Please see also this successor post in which I do come down in favor of the ban.
Next week, the Senate will vote on a proposal to ban use of hand-held cell phones while driving. As a frequent cyclist, I am a “vulnerable road user” and do live in fear of distracted drivers. But I am not sure how I’ll vote yet.
Current law already prohibits texting while driving. Fines start at $100 and go up to $500 for a third offense. Current law allows the use of hand-held phones by adults “as long as 1 hand remains on the steering wheel at all times.” Junior operators (those under 18) are already fully prohibited from using mobile devices while driving.
Under the proposed new law, the following acts would become violations punishable by fines if done by the operator while on an area of the roadway intended for travel (except in emergencies).
- Using a mobile electronic device except in hands-free mode.
- Touching or holding a mobile device “except to activate, deactivate, or initiate a feature or function.”
- Inputting information by hand into a GPS device.
- Holding a mobile device in “immediate proximity of one’s head” — presumptively a violation, i.e., the police can pull you over if they see the phone near your head.
In a court of law, the words “initiate a feature or function” would probably be read to allow dialing a phone, but the proponents appear to believe that they are prohibiting dialing — this language may need some clarification.
There appear to be conflicting findings on the issue of whether hands-free phones are actually safer than hand-held phones. It does stand to reason that dialing a phone manually is as dangerous as texting, especially if it involves looking up a contact. One federally funded study, completed in 2013, found that the visual/manual tasks associated with hand-held phones were associated with increased risks, but that talking on a phone (hand-held or otherwise) does not, per se, elevate risks.
By contrast, a AAA study released around the same time, found that conversation by phone, whether hands-free or hand-held, degrades driving performance. Also, a finding from the first study was that many hands-free phones require visual-manual tasks to initiate calls, so they can create many of the same risks created by a hand-held phone.
It may be that we should go further and just ban non-emergency calls. It would certainly be conceptually cleaner, given the vagueness of what “hands-free” means. I advocated a full ban in our last go-round on this issue in 2010. The National Transportation Safety Board came out for a full ban in 2011, but no other state has gone so far.
Given that a limited ban targeting hand-helds favors people with the means to acquire better phones, enforcement of it will certainly fall more heavily on communities of poverty and there is the perennial problem of differential enforcement against people of color.
And are we focusing on the right issue? Isn’t it just as dangerous to eat a meatball sub in a suit while driving? There are a lot of ways we let our guard down. Data from the federal Department of Transportation suggest that roughly 10% of fatal crashes involve distraction of some kind, but only 14% of that 10% (i.e., 1.4% of fatalities), involved the use of cell phones. And how many crashes have been avoided because someone had successfully put an address into a navigation system and was following the voice commands rather than fumbling with a map?
Finally, the law will remain difficult to enforce. People will learn to use the speaker phone and keep their hands below the window line. Ironically, dialing covertly, they may run greater risks. I’m not sure it is wise to add more unenforceable laws to the books — the police are already stretched too thin to stop people from running red lights. I haven’t seen before and after studies suggesting that passing laws like this leads to reduced fatalities.
The most important thing may be to continue to remind drivers about the dangers of allowing themselves to be distracted in any way, including driving while fatigued.
Despite these reservations, I remain unsure how I’ll vote. Passing a law like this, flawed as it may be, may be part of the education process that we need and it does stand to reason that it is a good thing to reduce visual-manual interactions with devices while driving.
I’d really like to hear from folks on this one.
Please see this successor post in which I do come down in favor of the ban.
Let’s continue the conversation there. I’ve closed comments on this thread (after reading carefully through all of them, believe it or not), but we can keep the conversation going in the successor post.
I agree with this law. Cellphones are addictive and distracting. All it takes is one second of distraction for lives to be lost. With the ability to use phones in hands-free mode, this law is not overly invasive of our freedoms. In the case of GPS, when one is lost or needs directions, one should pull over, park, and organize oneself. That way everyone is safe.
I recommend voting against this ban. As you point out, it would likely discriminate against drivers of older cars and those who cannot afford hands free interfaces for their phones. Enforcement will be haphazard, at best. Let’s focus on enforcing the existing law against texting and not add confusion.
Thanks for your communication on this and other issues!
I think that one of the motivations is that it is hard to enforce a texting ban if people can be dialing — looks the same.
