Slashdot Mirror


Cell Users As Bad As Drunk Drivers

An anonymous reader writes "News.com reports on a cell-phone use study which confirms that talking on your cell is as bad as being drunk, when it comes to driving skill. The researchers studied 40 volunteers in a driving simulator." From the article: "[The subjects were observed] while undistracted, using a handheld cell phone, using a hands-free cell phone and while intoxicated to a 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level--the average legal level of impairment in the United States--after drinking vodka and orange juice. Three study participants rear-ended the simulated car in front of them. All were talking on cell phones and none was drunk, the researchers said."

51 of 738 comments (clear)

  1. The usual response by IDontAgreeWithYou · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "But I can put my phone down, I can't stop being drunk." Except that people don't put the phone down, they crash.

    --
    Finding other idiots on /. that agree with your opinion doesn't make it any less stupid.
    1. Re:The usual response by Carnildo · · Score: 5, Funny
      "But I can put my phone down, I can't stop being drunk." Except that people don't put the phone down, they crash.


      Exactly. I got rear-ended at two consecutive red lights once, by the same cell-phone-impaired driver. Fortunately, the only damage was a matched set of trailer-hitch prints in his front license plate.
      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    2. Re:The usual response by Nos. · · Score: 5, Insightful

      FTA:

      • Just like many people who have been drinking, the cell phone users did not believe themselves to be affected, the researchers found.
      • They studied 40 volunteers who used a driving simulator four times--while undistracted, using a handheld cell phone, using a hands-free cell phone and while intoxicated to a 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level
      • Motorists who talked on either handheld or hands-free cell phones drove slightly more slowly, were 9 percent slower to hit the brakes, and varied their speed more than undistracted drivers.
      • "Driving while talking on a cell phone is as bad as or maybe worse than driving drunk,"

      Everytime this comes up, people always say that they use hands-free. That's not the point. This isn't about having two hands on the wheel. This is about paying attention to what you are doing. Talking on a phone is an added distraction. Its that simple. You can argue to what degree that distraction is, but you cannot deny that it is a distraction.

      Then people always talk about how they can drop the phone, or stop the conversation if a situation that requires their complete attention arises. Ever think that situation may not have risen if you hadn't been on the phone in the first place?

    3. Re:The usual response by ahsile · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...So we tell everyone it's ok to drink and drive as long as you don't kill anybody? You've got some serious issues. As stated by the grandparent, you are delusional... and a serious risk to yourself and others. I hope I'm nowhere near you on the road. Ever. I don't care if you're sober or not talking on your phone. You obviously think you are not affected by this problem while everyone else is.

    4. Re:The usual response by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Informative

      I was reareneded 5 times by a guy in a BMW behind me on a hill at a light. I let out the clutch rolled back and nailed his hood with the Pintel hitch. This happened at every light up the hill. when the guy got around us to flag us down (we had no idea, big truck = cant feel anything.) and pull over the cop gave him the ticket for beign too close to us. we not only caved in the front of the hood but ripped the metal from the repeated impacts.

      There is a law that you must allow roll back room for the car in front of you, too bad most people are too stupid to understand those laws or learn to stay away from the truck in front of them after the first few times they get hit. (we rolled back 6 -12 inches.)

      He did not have a cellphone in his ear, just a lack of IQ.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    5. Re:The usual response by Paladin128 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So any time any one does any thing that modifies the risk of a situation, we should pass a law? Sorry, I don't want my entire life ruled by obscure laws that no living being can bother to know.

      I hate the fact that I can't replace the carpet in my basement without a permit. Or the fact that if my business grows to more than 10 people I have to start making sure I hire someone of a different ethnicity even if there's no one qualified. Or the fact that I can't write a piece of software that can play a DVD without paying $10,000 to the DVD-CCA to liscence the CSS encryption scheme. Or get a concealed carry permit in my state.

      Add stiff deterrant penalties and charge people for it after they get in an accident. I hate the fact that innattentive and wreckless drivers that cause accidents get off with just insurance surcharges -- and possibly not even that in no-fault states -- while someone who uses a cell phone without a handsfree or drives with a 0.08 BAC can get jail time. That's seriously messed up.

      --
      Lex orandi, lex credendi.
    6. Re:The usual response by hazem · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think the real problem is that people don't pay attention to their driving and to themselves when they are driving.

