<p>teriwitt - There are a couple of theories. One theory is that when you are talking to a passenger, the passenger is also aware of the surroundings so the conversation pauses or adjusts according to conditions. A passenger may alert the driver to surroundings. I suppose it is that even if you are both distracted by the conversation, the two together come closer to one non-distracted person. The person on the other end of the phone is completely removed from the driving experience and is a greater distraction. Estimates are that you are 4 times more likely to be in an accident while having a cell phone conversation. </p>
<p>This article gives a little different explanation as to the reason.</p>
<p>That’s from the CAR TALK article; I’m quoting it because of all the explanations I’ve read, this is the one that made me think, “That’s exactly it!”</p>
<p>Talking while driving is by now so embedded in our lives that it almost feels like a God-given right, and I doubt that hands-free phones will ever be taken away. The people who make the laws are probably among the busiest blue-toothers on the road.</p>
<p>Here in MA it is illegal to text or read texts while driving - even if you’re stopped at a light - and it is illegal for drivers under 18 to talk on the phone while driving. Believe it or not, the cops lobbied against the law, saying it would be too hard to enforce. They had a point though - how can you tell the difference between someone is texting and dialing a phone call? And how do they tell if a driver is 18? Their thinking was that it ought to ALL be illegal for everyone.</p>
<p>I believe there was talk of a general law against DISTRACTED driving - you can be ticketed for eating, reading, shaving, putting on makeup, texting or talking on the phone while driving. Makes perfect sense - and it should be a major crime if you cause an accident when doing these things.</p>
<p>One of the reasons cell phone talking has been targeted is just because it is enforceable and the activity is capable of being proved. There are many other activities that all of us do that are just as distracting but there is no way to prove that we were doing them. </p>
<p>The 2009 naturalistic driving study done at Virginia Tech (meaning that a sophisticated camera system was installed in cars to film distractions) showed that reaching for something in the car was more distracting than talking on a cell phone, but I doubt we will hear calls for someone to go to jail for decades for reaching for their sunglasses or struggling with finding the right radio station. </p>
<p>Because talking on a cell phone can be proved, it is being demonized while even more dangerous behaviors are not.</p>
<p>I’ve also heard that the new laws have created new problems within themselves. People, in fear of being caught by the cops, now hold their phones down below the line of vision of someone outside of the car. Unfortunately, it means their eyes are that more far removed from what’s going on around them.</p>
<p>Of all the distractions mentioned here, I don’t believe anyone has mentioned smoking in a car. How on earth do smokers manage to focus on driving when they’re worried about whether or not ashes are going to drop on them somewhere, or that in a split instant, when they need both hands on the wheels, they’re not going to drop a lit cigarette on their lap and burn themselves? If I’m drinking a soda and spill, I’m not going to be distracted by immense pain while driving.</p>
<p>I think smoking while driving is more dangerous than all of them. Yet I continue to see it everywhere.</p>
<p>Sorry Terri - smoking is dangerous, but I can’t believe it is anywhere near as distracting as holding a conversation - especially a business conversation - or trying to text or read a text.</p>
<p>I doubt anyone will get a serious penalty for reaching while driving … however, if someone was reaching down and killed a pedestrian, for example, I would bet the odds of serious jail time go way up.</p>
<p>There also is a HUGE difference for most drivers in the amount of time these distractions are happening. For over a year I had a job with 2 hours of commuting a day … over those two years I probably was reaching maybe a total of a couple minutes over the two years … while lots of folks are on their cell phone virtually the whole time they are on the road. I can’t imagine any other distraction, on average, distracts drivers anywhere near the same order of magnitude as talking/texting on cell phones.</p>
<p>Last data point … on my commute I’d say if someone was driving 10-15 miles to slow, straddling lanes, didn’t have their lights on, etc there was about a 75% chance they were on a cell phone (or elderly) … it was certainly true that the vast majority of out to lunch dirvers were on their cells; however the big catch is not knowing what percentage of drivers were on their cells overall … if 75% of the folks were on their cells then the level of dumb driving was the same for cell and non-cell folks … but it certainly seemed to me the dumb driving was way out of proportion on cell phone drivers.</p>
