NJ bans hands-on cell phone use while driving

[BTox]

Interested to hear the libertarian opinion on this. I have no problem with it.

TRENTON, NJ-January 20, 2004 — New Jersey is set to become the second state in the country to ban motorists from using hand-held cell phones while driving.

Gov. James E. McGreevey is scheduled to sign a bill into law Tuesday that sets $100 to $250 fines for motorists caught using the cell phones in traffic. Handsfree cell phones are exempted.



Source: nj cell phone ban (http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/01202004_nw_njcellphone.html)

[WildCat]

I'm not even close to being a true libertarian, but this is assinine for reasons having nothing to do w/ libertarianism.

It makes no difference (and there are studies showing this, don't have time to search right this moment) whether the phone is hands-free or not, when you talk on the phone you get tunnel vision and aren't paying attention to your driving.

IMHO, hands-free are even worse, because in addition to dialing the phone you also have to fumble w/ a headset.

Man, I hate driving behind some cell phone user who can't maintain his speed, stay in his lane, or notice that the light has turned green.

If only having one hand on the wheel was the problem w/ cell phones, manual transmissions would have to be banned also.

Just hang up and drive...:p

[hawkins_anderson]

All it takes is one nogger-head with a flashpan flint of a notion to come up with a law no one is going to follow. Most people are not disciplined enough. Everyone knows they should not talk on the phone and drive at the same time, but there is always that small voice going off in their heads just dying to scream out "No one will notice. It's only this one time. You won't be on the phone long anyway. Who cares?" Most people are suckers for the cool-point images brought forth by the media concerning cars, phones, etceteras. What makes people think this law is going to change all of that?

[TillEulenspiegel]

Wildcat is correct, I can't remember the studies but the outcome of hands on and voice only telephony in cars showes a reduction of attention to driving . Evedently it dosn't matter if it's reading a news paper , eating a burger or chatting ( hands free ) about your aunt fannys gallblater operation , bottom line is "drive doofus!"

[richardm]

Originally posted by hawkins_anderson
All it takes is one nogger-head with a flashpan flint of a notion to come up with a law no one is going to follow. Most people are not disciplined enough. ...What makes people think this law is going to change all of that?

They said that about laws for wearing seat belts and drink driving, too, but diligent fining seems to have made people change their habits.

[HarryKeogh]

i agree with wildcat, it's not the holding of the phone but the act of just talking on the phone that's dangerous while driving. But people do so many dumb things while driving (eating food, fumbling for a cig. lighter, changing CDs, reading!) how do we handle those things as well?

i'd be more inclined to ban all cell phone use while driving, not just hand held cell phones.

and of course use common sense and pull over.

[Tony]

Originally posted by richardm


They said that about laws for wearing seat belts and drink driving, too, but diligent fining seems to have made people change their habits.


Wrong. People still drive drunk and people still drive without seatbelts.

[Tony]

I don't see what the big deal is, is driving while talking on the phone really that hard? When I was a pizza delivery driver I could talk on the phone, operate a manual transmission and smoke a joint all while driving, and I never had any problems. Although I wasn’t driving on the freeway.

[richardm]

Originally posted by Tony



Wrong. People still drive drunk and people still drive without seatbelts.

Of course they do. But in nothing like the numbers they used to in the '50s and '60s, when pretty much everyone did both as a matter of course - didn't even think about it.

Of course in the USA the laws are different regarding seatbelts, IIRC.

[hgc]

Originally posted by Tony
I don't see what the big deal is, is driving while talking on the phone really that hard? When I was a pizza delivery driver I could talk on the phone, operate a manual transmission and smoke a joint all while driving, and I never had any problems. Although I wasn’t driving on the freeway. You understand the difference between your personal opinion and science, right?

[Tony]

Originally posted by hgc
You understand the difference between your personal opinion and science, right?


Of course, but I see no reason why I should have to follow such a law.

[Tmy]

This is dumb.

Why not ban talking period! Whats the difference tween talking with a passanger or talking on hands free phone. And while your at it ban radios. You listening to radio is distracting! Changing stations and CDs is distracting.

You know who I alwyas see driving and talking on cell phones. Police officers.

[hgc]

Originally posted by Tony



Of course, but I see no reason why I should have to follow such a law. Fair enough. I see no reason you shouldn't suffer the penalty of the law when caught.

[Tony]

Originally posted by hgc
Fair enough. I see no reason you shouldn't suffer the penalty of the law when caught.


Besides the fact that I don’t deserve it, me neither. I stopped paying my tickets a long time ago.

