Teen Texting Driving PSA. Somewhat graphic.

[Sad Max]

That moment to drop the phone is a moment you may not have (or more accurately, that your prospective victims may not have).

And the research is conclusive, to demonstrate that simply having the telephone conversation makes you unsafe, as much as drinking and driving impaired make you unsafe. A telephone conversation is not like listening to the radio, it's not like conversing with a passenger, and it's not like mumbling to yourself. It makes you an active threat to the safety of all around you, and frankly the best anyone can hope for is that you just kill yourself without harming anyone else.

 

[Mattykins]

I was actually trying to find the article I read the other day about this. But I couldn't.

Conversing with a passenger is different from phone conversations. Passengers usually alter their conversations based on weather outside or other traffic conditions allowing the driver to concentrate.

And conversing on the phone limits peripheral vision. It has to do with paying more attention to the conversation and letting other things fall by the wayside. So you essentially have blinders on. Reaction times are slowed. Maneuverability is affected. Pretty much everything is affected.

So you can't really just "drop your phone". By that point, it will be far too late.

 

[Hawk Teflon]

My dad HATES seeing people talk on the phone while driving. He has a few choice words for them every time. My mom, now, never answers the phone when it rings if she's driving. She'll pull into a gas station, turn off the car and call them back. Every time. Seems crazy to me in practice, but she's not the one endangering any lives.

 

[Sad Max]

Your parents are sensible, intelligent people.

Must be nice.

 

[mobhb]

I don't know if it's even possible, but I think all cars should come with some kind of signal disruptor to prevent using any devices like that. People take driving way too lightly and any distractions could spell tragedy.

 

[Sad Max]

It's entirely possible at a technical level, but the FCC would probably go bananas.

I guess you could metalize the windows and turn the whole car into a rolling Faraday cage, but then you'd be out of luck trying to use a GPS receiver too (unless it was set up with an external aerial).

 

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

It's entirely possible at a technical level, but the FCC would probably go bananas.

I guess you could metalize the windows and turn the whole car into a rolling Faraday cage, but then you'd be out of luck trying to use a GPS receiver too (unless it was set up with an external aerial).

I agree with what you guys are saying and I am against driving with distractions. However, if people were really concerned with saving lives cars would be built better and we would all be wearing 5 point harnesses. Just look at the Nascar crashes that everyone walks away from.

Accidents are always going to happen and the technology to make cars safer has always been around. I saw a David Suzuki show (I think it was him) back in the seventies that had a car with foam injected surroundings, air bags, you name it. Drove it into a wall and the guy walked away, no dummy used.

My point is this. Accidents will always happen, why not make the cars safer?
Took forever just to get airbags in them.

MAH

 

[Sad Max]

Making drivers safer is much more important, than making cars safer. The car is your last line of defense, not your first.

And - forgive me - but the observation that accidents will always happen looks foolish in the context of removing a stupid lethal distraction from drivers' hands. Heck, why not let airline pilots fly drunk? Since airline accidents will always happen?

 

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

As I said... I agree that the distractions should be removed. Did you miss that part? Not arguing that.

Just stating that accidents will still happen and that the technology has always been available to make us safer in our cars. Do you realize how long airbags were around before they started putting them in cars?

Cars could be built a hell of a lot safer and I for one would appreciate being in a safe car when some moron smacks into me with their giant SUV.

 

[Sad Max]

Engineering safety is a total non-sequitur to a conversation about drivers' behavior. Sure, it's an important topic, but a separate one.

 

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

Engineering safety is a total non-sequitur to a conversation about drivers' behavior. Sure, it's an important topic, but a separate one.

Thanks for setting me straight. :violin:

Everyone here was complaining about morons in cars. Having been in a serious accident that was not my fault I'm just pointing out that they should stop with the BS ads and fix the cars that we all pay top $ for. It's the only way to be truly safe.

I'll leave you be to your own thoughts now. Wouldn't want you to stray off topic.

MAH

 

[Sad Max]

That's a peculiar argument. You're safer getting hit in a well-engineered car, than not being hit, at all?

Frankly, if cars came fitted with six-inch stainless steel spikes protruding from the center of the steering wheel, you can bet that people would drive *much* more carefully. Skill and attentiveness save more lives, than crash-protection technology.

 

[Ian-T]

I think Michael has a valid argument. We've gone from texting to talking on cell phones in this conversation. If we are not going to make cars safer for the general community then what about the folks who have jobs that requires the use of cell phones, cb radios etc. (police, firemen, utility, tow, and on and on) while on the road. They are supceptable to the same type of accidents (just like that "Final Desitination" clip demostrates). If your answer is the predictable "they are trained for that" then maybe a solution would be to train common folks on how to use these devices while on the road.....also (sounds stupid...but hey).

