NTSB Cell Phone Ban Advocacy

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

The thread is about cellphones. So, unless they are coming out with cellphones that have a "firearm app"............................

Dave

What a great idea. A cell phone that doubles as a protection device. I see all kinds of possibilities: a firearm model, a pepper spray model, and for the San Francisco crowd a stun device. Of course, for quick access it would need actual physical buttons, thus substantially increasing its price.

[whoaru99]

Originally Posted by bhunter

LEOs will not be able to distinguish who is and who is not using a cell phone while driving.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. There are radar detector detectors so I have absolutely no doubt there is a way to detect cell phones as well, and whether they are or are not currently in active use.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by bhunter

I'm not for texting and driving or any other distraction including eating. I do assert that the potential danger of cell phone use is less than what the NTSB and LEOs claim. The problem with the NTSB position is that it argues that even talking on a cell phone is dangerous and thus poses a substantial risk to the public. How many accidents has coffee drinking caused? I have no problem with using hands free devices. Newer higher end vehicles are coming with such devices pre-installed and they have a very low profile. LEOs will not be able to distinguish who is and who is not using a cell phone while driving. Surely, you don't feel that only the wealthy ought be able to make phone calls while driving?

It appears that behind the NTSB position is someone from the MADD group. The data appears to be difficult to collect and I suspect that a lot of accidents get unfairly blamed on cell phones, rather than drivers that are idiots regardless of if or if not they happen to have a cell phone on board.

Given the number of miles traveled and the number of people on SoCal roads, I'm surprised there are not more accidents. When it rains here in San Diego, like it did two days ago, we had around 300-400 accidents. I wonder how many cell phone calls were made and what percentage of those calls caused accidents?

I think we have some common ground here. I agree that a total ban is unreasonable. I do believe that there should be a requirement for hands free use. All phones come with some sort of hands free device, and most can be programmed to make calls based on name recognition. (In other words, you don't have to be rich, but you do need some tech savvy) It is the fiddling with the phone that is the most dangerous behavior.

The hands-free requirement would essentially take care of the texting issue. As far as I know, there is no way to do hands free texting. Even if a phone came equipped with voice recognition software sophisticated enough to write text (as opposed to dialing a pre-saved number), it would also have to translate text into audio to satisfy the hands-free requirement.

Regards,

D-Ray

[djv8ga]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

I think we have some common ground here. I agree that a total ban is unreasonable. I do believe that there should be a requirement for hands free use. All phones come with some sort of hands free device, and most can be programmed to make calls based on name recognition. (In other words, you don't have to be rich, but you do need some tech savvy) It is the fiddling with the phone that is the most dangerous behavior.

The hands-free requirement would essentially take care of the texting issue. As far as I know, there is no way to do hands free texting. Even if a phone came equipped with voice recognition software sophisticated enough to write text (as opposed to dialing a pre-saved number), it would also have to translate text into audio to satisfy the hands-free requirement.

Regards,

D-Ray

Some state passed a "hands free" law. It also unintentionally banned 2-way radio use because of the handheld microphones.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by djv8ga

Some state passed a "hands free" law. It also unintentionally banned 2-way radio use because of the handheld microphones.

Are people still using Criminal Band radios?

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

I think we have some common ground here. I agree that a total ban is unreasonable. I do believe that there should be a requirement for hands free use. All phones come with some sort of hands free device, and most can be programmed to make calls based on name recognition. (In other words, you don't have to be rich, but you do need some tech savvy) It is the fiddling with the phone that is the most dangerous behavior.

The hands-free requirement would essentially take care of the texting issue. As far as I know, there is no way to do hands free texting. Even if a phone came equipped with voice recognition software sophisticated enough to write text (as opposed to dialing a pre-saved number), it would also have to translate text into audio to satisfy the hands-free requirement.

Regards,

D-Ray

Yes, I do believe we've found common ground. FWIW, I'm finding my new Android phone more difficult to use in a vehicle than the Palm Treo I carried for the last five years. The new phone is surprisingly good at voice recognition; however, the lack of physical buttons is certainly a handicap for in vehicle use. I'm not a big SMS user, but do use email and the web from the phone on occasion. I think that voice dictation and text conversion is almost to the state where it will be usable even in a fairly noisy environment. My favorite apps are a decibel meter I downloaded and an HP48 calculator emulator. I looked at the iPhone, but ultimately liked the Samsung for its larger screen.

[piece-itpete]

I think there is some sort of hands free voice rec. texting out there already, probably primative but just the beginning.

Pete

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by whoaru99

I wouldn't be so sure about that. There are radar detector detectors so I have absolutely no doubt there is a way to detect cell phones as well, and whether they are or are not currently in active use.

I think a more likely scenario is for auto manufacturers to be pressured to install a proximity device in their new vehicles. Politically I don't see much support, but then, the 55mph speed limit survived for a number of years without much support from the populace. IIRC the BART system in the SF Bay Area blocked cell phone use on some of their train routes.

[BlueStreak]

A cellphone ban? I wonder how the founding fathers would have responded to the government trying to ban THEM from talking on the cell, while driving down the highway? Is there anything in the constitution about a God given right to text while driving?

(Oh, that's right. They were the government............)

Dave

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

I think we have some common ground here. I agree that a total ban is unreasonable. I do believe that there should be a requirement for hands free use. All phones come with some sort of hands free device, and most can be programmed to make calls based on name recognition. (In other words, you don't have to be rich, but you do need some tech savvy) It is the fiddling with the phone that is the most dangerous behavior.

The hands-free requirement would essentially take care of the texting issue. As far as I know, there is no way to do hands free texting. Even if a phone came equipped with voice recognition software sophisticated enough to write text (as opposed to dialing a pre-saved number), it would also have to translate text into audio to satisfy the hands-free requirement.

Regards,

D-Ray

Milbank said this in WaPo:

Incredibly, the NTSB has no data to support its radical proposal – only some laboratory-based studies, and those are inconclusive. The “Brain Research” study speculates that cellphone conversations are more distracting that “listening to a radio, eating and drinking, monitoring children or pets, or even conversing with a passenger,” but the authors admit: “It is not known exactly how much each of these distractions affects driving.”

The other study concludes that, while cellphone conversations can be more dangerous than those with a passenger, a passenger who is “constantly commenting and directing attention in an overcontrolling fashion has a potentially negative impact on performance.”

So, to be evenhanded, the NTSB should also propose a ban on back-seat driving, a ban on transporting children, a ban on radios and cup holders, and a ban on GPS devices, so that we can go back to those safer times when we blocked the windshield with gas-station maps. The agency should also ban cellphone use by pedestrians, to keep them from wandering into intersections.

I concur with his position. The absurdity of the NTSB proposal ought get all involved fired. It is almost like they couldn't decide what to do, thus they went for "Big Gulp" nanny approach, rather than a more nuanced proposal. The only thing that Hersman and the board did was show their idiocy. Come to think of it, is the NTSB, formed in 1967, even needed or could other agencies fulfill their role?