me stopped using their phone for any longer than it took to hand the officer their license and get it back. They were talking again as they drove off. If my license had been expired by two days I'd have had to call someone to come and get me and the car.

Which is the greater hazard? The outlawing of it was just another feel-good thing as far as I can tell.

Glad to hear they at least take a stab at it some places, though. A officer I'm friends with says three out of five accidents he works are at least in part caused by someone talking on their phone or typing with their thumbs and the people more often than not admit it. No fault insurance, so no problem.

14 posted on 07/26/2014 12:23:22 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: South40
No offense, but one of the most startling things on the freeway is when some bike riders come up on your right and rap their pipes to deliberately startle drivers. I understand it's tough for bike riders with some of the idiots on the road but remember drivers of cars have been trained for decades to watch for other cars which are easy to spot, but bikes have been growing in popularity and they are much harder to spot sometimes. But I hear ya, when the phone users can't seem to see my full size truck it has to be tenfold riskier for you bike riders.
15 posted on 07/26/2014 12:25:16 PM PDT by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

If you were to be an invisible passenger with one of those drivers, I bet you would discover that when they are not on the phone they are doing something else that diverts their attention away from driving.

That’s the way those kind are.


16 posted on 07/26/2014 12:34:40 PM PDT by ChildOfThe60s ((If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
prior studies had shown that people who talk on cell phones, while driving, are just as impaired as people who are intoxicated

They are not "impaired", they are inattentive. While at times could be just as dangerous, nonetheless is NOT the same thing. The terms are not interchangeable. The man should be sufficiently educated to be more precise in his use of language.

17 posted on 07/26/2014 12:37:02 PM PDT by ChildOfThe60s ((If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This all goes back to the early days of cell phones and the liberal response to them.

They were expensive and used mostly by businessmen and the 1 percenters.

Therefore, cell phones were a symbol of capitalism. So they must be banned.

Doing so today when they are the pacifiers of the masses makes no sense. But then, so does little of liberalism.


18 posted on 07/26/2014 12:39:22 PM PDT by llevrok (Straight. Since 1950.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: umgud

I refuse to be a passenger in a car when the driver “has” to text. Other activities that don’t require taking eyes off the road I don’t care about.


19 posted on 07/26/2014 12:49:02 PM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604

I’ve been talking on a cell phone driving since they first came out. Never a problem. This may not be true for everybody. Texting is dangerous even while walking.


20 posted on 07/26/2014 12:54:12 PM PDT by umgud (I couldn't understand why the ball kept getting bigger......... then it hit me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s; CatherineofAragon

I see it often as well, they are engaged in a phone conversation and slow to 50 MPH and become unconscious of traffic.


21 posted on 07/26/2014 1:09:24 PM PDT by ansel12 (LEGAL immigrants, 30 million 1980-2012, continues to remake the nation's electorate for democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Does she mean, ‘Law Banning Cell Phone Use is Ignored”?


22 posted on 07/26/2014 1:09:26 PM PDT by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Because its largely ignored.


23 posted on 07/26/2014 1:18:47 PM PDT by G Larry (Which of Obama's policies do you think I'd support if he were white?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: umgud

Yes, I don’t see talking as dangerous, but texting is a whole different story.


24 posted on 07/26/2014 1:21:35 PM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mastador1
No offense taken.

The majority of motorcycle related fatalities are caused by vehicle drivers not seeing motorcyclists and turning in front of or into their paths. Bikers have a saying, “Loud Pipes Save Lives”, and that is a fact.

If a newer motorcycle is running its headlight is on. That is for greater visibility. But vehicle drivers often do not see the light as it may be in their blind spot and that is where the loud pipes come in.

Far too many times while riding I have seen a driver just ahead of me look into his or her mirror, not see me and then start drifting into my lane. A loud rapping of my pipes and their actions were aborted. They didn't see me, they heard me, and a collision was avoided. That’s not to say I deliberately ride in their blind spots, I know better. That’s not to say I make excessive noise with my pipes either, I know better. But as a biker you sometimes find yourself in a driver’s blind spot. And these incidents of drivers coming into your lane can happen before any adjustments to your position can be made. Loud pipes aren't just to be macho and have a loud bike, though I have no doubts some riders do so for that very reason.

There are no studies that I am aware of that confirm loud pipes do indeed save lives. But I have aftermarket pipes, and I believe the vast majority of bikers who also have them have them because we know based on our own experiences that at a minimum, loud pipes do prevent collisions which in turn saves lives.

25 posted on 07/26/2014 1:23:26 PM PDT by South40 (Hillary Clinton was a "great secretary of state". - Texas Governor Rick Perry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

And no one with a clue ever expected it to.

It did however produce a new revenue stream thanks to creating yet another way to extort money from people who are minding their own business.

And thus,the looters consider it a success.


26 posted on 07/26/2014 1:29:54 PM PDT by Nik Naym (It's not my fault... I have compulsive smartass disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

And the argument will be that, if the law hasn’t had a positive effect, the law should be abolished - like how the immigration/border laws aren’t effective.....


27 posted on 07/26/2014 1:38:16 PM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Laws banning drug abuse don’t reduce the amount of drug abuse, either.


28 posted on 07/26/2014 1:39:19 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The man who damns money obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it earned it." --Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

People pay as much attention to these laws as King Obama does to the US Constitution.

When we see a car wandering from lane to lane, running into the curb or sitting still at a green light we know there is a cell phone using scofflaw at the wheel.


29 posted on 07/26/2014 1:40:33 PM PDT by Iron Munro (IRONY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I get just as occupied dipping my french fries in the ketchup container while driving. And losing that pickle in my lap while munching a hamburger.

No one is going to pry that hamburger from my cold dead hands when I’m hungry.


30 posted on 07/26/2014 2:39:42 PM PDT by jonrick46 (The opium of Communists: other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

Yes, most likely. They’re clueless, self-absorbed, and incosiderate.


31 posted on 07/26/2014 2:43:19 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males---the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Every time I see it happen, I hold my breath, waiting for an accident to occur.


32 posted on 07/26/2014 2:45:32 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males---the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

I have been hit by a shopping cart in the supermarket by someone on their cellphone.


33 posted on 07/26/2014 5:21:55 PM PDT by minnesota_bound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: minnesota_bound

Here’s hoping you gave him/her an earful.


34 posted on 07/26/2014 5:42:47 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males---the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Very simple way to stop people from texting and driving - simply charge a tax for each text message from a moving vehicle - maybe 25 cents.

Sure passengers may not like it too much, but they’ll always have the option to call if THAT IMPORTANT.


35 posted on 07/26/2014 6:14:03 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

The person barely noticed me. They just went on their way yacking away.


36 posted on 07/26/2014 11:18:52 PM PDT by minnesota_bound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg; Abathar; Abcdefg; Abram; Abundy; albertp; Alexander Rubin; Allosaurs_r_us; amchugh; ...
Use of mobile devices was the least prominent distraction observed, being overtaken by “adjusting controls, personal hygiene, communicating with someone outside the vehicle and reaching for objects in the vehicle,” according to the study.



Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!

37 posted on 07/27/2014 9:24:54 AM PDT by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Of course not. This law was never about safety in much the same way that gun control isn’t about guns. It’s all about control and providing new sources of revenue.


38 posted on 07/27/2014 9:41:32 AM PDT by RKBA Democrat (Be a part of the American freedom migration: freestateproject.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; ...

I didn’t read the whole thing — did they study the severity of crashes? The use of cell phones during fatal crashes?

Thanks SeekAndFind.


39 posted on 07/27/2014 11:51:40 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson