Calsun

"In 2021 more than 3,500 drivers in the U.S. alone died in traffic accidents linked to distracted driving. Using a cell phone is the primary source of distraction, but entering navigational information, trying to eat and performing other such activities can be just as risky. A new study in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied suggests that distracted driving is even more unsafe than previously thought."

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...esearch-shows/

In the past it was recognized that smokers had a higher auto accident rate and the insurance companies charged them more for insurance. At this time we have people eating their meals in their cars and using their cell phones (and seldom hands free) and the accident rates have jumped as a result.

People are in a frenzy mode and never think about stopping for 5 minutes to eat their McDonald's products or waiting until they get to their work place or home to call someone. They speed even when the time savings is trivial in the oveall scheme of things. We operate at a much lowered level of consciousness and do so without any thought about what we are doing. As a result we have created a much more dangerous world for ourselves and for others.

I too have been guilty of thinking I could multi-task and the reality is that no one is able to operate on two tasks in parallel. It is like the Japanese saying about a chef that he has many knives - none are sharp. The more we try to do the less we are able to do well.

FBinNY 

Distracted driving will only get worse.

Those of us who came of age when transistor radios were a novelty are used to living without constant inputs. But, as I look around I see more people addicted (for lack of a better word) to their earbuds, cellphones and so on.

It's not only the belief in the myth of multi-tasking, it's also that people cannot just do one thing, or be alone with their thoughts for 5 minutes. Friends are shocked to hear that I'll ride my bike 100 miles or more without a radio or cell phone.

bikelif3

Just talking on the phone hand-free has been proven to "distract" drivers. I used to love listening to music while I drove. I don't anymore.

work4bike

I think I was a near-victim to a distracted driver yesterday. I was doing at least 20-something mph on a two-lane residential roadway and I see a car at a stop sign with the intention of pulling out into my lane, but she hesitated as a large truck was coming from the opposite direction.

However, it seemed like she was trying to judge the distance vs speed of this truck (by the jerkiness nature of her car) so she could pull out safely. I'm thinking she must definitely see me, since I'm wearing high-viz yellow and in the middle of the lane, but I got that feeling that I need to keep an eye on this driver, knowing she cannot pull out without hitting me.

At the very last second she pulls out and nearly T-bones me, but I swerve just enough to prevent an impact. I'm going so fast I'm able to retake my position in the lane with her behind me and as I look back at her, I see her hold up both hands as if to say...Sorry...that made me

I really believe she was completely distracted by the large truck to her left and either didn't see me or totally misjudged my speed, since most cyclist in this area go at very slow speeds. (speed limit on this road is 25 mph).




.

I-Like-To-Bike

Everybody involved in a collision or driving mishap is a victim of "distraction," when every driver mistake, error or incorrect interpretation of real time traffic conditions, whatever the cause, fits an all-encompassing definition of "distracted driving." Especially if the definition of distraction includes any and every external potential stimuli like music, eating, or roadside vehicles or attractions.

FBinNY 

This isn't an example of what's generally meant by "distracted driver".

It might be an example of what I call a slow thinker ----- a careful driver who tries to make sure it's OK to go, but takes so long that by the time he goes, it's no longer OK.

It also has other elements of hazards that suburban cyclists need to factor; fixation on other more concerning issue (large truck) and the ever present underestimating of bicycle speed.

I've survived all these years because I ride like I'm an AWACS plane, tracking all the vehicles around me, and anticipating every possible way they can screw up.

Inusuit

Kid texting rear ended my vehicle and totalled it. It's not getting better.

JoeyBike

^^This may not say it ALL but it says ENOUGH.

Personally, I'll drift out of my lane in under three seconds if I take my eyes off the road and might be better off taking my hands off the wheel entirely as my car is well aligned on a level roadway. I know this because: I often drive across a 24 mile long bridge, 2-lanes each direction - straight as an arrow (Lake Pontchartrain Causeway, Louisiana) and when I do I use cruise control and set my dash display to MPG so I can see what my fuel mileage is and how it varies behind cars, trucks, headwinds, tailwinds, etc. I really only glance at it a few times during the crossing. But when I am wearing polarized prescription eyeglasses, I can't read the display as the polarization makes it look solid black. And I am nearsighted. So if I lift my glasses off my nose and lean slightly towards the display (top center dash) to read it, I'll drift a good bit in just a couple seconds (at 70 mph). Of course I never do it with other vehicles around me other than a big truck up front - fun to see how much fuel my car saves drafting a truck, even a pickup.

My point - there is NO WAY I can look at my phone. I just drop it in the console and forget about it. However, others on the bridge look at their phones (I can easily SEE THEM DOING IT) and drift all over the place. And usually their speed drops to become a road hazard on this busy commuter artery (no bikes allowed BTW) where traffic instantly piles up behind them causing other ppl to change lanes to avoid them. It can be mayhem with the right (wrong) combo of commuters who just want that 24 miles to go away ASAP.