      I don't think I'm any kind of uber-driver, but I pay attention to what's going on and how I'm reacting. I know that if the traffic situation is tense I almost automatically turn down the radio and cut out other distractions. It's the same when I'm on a cellphone while driving. If I'm getting more tense from the driving condition, I quickly tell the person I'll call them back and I pay attention. Driving doesn't always require 100% attention.

      There's no reason a responsible person shouldn't be able to use their cellphone while driving to a) pass time on boring stretches of roads, b) call ahead for take-out, c) call home to see if anything is needed, d) call ahead to let them know you'll be late, e) call and ask for directions, and f) call 9-11 because you just saw an accident or drunk driver.

      This is all about a group of whiny people who want to control what other people do. Punish people for what they do that actually harms others, not what could possibly harm others.

    7. Re:The usual response by absoluteflatness · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Does it matter? They still rear ended a simulated car. Who cares if they're not as impaired as someone with a 0.1 BAC?

      The point is, they didn't rear-end a simulated car. From the summary:

      Three study participants rear-ended the simulated car in front of them. All were talking on cell phones and none was drunk, the researchers said.

      The grandparent's point is, the average legal limit of .08 is a conservative one (by design, I'm sure), and many people at .08 are perfectly capable of driving.
    8. Re:The usual response by GreyPoopon · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Most people on the road cant not avoid rearending the car in front of them if they were wide awake and paying attention perfectly simply because of poor driving skills.

      But that doesn't make it OK to impair the bad drivers and make them even MORE likely to rear-end the car in front of them. The study showed that the same sample group fared significantly better when not distracted.

      For some reason race car drivers can talk to their pit crew often and not get into crashes and they are doing it at much higher speeds and the same 3 inch spacing from the car in front of them.

      The difference here being that race car drivers talk only in short phrases necessary to get and relay information, and the topic is always on their driving and the situation around them. They aren't having a conversation.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    9. Re:The usual response by vanman2004 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If the distraction originates from merely having a conversation, what is the difference between talking on a cell phone and talking to the person next to you?

      --
      -Siggy!
    10. Re:The usual response by lgw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People who think they can "handle their liquor" are quite dangerous indeed, right up there with people who think a cup of coffee or a shower will "sober them right up". Once your BAC approachs 0.1%, your rflexes and judgement both are terrible. If you're used to drinking, you simply don't feel tipsy: your reflexes and judgement are still screwed, but you no longer have the warning signs of staggering around.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    11. Re:The usual response by david.given · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is a law that you must allow roll back room for the car in front of you, too bad most people are too stupid to understand those laws or learn to stay away from the truck in front of them after the first few times they get hit. (we rolled back 6 -12 inches.)

      Uh... roll back room? I'm a bit confused; here in the UK, one of the standard driving test procedures is the hill start; if you roll back at all, you fail. (At least when I took it. They might have changed things.)

      Unless this is something to do with automatics, but you said you drive a truck, and they tend to use manual gearboxes...

    12. Re:The usual response by homer_ca · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's different because a passenger is in the car. So either from watching the road or watching for non-verbal cues from the driver, he'll see when the driver needs to pay more attention to something and pause the conversation. Try having a conversation with a passenger who talks on and on with no regard to the driver or the road. It's much more distracting.

    13. Re:The usual response by hazem · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Boring road: I can handle it. I've driven a lot and in a lot of conditions. I'm a good judge of when I need to pay full attention and when I can drive on "autopilot". If you can't be distracted by radios, cellphones and hamburgers, it's good that you know that.

      Before you leave: a typical trip may take anywhere from 30 minutes to 3 hours. It's not always appropriate to make that call before I leave. What's the point of calling for takeout 3 hours before I need it? I know I'm a good judge on whether the traffic is safe to call in. When it's not safe, I don't call. I see no problem with being at a stand-still in traffic and calling ahead to say I'm going to be late. For god's sake, nobody is even moving.

      9-11: Maybe it's on the other side of the freeway. Maybe there's a gang beating up somoeone and I don't feel safe stopping? And as for helping before the EMT's get there, I'm not going to risk that lawsuit. Sure, there are good samaritan laws, but those are only as good as the lawyers you can afford to defend yourself.

      What it all boils down to the fact that I'm an adult who is responsible for what I do. I make decisions every day that can impact other people. If I make a bad decision then I end up paying for it somehow. I know, that with many years experience, I know when I can talk on the phone and when I shouldn't.