<p>Smoker seem always ready to toss the cigarette out the window when it is inconvenient. I’ve seen all sorts of behavior, habits, tics, etc. with smokers in their cars.</p>
<p>There are many foolish reasons why a driver has an accident that is his/her fault. That cell phones, tvs, and other electronic devices have come in our lives has caused accidents while they are in use with a driver engaged is the reason why some of these rules have come to be. And the proof is easily obtained. That they increase the number of accidents has also been statistically proven, I believe. So yes, you can get into more trouble if you get into an accident while doing these things than if you were distracted thinking of some things, reaching for something you should not have been, having a conversation or argument with a passenger. Just like when your capabilities are compromised by drink or drugs.</p>
<p>Google is currently testing computer-piloted cars so perhaps we’ll be able to sleep while driving to the grocery store in the future. It should be heaven for texters.</p>
<p>The studies say that texting is by far the most dangerous behavior because it engages you mentally and takes the eyes off the road. After that, it is anything that takes the eyes off the road - for even a few seconds. That is why looking for something in the car or looking at radio dials or turning around to look in the back seat is more dangerous than talking on the cell phone. Taking the eyes off the road trumps everything else.</p>
I absolutely agree with this while you are distracted and I would think it is not even close … but then you’re back to the question of overall risk … on an 1 hour trip which is causing more risk 1) 10 seconds of glancing away or 30 minutes of talking on a cell phone? (PS - and texting has BOTH bad attributes). </p>
<p>PS #2 - I am not defending glancing away at all but trying to estimate which activity creates the largest overall public safety risk. One frustration I have on this topic is one defense against implementing a law to address one of these issues is “what about issue #2?” … the idea being we shouldn’t do anything about one issue until we handle all of them? Excellent delaying tactic … personally I wish Mass would address each one as soon as they develop a reasonable approach that is consistent with the others already implemented … and not wait for the perfect overall solution.</p>
<p>Mass was debating a fairly tough law on texting but I think that the mobile phone industry had their say and the law was watered down quite a bit. We could have had a far tougher law in NH but it seemed watered down to me in the final result.</p>
<p>I believe that New York has a tough law and perhaps that would be a good model for other states to go with. I am glad to see that the police are doing electronic investigation in accident reconstruction now.</p>
<p>Hubby just ordered a new car and I really wanted to suggest that he get the option that tells you when you drift over the line–but I did not have the nerve. BTW, he does not need to be on the phone to drift.</p>
<p>I should have clarified. What I meant was it was the most dangerous to the driver if they needed to drop something out of their hand at a split second to put both hands on the wheel. If they drop a cell phone, or food, or makeup, I don’t think the consequences are that painful! Once that cigarette has been dropped, and the situation has hopefully resolved itself and the person has a free hand again, then they have to quickly look for that burning cigarette. With the other items, it doesn’t still continue to create a danger. </p>
<p>Regarding throwing a cigarette out the window. Most people I see smoking cigarettes in cars do not have their windows down, or if they do, it’s just a crack. They’d have to lower the window more, then chuck it.</p>
<p>There are kids that will go to pick up their cell phone if they drop it while they are driving. One of the kids in my sons drivers ed class did that and caused a head-on collision.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Perhaps it depends on the time of the year and the kind of economy we’re in.</p>
<p>I’m sure it happens. But there’s not the urgency with anything other than a lit cigarette. You’re not worrying about whether or not it’s going to burn something or start a fire.</p>
<p>We drove into Boston today. It was 90 degrees out. The smokers that I observed had their windows all the way down. I have observed the cracked window phenomena and I presume that it is done that way to prevent ashes from blowing back into the car.</p>
<p>I’ve never smoked and I don’t let people smoke in my car nor do I take rides from smokers. My experience is just from observation of other drivers. BTW, my response to smokers is to turn on recirculate - it’s amazing how much air one cigarette can foul.</p>