So the SIMPLEST possible driving scenario - 20 minutes with zero crossings, lights, speed zones, or turns, (and absolutely NOTHING to look at but the road because it's like driving across an ocean) becomes an unnecessary white knuckle event - during commuter hours especially.

So yeah, I'm not the least but surprised by an study claiming that doing anything that takes eyes off the road ahead for more than one or two second is going to cause a long list of problems.

Paul Barnard

I can't drive anywhere without seeing appallingly bad driving. When I am able to confirm, distractions are almost always at play. It's interesting to note how often the vehicles involved have damage in multiple places on them. I'd love to see some focus on distracted driving enforcement, and I'd love to see insurance companies treat infractions as seriously as they should be treated.

FBinNY 

The problem is that there are so many kinds of distracted driving, besides cell phone use which gets most of the attention. So enforcement has two problems, the first is eyes can't be everywhere. The second is that distraction, per se, is too subjective to enforce in a free society.


I believe that one approach might be to change insurance rules, so drivers have a higher financial stake.

I'd like to see meaningfully higher deductibles, and possibly co-pays on collision and property damage insurance. Something like a $1,000 deductible, and 10% capped copay, might make people self regulate more. I'm sure that it will make parents think longer before giving cars to teens.

Chuck Naill

Babied a Subaru Forester from 2010 until 2015 with the purpose of giving it to my eldest granddaughter. A teen rear ended my daughter and totaled. Things didn't work out.

spclark 

Until last October NONE of the vehicles (cars, trucks, school and commuter bus) I ever drove had a center dash-mounted display screen of any kind. Gauges yes, analogue or digital, but nothing that required any kind of 'interpretation' or much concentration to glean meaning off what they were showing me.

I bought a 2017 Subaru Impreza (more out of desperation than any other reason; the MINI Cooper I'd been driving since 12/2010 had 94,000 miles on it and needed servicing to remain reliable but proper service where I live now could not be found) and there's a touch screen smack dab in the center dash I try to ignore.

Only useful thing it displays is the back-up camera when I'm backing up, particularly in a parking lot when I can't find a spot to back into so I can see what's coming when I want to leave.

I'm of the opinion that the touchscreen display in many contemporary vehicles is likely responsible for more injuries than the cellphones that came a decade before. Love to see some relevant studies to support / refute that conjecture.

FBinNY 

Like you I'm a fan of separate single function gauges directly in front of me. Likewise with radio and heater controls that provide direct feedback via position or touch. I rent various cars and absolutely hate cars that force me to look at a center console screen to adjust heat or A/C, the radio, and even had one where windshield wiper speed showed there.

IMO - NO control or gauge should need anything more than finger feedback or a 1/4 sec flick of the eye to use. BTW- as a nearsighted person who uses glasses to drive, I also hate digital speedometers because I can't tell the difference between a 0 and 8 (for example) without lifting my glasses slightly and looking below them, whereas I have no problem reading a dial. (Please don't tell me to get bifocals)

Paul Barnard

Not really. There is almost always a violation of the law that I see associated with the distractions that I witness. Drifting out of lane, slower traffic in left lane, disregarding traffic control device etc. Laws can be written so that when a violation of the law occurs and the officer witnesses a distraction such as manipulating a phone, changing a diaper, eating a bowl of cereal etc. it can be a double whammy. I see our state troopers regularly writing tickets on our interstate on and off ramps where motorists often exceed the speed limit. I have never in my life seen an accident on an on or off ramp. I am sure it happens, but with enough frequency to make speed enforcement there a priority? I doubt it seriously. There are crashes on the adjacent interstate regularly.

FBinNY 

With respect to tickets on off ramps, I SUSPECT that it's not about something that happened on the ramp, and more likely something before like an unsafe move to exit from the center lane.

But the bigger issue is that you and I have very different worldviews. You believe in regulating behavior via police enforcement, or fear of such.

I'm less willing to trust police with excessive discretion, and also unwilling to live with police everywhere (via cameras). I prefer to encourage positive actions by bringing back greater personal responsibility for consequences.

We enforce speed limits for safety, and under the law 65 in 55 is the same for everybody. But the reality is that not everyone is equally safe or dangerous at any given speed. So, I'm more interested in raising the costs for those who dangerously, than enforcing by-the-book law.

This isn't a value judgement. It's simply a different opinion in how best to make free society function.

LV2TNDM

Cell Phone Whistle Blower Law:

Pass a law that rewards law-abiding, concerned citizens for reporting illegal phone use. Make the penalties steep and give "whistle blowers" 1/3 of the fines, or $100, whichever is more. Make repeat penalties grow exponentially for drivers who continue to endanger others, and unpaid fines result in the boot to render the scofflaw’s vehicle useless.