Anyways...I'm all for making automobiles safer.

 

[Batutta]

Skill and attentiveness save more lives, than crash-protection technology.

You know that's interesting because I just moved to Canada in an area that just had a suburban population explosion, and I've seen and heard about more car accidents in a month that I ever saw living in Los Angeles. I think it's because driving in Los Angeles demands attentiveness. You have to be a certain caliber of driver to even get out of your driveway, and you can't relax for a second. Here, you have a mix of city drivers and country drivers used to driving on unpopulated roads and the result is more accidents.

 

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

That's a peculiar argument. You're safer getting hit in a well-engineered car, than not being hit, at all?

Nope. My argument is that accidents will always happen, that's why they are called accidents.

I would rather be in the safe car that provides a much higher chance of walking away from an accident then rely on the person in the other car to do the right thing.

The cops and firemen told me that had my car been T-boned by the old lady running a red that I would have been dead. Luckily she just removed the entire front end of the car and the engine took the hit.

I would prefer to be in a car that CAN be T-boned and that we can all still walk away from after the accident. I don't want luck saving my ass, I prefer reliability.

But we are getting off topic. I agree with cell phones and the like being banned from cars. I just don't think it will solve the problem since states that outlaw it still have people doing it every where you look. So what does it fix?

MAH

 

[Sad Max]

Agreed that on their end engineers should continue to improve auto safety.

But the degree to which an car's safety systems come into play is almost entirely a consequence of how the operator drives. So improving operator attentiveness is the place to start.

As far as the small proportion of 'gotta have them' users go, even if they keep talking the removal of all the 'don't gotta have them' users' devices will *still* make a gigantic difference in road safety.

 

[Hawk Teflon]

I don't know if it's even possible, but I think all cars should come with some kind of signal disruptor to prevent using any devices like that. People take driving way too lightly and any distractions could spell tragedy.

Or you could just put my apartment on wheels

 

[Jon Starr]

What about the people on foot?

I was almost hit by someone talking on their cell phone. I was just crossing at an intersection, the car was fully stopped, but then it turned and nearly hit me. She was on the phone and didn't even notice me.

Which I don't really get... If you're on the phone, your have you phone upto the side of your head, and you can look at the road. You don't really need two hands on the wheel at all times. Worst case scenerio if you need to, you drop the phone. The only dangerous part about actually talking on the phone, is dialing and answering, which you still have to do with most wireless headset devices.

Texting is a completely different story.

Seriously!?! Others have said it but think of it this way.

The radio you listen to, but you don't fully pay attention to. You can also easily ignore it without problem, and you generally don't have to do much thinking when listening.

If you have a passenger they are there with you, re-acting to the surroundings. Sometimes they can even act as a second pair of eyes (if they want to).

Now if you're on the phone, not only do you have to think and respond, but the person on the other line isn't reacting to your driving, they don't know when you're at a red light, or trying to merge onto the highway, and certainly aren't a second pair of eyes.

I never answer my phone when driving, and have even told passengers to shut up when I'm trying to concentrate on my driving. After all, the only person that's confident in your driving is yourself, until you get into an accident.

Anyways, here's a far more graphic one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YozMDzOAGxk

 

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

Agreed that on their end engineers should continue to improve auto safety.

My point is that they already have. They just don't implement it because of costs and the fact that if you build it really well it will last longer and you won't have to buy a new one as often. Not good for the auto industry.

Anyway, I think improvements all around need to be made, I agree with you there. But laws don't make these things suddenly stop however.

I just look at it like this... would you rather have your life in the hands of another or be in a car that can be hit from all angles and keep the occupants safe?

I vote for the latter.

Either that or GPS controlled systems in each car monitored by highly advanced computers that control the speed, driving, braking distance, while knowing where every other car is on the road, within its proximity, at all times.

 

[Sad Max]

Nope. My argument is that accidents will always happen, that's why they are called accidents.

And removing a source of stupid distraction from the driver's hands will decrease the number of accidents we see. An unqualified good.

I would rather be in the safe car that provides a much higher chance of walking away from an accident then rely on the person in the other car to do the right thing.

'Safe' cars are like 'safe' cigarettes: no such thing. Sure, you can make a car technically safer, a desirable thing. But it still comes down to operator skill and attention, as to whether or not the safety systems even come into play.

I would prefer to be in a car that CAN be T-boned and that we can all still walk away from after the accident. I don't want luck saving my ass, I prefer reliability.

Don't you think it's luck that you were hit where you were hit?

But we are getting off topic. I agree with cell phones and the like being banned from cars. I just don't think it will solve the problem since states that outlaw it still have people doing it every where you look. So what does it fix?

Outlawing the use of the devices has to be coupled with draconian enforcement of the law. Otherwise, yes, it's not going to be as effective as it should.