I agree that distractions will continue to munt with time until we deploy the automated driver assist methodologies that have been mentioned and then some. Freightliner (now Daimler Trucks, Portland, Oregon) has been working on these technologies for the past 12 years that I am personally aware of. Those technologies have been out there among many of the transportation vehicle designers for quite some time, and are being tested constantly. Universities have been testing their concept auto-driver modules for decades. They have their own numerous issues. I do not believe that this issue is moot as you say, because of the advances in EE designs and technology. We have a very long way to go before we are stepping into a "Fifth Element" vehicle with Bruce Willis. This topic/issue is current and it will be a long time before all vehicles are of that futuristic type.
The enforcement of the specific law herein is not possible in today's environments where there are far more pressing concerns for the PDs of whatever city you're in, and "check points" fall into this area. It is obvious as any of us can bear witness to that many drivers are in violation of the cell phone laws. Yester year, that was not the case and you might see several patrol cars while traveling. They were mostly seen as a reminder of the laws, but did in fact give tickets. Today, you might never see an officer of the law for several days or weeks while traveling.
The vehicle controls do not necessarily need our undivided attention to operate. They are mostly used in a second nature application. It is the not specific vehicle controls that are distracting the drivers. We have been trained to yield all of our attention to the person that we are in conversation with. That includes the person or persons in the vehicle with the driver.
Going back to the idea that drivers of automobiles need or should be licensed more rigorously, public transportation drivers must be licensed for the vehicles that they are to operating. They are disallowed from taking part in any conversation while the vehicle that they are operating in moving. There are notices near those drivers that state the passengers are not allowed to talk with the driver when the vehicle is in motion. Governing the licensing would be a horrendous task to take on and please everyone. And who would monitor drivers for violations? As was pointed out, it is not a legal issue but an enforcement issue.
Reference was made to the older generation or geriatric (ever-aging) drivers as being a cause of the problem. I do not agree with that assessment. It is the lesser experienced driver, young, old, or in their mid-life crises, who are in the cell phone user boat. Most anyone with enough experience or training will reframe from the use of cell phones while driving, whether they are in traffic or on a winding country road. They will either ignore the call or find a way to pull over safely to have a conversation. They might answer the call, but only to inform the caller that they are driving and will return the call shortly or continue when the have safely stopped the vehicle.
Yes, and if we ban communications devices al together, then when would the various emergency groups have permission to use them?
I remember my Human Factors class with Dr. William Farrell at U of AZ some years back, where we tested our reflexes with a Telex Model-33 for responses under various distracting conditions. The results were similar to Semipro's (below). This topic is one of concern to all of us who wish to be safe on the roads and streets.
Wow 35 posts and counting – Obviously a Hot topic.Yes, consumers want more and more electronics and responsible mature drivers will be able to handle them all.
But I think there is a bigger issue looming that will make all of this moot.I believe we are in a transitional time in the electronics and automotive industries where, over the next few years, the autonomy of the vehicle will overcome the risk of distracted driving, and smart cars will intelligently behave more like trains, allowing the passengers – and drivers – the luxury of electronic distractions without the risk of accidental collisions.
Refer back to a recent article that covered this topic well: "Ready to Be Chauffeured by Your Car?"Nov 21, 2011 (also by Charles Murray) which also had a whopping 37 comments, one of which was: 'Autonomy of the Auto; has a nice ring to it." Describing the hopeful future of smooth sensory operation of the autonomous auto and the related safety aspects.
There are a few errors and several differences relative to who is using what while driving. For firemen, it is not the driver looking at the computer, for the police, they mostly use the computer while stopped, either before chasing or after stopping somebody. And for HAMs and CB operators, those radios are push-to-talk, release to listen, instead of full-duplex like a cell phone or a real phone. THat makes a HUGE difference in the degree of concentration required.
Of course there will never be a valid law against talking on the cell phone while driving, or even just against using the cell phone while driving, because the celular industry has way more money to spend than the tobacco industry ever had, and look at how long it took to determine that smoking might be hazardous. So the money will make the laws and there is probably not much that anyone can do about it, no matter how many hundreds are killed. REally big money does get it's way.
And don't forget amateur radio enthusiasts who can gab for hours while commuting without getting into accidents. Some if it is practice. Some of it is common sense. If you ever listen to 2 meter amateur radio repeaters you'll hear lots hams talking while driving. But if they get into heavy traffic they'll typically say 73 and hang up their microphone until traffic lightens up.