[Wolrab]

I also see police talking on cell phones, usually while speeding!
If you want safer cars, ban children or at least sedate them.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Wolrab
I also see police talking on cell phones, usually while speeding!



I thought about being a cop for two reasons:

1. So I could be above the law

and

2. So could not enforce laws I disagreed with.

[richardm]

Originally posted by Tmy
This is dumb.

Why not ban talking period! Whats the difference tween talking with a passanger or talking on hands free phone. And while your at it ban radios. You listening to radio is distracting! Changing stations and CDs is distracting.



What do you make of the research that indicates you are four times more likely to have an accident while driving if you are holding a mobile phone?

Hands-free phones are also still dangerous, but less so, and the powers-that-be in the UK and NJ have been pragmatic enough to realise that a complete ban on them, radios and talking to passengers would be unworkable.

So just buy a hands free kit! They're only ten quid in this country, which probably means they're giving them away with cornflakes in the USA.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Tony



I thought about being a cop for two reasons:

1. So I could be above the law

and

2. So could not enforce laws I disagreed with.

Thats why everyone wants to be a cop. Why else would there be huge waitlists for a job thats always billed as thankless lowpaying and dangerous. Its crazy enough to cause Shaneks min wage supply/demand charts to implode.

[hawkins_anderson]

Originally posted by richardm


They said that about laws for wearing seat belts and drink driving, too, but diligent fining seems to have made people change their habits.

I work for the courts and sad to say not the last time I looked.

[richardm]

Originally posted by hawkins_anderson


I work for the courts and sad to say not the last time I looked.

Everything's relative.

[hawkins_anderson]

Originally posted by richardm


Everything's relative.

It' becomes like a game of chance that makes most of them want to do it even more.

[richardm]

Originally posted by hawkins_anderson


It' becomes like a game of chance that makes most of them want to do it even more.

Even if that were so, you're talking about a hardened drinker and recidivist. I'm talking about the effect it has on most people. I put it to you that most people will not drink and drive because they know if they get caught they'll lose their licence.

Ditto seatbelts. While in the UK there are some people who insist on not wearing them, the majority do simply because it's not worth the hassle of being pulled over and fined.

How many motorists are there in the area where you work? And how many of them end up in court? Is the second number because they're not being caught, or because they're obeying the law?

[DavidJames]

Seat belt laws, helmet laws, drinking and driving laws. If Natural Selection didn't work so damn slow, I would support getting rid of all of them ;)

[BillyTK]

It always strikes me as sad when common sense and basic decency have to be legislated, but if it means I've got less chance of being side-swiped, bumped or cut-up by some idiot with a mobile phone, or have some way of getting back at any inconsiderate squackhead who does such a thing, then so be it.

[specious_reasons]

Originally posted by Tony
I don't see what the big deal is, is driving while talking on the phone really that hard? When I was a pizza delivery driver I could talk on the phone, operate a manual transmission and smoke a joint all while driving, and I never had any problems. Although I wasn’t driving on the freeway.

I don't think this is a good example of critical thought on your part. I can drive for months and thousands of miles without incident, it doesn't mean I'm a safe and attentive driver. I haven't been the cause of an accident since I was in high school, it doesn't mean I'm a safe and attentive driver.

I recently watched a person make a left turn in front of me, while I was in the left turn lane, and he wasn't. He then proceeded to drive, full speed, through a stop sign. He managed not to get himself into an accident. Does that make him a good driver?

[jj]

"Drivers on the Phone" by Bob Rivers.

www.twistedtunes.com

Go to "the vault" and "the tunes".

Enjoy!

[hawkins_anderson]

Originally posted by richardm


Even if that were so, you're talking about a hardened drinker and recidivist. I'm talking about the effect it has on most people. I put it to you that most people will not drink and drive because they know if they get caught they'll lose their licence.

Ditto seatbelts. While in the UK there are some people who insist on not wearing them, the majority do simply because it's not worth the hassle of being pulled over and fined.

How many motorists are there in the area where you work? And how many of them end up in court? Is the second number because they're not being caught, or because they're obeying the law?

