I was at a gas station that borders a busy intersection where I live in Toronto. Idly filling the tank, I looked at the adjacent street and watched as a goofball, animatedly talking on their cell phone crashed into the back of another car. Both were BWMs. Since the driver was approaching a stop, the accident was minor, ($2000 or so). But, since the front driver was at a dead stop and since the rear driver had plenty of space to do the same, it's clear the cell phone lover's mind wasn't on the task of driving. I love the disoriented look the driver displayed after the accident. I'd be the same since that kind of accident guarantees a nice, big increase in insurance costs. I hope they ban cell phone use while driving in Ontario very soon.
Want them to ban stereos, too? And drinking a soda or coffee? Or whatever... I grant you, cell phones are distracting, and such accident could be avoided, but, I's bet there have been a lot more accidents caused by smokers dropping a cigarette or hot ash between their legs or onto the floor; or people leaning over to see the dial on a stereo. And I wonder how many accidents there have been from guys checking out the women walking down the street.... Gonna ban all those activities? Next you'll have to talk to a shrink (at your expense) to get clearance to get behind the wheel in order to head off road rage, daydreaming, or whatever. Much as we might like, you can't cover everything. But, if you are bound and determined... what will you do when they take away something you naturally do while driving? Spike
Depends on the jurisdiction. That's it in some. In others it's failure to maintain control (resulting in...), or inattentive operation (which also applies when you fail to note the flashing lights in your rearview mirror). Spike
I almost rear-ended a guy on Friday b/c of my looking at a remarkably endowed woman waiting on the corner to cross the street. I'm just glad I didn't have to come up with a story to tell my wife about what caused the accident.
Because like idiots who drive without seat belts, some people are incable of being left to their own devices. Unfortunately, everyone pays for it, but the evidence that cell phones are the most distracting driver action is pretty clear. Listening to a radio or drinking coffee is no where near as distracting.
Don't feel bad.... walking down the street with my grandfather, a fine looking babe in a belt (sure could not say it was a skirt) walked past going the other way. Next thing I know my granddad is sprawled over one of those city wire basket waste receptacles... He looks up as he's getting to his feet and says, "damn, that was fine!". He could have been driving. I have no idea what my grandmother might have said if he'd crashed the car. Spike
Anything a driver does, from the stereo, to cell phones, to conversing with a passenger is distracting. So is flipping off another driver, or even shooting at them while traveling 65mph. It's not the listening to the radio, it's the changing stations or picking another CD etc. It's not so much the drinking of the coffee as it is the disruption of the view of the road. Or the smoke fumbling with the pack, and the lighter, and the ash tray.
Aside from dialing, what extra is there about using a cell phone, which does not occur when a driver is conversing with a passenger, multi-tasking the day ahead, smoking a cigarette, drinking a cup of coffee, while trying to read the road signs, watch for cops, and all the rest, at 65mph? Even with a hands free unit, it's essentially the same as conversing with a passenger. I'm not promoting cell phone use. Personally, with text messaging, and lists of missed calls, a driver can wait to a more opportune time... like stop at a truck stop and have a cup of coffee while catching up on calls. As for dialing, if it's necessary, most phones have speed dialing.
I'd have to disagree to a point. In my experience using a phone while driving is much more distracting then listening to the radio. I think it's because when I'm on the phone (as opposed to talking to a passenger), I'm thinking more about the person I'm talking to because I can't see them. It's like when I'm home or at work, I'm concentrating on visualizing the conversation instead of concentrating on driving. Therein lies the danger, at least for me.
Not according to what I have read. Also talking to someone in the passeger seat CAN be as distractive as a phone. Third, it's nonoe of you damn business if I wear a seatbelt or not.
Oh no? It's idiots who help raise insurance rates by sustaining WORSE injuries because they didn't wear seatbelts. But, if you (being Canadian) want to FOOT your own bill for a couple years physiotherapy, then please, don't wear a seatbelt.
Personally, I think it, like helmets, should be a personal choice. As for any passengers, that would be their choice, except in the case of children.
At the same time, I would have no problem with an insurance company contract which says that if I have an accident and am not wearing a seatbelt, my coverage is void, or, charging me higher premiums for not wearing them, or otherwise restricting my coverage, and not raising the rates for all other drivers to cover the fact that I don't wear mine. And if car makers produce a vehicle which will not run at all if your seatbelt is not used, that is their right.
I DO wear mine, by the way. But I still resent so much government intrusion in daily lives. Spike
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.