Just have other (non-driving) road users take a quick pic of a driver breaking the law and the vehicle license plate, send it to the DMV and you get a hundred bucks! And if you're caught driving and taking a picture of another driver, the fine's doubled. This will help prevent "unintended consequences" of idiots causing collisions while taking pictures of other drivers!

We know we don't have NEARLY the number of police to effectively enforce cell phone laws, so let the public help out.

Pretty simple. The public gets rewarded for reporting scofflaws and we get safer roads!

FBinNY 

Sounds Great!!!!!

If it works, we can expand to all sorts of anti-social conduct.

So, the real question is----- Is solving this kind of problem worth creating a society where everyone is constantly reporting others for profit? Does anyone really want to live like that?

jon c. 

Certainly not a society I'd wish live in.

Roughstuff

just another step toward fascism.

The best way to fight this is to shove it right back in their face. You know darn well who the folks who support this crap are. Just call the cops and say you THINK YOU saw them using their cell phone. Or [heavens!] they drifted into the “bike lane” or [heavens!] the bus lane! You realize they will have more hassle with the cops than shoplifters?

Better yet: (and this has already happened a few times), people have been reported/photoed while using their cell phones in traffic jams to tell folks they’ll be late or whatever. I’m sure using your cell while sitting in a traffic jam is a real threat to society (right up there with BLM roadblocks). In any case they sued for harassment and got a nice settlement.

seriously, the reason I oppose this law? Just another reason for the state to levy a fee or harass folks. Once cops stop you they can have a field day searching your vehicle. And unless you have a good lawyer like the folks above had (they WERE LAWYERS! Ha!) you have no recourse.

I-Like-To-Bike

I believe that the posters who report that almost every driver they see is texting while driving, are extrapolating from viewing some drivers holding a phone while motionless at traffic light and exaggerating whatever they see as Danger, Danger, Danger; Texting, Texting, Texting! when the only threat from such activity is that the driver may not be ready to make a jack rabbit move when the light turns green, prompting a toot from another car.

Reports from DeputyDawg wannabes are likely as reliable as those from "concerned citizens" reporting anonymously to the police about people who don't seem to belong in their neighborhood. There are other agendas at work for those people so anxious to "report" on activities of people who they don't like.

Roughstuff

Hmm...interesting related issue. Has any one here tried these programs run by insurance companies where you allow your cell phone to send information on "how you drive" (how do you brake...do you signal soon enough....do you go the speed limit...etc) to your insurance company, and they adjust your premiums accordingly? I don't think of myself as a particularly good driver, (which is why I don't drive much) so I haven't considered a program like this.

It is kind of spooky in a way, but if it works who knows.

Trakhak

Never heard of that, but it sounds like a great idea. Everyone gets to decide whether to remain surveillance-free or (one hopes) save money and maybe drive more safely or at least be rewarded from driving safely.

I-Like-To-Bike

State Farm offered their Drive Safe and Save to me for my 2022 Corolla but it doesn't appear to offer me much over the discounts I already receive for over 20 years of accident free driving and low mileage (less than 7,500 miles/year.) In addition it requires having a turned on, Bluetooth activated smartphone present at all times in the car when driving. Given that I do not usually carry a smartphone and my wife never does it is a no-go. Privacy considerations are another serious concern with this program.

More info at:State Farm Drive Safe and Save Info

jon c. 

Similarly, while I wouldn't likely sign up for that in any case my agent advised that the savings would be inconsequential in my situation.

cellery

This trope again. The worst distracted drivers I continue to observe on a daily basis are senior citizens who are straight up phone addicted. I watch them daily at stop lights, and continue looking down after the light turns green. Lots o' wrinkles on their faces - it's easy to see them because the phone lights up their faces for me. The younger people seem to be a bit more self-aware that it's not cool, but they do it anyway. They tend to look up more from the phone screen (possibly scouting for cops?). The seniors just look totally disconnected from the world around them.

Let me tell you. It's really really fun driving the two hours to another city to go to dinner with my family once or twice a year. And instead of asking me about my life, all four of them - my parents and two siblings sit at the table staring down at phone screens. They can. not. be. pulled. away. Nothing seems to work.

No amount of shaming works on them. Five minutes after I bring it up - they are back to their phone screens once they finish the next thought. Age has absolutely zero to do with this problem. My siblings are 25 and 30 respectively. None of my 30yo cousins engage in this type of behavior. But plenty of college aged individuals do - including both times I was hit by distracted drivers. This is a problem of individuals who voluntarily surrender any semblance of willpower over to an algorithm that gives them short sweet dopamine rushes of likes and indignant rage. It takes exercising willpower and self-awareness to overcome what is becoming an addiction to many. I fall into the trap on occasion but never while driving. It's tough when it's on us all the time and in our faces - but it definitely isn't an age thing.