Will, I agree when you write this: “Passing a law like this, flawed as it may be, may be part of the education process that we need and it does stand to reason that it is a good thing to reduce visual-manual interactions with devices while driving.”
Many studies say that using a cell phone while driving is as dangerous as driving drunk. Please vote to ban cell phone use while driving.
While I hate drivers who use any form of cell phones when driving because the distraction puts others at risk, the unintended side-effects of an onerous law may be worse than the problem being solved. Ultimately, serious distractions depend on what the driver does in his head, and there is no law that can regulate mental activities. A cell phone conversation invites distraction, but so does thinking about a difficult upcoming confrontation with a colleague. Nevertheless, I would vote for a ban.
This is a tricky issue to solve. Cell phones can be distracting and dangerous, but it depends on how they are being used and in what situations. Today’s new cars nearly all have large touch screens that are just as distracting as cells phones, yet we continue to allow their installation and use. I’ve used a cell phone mounted on the dashboard for navigation and for music, much like a touchscreen in a newer car. The key is being a responsible driver and paying attention to the road while driving, and only adjusting settings on a cell phone or touch screen when stopped or perhaps on a long straightway on the highway.
I’m not sure any legislation can be worded in such a way to reduce or eliminate dangerous cell phone usage so that it is reasonably enforceable by police. They already have a very tough time enforcing the no texting while driving law we already have. In addition, the existing law has resulted in drivers trying to be more covert in their cell phone usage. Just look around while sitting in a red light. You’ll see lots of heads looking straight down into cell phones that they think they’re hiding out of sight on their laps.
To me, the best solution would be to have a strong distracted driving law that gives the police flexibility to issue violations whenever they see a driver operating in a dangerous manner, for example using a cell phone or adjusting built-in features of the car when they should have their attention focused on the road.
As someone who also bikes a lot, I see way too much distracted driving. I see some people using cell phones very responsibly while others use them at times when they clearly should not. Anything we can do to prevent irresponsible use without punishing responsible use, I am all for.
What is one voTing FOR if one is voting against the ban ? I walk around the streets of Belmont and Watertwon every single day. What I fear most are the one- handed drivers turning a corner while smiling and chatting away, invariably never using a directional.
Thanks, Senator Brownsberger.
If those fatality rates are correct, I think that we’re trying to solve an almost insignificant problem while giving police one more excuse to racially profile.
The rates are as reported, but they may be underreported — in other words, we may not always know when distraction played a role.
People should not be texting or emailing or keying or talking on their phones while driving.
But many of us use our smart phones to navigate (Google Maps, Waze, MapQuest) so I would be sad if using iPhone’s GPS features were made illegal.
I agree. I drive a lot more safely with Siri telling me where to turn…if I have to go back to mapquest print-out directions my eyes will be reading and I will be more distracted. Please consider protecting the use of the GPS function while banning other uses.
Clearly, GPS is a big safety benefit. But the response is: Set your destination before you get rolling. I’m sure that is better, although I know I don’t think to do it until I am unsure of direction some times.
I once read a reference to a study that found that just having a passenger provided as much distraction as cell
phones.
Self-driving cars can’t come fast enough.
I strongly agree with the proposed new law. As I walk or drive around the greater Boston area, every day I see drivers being distracted by cell phone use, and putting pedestrians and other drivers in danger.
I support a FULL ban on all cell phone use.
I believe cell phone use is a real problem and the proposed law is step in the right direction
Thanks for the summary, Will. I think it is a tough call. At first I thought – what is the data? It seems logical, but only if the information we have is clear and it seems not entirely. The two main concerns you noted: is this effectively punishing people who don’t have the latest phone with the latest hands free technology – which feeds into the idea that we all need to BUY the latest… instead of modest upgrades. And the fact that other distractions are as dangerous yet not prohibited…
The no texting current law is a good one. The no calling at all which was proposed makes some sense, yet as you point out, the data suggests that calling is not the only distraction. Drinking coffee and munching on a sandwich can be as distracting. What about using your CD player in the car? or music /radio – that is not mobile, but can be as distracting. I would seek out any data from other states – what about studies in Europe?
