Joseph, The Reason I Say No To A Cell Phone Ban Is Because We Already Have Laws Covering Negligent Driving.

We have parking laws. We have impaired and drunk driving laws. We have careless and negligent driving laws. Those are fine. I agree with you.

It's not that I think that people should use cell phones while operating a vehicle. I think it is stupid and extremely dangerous. Do we need a law against putting stamps in a collector's album while driving? How about giving one's self a pedicure at 70mph on the Interstate?

I just don't think we can pass an individual law for each idiotic type of negligence that a driver can perform. Throw the book at them! Get the tailgaters, too!

I guess what I'm saying is that the laws are there, increase the penalties and enforce them. Come to think of it, I've already said that. Reread my previous comments.

Does that make sense?

I agree. One of my fiends recently got into a head on collision while putting on her shoes and driving because she was late for school. I believe we already have laws against driving without shoes anyway, though.

I have to agree with you when you put it that way. Anyone can see that it's the conversation that is potentially lethal, not the one-handed driving (let's outlaw coffee drinking while we're at it). It's hard to regulate stupidity.

Put it any way you like, it is the distraction of punching up numbers, looking at the screen, and looking for thing between the seats or in a purse when it goes off.
Too many cops see phones on the floor of a vehicle involved in an accident, but it is rarely reported because there is no law violated. The Highway Traffic Admin should introduce an across the board prohibition for operators of any motor vehicle from operating cell phones while the vehicle is in motion. PERIOD Truckers use CBs but you don't dial them, they are on all the time. Emergency vehicles use radios but they also are on all the time (Push to talk) But cell phones in the hands of drivers in moving vehicles are lethal because they are not concentrating on the road.

I think personally people should have to pass a mental wellness test before they can get their liscense! I have noticed that most people here are on their cellphones from the time they are on the highway until they arrive at their destination, they do not focus on the whole of traffic instead they see a narrow veiw. I once tried to use a cell while driving, I had to pull over on the side of the road. There is no way I felt safe while driving and I felt like if I made a mistake I would hurt someone. I guess if you have a lesser conscience and do not care about people or life in general you can opt to focus on your conversation. If its an emergency and youre a doctor or something you can get a text option and most cells have pager function on them. So really is there any reason not to go home after the call? What is your life worth? What is the driver next to you worth? To tell you the truth if it were that I was the innocent bystandard or innocent driver and I got hit I would personally make sure that you lose everything you had, because knowing what it can cause you still did what you were going to do and it harmed me or who ever i had in the car with me.I may even try to go for a assault charge if possible.

Driving is Not a right,it is a privilege.
Shut up and Drive.

I agree with that. But is a privilege we are all untitled to, IF we follow the law.

Well said.

Good answer common sense. There are laws against drunk driving, or, more to the point, "driving under the influence", but jackasses do it anyway. Severe penalties with mandatory strict enforcement for reckless driving when some jackass causes an accident are what is needed. Although, providing police with the ability to arrest some bubblehead who is driving wjile on the phone ain't such a bad idea!

Amen, CSA
Banning mobile phone use while driving may seem like a good idea, but
it smacks of elitism. Some will say, “Why just cell phones? Why not
2-way business, amateur, or CB radios?” Once it starts, it never
ends. I'm a ham, and I resent anything that can result in the
prohibition of mobile communications of any sort.
Some people want to reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator
because some idiot threw caution to the wind. This concept is 'equal
justice under law', and it's Communist malarkey.
We must stand up to those touchy-feely psychobabble spouting
overreactors, and just say “Talk to the hand!”, like the Terminator.
Furthermore, I hereby suggest that somebody create something similar
to the Moxie horse car (a vehicle outfitted with a life-size model of
a horse, with a steering wheel at the rider position), but have a
glass and aluminum phone booth where the driver's seat and door
usually are, in brazen and blatant defiance of the contemptibles who
want to infringe on our freedom.
Obviously, you can't drive such a thing on the public roadways, so it
would be wise to hack a car you couldn't drive on the public ways
even without the modification.
Siebsig Drei,
Geschlechlichinginieur

