POLL: Would you support a ban on using cell phones while driving?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Originally posted by: Linflas
I am guessing the yes responders would reply in the affirmative in this thread as well.

Read that thread to see what a stupid question it is.

Specifically the posts by:
chambersc
me
mercanucaribe
Garet Jax

So to respond to your post - no, that is not the case.
 

Stuxnet

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2005
8,392
1
0
Originally posted by: Linflas
I am guessing the yes responders would reply in the affirmative in this thread as well.

I actually have some Libertarian beliefs. That said, I do feel that laws make sense when the common sense of the people fails to prevail... as is the case with soccer moms yapping on the phone whilst doing 45MPH in the fastlane on the freeway (or 95MPH in the merge lane).
 

lokiju

Lifer
May 29, 2003
18,526
5
0
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability to operating the vehicle. The other's do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Funny thing is neither one of us "qualified our response" hand held vs hands free.

FWIW I ONLY use my hands free head set when driving. (and pretty much all other times also)

 

Stuxnet

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2005
8,392
1
0
Originally posted by: mugs
Originally posted by: Linflas
I am guessing the yes responders would reply in the affirmative in this thread as well.

Read that thread to see what a stupid question it is.

Specifically the posts by:
chambersc
me
mercanucaribe
Garet Jax

So to respond to your post - no, that is not the case.

Exactly. I haven't read beyond chambersc's post, but he nailed it on the head:

I believe the numerical amount of laws is irrelevant. What matters are the context and the quality of said rules as it relates to society.

Exactly how does the number of laws affect a society, by the way?

It's a dumb thread, as the question needs much qualification.
 

moshquerade

No Lifer
Nov 1, 2001
61,504
12
56
Originally posted by: jlbenedict
I would support it.

There are just alot of people that do not have the brain capacity to do more than one thing at once.
this is true. that is why i support it and it's also a law in NYS. no cellphones while driving unless they are handsfree.

 

Stuxnet

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2005
8,392
1
0
Originally posted by: lokiju
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability to operating the vehicle. The other's do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Funny thing is neither one of us "qualified our response" hand held vs hands free.

Because in the context of the poll it's not relevant. That's why it's a bad poll.

If I had to make a choice between allowing cell phones while driving or banning cell phones while driving - with no optional provisions - then I'd still ban them in a heartbeat.

But if there were a third choice - to allow cell phone use only when accompanied by a hands-free kit - then I'd probably allow it.
 

DougK62

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2001
8,035
6
81
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

 

Glitchny

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2002
5,679
1
0
Since I live in a state where talking on cellphones is banned I'm used to it, and honestly I agree with the law. Too many times I've seen idiots on their cell phones veering into other lanes on the highway, missing stoplights etc. I now there are people who can talk on the phone and drive at the same time, I do it myself from time to time, and find myself dropping the phone to my lap whenever I see a cop. Hands free sets are a good idea and should be mandatory, they arent that expensice/cumbersome/annoying. And considering the idiots that are given license to drive in this country I'd much rather have their eyes and thoughts on the road in front of them. Personally I've never really had a situation where I had to talk while driving and couldnt either pull over or call the person back when I stopped or got to my destination etc...
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
33,553
13,227
136
can we support a ban on those w/o common sense?

i've talked on my phone before while driving (doesnt happen often at all), but those instances were VERY short. then again, it doesn't take long before you can fvck something up on the road...
 

Glitchny

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2002
5,679
1
0
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

He was referring to the fact that most people hold the phone to their ear while talking on it... i dont usually have my finger on the volume while i drive. and those few seconds of time from dropping the phone to grabbing the wheel etc could be fatal. and yes if im adjusting the volume at that exact second it will take just as long as if i had a cell. but the chances of my hitting the volume adjust at that exact moment arent very big. but if im talking on the cell for a long time, the chances increase
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,595
992
126
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: jbourne77

What "rights" are you talking about? Please link to the text in the constition which states that it's your "right" to talk on a cell phone while driving?

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Just a thought...

Like the right to drive drunk? I draw the line when it endangers others.

You completely missed the point of my post.

Please try again, and think harder this time. Pay special attention to the part of the post I responded to that I have bolded just for you.

Oh, okay. I thought you opposed a ban on cell phone use while driving. My apologies.
 

Stuxnet

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2005
8,392
1
0
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

If it were the same, we wouldn't be having this discussion. There's a reason cell phones have drawn far more attention than radios and passengers. It's not like a bunch of people got together one day and said "you know what, we're jealous of all the people with cell phones... let's fsck with them."
 

DougK62

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2001
8,035
6
81
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

If it were the same, we wouldn't be having this discussion. There's a reason cell phones have drawn far more attention than radios and passengers. It's not like a bunch of people got together one day and said "you know what, we're jealous of all the people with cell phones... let's fsck with them."