Hi–Thanks for asking us for our thoughts. As a pedestrian, I have come very close to being hit, many times, by drivers talking on handheld phones. In most cases, they don’t even realize that they just missed me. I agree with your final statement, above, that even a flawed law is better than nothing. In my car, the button for the phone is on the steering wheel. I only have to move my thumb to initiate a call and everything else is done by voice command. If I need to set my GPS, I pull over to the side of the road. You may be right that the safest law would be to ban cell phones while driving, period, but I don’t think it would ever pass. I was interested to see, driving on the NY State Thruway this past winter, that the state has specific pullouts on the interstate for texting–and signs tell you how many miles to the next texting area. Another good reminder that you can’t text and drive.
best,
Liza Ketchum
Will,
Thanks for asking us to weigh in. I support a ban on the use of cell phones while driving. I’m not sure what to do about the enforcement piece; I don’t want policemen targeting people of color and pulling them over. And I agree – police don’t enforce people running red lights. But if having the ban serve to deter some people, then I think it will be worth it. In your example of listening to the voice commands to give directions – do we consider that “use of a cellphone”? I think we want to ban the act of having a conversation – dialing, speaking and listening; we don’t want to ban getting directions.
Will,
I would tend to agree with you here that banning cell phone use, while a laudable goal, is likely to be selectively enforced at best. I see people on their cell phones all the time, and it does worry me. But don’t police already have the authority to pull people over for “reckless driving” however defined?
I think we have learned as a society that the threat of punishment is not enough to stop crime.
If a ban is to be the solution, please consider implementing income-based penalties, as they have in Sweden. The punishment has to be perceived as significant in order to influence behavior. I hate to make generalizations, but the people I see driving recklessly on cell phones are more often than not in luxury cars.
Another point to consider here: European countries have much fewer auto-related deaths because they simply drive less. That’s one reason drunk driving is not such a huge problem there. We could reduce all road fatalities more significantly if we create policies that shift how people choose to get around (i.e. dramatically improving transit service and making auto trips more expensive relative to transit).
The NTSB and AAA proved all that anyone needs to know: dialing, featuring, and/or talking while driving are all dangerous to the driver, other occupants, other people in other vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians.
No one should have the right to threaten my safety — and my life — with their phone conversations during driving.
Ban all calls (attempted or completed) while driving.
Will,
Aram Hollman here. In principle, I’m in favor of greater restrictions, including a strict ban, or whatever compromise that can pass a vote comes closest to that, on mobile phone use while driving. I prioritize public safety on public roads over personal convenience, and would like the law to reflect that.
Creating legal distinctions, e.g. between the distraction from physical manipulation (e.g. holding the phone, dialing the number) and the cognitive distraction (holding a conversation above the road noise) needlessly muddies the waters on what should be a simple public safety issue. Ban their use by drivers while driving. There are safer alternatives: someone else in the car can make the call, or the driver can pull over. The public safety benefits trump the personal inconvenience of these and other alternatives.
Personal anecdotes: As a driver, cyclist, and pedestrian, far too many of the evasive actions I have had to take involved avoiding a driver on the phone. As a driver, I have occasionally placed a call while driving, and it’s dangerous. At highway speeds, one-half second of inattention is enough to have one’s car start veering out of lane. On local streets, one-half second is enough for someone to step off the curb. While driving I have dialed digits one digit at a time; each takes one-half second. The distraction involved in adjusting a car stereo is significantly less than using a phone; because the former’s interface is simpler. And somehow, the cognitive load of carrying on a conversation on a phone far exceeds that of conversing with a passenger.
The only concern I have with a complete ban is pragmatic, that passing laws that are difficult for police to enforce (e.g. visibly observing someone using a phone while driving) encourages contempt for both the law and law enforcement.
I’m not worried about disproportionate impact on people of color, nor about the added cost of gadgets that might circumvent the law. Regardless of whether they’re valid, public safety trumps them.
I urge you and your colleagues to pass whatever restrictions you can.
Sincerely,
Aram Hollman
Thank you Senator for the opportunity for feedback. I agree with the proposed law for banning hand-held cell phones. I understand that the police have their hands full, but I believe that the law itself could eventually have drivers know that it is not an option. If I am driving in a sketchy area and missed my turn and need directions, I might just have to suck it up and pay the fine, (hopefully not a “moving violation” but a significant fine.) People don’t get into their cars and automatically eat a meatball sub, but they do automatically get on their phones. Nobody is that important that the MUST chat on their phones about their day, where they are headed, etc. Of course, there are people that must be on call to save lives, but otherwise, there is nothing that can’t wait until they have a chance to pull over. Also, being at an intersection is not what I would consider an ok time to make calls. Just because it has become the norm does not make it ok. I think what a lot of people forget: We own our cars, we own our phones, but we do not own our license to drive.