My apologies for my previous post, which was a reactionary flame. After reading other posts, I have formed a more logical opinion on this issue: cell phone and two-way radio use should not contribute to “information overload”.
Different driving situations demand different amounts of attention. Navigating city traffic, as replicated by Mythbusters' obstacle course, and the situation described by the OP, demand so much attention that conversing would likely cause information overload (and a collision); whereas highway driving may be low demand enough to accommodate a conversation, if a driver makes it so. Set the cruise control to within the speed limit(s) and stay to the right; all on a stretch of road with no exits. Ever notice why highways seem so bland? They're designed that way to minimize the stimulus rate for higher speed traffic.
Many times on I-95, north of Boston, I have seen vehicles stopped in the breakdown lane, with the driver on the phone, because “The Law” in Massachusetts requires that he stop. I think, 'What if he gets rear-ended?' Also, I've seen other vehicles stop behind these talkers to offer unneeded help. At that point, it becomes crying wolf.
Laws and codes to regulate activities are necessary to the extent that the most people can safely benefit from scientific and technological progress, otherwise driving would require that one be an engineer or physicist. That would be absurd.
Beyond that point, however, laws tend to reduce the skilled and rational to the lowest common denominator, impede progress, and diminish the benefits of technology. As in my previous post, this is what I vehemently oppose, as should we all.
The ability to communicate while traveling is a tremendous boon to modern life. Experience can help us determine what situations in which it is appropriate to make use of that ability. Rather than regress and reject progress, we must investigate this issue thoroughly, and achieve a consensus.

Down boy!

Whoa!!! Geschlechlichinginieur Unfortunately common sense can't be taught.

Laws are not made to ensure our freedoms to do things - that's what the constitution does. Laws are made when what we do with our freedoms restricts the freedoms of others.

If actions and behaviors (prevailing or new) of society impinge on individuals' rights to life and liberty, then the right thing to do is to ask whether that behavior should be moderated, e.g., by law.

Without laws, this would be a lawless country. We've been there in our past. No thanks. And, just by the way, without laws there would be no lawsuits.

Hmmm....

i agree 110% with u

There is a germ of an idea here. The behavior of these compulsive cellphone communicators resembles that of persons addicted to drugs or alcohol. Since using a cellphone while driving imposes the same risk as DUI why not include cellphone use to the existing DUI statutes. Perhaps loosing their drivers license, having their car impounded, and spending time in the county jail or state prison would get more of their attention than driving does when they are on the phone.

Yes, cell phone usage while driving should be banned, simply because cell phones do distract a driver from the necessary tasks that he/she must perform while piloting a vehicle.

Many years ago, shortly after I got my first cell phone, I was stuck in a traffic jam on the way to work. Knowing that there would be clients waiting for me, and unsure of just how late I might be, I phoned my secretary to tell her that I was running late.

As we began to talk, the traffic jam began to clear and the traffic began to move at a fairly normal pace. And--guess what--because I was talking on the cell phone, I proceeded to drive right past the highway exit that I had been using every day for the preceding 6 years or so! As a result of missing my exit, I had to drive to the next exit on this limited access highway (Garden State Parkway), double back, and as a result of all of the additional miles driven, I arrived late at work. However, if I had not been talking on the cell phone, and had not missed my usual exit, I actually would have been on time! This one incident proved to me just how distracting a cell phone can be.

All of this being said, enacting a statute and enforcing it are two different things. When NJ enacted its "hand-held cell phone" ban a couple of years ago, a few communities had a ticketing blitz, and--literally--hundreds of traffic tickets were issued within a few days. However, that enforcement zeal has now apparently ended. Every day, I see countless drivers (probably about 80% female) driving while holding a cell phone to their ears. And, a distressing percentage of these drivers can be witnessed doing the most absurd, dangerous things while driving in that impaired state.

So, yes, a statute banning this unnecessary behavior is a very good idea, but unless local and state authorities actually enforce that statute, it is merely a paper tiger.

This happened to me when I was talking with a human passenger in the car; we got on the highway for what was a 1.5 hr ride and what seemed about 5 minutes later she pointed out "oh there's our exit that we're passing," with the next one about 15 miles further on.
What do we say about driving while talking with passengers (incl. kids in the backseat, who aren't driver-trained and can't predict & identify other road hazards easily)?

I would like to see cell phones banned while driving, but I think the real issue is bigger than that. I would like to see tougher standards for getting a license. I would like to make both the written and driving tests harder and make the passing score higher. I would like to see people show proper respect for the dangers involved in operating a vehicle. Driver's education should consist of more than just showing videos. Driver's education should also be taught by educators, not former professional drivers. In many states, you can get a driver's license when you turn 18 without taking driver's education. Driver's education is only required if you want your license before you turn 18. That should change. Driver's education should be required for every driver. Making these changes would go a long way to solving the cell phone problem.

Ban cell phones and people will just get hands-free setups. The problem of inattention will remain. Besides, here in the Northeast where the sun sets early for much of the year, and much of the year is rotten weather, the cops wouldn't even be able to see the drivers using the phones and they'll just do it anyway. It's not really an enforceable law.

I agree with Whitey that far better driver training is needed. People really don't understand how quickly things happen and how long it really takes to respond. And they don't understand how much of an impact inattention really has on response time. Perhaps some form of closed course where they can get the heck scared out of them would leave an imprint.