• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cell phone bans do not reduce car accident rates

I would guess that there's no difference between accident rates between states with cell phone bans and those without because people disregard the bans and use their phone while driving anyway.

Does using cell phones while driving cause some people to have accidents? Of course they do.
 
halik said:
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/12/18/iihs-contends-cell-phone-bans-not-effective-for-curbing-accident/

Straight from IIHS. Much like I suspected it's the idiot drivers. If you cannot handle driving and having a conversation, I would think the fact that it's over a phone is the least of your problems.
Click to expand...

Einstein said it best: "Two things are infinite: human stupidity and the universe; and I'm not sure about the universe."

A lot of people are stupid; drivers are people; there are a lot of stupid drivers.

So ban cell phones. Ban all conversations. Ban radios, iPods, DVD movies for people in the rear seats, put blinders on the driver...when does it end?
 
Passing a law that bans cell phones in cars because it is a risk factor in causing accidents is about as useful as passing a law that bans hurricanes from forming because it is a risk factor in causing death and destruction.
 
Without digging too deep into their study, I wonder if it takes into account the fact that many people ignore the laws and continue to use cells while driving. I see it all the time here in CT.
 
TastesLikeChicken said:
I would guess that there's no difference between accident rates between states with cell phone bans and those without because people disregard the bans and use their phone while driving anyway.

Does using cell phones while driving cause some people to have accidents? Of course they do.
Click to expand...

This. It's probably the most disregarded law I've ever witnessed. Something about cell phones brings out rudeness to the infinate degree. I'm so sick of having to overhear someones personal conversation while waiting in line at the grocery store. Or the assholes who insist their special and they don't have to obey any of the FAA rules on an airplane.
 
Like the seatbelt laws, I think its more about education. It is pretty obvious that any distraction while driving could cause a crash.

From the actual IIH website "Noncompliance is a likely reason texting bans aren't reducing crashes. Survey results indicate that many drivers, especially younger ones, shrug off these bans."


33,808 people died in motor vehicle crashes in 2009
 
Last edited:
http://www.iihs.org/research/topics/pdf/HLDI_Cellphone_Bulletin_Dec09.pdf

The link is to the study in question. Just a note: the study isn't new it's from 12/09. CNN just decided to run a story rehashing their own story from January 2010.

I've taken a look at the study and this is basically what it says:

States that enact cell phone bans see no discernable drop in auto accident claim frequency relative to their pre-ban status and also relative to comparable non-ban areas. The study itself does not control for drivers ignoring the bans but does cite three other, independent studies to note that bans drop cell phone use while driving by 47%, 41%, and 76%.

The ultimate conclusion then is that cell phone bans reduce cell phone usage while driving by about 50% but do not reduce auto accident frequency at all.
 
zsdersw said:
Passing a law that bans cell phones in cars because it is a risk factor in causing accidents is about as useful as passing a law that bans hurricanes from forming because it is a risk factor in causing death and destruction.
Click to expand...

So there should not be law outlawing DUI?
 
zsdersw said:
Passing a law that bans cell phones in cars because it is a risk factor in causing accidents is about as useful as passing a law that bans hurricanes from forming because it is a risk factor in causing death and destruction.
Click to expand...

By that logic we should allow drinking and driving.
 
The enforcement of the current cell phone laws is horrendous. I know there are still drunk driving fatalities but the enforcement seems to be pretty good. Maybe cops should be posted along roads/highways to look for people texting or using cell phones. Right now, the study shows most people ignoring the law.

The law also needs to be rewritten in some states to make it a main offense (whatever the term is) instead of secondary. Until then, might as well ban hurricanes from killing people because it does have as much effect.
 
There is also data showing x number of injury and fatality causing accidents associated with distracted cell phone use. These numbers are in the hundreds nationally for fatalities, and in the thousands for injuries. If you divide those up among various states, and assume that each state's injury claims will go down by about half (50% decrease in cellphone use), you probably end up with a reduction in accidents that is so small that you end up showing no statistically significant difference in the number of claims filed.

Another theory is that with cellphones, accidents caused is offset by accidents avoided. One cause of accidents is people falling asleep at the wheel, particularly on longer trips. A cellphone could reduce this sort of occurrence by keeping the driver occupied and awake.

My feeling is that banning car cellphone use may cause a small net reduction in accidents, but I don't really think it passes the cost-benefit test. I think only texting should be banned.
 
woolfe9999 said:
There is also data showing x number of injury and fatality causing accidents associated with distracted cell phone use. These numbers are in the hundreds nationally for fatalities, and in the thousands for injuries. If you divide those up among various states, and assume that each state's injury claims will go down by about half (50% decrease in cellphone use), you probably end up with a reduction in accidents that is so small that you end up showing no statistically significant difference in the number of claims filed.

Another theory is that with cellphones, accidents caused is offset by accidents avoided. One cause of accidents is people falling asleep at the wheel, particularly on longer trips. A cellphone could reduce this sort of occurrence by keeping the driver occupied and awake.

My feeling is that banning car cellphone use may cause a small net reduction in accidents, but I don't really think it passes the cost-benefit test. I think only texting should be banned.
Click to expand...

Passing a law that common sense already dictates....but I agree because there needs to be a punishment for someone so fucking stupid to actually take their eyes off of the road long enough to read and write texts.

But using a hands-free cell phone to talk should be no more distracting than having a conversation with people right there in the car. Why not ban conversations altogether?
 
JockoJohnson said:
Passing a law that common sense already dictates....but I agree because there needs to be a punishment for someone so fucking stupid to actually take their eyes off of the road long enough to read and write texts.

But using a hands-free cell phone to talk should be no more distracting than having a conversation with people right there in the car. Why not ban conversations altogether?
Click to expand...

Not sure what you're asking here, since I already said I'm against banning cellphone use in cars, except for texting.
 
My proposal is to respect property rights. If you damage someone else's property, then you should pay for it. If you don't damage anyone else's property then you shouldn't have to pay for it.
 
Anarchist420 said:
My proposal is to respect property rights. If you damage someone else's property, then you should pay for it. If you don't damage anyone else's property then you shouldn't have to pay for it.
Click to expand...

Suppose you kill someone? You can't compensate that with money, no matter how much you or your insurance carrier pay. Better to prevent it from happening to begin with. I don't support the cellphone laws, but your "anything goes" attitude toward driving on public roadways is another reason you have a screw loose.
 
One issue is that if you are looking at the phone to dial or type, then you are not looking at what you are about to run into. Texting and driving is premeditated reckless driving. If this happens it is the same as watching TV and driving. It is just asking for trouble. It is like premeditated murder.
 
woolfe9999 said:
Not sure what you're asking here, since I already said I'm against banning cellphone use in cars, except for texting.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was unclear. This topic gets me so worked up. In short, I totally agree with you. It is just a shame that we need a law to enforce common sense --- don't text and drive.
 
piasabird said:
One issue is that if you are looking at the phone to dial or type, then you are not looking at what you are about to run into. Texting and driving is premeditated reckless driving. If this happens it is the same as watching TV and driving. It is just asking for trouble. It is like premeditated murder.
Click to expand...

That's why dialing a phone should fall under the texting portion. Hands-free, voice controlled should be perfectly legal since you are telling the phone who to dial or to answer a call, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top