Sensible Talk - Criticism for the reality-based world

Write Journal

Register

Log In

Cell phone silliness

Robert Niles
Published: July 16, 2008 at 1:20 PM (MST)
Is this illegal?

I wished I'd had time to take a picture, but here was the scene: Driving west on Del Mar on Pasadena, I saw, in a tan BMW to our right, a woman talking on her cell phone. No big deal, right?

A new law in California, effective this month, makes holding a cell phone to your ear while driving illegal. (Even though the rationale behind the new rule is bogus. [Link is to a PDF file of a magazine article I wrote on cell phone use by drivers.]) If a driver over 18 wants to talk on a cell phone, she must use a "hands-free" device, such as Bluetooth earpiece, or the phone's speaker function.

The woman in the BMW had a bright-green earpiece/microphone unit... which she was holding up to her ear with her left hand. For three blocks.

Aaargh.

Robert Niles also can be found at http://www.themeparkinsider.com

From Jason Preston on July 16, 2008 at 4:26 PM

I only skimmed your article on cell phones, but I remember going to a very interesting talk by John Medina, author of Brain Rules (http://www.brainrules.net/) that talked a lot about this topic.

The way he broke it down was not in studies, but in how the brain actually operates, and talked about the functions active in a person's brain when they were using a phone---any phone---and the built in lag time because of the neural pathways, brain hemispheres, and the laws of physics.

Essentially, he came to the (apparently) popular conclusion: cell phones are in fact a dangerous distraction to drivers.

Furthermore, it makes very little difference if it's a handsfree device. Go figure.

From Robert Niles on July 16, 2008 at 4:36 PM

I should summarize the piece, 'cause the AmStat server is sloooow:

Cell phones are a distraction to drivers, and a serious one. Their use is associated with an increase in accident rates. However, there is no significant difference in the danger between hands-free and traditional cell phones. It is the conversation that is the distraction, not the physical act of holding a phone.

They also are worse than having a conversation with someone else in the same vehicle. A fellow passenger can see traffic, weather and other potential driving problems and be quiet while the driver deals with those. Someone on the other end of the cell phone line, can't, and won't know to keep quiet for a moment while the driver concentrates.

What drives me nuts is that the research shows an identical level of impairment between:

  • driving with a .08 blood alcohol level
  • driving with a traditional cell phone
  • driving with a hands-free cell phone

    But the law treats the three very differently:

  • Huge fine, suspended license and possibly jail time
  • A fine
  • Nothing
  • This journal entry has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.

    Newsletter Sign-Up

  •  Subscribe in a reader
  • Recent Journal Entries

  • "Suicide. Wrong or a right?"
  • "Robert Niles?"
  • "Perhaps someone's spending too much time online?"
  • "Just make the call"
  • "How two newspapers followed Laurie's scoop from yesterday"
  • "It's the gambling, stupid: American families sick of economy that values gambling over work"
  • Become a fan of Sensible Talk
  • Best of the Journals

  • "It's time for journalism to face the music"
  • "Cracking the Local Media Market"
  • "Questions to Ask Political Candidates"
  • "It's Time for Sensible Talk"
  • Statistics Every Writer Should Know

  • Mean
  • Median
  • Percent Change
  • Per Capita and Rates
  • Standard Deviation
  • Margin of Error
  • Data Analysis
  • Polls and Sample Sizes
  • Statistical Tests
  • Student's T
  • Site Search

  • Archives

  • 2009: Jan.
  • 2008: Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Dec.
  • Masthead

  • Robert Niles, Editor
  • Laurie Niles, Assistant Editor