Cell phone bans don't reduce car crashes - U.S. insurance group

alexmst

New member
Dec 27, 2004
6,939
1
0
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Cell phone bans, such as those recently recommended by the National Transportation Safety Board, have so far proven useless when it comes to actually reducing car crashes, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

The Insurance Institute is a private group financed by auto insurers. The National Transportation Safety Board recently recommended that states adopt strict rules banning all non-driving-related use of hand-held devices such as cell phones -- even hands-free -- while driving.

Many states already have bans on hand-held cell phone use and on texting while driving. The Insurance Institute has studied crash rates before and after bans were enacted in various states and also compared them to crash rates in nearby states with no such bans.

While the bans have resulted in actual reductions in phone use, they have not resulted in any reduction in crash rates, according to the Institute.

The Institute found similar results from bans on text messaging while driving. In fact, in a strange twist, texting bans actually resulted in more crashes in several states, according to an IIHS study.

The lesson, Insurance Institute spokesman Russ Rader said, may be that cell phones aren't really the problem, drivers are.

"Part of it is that distracted driving is much bigger than just phones," he said "so focusing on phones doesn't deal with the full spectrum of things that distract."

For its part, the NTSB has cited various studies showing a connection between cell phone use and an increased likelihood of crashing. An NHTSA study indicated that distracted driving caused about 3,000 crash deaths last year, although it's not clear how many of those crashes were related to hand-held devices as opposed to other distractions.

"What we know is that the best course of action is a three pronged approach -- strong laws, strong education and strong enforcement," NTSB spokeswoman Kelly Nantel said in an email.

Automakers, including Ford (F, Fortune 500), General Motors (GM, Fortune 500), Toyota (TM) and Hyundai (HYMTF) have invested heavily in creating increasingly sophisticated hands-free phone systems for cars. Most of those systems would be banned under the NTSB's proposal. (An exception would be GM's OnStar which allows users to make calls using a telephone built into the car itself. The NTSB proposal would specifically allow calls on that sort of system since it does not involve a handheld phone.)

Ford spokeswoman Christin Baker objected to the NTSB proposal citing research that tracked real-world drivers. The research showed that talking on a phone resulted in dangerous incidents only when drivers took their eyes off the road and their hands off the steering wheel. (ummm...ok...that makes sense...) Voice-activated systems like Ford's Sync would prevent that, she said.

Experts have said the NTSB's proposal is unlikely to become law in many, if any, states due to strong resistance from drivers who want to talk on the phone while driving.

New technologies that help alert drivers to hazards on the road would probably do more to actually reduce distracted driving crashes, the Insurance Institute's Rader said.

Such technologies include forward collision warning systems that alert drivers to stopped or slow-moving cars or pedestrians ahead of them and lane keeping assistance systems that warn when a distracted driver's vehicle is drifting out of its lane.

Both the Insurance Institute and the U.S. Department of Transportation are looking at ways to incorporate safety systems like these in their assessments of car safety. As of now, such assessments rely almost entirely on crash tests.

There is the danger that drivers might over-rely on these systems though, said Rader, canceling out their benefits by just paying even less attention to the task of driving.

"That is the thing researchers are going to be watching," said Rader. "How are drivers going to respond to these systems?"
 

alexmst

New member
Dec 27, 2004
6,939
1
0
IMHO:

If one hits the DVP northbound and there is no traffic, then enjoying the views, handling the curves, etc becomes entertaining in itself.

If, however, one hits the DVP and it is a solid wall of cars moving at 1 km/h or not moving at all, then one thinks "I'm going to be stuck here for 90 minutes to drive a distance that should take 10 minutes, so what can I do so as not to 'waste' that 90 minutes of time?" So one thinks one can always catch up on returning phone calls and/or text messages. Taking a nap isn't generally possible. Eating a meal could work, though that is distracting too. Reading a book is tricky as every few lines the traffic would inch forward a bit. Books on CD is okay IF one likes having books read to them (I don't). Playing with the radio/CD selection is an old standby.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
Forward collision and lane assistance systems sound like a good idea but unless they are bullet proof they are really dangerous.

