      |
|
|
|
Evidence mounts that cars And cellphones are a dangerous Combination By Bob Cerullo (Reprinted with permission AMI Auto World magazine, 2/2/01) In Brooklyn Ohio, using a cellphone while driving is against the law. Brooklyn was the first community in the country to enact a ban on phoning while driving. Fines for the misdemeanor start at $3 for first offenders, and then shoot up to $100 for a second offense or a cellphone-related accident.
DATA POINTS TO DANGER The Fatal Analysis Reporting System in a census of police-reported fatal accidents from all across the U.S. In its study of cellphone-related accidents between 1994 and 1995, the number of citations issued to cellphone-using drivers involved in fatal crashes was disproportionately high when compared with citations issued to all other drivers included in the FARS reports. The Farmers Insurance Company surveyed its drivers to ask their opinions of cellphone use while driving. The results showed that 87 percent of adult respondents believe that using a cellphone while driving impairs a person’s ability to drive. More than 40 percent of the respondents said they had experienced a “close call” or a “near miss” with a driver who was on the phone. Two percent had actually been involved in a cellphone related accident. Brian O’Neil, president of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, says, “The evidence is very clear that using a cellphone while driving increases the risk of crashes because it distracts from the driving task. If you need to use your phone while you are in your vehicle, we ask that you pull off the road to use it. You still have the convenience of making calls from your vehicle. You’re just not endangering yourself, but other motorists by using the phone in traffic.” CRASH RISK QUADRUPLES The New England Journal of Medicine reported the results of a University of Toronto study of 699 collisions and concluded that the risk of a crash more than doubled after 5 minutes of cellphone use. The risk of a collision was between 3 and 6.5 times higher after 10 minutes of cellphone use, compared with the risk for drivers not using cellphones. After comparing the times of collisions with the times of cellular-telephone calls (obtained from billing data), the researchers estimated that the increased risk of collision as a result of cellphone use could result in a cost to society of $2 billion to $4 billion per year in the United States. Obtaining reliable data regarding cellphone use is often difficult. The widespread use of cellphones is a phenomenon of the past decade, and accident reporting simply hasn’t caught up. Joseph Tessmer, a statistician with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, estimates 20 to 30 percent of fatal accidents are due to “distractions”—including cellphone usage—but he notes that it’s impossible to know for sure, because only a few states document distractions in accident reports. But where investigative methods do take cellphone usage into account, the results can be dramatic and quick. The National Police Agency of Japan found that Japanese drivers using cellphones caused 2,297 accidents in 1997. Twenty-five people died and more than 3,000 were injured. Japan has become one of 14 countries that now ban hand-held-phone use while driving. Mark Burris of the University of South Florida’s Center for Urban Transportation Research reports that accidents caused by the use of mobile phones dropped by 75 percent shortly after the Japanese ban was enacted. In a 1997 report titled “An Investigation of the Safety Implications of Wireless Communication in Vehicles,” the NHTSA concluded that more detailed study is needed to understand the risks and benefits of cellphones in passenger cars. Fran Bents, coauthor of the report, says: “NHTSA reports that they receive more complaints and requests for information about cell-phone use than any other driving issue. Part of the reason is surely because cellphone users are readily visible to other drivers, at least in hand-held mode.” But Bents also questions the idea that hands-free phones are safer. She points out that “researchers are beginning to obtain evidence that shifting from hand-held to hands-free phone use while driving does not result in eliminating all cellphone distractions. It addresses the visual and mechanical distractions but does not address auditory and cognitive issues.