CB'ers do the same but often without the good sense to hang it up. Yet they too are rarely involved in accidents, though they are often warning fellow denizens of 27 MHz about accidents up ahead.
That said, any distraction from the main task of driving is a problem. But attacking cell phones as the main culprit is silly. How about the driver who is busy combing their hair using those sunvisor mirrors. Shouldn't they be banned?
What about the crying child in the passenger seat or the fighting children in the rear? Should we ban transport of children in cars with only one adult onboard?
Driving distracted .. everyone agrees is bad and should be minimized.
But making laws to ban Cell phone usage has several issues/limitations:
- 3K accidents/ year? out of 30-40K car related deaths / year.. (approximately 10%). Is this where the focus should be?
- of this 10%.. what percentage is distraction from cell usage? further reducing the significance of cell phone usage.
- What about other distractions? As stated by others, there are many and most are impossible to do anything about. Examples: conversations with passengers, eating, drinking coffee, SMOKING (a fire in your hand!), blowing your nose, etc..
- We ban drinking and driving... does the act of making it illegal stop it from happening? obviously not. It has a modest effect. Education / liability costs on the subject have a much bigger impact.
We (in the US) are driving more miles than ever before and with more distracted lives.. yet our fatality rate (accidents/mile driven) has been on the decline for a long time.
accident / fatality figures are very misleading.
accident / fatiality RATES are much more meaningful.
I still think "user friendly" controls that do not REQUIRE looking down and reading to operate would be an asset for the driver. Pilots have "heads-up" displays for that very reason.
A glance down is no big deal, but if you need to focus attention away from the road, it can be a problem. I think our police and firefighters do an amazing job with all the multitasking they do under stressful conditions. I think their intent focus and responsible effort to keep in touch with "the big picture" is the only reason that it doesn't create more problems.
Unfortunately, I do not see the average or below average driver maintaining that standard. Should we do nothing and let "natural selection" take its course, or at least try to make the operational environment as user friendly as possible?
Police need cellphones, multi channel radios, and computers while responsing to emergencies; sometimes they use all 3 at once while driving in extremely stressful conditons.
Firefighters use radios and often computers and internal communications while responding to fires to do size-up and coordinate equipment deployment. Desirably there is someone available int he cab to do some of these things, but not always.
Aircraft pilots have far greater opportunities for distraction than most of the rest of us, yet for the most part they recognize their primary purpose for occupying the seat is to fly the airplane.
None of these occupations have extraordinary training or abilities beyond normal defensive driving and the recognition that while operating a moving vehicle their primary responsiblity is the safe operation of that vehicle.
It isn't the cell phone, GPS, coffee cup, newspaper, or passenger that causes accidents; it's the operator. Let's outlaw them! Sure would cut down on traffic congestion. We really need to stop making laws that solve nothing except the apparent overwhelming need to do something, even if it's wrong.
This is just yet another 'Mothering' bill. No intent to infer that it is bad to mother ones kids, or be a mother, but we have lost so many rights (bill of rights) and common abilities from over protective agencies I must just say it.
States that forbid drivers to have phones have not reported any change in distraction accidents. And why just now ? Nothing else to do in Washington ?
How about a budget ? Trimming fat, etc. Laws upon the voters won't work well in the future. And the future is upon us.
We looked at a number of sources to determine this year's greenest cars, from KBB to automotive trade magazines to environmental organizations. These 14 cars emerged as being great at either stretching fuel or reducing carbon footprint.
Healthcare might seem to be an unlikely target application for the Internet of Things technology, but recent developments show small ways that big-data is going to make an impact on patient care moving into the future.
A quick look into the merger of two powerhouse 3D printing OEMs and the new leader in rapid prototyping solutions, Stratasys. The industrial revolution is now led by 3D printing and engineers are given the opportunity to fully maximize their design capabilities, reduce their time-to-market and functionally test prototypes cheaper, faster and easier. Bruce Bradshaw, Director of Marketing in North America, will explore the large product offering and variety of materials that will help CAD designers articulate their product design with actual, physical prototypes. This broadcast will dive deep into technical information including application specific stories from real world customers and their experiences with 3D printing. 3D Printing is