      Your experience teaches you that you can't handle it at all. That's just fine. In fact, I'm glad you know your limits. But don't go trying to limit me based on what you can't handle. Too many stupid laws come out of thinking like that.

    14. Re:The usual response by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 4, Informative
      I have a UK HGV licence, and you definitely would definitely fail your test (HGV or otherwise) if you roll back. I would imagine you would be charged with dangerous driving if you rolled back and hit a car with a truck here, even if no damage was caused.

      GP is correct you would not feel it if you hit a BMW- you could probably crush it flat and not feel it - hence the need to not roll back.

      This does not eliminate the need to stop suficciently far behind the vehicle in front that you can pull past it if the driver stalls (or runs out of fuel waiting at the lights - it happens!)

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    15. Re:The usual response by AHarrison · · Score: 3, Informative

      The basic premise of the "roll back room" law in the US actually has nothing to do with rolling back. If a person rearends another person for any reason other than something such as a drastic lane change, it is considered follow too close. If, for example, I got rearended myself and hit the car in front of me from the momentum, the second accident is my fault because I was "following too closely". The rule of thumb in the US (California, at least) is you should be able to see the bottom of the person's tires in front of you when you come to a stop. This generally gives about half a carlength which is more than enough for rollback or a low velocity collision. Or at least, that is what I have been told.

    16. Re:The usual response by lgw · · Score: 4, Funny

      You know what they say ... people in cars produce accidents, accidents in cars produce people.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    17. Re:The usual response by Scrameustache · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So while we're studying things, how about the people driving and talking to passengers? I bet they suck too.

      How much did you loose on that bet?
      I think that was on that Mythbuster episode... Passengers are in the same environment as the driver, and react to it with the driver... well, some times (arguments happen). People on the phone, however, don't wait to ask a question after you're done doing your left turn. It's really a different situation.

      And don't forget: anything distracting besidses the phone, you can ADD to the phone. You can have people on the phone and in the car talking to you at once, be drunk and on the phone, be tired and on the phone, etc.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    18. Re:The usual response by vanyel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If this scaremongering were true, accident rates would be skyrocketing along with cell phone use. The fact is, that while it may impair driving a little, it's not doing it enough to affect accident rates, so it's just one more bandwagon for people to get on without thinking. There are a lot of bad drivers out there; it's no surprise that more of them are talking on cell phones when they crash because more people are talking on cell phones, so they're more likely to be doing so when they do something stupid. And it's a rather visible activity, so it's easy for people to latch onto it. What's worse is that people seem to like to latch on to one or two instances, when if you actually watch, there are a lot of people talking and driving and doing just fine. The majority of them.

      I've been talking and driving for 30 accident free years, well over 10 of them with a cell phone. If someone can't talk and drive at the same time, they should be banned from driving, not banned from cell phone use.

    19. Re:The usual response by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I think a salient point would be that those using a cell phone in the experiment were probably not allowed to choose to hang up

      The guy who ran into the back of my car last month could have chosen to hang up at any time. He didn't hang up because he was concentrating on his phone call instead of noticing I was turning into a carpark 50 metres in front of him.

      By the time he noticed there was an almost stationary car in front of him, he was less than 20m away and travelling too fast to stop. He may have tried to hang up at that point, but even if he didn't, the call would have been terminated when his phone hit the windscreen of his car and shattered.

      He may have been more likely to run into a virtual car, but by choosing to be an arsehole and put other people's lives and property at risk, he ran into mine instead.

      He'll be prosecuted, and doubtless fined, and his insurance will pay for repairs, but that won't give me back the week of walking around in pain from the bruised hip. It won't return my MGF to pristine condition. It'll always be an accident-damaged car, and will be worth less when I sell it.

      I don't care how interesting his phone call was to him, he had no right to involve me in it, and that was the choice he made when he tried to operate a car and a phone at the same time.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  2. forget cells... by torrents · · Score: 5, Funny

    how about the idiots trying to use wireless email behind the wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

    --
    Get your torrents...
  3. I'm Not Drunk by neonprimetime · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just like many people who have been drinking, the cell phone users did not believe themselves to be affected, the researchers found.

    Honestly officer ... I wasn't really talking on the phone ... I just hold it by my head to keep warm.

  4. Old by cosmotron · · Score: 3, Informative

    This was already on MythBusters...