Will, a real dilemna here. In general I favor a ban on the use of hand held phones but some folks are not in a position to have bluetooth equipped vehicles. They would unfairly bear the brunt of enforcement. I would rather see a more concerted enforcement effort on texting while driving. Still witness too many abuses of the current law. Does the state keep enforcement records.
Maybe they should be regularly published so that folks understand there is a price to pay for violating the texting law.
I gather the texting law has been very minimally enforced, in part because it is hard to tell whether people are texting or manipulating a phone for dialing.
Using only in hands-free mode.
Initiating calls by dialing should not be permitted.
I think it’s difficult to totally ban cell phones while driving but I think hands-free needs to be mandatory and enforced and I think texting and emailing while driving need to be banned and drivers who text while driving need to be fined.
Please vote in favor of this proposal. Safety should be our highest priority. This law is a step in the right direction.
A full ban on non-emergency calls could be a win-win-win proposition for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers.
A total ban would be great, but a partial ban would at least be a step in the right direction. Please support this effort.
Ban it
I am opposed to such a law.
OK, in the light of what others have said, I’m going to add onto my earlier comments.
I. Accidents
1) 1.4% of traffic fatalities (if it’s actually that low) is a lot of deaths. And that’s just the fatalities — there are lots of other injuries, many of them permanently disabling, not to mention the traumatic psychological nature of these events, not to mention the aggravation and serious disruption involved — and possible loss of money, of work ($) or even of job.
2) For low income drivers: This is all worse for those who are low-income. And as someone else pointed out, if people are generally safer, then that includes low-income people. Moreover, they generally have less flexibility to spend time with an injured child.
II. Cost
Technology costs for low-income people to get up to speed are NOT high
1. It costs very little ($5-10) to get a holder for a cell phone — — so it is not necessary to look down! As for a GPS, you don’t need to look at it. You can pull over to change the GPS destination. And they can also be attached to the dash; and so can your phone, no matter how fancy, be put in a dash holder. Nor is a (one-ear, please!) earbud expensive – $10-20. Also, GPS and phone calls can be programmed ahead, or wait till you pull over; a special cell-phone can be used for emergency calls; kids can be told to hang on while you pull over (which is good role-modelling). True emergencies are rarities — but when they happen, then the breaking of a minor law is not a big deal.
3. Nor is a device to make the radio into a speakerphone expensive — $10-20.
Bluetooths may be, but you DON’T need them. A nice GPS may require a fancy cell phone, but you DON’T need them! And it is unnecessary to look down at a GPS. Again, they can be attached to the dashboard. Having decided that I should get one so I won’t slow down to look at street signs (let alone look at a map), I find they go for about $40 on Craig’s List.
I might add that it is not necessary to look at the radio in order to change the station! Put one hand on the dial, and turn w/o looking.
III. As for profiling, that is a serious issue about the police, and the courts. which we as a society need to deal with! They can always find some excuse, if they want, to stop those who insist on Driving While Black, or Driving While in a Shabby Old Car. (Or they can wait awhile for another Black or Shabby-car Driver who provides them with some sort of excuse.)
BTW, unless there’s an emergency. police should also be required to follow these rules.
IV. In other words, the seriousness of the “pros” for this law are of much more consequence than the “cons.” And again, laws can be fine-tuned or improved. Please, don’t let the desire for a perfect override what would be a clear improvement.
Thanks again, Will — I always appreciate your willingness to consider others’ points of view.
I support the ban. I observe drivers being distracted frequently texting
or dialing.
I spend more time during the week on a bike than I do in a car. However, I don’t think we should restrict cell phone use while driving.
There are no clear statistics that link cell phone use to accidents and it’s one more cumbersome law – one more reason to be pulled over – one more reason to discriminate between drivers.
What’s next? A ban on eating while driving? A ban on applying make up or brushing your hair while driving?
Furthermore, it would tax those people who don’t have new fancy cars with built-in bluetooth devices – they are the ones that will have to buy headphones and systems to accommodate their car.