You're right, there is a reason. It's because cell phones are new. Do you really think that if car radios were scrutinized like cell phones are that the findings would be any different?

 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,595
992
126
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

No they aren't. Ever see someone talking on a cell phone? They are a huge distraction with those tiny little buttons and the fact that you have to hold it in your hand to talk to someone. Hands free devices help but unless your phone supports voice commands you still have to take your attention off the road to dial and answer it (I am okay with allowing handsfree devices though).

I do think BMWs iDrive should be banned though. That thing is a horrible mess and requires scrolling through menus to adjust pretty much any setting from A/C to the radio. ;)
 

DougK62

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2001
8,035
6
81
Originally posted by: Glitchny
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

He was referring to the fact that most people hold the phone to their ear while talking on it... i dont usually have my finger on the volume while i drive. and those few seconds of time from dropping the phone to grabbing the wheel etc could be fatal. and yes if im adjusting the volume at that exact second it will take just as long as if i had a cell. but the chances of my hitting the volume adjust at that exact moment arent very big. but if im talking on the cell for a long time, the chances increase

Thanks for proving my point.

 

Glitchny

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2002
5,679
1
0
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

If it were the same, we wouldn't be having this discussion. There's a reason cell phones have drawn far more attention than radios and passengers. It's not like a bunch of people got together one day and said "you know what, we're jealous of all the people with cell phones... let's fsck with them."

You're right, there is a reason. It's because cell phones are new. Do you really think that if car radios were scrutinized like cell phones are that the findings would be any different?

yes i do, radios may be loud and can affect hearing, but generally most people arent blasting their music and usually the radio is background noise. It doesnt take a whole lot of attention to listen to a song, whereas in a conversation i have to think about what im saying to the person, listen to them, keep up with the conversation etc. i guess its the same if i just held the phone to my ear while the person on the other line hummed a tune. Do you honestly think listening to music and having a converstation take the same amount of concentration?
 

DougK62

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2001
8,035
6
81
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

No they aren't. Ever see someone talking on a cell phone? They are a huge distraction with those tiny little buttons and the fact that you have to hold it in your hand to talk to someone. Hands free devices help but unless your phone supports voice commands you still have to take your attention off the road to dial and answer it (I am okay with allowing handsfree devices though).

I do think BMWs iDrive should be banned though. That thing is a horrible mess and requires scrolling through menus to adjust pretty much any setting from A/C to the radio. ;)

And radios don't have tiny buttons?

My point is really simple, but people keep tip-toeing around it. Cell phones take attention and (in many cases) a free hand away from the driver. Yelling at the kids, playing with the radio, etc, etc also take attention and (in many cases) a free hand from the driver. So my computer science programmed brain says that these are the same.

 

Glitchny

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2002
5,679
1
0
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: Glitchny
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

He was referring to the fact that most people hold the phone to their ear while talking on it... i dont usually have my finger on the volume while i drive. and those few seconds of time from dropping the phone to grabbing the wheel etc could be fatal. and yes if im adjusting the volume at that exact second it will take just as long as if i had a cell. but the chances of my hitting the volume adjust at that exact moment arent very big. but if im talking on the cell for a long time, the chances increase

Thanks for proving my point.

Well cant argue with the truth, but you have to understand that having my cell phone in my hand for 30min while i drive increases the chance ill not have that hand for an emergency. I might play with the radio for a total of 2min in a 30min span in the car. so the chances of me not having that hand are still slimmer. Both are equally unsafe if u are doing them at the exact instance of an emergency, but cellphones are an item that is constantly used whereas the radio is not constantly adjusted
 

Stuxnet

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2005
8,392
1
0
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

If it were the same, we wouldn't be having this discussion. There's a reason cell phones have drawn far more attention than radios and passengers. It's not like a bunch of people got together one day and said "you know what, we're jealous of all the people with cell phones... let's fsck with them."

You're right, there is a reason. It's because cell phones are new. Do you really think that if car radios were scrutinized like cell phones are that the findings would be any different?

New? I don't know about you but I've had a cell phone for about the last 12 - 15 years, give or take.

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
They are a huge distraction with those tiny little buttons and the fact that you have to hold it in your hand to talk to someone. Hands free devices help but unless your phone supports voice commands you still have to take your attention off the road to dial and answer it (I am okay with allowing handsfree devices though).

Exactly
 

Stuxnet

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2005
8,392
1
0
Originally posted by: Glitchny
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: Glitchny
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

He was referring to the fact that most people hold the phone to their ear while talking on it... i dont usually have my finger on the volume while i drive. and those few seconds of time from dropping the phone to grabbing the wheel etc could be fatal. and yes if im adjusting the volume at that exact second it will take just as long as if i had a cell. but the chances of my hitting the volume adjust at that exact moment arent very big. but if im talking on the cell for a long time, the chances increase

Thanks for proving my point.