    --
    Ryan - http://www.thecosmotron.com/
  5. Incomplete study... by gasmonso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would like to see a few more test groups added to this. How about the average pot smoking teenager, the girl putting makeup on, and my personal favorite that I saw recently... a woman brushing her teeth!

    http://religiousfreaks.com/
    1. Re:Incomplete study... by forkazoo · · Score: 4, Funny
      I would like to see a few more test groups added to this. How about the average pot smoking teenager, the girl putting makeup on, and my personal favorite that I saw recently... a woman brushing her teeth!


      Also, I want to see a study of how much reading while driving impairs your ability. I want to know how much more dangerous I make my drive home, so I can calculate if the probable time savings are likely worth it... :)
    2. Re:Incomplete study... by fobbman · · Score: 4, Funny

      They can't find enough pot-smoking teens with the motivation to get off of the couch, let alone actually DRIVE somewhere.

    3. Re:Incomplete study... by Wdi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They pay low insurance rates *because* they have less accidents. Insurance companies make no gifts. They do math. Very precise mathon large sample sizes.

    4. Re:Incomplete study... by boingo82 · · Score: 4, Informative
      It's not that old people get in fewer accidents, they get in cheaper, less fatal accidents.

      Old people tend to get into slow crashes. Parking lot crashes are a biggie, and they get into many more accidents while making left turns than do younger drivers.

      How do crashes involving older drivers differ from those of other drivers? Compared with younger drivers, senior drivers are overinvolved in certain types of collisions -- angle crashes, overtaking or merging crashes, and especially intersection crashes. The most common error made by seniors is failure to yield the right-of-way. Seniors are cited for this error more often than younger drivers.15
      From the IIHS's facts on old people page..

      Teenagers, on the other hand, tend to get in single-vehicle, higher-speed collisions. They're more susceptible to distractions, such as passengers and cell phones.

      How do crashes involving teenagers differ from those of other drivers? Teenagers have higher crash rates than older drivers, and their crashes differ. Analyses of fatal crash data indicate that teenage drivers are more likely to be at fault in their crashes. Teenagers' crashes and violations are more likely to involve speeding than those of older drivers, and teenagers are more likely than drivers of other ages to be in single-vehicle fatal crashes. Plus teenagers do more of their driving in small and older cars3 and at night, compared with adults. In 2004, 18 percent of teenagers' fatalities occurred between 9 pm and midnight, and 22 percent occurred between midnight and 6 am. Fifty-four percent of teenagers' fatalities occurred on Friday, Saturday, or Sunday. For 16 year-olds, all these problems are heightened. The combination of inexperience behind the wheel and immaturity produces a pattern of fatal crashes among 16 year-olds that includes the highest percentage of crashes involving speeding, the highest percentage of single-vehicle crashes, and the highest percentage of crashes with driver error.
      (From the IIHS's teenagers fact page.
      --
      As a republican I feel it my responsibity to manufacture criminals. People need punished!
  6. Things that make you go "Hmm.." by MImeKillEr · · Score: 3, Funny

    What about drunk drivers who are also on their cellphones?

    Hmm..

    --
    Cruising the internet on my TI-99/4A @ a whopping 300 baud!
  7. What about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What about just having a passenger to talk to? what about screaming kids in the back seat? What about trying to fish that CD out from behind the seat so you can change your music? How drunk does doing these things make you drive?

    1. Re:What about by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Informative
      I dunno about the screaming kids. Ideally you'd pull over and stop before belting them into quietude. Talking to a passenger does not offer the same level of distraction because they're there with you, can see road conditions and will STFU when things start to get hairy. If a passenger demands that you pay attention to them, they should be ejected from the vehicle. Stopping to do so is optional.

      Fiddling with the radio in any significant way really does make a noticable difference in how much attention I pay to traffic. If the radio's pissing me off and traffic's kind of bad I'll just reach out and turn the damn thing offf rather than try to locate a channel that doesn't suck.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  8. Sure... .but by warrior_s · · Score: 3, Insightful

    talking on your cell is as bad as being drunk So lets propse another study... how bad is it when we talk to other people in the vehicle while driving? Is it same as talking on cellphone or not?

    1. Re:Sure... .but by RapmasterT · · Score: 4, Informative
      according to accident statistics, talking to other people in the car is the #2 cause of driver distraction accidents. Second only to rubbernecking at stuff outside the car.

      cell phones barely make the list. According to anecdotal evidence, they're the #1 cause of "almost had an accident", but for real accidents they barely make the list.