Sorry can’t agree with you Chrissie. At the corner where I live, I’ve seen drivers distracted, turning right on red illegally while my son and I are trying to cross with a ‘walk’ light. The guys never saw us. I also see texting drivers ignoring pedestrians in school zones during walk to school hours. And I see see texting drivers blow right past crossing guards. I don’t buy the ‘where will it stop’ argument either. You won’t ever get pulled over for changing your radio station or sipping your coffee. Let’s protect kids, pedestrians and law abiding cyclists.
Please vote no. We already have too many unenforceable laws, and police have better things to do with their time. More education is the best route to changing behavior.
Many cars today come with Bluetooth that allows for hands free talking and calling.
Your point about eating is right on so will this be the next legislation?
You cannot legislate common sense.
My vote is no
Please vote against this law
On balance, I think the new proposals make sense. I’m sure there are still distractions with hands-free phones, but as an inveterate radio listener, it doesn’t strike me as much worse. The points about eating and fumbling with a map are apropos.
We are in the middle as you are. Vote no, too tough to enforce.
Cars speed through yellow and newly turned red lights-this is far from being enforced.
We walk a lot, often drivers do not even look up at intersections to see that someone is about to cross. A big concern.
While I agree we might be able to make some things safer by legislating behavior, after some thought, I don’t feel that this one is a wise or fair one. It definitely will be differentialy enforced and proving exactly what went on could be difficult. There may be too much of a gray area. If I need to call or text, I usually pull over but what if I do the same at a stop light?
I agree that any kind of distraction can prove dangerous or even deadly and that people have varying capacities for multi-tasking. I think the texting law makes a lot of sense as it’s more obviously a hazard. Since most distraction-related fatalities don’t involve cell phones, I’d be curious about what the other distractions are? Should they be looked into too? (I just now looked it up: http://www.distraction.gov/stats-research-laws/facts-and-statistics.html) I hope perhaps that technology will get cheaper so that whatever is only affordable by some might one day be affordable to all. When we lived in Australia for a brief time, they had very powerful drunk driving ads. Perhaps a public awareness ad campaign might help.
Thanks, Will. Distracted driving is a significant problem; and although our personal observations are necessarily subjective, cell phone use in automobiles appears to be greater now than ever. Have read the statutory snippet you provided above and agree with your conclusion as to how the provision will likely be interpreted by the judiciary. Again, though subjective, my observation is that holding the phone, either to one’s ear, or to attempt to manipulate it, is the most distracting – – were I the philosopher king, I’d simply ban having one’s hand on a phone. The technology available in police cruisers has made leaps and bounds in recent years, as indicated by citations that arrive by mail for driving with expired plates, inspection stickers, and other like infractions – – don’t believe that there’s an enforceability issue if police are willing to enforce.
According to the National Safety Council accidents due to cell phone usage is likely to be underreported http://www.nsc.org/learn/NSC-Initiatives/Pages/priorities-cell-phone-crash-data.aspx
They also have a good report explaining how it’s about talking on the phone that is the major issue, not the distraction from using a GPS function, or listening to music, or a podcast even. http://www.nsc.org/DistractedDrivingDocuments/Cognitive-Distraction-White-Paper.pdf Lots of supporting research found in this document.
So if this bill can distinguish between cell phone use as a phone vs. cell phone use as a GPS or radio/CD player then I would support this bill, which as worded it seems to do. Although this bill doesn’t go far enough as to ban hands-free use as a phone which is where the real difficulty comes in as a safety issue. And yes, they’ve done studies showing that talking to one person in a car is not as distracting as having a conversation on the phone.
Thanks, Colleen.
This is helpful information.
I am not sure banning cell phone use is the place to concentrate. While driving a car and conversing by phone (and sometimes even with another person in the car) definitely degrades attention from driving, I couldn’t agree more with your point that EATING while driving is every bit as degrading of the driver’s focus. I’m not sure how we discourage these behaviors, but cell phone use is certainly not the only dangerous diversion in which drivers engage.
I know that there are a lot of driver distractions other than mobile phone use. And I know this is very subjective. But more than once I have almost been hit by someone who makes a right turn on red, ignores the pedestrian light that I have in my favor and nearly hits me as I cross the street – and is talking on a mobile phone! Even if it winds up as one more educational effort, it’s worth doing.
I’m for the proposed new law. Determining if a driver is texting or dialing is impossible for police to detect. No phone near head can be readily seen. I understand the flaws mentioned above. I simply believe this law will likely give us a little safer highways.