Well cant argue with the truth, but you have to understand that having my cell phone in my hand for 30min while i drive increases the chance ill not have that hand for an emergency. I might play with the radio for a total of 2min in a 30min span in the car. so the chances of me not having that hand are still slimmer

Yep. Adjusting the volume takes a few seconds. Dialing a phone number takes much longer. On top of that, operating a cell phone and operating a car stereo are different things. The cell phone requires much more attention.

Again, these two things aren't even remotely analogous... I don't even know why we're comparing the two.
 

DougK62

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2001
8,035
6
81
Originally posted by: Glitchny
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

If it were the same, we wouldn't be having this discussion. There's a reason cell phones have drawn far more attention than radios and passengers. It's not like a bunch of people got together one day and said "you know what, we're jealous of all the people with cell phones... let's fsck with them."

You're right, there is a reason. It's because cell phones are new. Do you really think that if car radios were scrutinized like cell phones are that the findings would be any different?

yes i do, radios may be loud and can affect hearing, but generally most people arent blasting their music and usually the radio is background noise. It doesnt take a whole lot of attention to listen to a song, whereas in a conversation i have to think about what im saying to the person, listen to them, keep up with the conversation etc. i guess its the same if i just held the phone to my ear while the person on the other line hummed a tune. Do you honestly think listening to music and having a converstation take the same amount of concentration?

Good job at twisting my point into something that can be attacked. I'm not talking about listening to music AT ALL. Please re-read all of my posts with a more critical eye.

 

Glitchny

Diamond Member
Sep 4, 2002
5,679
1
0
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: Glitchny
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: jbourne77
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

Those other activities also do not require committing one appendage to the activity. A cellphone permanently removes one hand's availability from operating the vehicle. The others do not, or do so only briefly.

This is exactly why most people that are for the ban also qualify their response with "unless a hands-free kit is used". It's still a distraction, but it's far less of one.

Sorry, equating using a cell phone to talking with a passenger or using a radio is not analogous.

Yes, it is analogous. If you need the use of your cell phone hand for an emergency purpose how long does it take you to drop the cell and get your hand where it needs to be? A second? That seems like the same amount of time to get your hand back in position if you were fidgiting with the radio, digging in your purse, waving your hands at the kids, etc.

It's the same.

If it were the same, we wouldn't be having this discussion. There's a reason cell phones have drawn far more attention than radios and passengers. It's not like a bunch of people got together one day and said "you know what, we're jealous of all the people with cell phones... let's fsck with them."

You're right, there is a reason. It's because cell phones are new. Do you really think that if car radios were scrutinized like cell phones are that the findings would be any different?

yes i do, radios may be loud and can affect hearing, but generally most people arent blasting their music and usually the radio is background noise. It doesnt take a whole lot of attention to listen to a song, whereas in a conversation i have to think about what im saying to the person, listen to them, keep up with the conversation etc. i guess its the same if i just held the phone to my ear while the person on the other line hummed a tune. Do you honestly think listening to music and having a converstation take the same amount of concentration?

Good job at twisting my point into something that can be attacked. I'm not talking about listening to music AT ALL. Please re-read all of my posts with a more critical eye.

I adressed the whole hitting the button while driving thing in a different response above, I just decided to look at ur argument from all possible angles. And after doing so I still think talking on a cellphone increases the chance that ur hand is occupied during an emergency when compared to the radio.


talking with hand held to head for 15-30min or adjusting the radio in 5 seconds
obviously there is a greater risk with the cellphone simply because the amount of time that hand is occupied
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,595
992
126
Originally posted by: DougK62
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: DougK62
Everyone in favor of cell phone bans in cars must also be in favor of banning car radios and talking to passengers. Those are just as dangerous...

No they aren't. Ever see someone talking on a cell phone? They are a huge distraction with those tiny little buttons and the fact that you have to hold it in your hand to talk to someone. Hands free devices help but unless your phone supports voice commands you still have to take your attention off the road to dial and answer it (I am okay with allowing handsfree devices though).

I do think BMWs iDrive should be banned though. That thing is a horrible mess and requires scrolling through menus to adjust pretty much any setting from A/C to the radio. ;)

And radios don't have tiny buttons?

My point is really simple, but people keep tip-toeing around it. Cell phones take attention and (in many cases) a free hand away from the driver. Yelling at the kids, playing with the radio, etc, etc also take attention and (in many cases) a free hand from the driver. So my computer science programmed brain says that these are the same.

They do but they are always in the same place. I can find the buttons on my radio without taking my eyes off the road. A few hours in any car and I can familiarize myself with where things are so it doesn't take much attention to fiddle with the settings. Also, my steering wheel has radio controls on it so I can change the station and adjust the volume without taking my hands off the wheel.

Children can be a big distraction but only if you let them. When my son gets demanding I just tell him that I cannot look at what he wants me to because I am driving.