Drivers will start relying on them, becoming lazier and less focused on what they are doing, relying on the detection systems to alert them when they need to pay attention. Great if it works.

Then you get to that section of road where the detection is skewed for some reason, and doesn't work, and the driver isn't paying attention at all... whoops.
 

LKD

Active member
Aug 6, 2006
5,063
7
38
Forward collision and lane assistance systems sound like a good idea but unless they are bullet proof they are really dangerous.

Drivers will start relying on them, becoming lazier and less focused on what they are doing, relying on the detection systems to alert them when they need to pay attention. Great if it works.

Then you get to that section of road where the detection is skewed for some reason, and doesn't work, and the driver isn't paying attention at all... whoops.
yup north american are just getting lazier and more stupid by the day. Most wouldn't survive in European roads, one lane, one way, maze like roads.
 

Scooter Brown

Member
Sep 8, 2009
126
0
16
yup north american are just getting lazier and more stupid by the day. Most wouldn't survive in European roads, one lane, one way, maze like roads.
Exactly! Even worse in Latin America or Far East. Our idiots are talking all the time about safety of our roads etc. but miss the crucial fact: North American drivers are the worst in the world, bar none. I doubt that more than 1% would pass driver's exam on any other continent. On the other hand, North American roads are probably the safest in the world.
 

night ride

Active member
Jul 23, 2009
3,448
5
38
Exactly! Even worse in Latin America or Far East. Our idiots are talking all the time about safety of our roads etc. but miss the crucial fact: North American drivers are the worst in the world, bar none. I doubt that more than 1% would pass driver's exam on any other continent. On the other hand, North American roads are probably the safest in the world.
I think they say Ontario roads are the safest in North American. What they don't mention is that our speed limits are slow low in some places that you'd die of old age getting there before you worry about a speed related crash.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
I looked up fatality statistics. We look to be in the middle of the pack. Exactly where in the middle depends on whether you use the deaths-per-capita statistic, or whether you use the deaths-per-billion-km statistic. In either case there are European nations with higher fatalities, and others with lower fatalities, but Western nations all cluster around the same range.

Developing nations, places like Mexico and China, have fatalities that are roughly 5x to 10x higher by either measure. I'm pretty sure that means that they are worse drivers and that we are not "the worst in the world, bar none".
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,085
1
0
Love it.

I was in the minority saying it wasn't the factor that many were trying to make it when this was discussed back when. It was no more contributive than in depth talking to passenger, drinking a coffee, or dealing with children, but it was an easy target making the government look like they were doing something, cared, and that most people wouldn't really argue against.
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,085
1
0
I think that cell phone bans makes people text more. A lot of people need to communicate for business and things. So if they're afraid of talking on their phone, they're going to text instead. :(

I think hiding your phone while texting is more dangerous than keeping your eyes on the road and talking.
Anyone who texts while driving has a death wish, hopefully for just themselves, but unfortunately not the case.
 

kid_kuh

Member
Aug 31, 2010
443
0
16
GTA
It's no surprise that the study was done by representatives of the Auto insurers. They need to make a profit right. Do you know how many times I see cars swerving into other lanes going at 30 km per hour. Upon further investigating the person was doing something with a phone. Imagine at higher speeds. It's a privilege to drive right then do just that drive. Leave all the bullshit for later. The forementioned technologies are great as long as we learn to drive better and undistracted(electronics, conversating, misc stupidity). Sometimes i wonder how people get their license. Then i realise the government, insurers and other related parties need to line their pockets with profits.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,488
11
38
As if a cel phone ban was gonna make even one better driver.

That is the point kiddies, to be better drivers, not better talkers and texters. Too bad you're spending all that energy resenting Big Daddy taking the toys away. That's all government can do, they can't learn for you.