Most people do drink and drive and the repeat offenders that are caught are only a small number of what is out there. However, what they as individuals constitute as being "drunk" does not always match up with what is stated by law. The overall mentality towards alcohol in this country alone differs greatly from what I have seen after having lived in the UK for four years. Racial profiling and the number of police officers in the lower economically stable neighborhoods as opposed to the higher economically stable "residential" neighborhoods play major factors in who is caught and who is not caught. Do you know all of the people in the UK and are there to check and see if they're wearing their seatbelts? I use the word "most" because it is a domino affect. Most films present people who fit into one of the following categories: they do not buckle-up, they talk on cell phones while driving, and drive after having had only a "few drinks." Most vehicular offenders, especially in terms of traffic tickets, whisper to each other about how they beat the last ticket and discuss constantly how many years they have to go to try and make it so when they get their next ticket they can get it dismissed or "I can't get this one dismissed because I got out of one a month ago so now I'm going to have to pay." Sex scenes never show men stopping to put on a condomn, but they will glorify the families who are affected by the actions of those whom have committed the offenses and they will also glorify the offenders themselves. The news knows no boundaries of decency nor promotes such positive conventions of mind. When was the last time you were in this country and just stood on the side of a main road in an urban center and watched exactly how many people refuse to pull over to the side of the road when their cell phones went off or were in a car with your friends and the phone rang, answered it while driving? This is a daily occurence here. The media glorifies the worst offenders but most are just everyday people. The scariest and the worst number is the number the average person not working in the court system does not see except for when the news tells them about one - two people who committed an act within the first ten minutes of its presentation times 3. Most accidents go unreported and most offenses go unreported because jail and insurance is deemed to be too "messy" at times.

I can't help but to think of Dirty Harry - A man with a briefcase can steal more and get away with more than the man with the gun.

[c0rbin]

Off topic but quasi related (dumb traffic laws).

A new law passed here in Texas stating that you have to slow down by 20 mph (sorry no metric conversion) when passing an emergency vehicle with its lights flashing on the side of the road.

So, if you are ina 60 MPH zone and are passing a cop car, fire-truck or ambulance on the side of the road and its lights are flashing, you must slow to 40 mph.

Well, I was in a school-zone this morning that was posted 20 MPH and damn me if there wasn't a cop car parked in one lane with its light flashing.

Should I have slowed my vehicle to 0 MPH!?!?

[hawkins_anderson]

Originally posted by c0rbin
Off topic but quasi related (dumb traffic laws).

Well, I was in a school-zone this morning that was posted 20 MPH and damn me if there wasn't a cop car parked in one lane with its light flashing.

Should I have slowed my vehicle to 0 MPH!?!?

LOL. Hope you didn't get a ticket.

[Snide]

Originally posted by jj
"Drivers on the Phone" by Bob Rivers.

www.twistedtunes.com

Go to "the vault" and "the tunes".

Enjoy! Bob Rivers rocks.

[Snide]

I'm with Wildcat on this one. I've never had a "close call" driving because one hand wasn't on the wheel. Being distracted in a conversation, however, is a different story.

Anecdotal, I know...

[Charles Livingston]

This doesnt make any sense to me. If hands-free are ok, they are basically saying the its the 'only one hand on the wheel' that is the problem. If so, why arent they banning that, ie you must have two hands on the wheel. I mean, is there a difference between using one of my hands to dial the phone and using one of them to change the radio station, etc.

[SRW]

Originally posted by Charles Livingston
This doesnt make any sense to me. If hands-free are ok, they are basically saying the its the 'only one hand on the wheel' that is the problem. If so, why arent they banning that, ie you must have two hands on the wheel. I mean, is there a difference between using one of my hands to dial the phone and using one of them to change the radio station, etc.

A ban on hand free use would be imposable to enforce, how could you tell if someone is on the phone if they cannot see it.

But the real distraction in cell phones is the conversation and not the use of the hands. I would think that reckless driving laws should cover this, if you are not driving safely, weaving or what have you then you should get a ticket.

[Bentspoon]

.................. I would bring a law suit to test it and it would probably be overturned because the probelm is not cell phones, it is distraction. The cell phone industry is being singled out for no apparent reason.

Why don't we just legislate that people should be licensed and trained to drive responsibly .... oh wait we already do that.

I don't even have a cell phone - all it took was my girl friend calling me during rush hour traffic because she was bored and wanted to blah blah blah - I removed it. I just don't need the phone.

Anyway, if cell phones are illegal in the vehicle then the following should be:

1) smoking
2) eating
3) gawking
4) children in the back seat
5) two people in the front seat
6) two women in the car anywhere (OK ladies that was just a joke)
7) CD playing
8) radio listening
9) sneezing

I propose that we pass a law where everyone just had to act responsibly - that'll fix thngs.

Jokes aside, this law is challengeable and if I were going to defend this law in court, I would want to know that there was some reason cell phones were singled out. Statistics or some obvious theory as to why this distraction among all other distractions should be banned from the vehicle. I don't think it is supportable. Any legislator that fosters an untenable law should be held accountable. They are wasting time and money. We do too much of this all over the country.

