Banning Cell Phones in Cars

Banning Cell Phones in Cars

The roots of mobile phone technology can be traced as far as the 1940s, but in the United States this basic technology that is in use today was developed in the 1970s. However, full commercial use of mobile phones in the United States started in the year 1983 (NHTSA). Currently about 80 million persons within the United States own cellular phones and an estimated 85% of these persons use the phones while driving (NCSL, p.1). This trend has been occasioned by the fact that cell phones are not just used for business purposes but also as a personal-use appliance. The other factors that have also led to the increase of cell phones in cars include reduced size, reduced cost, and increased functionality of the cellular phone. In fact the time spent in traffic and while travelling could now be made more productive. Additionally, those travelling alone in unfamiliar areas felt more secure and especially when there is the concern of vehicle breakdown.

With this increased use of cell phones in cars there has been much concern on the effects it could have on driving performance. Even though several studies have come up with varying conclusion there has been common findings on this matter, generally, it has been reported that: use of cell phones distracts a driver; and causes many changes in behavior of drivers thereby negatively affecting traffic safety (Axiom Research Company, 15). There are several sources of driver distraction and use of cell phones is among them, these lead to road crashes and injuries to persons both inside and outside the vehicle. The use of cell phones distracts drivers in a number of ways. First and foremost, "drivers gets physically distracted since the driver will either use one or both hands when manipulating the phone, this means the driver will not concentrate on the physical tasks necessary while driving such as steering" (Kunreuther and Slovic, 271). In addition the driver may also get involved in associated tasks such as writing notes which may cause further distraction. It is also obvious that when a driver is using a cell phone then his/her eyes will be on the phone for sometime and off the road leading to visual distraction. It has also been reported that while talking on the phone, a driver could be looking at the road but will not be seeing. The third form of distraction is the auditory distraction which is experienced when the driver is surprised by the initial ringing of the phone or by the very conversation. In addition to these, there is also the cognitive distraction which comes about due to lapses in attention and judgment. Cognitive distraction is usually as a result of two mental tasks carried out simultaneously. The conversational needs tend to compete with the driving demands. In fact, it has been reported that brain activity associated with driving can be reduced by up to a third by listening alone (Keller and Cynkar, p.3).

Apart from the distractions is also the change in the driving behavior. Use of cell phones while driving can impair the response of the driver to critical situations. These changes may include longer reaction times, and slower reaction to traffic signals and more frequent missing of signals. The driver may also react slowly to braking with characteristically intensive braking and shorter stopping distances. A driver using a cell phone will be less aware of other traffic due to reduced perception, comprehension and projection of other traffic. This will expose such drivers to more risks in decision making (Kunreuther and Slovic, 275). Other behaviors that have been observed include compensatory behaviors such as reducing speed, and lower use of seatbelt. On average, the level of the negative effects of cell phone by drivers on the road is dependent on the complexity of both the driving situation and cell phone conversation. The more complex and intricate the conversation, the stronger the effects on driving performance, at the same time the more the intricacy of the driving situation, the more impact is expected from a phone conversation.

Despite of these, there are some benefits associated to the use of cell phones in cars especially as viewed by those involved in this behavior. Benefits to individuals include peace of mind of the drivers, fewer trips and shorter trip duration, expanded productive time, ease of contacting emergency services, and strengthening social networking (Redelmeier & Weinstein, 6). Benefits that the community can get include shorter accident response times, better knowledge of emergencies for emergency response teams, better life-saving results, and more effective apprehension of criminals. It has been suggested that the monetary value of using cell phones while driving exceeds the related costs.

All these issues relating to cell phone use in cars have led to wide debate regarding the introduction of legislation banning the use of hands-free phones in a number of countries. A number of organizations concerned with safety are advocating for a complete ban on cell phone use in cars such as the National Safety Council in the United States. The National Transport Safety Board (NTSB) had also recommended that all the states should ban use of cell phones in cars in every form (Terlep). This recommendation covered both hand-held and hands-free devices implying that there should be no phone conversations at all should be allowed. Currently just a few states U.S. states have implemented a ban on the use of hand-held phones while driving, with some more banning texting, but ban of all communications have not been experienced except in some cases for novice and school bus drivers. However, these recommendations to ban use of cell phones while driving may not be enforceable in the United States due to a number of reasons.

The most significant set back is that the NTSB which has the responsibility of improving safety of all travelling kinds is not given the power to be a regulator of any kind of driving practice. All that the body does is to give recommendations from the outcome of their research; therefore it is the policymakers who decide whether to adopt the recommendations. Americans have also known to put up with a lot of danger, death and even mayhem in excuse of personal freedom. Americans will insist on it and policymakers will listen, the American political system has the habit of prioritizing freedom over safety. The other influential group is the car makers and cell phone companies who have always advocated for the use of hands-free devices rather than the ban on cell phone use in cars. These companies end up influencing the policymakers to rule in their favor (Terlep).

Due to these forces there has been uncertainty among policy makers on whether to pass legislations that either restrict or prohibit use of cell phones while driving. This uncertainty can get slight support due to the weak scientific findings on the risks and benefits associated with use of cell phones while driving. First, even though the risks of using a cell phone while driving are real, they are too small and may not be detected in overall statistics of crash/fatality (Kunreuther & Slovic, pgs. 270). Second, there has not been much attention on the study on the benefits of using cell phones while driving, yet they could include benefits to public health and safety. Finally, banning of cell phone use in cars may be less efficient in saving lives and preventing injuries as compared to other policies on highway safety (Redelmeier & Weinstein, 6-7).

Faced with all these uncertainties, policymakers have the option of waiting for better scientific information before passing a restrictive legislation, or passing a restrictive legislation immediately having in mind that the legislation can be modified or repealed if new suggestions are brought by new scientific information. Passing restrictive legislations immediately will have the advantage of responding to concerns of the citizens, such as, that cell phone users may be creating high risks on other road users. On the other hand there are at least demerits of immediate restrictive legislations. First, such legislation could make the ability of gathering information by scientists complicated and weak especially with regard to the risks further occasioned by the technological advancements. Second, legal restrictions may be very difficult to reverse, going by previous experiences, even in cases where the new findings are reassuring. (Kunreuther & Slovic, pgs. 272).