Get on with your job!
 

blackrock13

Banned
Jun 6, 2009
40,085
1
0
It's no surprise that the study was done by representatives of the Auto insurers. They need to make a profit right. Do you know how many times I see cars swerving into other lanes going at 30 km per hour. Upon further investigating the person was doing something with a phone. Imagine at higher speeds. It's a privilege to drive right then do just that drive. Leave all the bullshit for later. The forementioned technologies are great as long as we learn to drive better and undistracted(electronics, conversating, misc stupidity). Sometimes i wonder how people get their license. Then i realise the government, insurers and other related parties need to line their pockets with profits.
Yes, the Insurance Industry did the research and believe they are not my favourite people, but that doesn't make the points raised wrong. The person swerving was definitely wrong, but he can get nailed for unsafe driving whether on a banned phone or not. He probably needs two hands to eat his Big Mac.
 

rhuarc29

Well-known member
Apr 15, 2009
9,650
1,296
113
I think that cell phone bans makes people text more. A lot of people need to communicate for business and things. So if they're afraid of talking on their phone, they're going to text instead. :(

I think hiding your phone while texting is more dangerous than keeping your eyes on the road and talking.
Unfortunately, I think that is true. Instead of talking and keeping their eyes on the road, they're "forced" to text on their lap.

Sometimes i wonder how people get their license.
That's for damn sure. I think we need an integrated training and testing system that really allows an examiner to get a feel for how a person drives. Rather than just a snapshot. I passed both driving tests my first time, meaning I had full priviledges on the road after just over an hour of examination time. That said, I did take driver's training as well...these courses should be mandatory.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
I have seen people driving along on the 400 with their electric shavers going. I guess really a cellphone should not be an issue if it is in hands-free mode, but if you are fiddling with any kind of device while you are driving, that has to be a bad idea.
 

Mencken

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
1,059
49
48
I think that cell phone bans makes people text more. A lot of people need to communicate for business and things. So if they're afraid of talking on their phone, they're going to text instead. :(

I think hiding your phone while texting is more dangerous than keeping your eyes on the road and talking.
I've seen people all over the road while looking down at something and fiddling with something. And many of them are not the demographic that would be giving themselves a hand job and having to look down....so I'm guessing that they're texting.

That may have skewed these results...in spite of bans people are still using cell phones, texting...and perhaps have moved from phone to texting more, which is more dangerous.

If so then greater enforcement and people actually changing behaviours may help.

Not to say there are lots of ways people can be bad drivers...even without using cell phones.
 

night ride

Active member
Jul 23, 2009
3,448
5
38
Cel phones in the car should be treated like liquor. Stored out of reach like in the trunk.
Cup holders - get rid of them. Drive thrus too.

GPS's too. When all we had were maps you didn't see maniacs fiddling with a road map while they were driving. They actually had the patience to pull over and spend a minute figuring out what they were doing to do beforehand.
 

Tdot'sFinest

New member
Jun 2, 2011
1,063
0
0
Cel phones in the car should be treated like liquor. Stored out of reach like in the trunk.
Cup holders - get rid of them. Drive thrus too.

GPS's too. When all we had were maps you didn't see maniacs fiddling with a road map while they were driving. They actually had the patience to pull over and spend a minute figuring out what they were doing to do beforehand.
I can't agree with this one at all. I think it's a lot safer having a GPS that'll give you an advance alert that your turn/exit is coming up.

A GPS is a valuable tool but one that shouldn't always be relied upon 100%. Whenever I'm going somewhere new to me or a great distance away I'll hit up Google maps and plan out my trip. I'll also punch in the address on my GPS. When used properly (non-handheld) they are great!

On another note, what do you think about BMW releasing twitter and facebook apps for their cars? These apps can be used while the vehicle is in motion.

http://www.wheels.ca/columns/article/801501
 

S.C. Joe

Client # 13
Nov 2, 2007
7,145
1
0
Detroit, USA
Cell phones have slowed traffic down and reduced the severity of many crashes. People don't rush to get where they are going like in the past. Many people just sit and talk away, they don't care if they miss the green light or their lane is moving slower.

Insurance companies are always bitching about something. They are never fucken happy
 
Toronto Escorts