We had some yahoo in Washington state that was running around with a camera on his shoe so he could get pictures up womens' dresses. Then some idiot thinks we need a law on the books specifically prohibiting this activity - because of one or a few idiots. How about a law that women must wear panties - I mean think of the dignity we could save - and it is enforceable. Where do I get my badge????

err Miss, may we talk to you over here??? Panty patrol

we make too many laws - the law should be more precious and serious.

Bentspoon

[BTox]

Let me add that drivers here in jersey are horrendous and rude to begin with, cell phones have only made it worse. Why I even saw some fool driving with his elbows and reading the paper at the same time... what a minute, that was me...

[richardm]

Originally posted by Bentspoon
Statistics or some obvious theory as to why this distraction among all other distractions should be banned from the vehicle. I don't think it is supportable.


Research has already been done. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1885775.stm) This hasn't come out of the blue.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1885000/images/_1885775_distance_trav2_gra_300.gif
(Image from BBC Website).

Roger Vincent of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents: "The problem is you actually get sucked into the telephone conversation, and the conversation starts to take precedence over the driving task.

The person on the end of the phone doesn't know the driving conditions around you. If someone's in the car talking to you they can stop talking if a dangerous situation arises.

"People just don't seem to understand how distracting these telephone conversations are.


I'd point you at the TRL site but it doesn't want to play today. But the linked article summarised:

The research said reaction times were, on average, 30% slower when talking on a mobile than when just over the legal limit, and nearly 50% slower than when driving normally. emphasis mine

Drivers were also less able to maintain a constant speed and found it more difficult to keep a safe distance from the car in front.

In the tests at 70 miles per hour, the braking distance was 102ft (31m), which increased to 115ft (35m) with alcohol; 128ft (39m) with a hands-free phone and 148ft (45m) with a hand-held mobile.

[Tmy]

"The person on the end of the phone doesn't know the driving conditions around you. If someone's in the car talking to you they can stop talking if a dangerous situation arises."

Oh pleeze. How would this have any real effect on your driving. If Im talking on a hands free cell and deer jumps in front of my car, IM NOT GOING TO CONTINUE WH THE CONVERSATION. Hell, if the person was in the car their screaming and "watch outs" would probably be more distracting.

If you want to band hand helds, fine I can see that. But there is no good argument for banning hands free. Do people realize how much business is conducted on cell phones??? WHy mess with that.

[Snide]

Originally posted by Tmy
How would this have any real effect on your driving. If Im talking on a hands free cell and deer jumps in front of my car, IM NOT GOING TO CONTINUE WH THE CONVERSATION. But the point is, in which scenario will you notice the deer sooner? Phone conversation, or no phone conversation? A split second is all it takes...

BTW, I'm with you, just not this line of reasoning.

edited to add missed word

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Originally posted by Tmy
"The person on the end of the phone doesn't know the driving conditions around you. If someone's in the car talking to you they can stop talking if a dangerous situation arises."

Oh pleeze. How would this have any real effect on your driving. If Im talking on a hands free cell and deer jumps in front of my car, IM NOT GOING TO CONTINUE WH THE CONVERSATION. Hell, if the person was in the car their screaming and "watch outs" would probably be more distracting.

If you want to band hand helds, fine I can see that. But there is no good argument for banning hands free. Do people realize how much business is conducted on cell phones??? WHy mess with that.

Except that the research shows a marked impact on braking distance even when using a hands free phone. If this is correct (and it may be that more research is needed) then there is an argument for limiting their use.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Jaggy Bunnet


Except that the research shows a marked impact on braking distance even when using a hands free phone. If this is correct (and it may be that more research is needed) then there is an argument for limiting their use.

Im thinking this research is kinda bogus. THe assumption is that if you are not talking to someone you must then be concentrating on driving. Which would happen in test setting but not in real life. When your driving you can be distracted with just thought.

Who are these idiots who cant talk and drive? Are they the ones also who cant walk and chew gum at the same time.

[bignickel]

Originally posted by Tmy

Im thinking this research is kinda bogus.

Fine. Find a dis-interested third party, and bring us their research.

"I don't see how this can happen" is an Argument from Ignorance. Thus -> the data.

[Tmy]

Well the article just tells us the result of the experiment and little else. Makes it hard to debunk their testing process.

Look, Im sure they are right. Im also sure that people driving from a funeral react slower than people who arent driving back from a funeral. LETS BAN DRIVING FROM FUNERALS!

[SRW]

Originally posted by Tmy




Who are these idiots who cant talk and drive? Are they the ones also who cant walk and chew gum at the same time.

Oh they are easy to spot they are the ones running stop sign, rear ending you, and running over kids at the cross walk.