The NHTSA points to the faster emergency-medical-service response to accidents as a direct result of cellphone-equipped drivers or witnesses notifying authorities. The agency also notes that drivers with cellphones provide quicker notification to authorities of road hazards, congestion, and problem drivers. Another clear benefit is that route drivers and other on-the-road personnel can change their schedules on a moment’s notice, thanks to cell-phones. For many companies, that has become the accepted way of providing prompt customer service. And there is the obvious advantage for cellphone-equipped drivers of heightened personal security for themselves and their occupants. As long as you are within range of a cellular tower, it’s easier than ever to summon help in the event of a mechanical problem or a roadside mishap. Even the most adamant cellphone critics recognize their personal safety benefits. It was for precisely such reasons that in 1997 AT&T initiated a school safety program that puts free cellular telephones and phone service in the hands of school-bus drivers, school guards, and playground monitors. And cellphones might become even more valuable in terms of personal protection. In a pending technical development, having a cellphone in a car could be an invaluable means for police and emergency personnel to pinpoint endangered or injured individuals who dial 911. Currently, about 40 percent of all 911 calls, roughly 98,000 a day, are made on cellphones. With present technology, it’s far more difficult to find the origin of a cellphone call than it is to locate a conventional telephone. To rectify that problem, the Federal Communications Commission has mandated that by October 1, 2001, wireless carriers must have the technology in place for tracking the location of 911 calls. It is anticipated that such systems, like one developed by Snap-Track and licensed to Motorola, will be able to locate a 911 caller in 3 seconds by means of the U.S. Department of Defense’s Global Positioning System. The cost of installing GPS processing chips in cellphones is estimated at about $10 per unit. But there is a possible downside to this tracking capability. Maryland and Virginia are already experimenting with using the signals generated by in-car cellphones to monitor vehicle speed. Computers pinpoint the caller’s changing location and calculate speed based on how long the call lasts and how far the car travels. It’s like having a police radar gun trained on you every second you’re behind the wheel. PERSONAL RIGHTS VS. BIG BROTHERISM Opponents of legislation banning cellphone use in vehicles are quick to point out that, 70 years ago, the same arguments advanced against cellphones today were used against another sort of automotive distraction: the car radio. Where, they ask, do you draw the line? Is talking on a cellphone any more dangerous than putting on makeup, eating fast food, tuning a radio, or reading a map while driving? Is talking to someone on a cellphone any more distracting than talking to someone in your car? Taking such thinking to its extreme, some people see cellphones as essential to their right to free speech, citing foremost the safety aspects of having a means to communicate with law-enforcement and other emergency agencies, and also noting that modern business practices all but demand nearly constant phone work. Would it be fair to prohibit a stockbroker or a real-estate agent in one county from using a cell-phone while a rival in a neighboring county is free to call clients? COMMON SENSE CELLPHONE USE Is cellphone use while driving a “rock and a hard place” argument in which there can be no winner? Not necessarily. One thing the pro-ban folks and the no-ban folks agree on is that the risks can be dramatically reduced if drivers exercise common sense. For example, it’s almost impossible to justify drivers’ holding phones to their ears with their shoulders and tilting their heads to one side to keep the phones in place. Obviously, this limits drivers’ ability to turn their heads left or right to observe road conditions. Looking up phone numbers while driving is another inexcusably dangerous act. Except with the relatively rare voice-activated units, users need to press buttons on most cellpones to make a call, even when there are programmed dialing options. But there are far more subtle distractions that can be equally risky. Different kinds of conversations require different levels of concentration and can have a direct bearing on driver inattention. These are the cognitive problems to which the NHTSA’s Bent referred. Depending on the emotional level of the conversation (your daughter just got turned down by the college of her choice) or the complexity of the subject (the prospective buyer for your house wants to give you AT&T stock as a down payment), you may indeed become at least as distracted from the responsibility of controlling a vehicle as when you are dialing a number. The similarity between talking on a cellphone and talking to a passenger is often cited as an argument against cellphone bans. But researchers in the field point to two important differences between the two types of conversation. Passengers are looking at the same road conditions as the driver. Their conversation is geared to those driving conditions, and they are far more likely to pause or stop talking altogether should a dangerous situation seem to be developing. The other important differences have to do with the sense of immediacy most people feel when a phone rings, as in the case of the Kansas City woman mentioned earlier. Regardless of road conditions, drivers often feel they must answer the phone. They become focused on the ringing phone and may lose a large part of their awareness of what is happening outside of their vehicles. New technology has made it possible to check e-mail, get stock quotes, send faxes, and even surf the Web with a cellphone. Moreover, manufacturers at electronics and auto shows take pride in demonstrating the possibilities of the automotive cellphone as a mobile communications center. With each of these innovations comes a greater risk of distractions. Is it time to set limits? Clearly, some communities, and even some entire countries, say it is. Elsewhere, there are legitimate concerns about limiting the use of cellphones in vehicles. For the individual, it is important to remember that common sense can lessen many of the risks associated with cellphone use. The following guidelines will help you to enjoy the benefits of using a cellphone in your car, while minimizing the risk to yourself and to other drivers:
VERIZON BACKS BAN Verizon, the largest U.S. cellular-telephone provider, with more than 25 million wireless customers, has agreed to support laws that would ban the use of hand-held cellphones while driving. Verizon says it will back certain state initiatives, rather than national or local efforts, to impose “hands-free” requirements such as using a headset, an earpiece, or a speaker phone for making calls while driving. Verizon’s surprising support for new state laws has three conditions: 1. Exemptions from hand-held phone bans for emergency or 911 calls. 2. Provisions for drivers to have a three-year grace period to buy hands-free phones. 3. Fines and punishment consistent with those associated with other types of “distracted driver” laws. Rival cellular-telephone providers such as Sprint PCS and SBC communications have argued that existing laws against driving while distracted already prohibit reckless cellphone use. They call for more driver safety education and oppose regulation.
|
CELLPHONE BENEFITS
There is no shortage of data indicating that cellphone use while driving is a
growing problem. Industry estimates put the number of cellphones currently in
use at nearly 100 million, with thousands being added every day. With so many
users, it’s obvious that cellphones have some very real, very important benefits
that must be considered before jumping to the conclusion that they should be
banned from cars.