I think “hands free” mode should be mandatory, No hand held devices should be legal while driving,unless it is an emergency for health or safety, or unless pulled over and stopped.
This is a true safety issue. Hands free is not difficult, nor is voice activating a call.With all of the accessories available, people can make this adjustment.
Thanks again for hearing feedback. Vote no on this one. Continuing the ban on texting makes sense. Banning phone usage to make calls would be draconian. It would unfairly punish those who can’t afford a new car with a hands-free system built in or expensive blue tooth technology. It would also be extremely inconvenient in general. Help educate people of the dangers, but don’t ban usage.
Distracted driving, whatever the cause, is dangerous, but I see this as a matter for education, not legislation.
I am very concerned with the amount of texting while driving. I see it all the time at street corners. I think a further ban would be helpful. Unfortunately, I know someone who was invloved in a fatal accident due to a cell phone.
I think there need to be stricter regulations/laws.
I recommend banning all cell phone use while driving because any use inherently distracts from driving thereby inherently increasing the risk of accidents. Many more people use cell phones than eat meat ball subs in a suit while driving so banning the former is more urgent than banning the latter even though both are dangerous.
I feel that all cell phones used while driving should be banned. They are impeding safe driving on our conjested road ways. People are so distracted by their phones that they are forgetting their responsibility of being a law abiding safe driver.
Driving is a PRIVILEGE not a right. Too many accidents and near miss accidents occur on a daily basis. It’s time to stop our dopamine madness. If you absolutely have to read a text, respond to one or make and take calls, PULL OVER!
There should definitely be a law banning this. There is no reason that people should have any device in their hands.
You mentioned banning ALL cell phone use, including hands-free. How would this be enforced? How would you even KNOW someone is talking hands-free and not say singing along to a song or yelling at some news piece on the radio? I think unreasonable to think that this can be achieved.
What CAN be achieved is banning all hand use of phones while driving, which I support 100%. In addition to the distraction just having to hold the phone presents, it also prevents the person from holding onto the wheel with both hands, hindering their full ability to control their vehicle. For those who are for whatever reason unable to talk hands-free in their car, either pull over or wait until you get to your destination. It’s really that simple.
Drivers should not be allowed to handle cell phone while driving unless there is an emergency. No exceptions. period. Virtually very time I drive around the Boston area I am involved in a near accident with someone driving and holding a phone to their head – virtually every time. Try standing on Main St or Mt Auburn St some day at rush hour and you can see just how big a problem this is. Other states prohibit this behavior and you just don’t see it as much as a result. If the proposed language is unclear then tighten it up. The police are fully capable of enforcing this law. They may chose not to but that is another matter.
Please do not ban all cell phone use other than “emergency” calls. What constitutes an “emergency” is subjective also. If you are trying to pick up your child at day care, you’re stuck in traffic, you can’t afford the $10 per minute fine and you’re trying to reach your kid’s friend’s mom to pick him or her up – that’s an emergency to you. If your boss is calling, that may be an emergency to you. Or your latch-key kid. Etc.
Having struggled mightily with so-called “hands-free” features, I have to say that they still do not generally allow you to keep your eyes consistently on the road. If we need to require hands-free, we will find ways to adapt, but like it or not, people need to use phones in their cars for a whole host of reasons.
It won’t be that much longer and we’ll be getting into self-driving cars, in which we can talk, text, even watch movies. Then, this issue will be moot and there will be a bunch of new issues. Let’s go as easy as possible on creating new crimes for all of us to commit.
I appreciate you reaching out to us and being so candid about your uncertainty.
From my point of view, safety has to come first, and that means banning cell phone use. Doing anything while you are driving is distracting, and the number of accidents and near-accidents I have seen related to people using phones (I was rear-ended by one of my own students while on her phone) is completely unacceptable because it puts others in jeopardy.
I recognize that this law will be largely unenforceable for the reasons you pointed out, but I would argue that a law being largely unenforceable does not mean that it shouldn’t be a law. Many people follow laws when police aren’t around or are highly unlikely to be present for the “crime,” and this law wouldn’t be an exception. Anything we can do to send the signal to the motoring public that they must put others’ safety and wellbeing before their own perceived needs is essential at this point.