    2. Re:Sure... .but by Carnildo · · Score: 3, Informative
      So lets propse another study... how bad is it when we talk to other people in the vehicle while driving? Is it same as talking on cellphone or not?


      The study's been done, and the answer is "no": the passenger usually has the sense to shut up in dangerous situations.
      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    3. Re:Sure... .but by quokkapox · · Score: 4, Insightful
      how bad is it when we talk to other people in the vehicle while driving?

      It's a different thing entirely to converse with a passenger in the same car. There's a lower drain on your cognitive resources, the person next to you responds to the same environmental cues as you do, and will shut up and/or scream if you're heading for trouble.

      An alert passenger in your front passenger seat improves your ability to drive safely, even if you're deep in conversation. It's another set of eyes watching the road. A remote voice on the other end of a cellphone has the opposite effect.

      --
      it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
    4. Re:Sure... .but by LoveGoblin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not to mention that the sound quality's a hell of a lot better. You're not spending brain resources trying to make out what they're saying over a crappy cell connection.

  9. Hot Damn! by fobbman · · Score: 4, Funny

    You mean I might have a chance with the hot babe at the party whose sober but chatting on her cell phone?

  10. where to draw the line? by tont0r · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Im not going to say that cell phones dont cause distractions while driving. But where is the line of concern drawn? I need to take my eyes of the road in order to change my CDs or the radio station. Or how about the nice people with stereo systems so loud it shakes the windows of your house. There is a small noise ordinance rule for that, but nothing major. Girls putting on make up, combing hair, getting ready, etc. Its unfair to just point out cell phone users and accidents. A line needs to be drawn somewhere if you are going to make that argument.

  11. Driving all over the road by eric76 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One night years ago when I lived south of Houston, I was driving over to a fast food place to get something to take home for supper.

    There was a van in front of me that was driving all over the road. It almost went into the ditch on each side of the road at least once.

    When we go to a four lane highway, the van spent part of the time taking up both lanes going our direction and some of the time in the oncoming lanes.

    I was surprised to see the van turn in ahead of me at the fast food joint and pull up to the drive through.

    Being the nice guy/asshole that I am, I thought I'd do a good deed and suggest that the driver wait for someone sober to drive him home. I stood about 5 feet from the window when I made my suggestion.

    It turned out to be a woman who had the foulest mouth of any woman I ever met. She was screaming unbelievably loud that she wasn't drunk, that she was only using her cell phone, and that how she drove was her business and noone elses.

    So I got back in my car.

    When I finally got around front, everyone inside was laughing. I guess everyone in the place, employee and customer alike, heard her tirade over the speaker system.

    I told a local cop about it later. He wasn't amused at all about it.

  12. multi-taskers by Loconut1389 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    some people are naturally adept multi-taskers- professional drivers (especially school bus drivers) are trained and in the regular practice of having extremely distracting activities going on and still being good drivers.

    Personally, whenever I've been on the phone (not too often, I avoid it if possible) and something has gone on, without even thinking about it, my mouth stops and I'm 100% tuned into the road, I don't even notice I was talking to someone until things settle down. I'm used to having a bus full of drunk adults (bachelor parties) and rowdy kids.

    I think they should test the subjects general multi-tasking ability and come up with a statistic that correlates multi-taskability (or inability) to accident+phone rates.

    1. Re:multi-taskers by cain · · Score: 4, Insightful
      ...without even thinking about it, my mouth stops and I'm 100% tuned into the road

      I call BS. How do you know there were not other times when you were oblivious to danger? You'd be oblivious so you would not even be aware that there was danger.

  13. Well, they don't quite show that. by Onan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    According to TFA, they compared phone users to drivers who were at the legal blood-alcohol limit, not those above it. So they have, at most, demonstrated that driving while using a phone is more dangerous than other driving that we consider legal. Obviously there's some level of drunkenness that would be more impairing than phone use; finding out where that point is would be considerably more interesting than what this study actually did examine.

    I'd also love to hear more detail about the "hand-free" devices that they used for the test. Were these earpieces, or something more speakerphoneish? I seem to recall another study finding that the problem with driving while using a phone is not having your hands occupied, it's the mental isolation that happens as your brain divides resources between your conversational world and your driving world. And that earpieces did not change this, but that speakerphones _did_.

  14. And when you combine all three... by MyOtherUIDis3digits · · Score: 3, Funny

    you are really asking for trouble!

    "Yeah, babe, I've been thinking about you"
    "Noooo, I haven't been drinking! I'm close to your place, can I come over? I miss you..."


