All contents copyright ©, Drive and Stay Alive, Inc., 2003 onwards, unless specified otherwise. All rights reserved. IMPORTANT: click here to read the DISCLAIMER |
|||||||||
|
Young Drivers Not Happy With Cell Phone Restrictions
A Connecticut Example of a Nationwide Problem
By: Eddie Wren, Executive Director, Drive and Stay Alive, Inc.
June 10, 2005
|
|||||||||
|
Research from around the world has shown that the act of talking on any cell phone while driving is a seriously dangerous activity. Indeed, one report from a hugely respected research establishment shows that it has a similar effect on a driver's abilities as being intoxicated at 0.08% BAC.1
Yet we repeatedly see media articles in which people strive to justify their actions and fight the imposition of laws that will save many lives.
Regular readers know that at Drive and Stay Alive, we occasionally add comments to news stories.
At such times, we strive to make a point as diplomatically as possible but this is a subject on which it seems that subtlety and reason are entirely lost upon a large number of people who place their own desire for convenience far above common sense or a concern for other people's well-being.
Therefore the gloves, regretfully, are off. We feel that it is neither reasonable nor responsible for us to simply sit back and watch articles such as the above go meandering past without strongly rebutting the fallacious comments and dangerous ideals of the people interviewed.
Regrettably, however, any media report must in itself be subject to scrutiny. In the article, young Mr. Giel was reported as saying: "If I'm driving home and have an emergency, how am I going to call my parents?"
Following an earlier version of this response to the article, Mr. Giel contacted Drive and Stay Alive to state that his words were "spun" by the reporter concerned and that in fact his comments were: "I said that if a law was passed that prevented people under 18 from talking on the cell phone I would obey it. If there ever was an emergency, then I would use it."
We fully accept Mr. Giel's comments about the possibility of the media misquoting him but it is important for those individuals who do hold the viewpoint that the journalist reported that we ask: "Are such emergencies a regular part of your life? The fact is that using a cell phone while driving is not only selfish and stupid but it will inevitably cause a thousand times more emergencies than it will ever help cure!" (And we are, of course, talking about genuine emergencies here, not just about trivial interruptions to teenage social life.)
Back to the original article: "What are kids gonna do when they want to meet up with friends and they get a call?" said Mr. McConnon -- allegedly much more mature, at the ripe old age of 18.
Well Mr. McConnon, it is said to be quite difficult to "meet up with friends" if you are dead. And let's not pretend this doesn't happen -- the USA has a particularly poor per capita death rate when compared to other developed nations,2 perhaps due in part to an attitude that an individual's right to do more or less whatever he/she pleases seems to take precedence over the rights of other people not to get killed.
"Teenagers don't really plan ahead, the phone just rings," said Alex Steiger.
To Messrs. McConnon and Steiger we must say the simple phrase: "voice mail." Your 'social lives' will not be destroyed by getting messages a few minutes late -- after all, previous generations seem to have managed okay without cell phones -- but unsociable deaths are caused by driver distraction and now top researchers have shown that talking on a cell phone, unlike talking to other people in the car, is the most significant distraction and danger (i.e. not merely the act of dialing, Mr. Thayer).
And for Mr. Thayer, as a driving instructor, to publicly comment that he "would favor of a complete ban on cell phones for driving of all ages, even though he admits to talking on a phone while driving." [And] "he said he recently installed a hands-free device for talking on the phone while driving, but he said he knows it is still dangerous to use," is a disgrace to his profession. What preposterous comments to make and what an example to set! This of course translates as: 'I think they should be banned because they are dangerous, but I still do it myself.'
As long as people insist on ignoring evidence about fatality causation and pretending that they, individually, are somehow exempt from safety restrictions, or that "it will never happen to me," then deaths and maiming will continue to happen at the current, hideous rate.
These are the people who may get a pass on the driving test but fail -- sometimes tragically -- on one or more of intelligence, thoughtfulness, common sense or maturity.
Let's close on a key point: If, mercy forbid, a tragedy on the scale of the World Trade Center massacre were to happen every 23 days in the USA, it would still kill less people each year than do America's roads. (But then what does that matter, just so long as we all get to use our cell phones and do other stupid things while driving, whenever we feel like it!)
1. 'How dangerous is driving with a mobile phone? Benchmarking the impairment to alcohol.' TRL (Report 547) 2. International Road Crash Fatality rates, 1988-2002 and Multi-Country Per Capita Fatality Data for 2003
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
|