My vote would be full out banishment. Or pull over and make the call. But a win won’t make any difference. I see cops *texting* while driving, so who will enforce the or any new law ? On a daily basis my dog I and miss being hit by texting/talking drivers as we cautiously cross in crosswalks *and* with the Walk Sign. As a driver, I also know how infuriating pedestrians can be so I try to be a mindful walker. But banning cell phones won’t make a difference if the police won’t set an example- driving laws are not enforced in MA. But I love your spirit !
Will, I appreciate that you keep constituents informed about issues on the state’s agenda. Re: cell phones & driving – you raise excellent points from both sides. I can offer only what I do. It is not perfect, but I think it makes common sense – especially when one takes into account that there was life before cell phones. My driving record is excellent. I drive a 2002 Ford Escort, so I have no Bluetooth connection to a car speaker. I own a ‘dumb’ phone that sticks on the dash and will receive a call from the phone’s loudspeaker. I never have used the phone up to my ear – having both hands free to be on the wheel is imperative, because circumstances surrounding navigating a 1 ton vehicle can become swiftly unpredictable at the most inconvenient moment. If I “need” to call someone, I pull over and dial – even if the number is on flash dial, because I know that accidents happen in an instant. For what it’s worth, that is my nontechnical opinion. Incidentally, I was unable to locate any stats on coinciding auto accidents with eating meatball subs – but that doesn’t mean there is no correlation, just no findable studies! 🙂
Will -I do not use my cell phone while driving. I agree with the data that say that manual tasks are more distracting than talking. However, the person to whom the driver is talking, has no idea of the driver’s situation. When the other person is in the car, he or she can quit talking if, for example, there is an intersection or a lot of traffic. The passenger can quit talking so the driiver is not distracted. The person at the other end of the phone call mmay not know the situation and could be distractng. So I have a policy of not talking on the phone while I am driving. My phone has hands-off but even so, it is a distraction. I realize that this may pose an inforcement quandry but it does send the message.
Dan Healey
This is a terrible idea. Let’s enforce the laws and rules about driving – and if somebody doesn’t follow those rules *FOR WHATEVER REASON* then they should be punished. That would include putting on make up, eating, listening to the radio, talking and even using a cell phone. Others can do all of those things and drive just fine. Criminalize the violation, not the behavior.
This goes against my libertarian/liberal nature, but I have opined here before about the dangers of texting and driving. I believe that it has far more impact than cited in your email and that the law should be strengthened. Talking on the phone, while also dangerous, at least keeps the driver’s head up (vision impaired on one side and only one hand on wheel). I think any driver involved in an accident should automatically be investigated for cell phone use at the approximate time of the accident. Although difficult to prove it was the cause, perhaps their could be some punitive repercussions through points on their driver’s record, regardless of who is assessed fault. I.e, they most likely contributed.
One hand driving is dangerous and should be prohibited. I constantly see a lot of bad driving in Boston with phone in one hand. Hands free, especially installed by car manufacture is safe, I am using it. All control of smartphones should be done either by voice or by the bluetooth connection to vehicle electronics.
Inputting information by hand into a GPS device. – It needs correction.
I think the current law is sufficient. It is also counterproductive to attempt to impose through legislation actions which people will uniformly disobey. It undermines the respect of the laws.
Please vote to ban cell phone usage while driving. This law is long overdue.
Thank you
I’d like to see a ban. I agree with the thought that it’s one step in educating drivers to get off the road while dealing with phone calls and GPS settings.
I see drivers in Boston on cellphones and in “emergency-panic” mode all the time. They look lost, and they are probably on their cellphones trying to get directions from someone. Or they may be in some other personal moment of panic – late to pick up from daycare or dealing with a work crisis – as one poster suggests.
I generally see this “moment of panic” cellphone use while I am biking on city streets where the speeds are lower. At city traffic speeds, an accident is generally/hopefully less likely to be fatal …. and so the research on the benefits of cellphone bans should look at all types of accidents and not only fatalities.
I am often behind or next to people on their phones. They are often the ones weaving in their lanes on Rt. 2 or 128/95. They are the ones who don’t realize the red light has turned green because they are face into their phone. It’s as bad as drunk driving. They are not paying attention to driving or road conditions, or pedestrians.
I think that hands-free phone use is OK, but I would support a ban otherwise.
I agree with this proposal.
It is a no-brainer. I would ban all use.