    Never ends well.

    --
    Ignore anything I said above, I actually agree with everything you believe - mod accordingly.
  15. Handsfree by BigDuke6_swe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think I've heard about a similar report where driving with and without handsfree was compared. The conclusion was that it's not the fact that your holding a phone thats the biggest issue. It's the fact that you're concentrating on something else than driving that causes reactions to take longer.

    --
    Zere vere zwei peanuts valking down der Straße, and von vas assaulted...peanut
  16. Re:hmm by Carnildo · · Score: 3, Informative
    40 people? thats not that many.
    its just as likely that they got the really good drivers drunk and all the shiat drivers were handed cell phones.

    not that i doubt the conclusion, or anything. i hate cellphone-talking drivers. i'm just saying that 40 is kind of a small sample size for something being touted so much by the anti-cellphone-while-driving peoples.


    If you look at the study methodology, it's quite large enough. They didn't divide it up into several smaller groups, they tested each participant under four different conditions: undistracted, talking on a hand-held phone, talking on a hands-free phone, and drunk.
    --
    "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  17. Re:Yeah, you're awesome, I love you man... by Loconut1389 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Funny, in one sentence it says it will prevent you from calling anyone if you're drunk and in the next says you should call a cab if you're drunk. How does that work again?

  18. Obvious BS. by Belial6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If three out of every 40 people who talked on cell phones were going to get in an accident, the highways would be a blood bath. A one in 14 chance of an accident? Come now. Nobody that spends a minute thinking about it is going to believe that.

    Of course if they do, then they have to also look at the fact that 0. That's right 0 drunk drivers had an accident in the study. That means that the study proves drunk driving is perfectly safe right?

  19. Flawed methodology by vanillaspice · · Score: 4, Informative

    So the researchers at the University of Utah determined that using your phone is worse than having a BAC of 0.08, the equivalent of one drink, not the equivalent of being drunk. How does the rubric stand up to two drinks? Four? As it is, the data don't suggest much. And don't be fooled by the "alcohol is involved in 40 percent of the 42,000 annual traffic fatalities" statistic, either. Most states derive that number from whenever any party, regardless of fault, has a BAC of 0.01 or more. In other words, you could eat a cherry cordial and a sober person could plow right through you and the state would consider your death an alcohol-related traffic fatality.

  20. Mythbusters confirmed this by HappyDrgn · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(season_2 )#Cell_Phones_vs._Drunk_Driving

    Adam and Kari drove normally, then while talking on a cell phone and also while drunk. They had officers taking breathalyzer tests to get their BAC. In the show they determined that they where equally bad at driving using a cell phone as they where while drunk. Scores where done by a driving instructor in the car with them during all the tests.

  21. Re:Something is fishy here by nickfrommaryland · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That table does only looks at total fatal crashes. There is no data on the total number of automobile accidents. I suspect that more people aren't dying in automobile accidents because automobiles are safer overall. Cell phones started becoming more common in 1994, but so did SUVs. Those bigger vechicles are less likely to cause fatalities to their occupants (although not necessarily their victims).

  22. We always treat the symptoms not the problem.... by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is not cell phone use in and of itself causing crashes. That is just a symptom of a bigger problem: people are not trained to use cell phones properly while driving and usually don't have the correct equipment to do so.

    When I was in the military I drove tracked vehicles while communicating on a radio net, and also talking on an internal intercom system with a TC and squad leader. Getting in an accident would have been far more catastrophic given the weight and size of the equipment I was operating.

    Similarly, Pilots also have to communicate while controlling an expensive piece of equipment - and I've also done that.

    In both cases I never had an accident. I can't imagine the military or aviation systems working without radio communications. Similarly the efficiency of using the Cell phone has provided amazing and equally important impacts to the civilian world.

    The number one key is to have the right equipment for 'hands free' operation. For cell phones this means buying and using the voice-dial features available on most phones now, and getting a headset for hands free operation in your vehicle.

    Secondly you must learn to modify your driving habits so that if the conversation moves to a point of needing to take your eyes off the road (e.g. to search for or record information), that you then pull off the road and carry on the conversation without impacting your driving ability. You should never manually dial a number into your phone while driving, and never attempt to write something down, or search for some item in your briefcase or purse, for that matter.

    Banning the use of Cellphones in cars is not the solution; proper training and equipment is the right answer.

    --

    Lodragan Draoidh
    The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain