Cell phones are a wonderful convenience and are here to stay. Cell phone use is no longer a trend — it's become a way of life. However, no matter how much we love our cell phones, for the safety of all drivers on the road, it is time for us to take a hard look at the use of this product in motor vehicles. We know that as a society we can keep in touch with friends, resolve family conflicts, conduct business deals, and even make dinner reservations while simultaneously talking on the cell phone and driving our cars. However, the important question that needs to be adequately addressed by society is, "Should we?"
The cell-phone industry itself recognizes the danger inherent in using its product while a car is in motion. To protect itself from product liability, cell-phone owner's manuals warn about the risks of talking while driving. ("Don't use a hand-held phone while driving; park the vehicle first." Nokia 6160 Owner's Manual, "If possible, place calls when you are not moving or before pulling into traffic." Sprint PCS User Guide)
Those opposed to cell-phone regulation maintain that the use of phones while driving is no different than the use of any other product that may cause driver distraction (such as applying makeup, reading or eating food). There is a difference. Cell phones are a product primarily used by the consumer while driving. Studies show that 70 to 80 percent of cellular airtime is used in motor vehicles. In comparison, 70 percent of makeup is not applied in the car, 70 percent of soft drinks are not consumed in automobiles and 70 percent of child discipline does not occur in motor vehicles.
Research shows an additional difference between cell-phone distraction and other products that may cause inattentive driving. Experts identify three kinds of driving distractions: 1. Visual (taking your eyes off the road or blocking peripheral vision by holding a phone to the face); 2. Cognitive (being engrossed in conversation); and 3. Motor (holding/dialing a phone). No other product used while driving involves all three types of distraction except the use of a hand-held phone. What makes it even more dangerous is that this compounded distraction lasts as long as the phone is in use, which can be a very long time.
Three arguments are consistently voiced against cell-phone regulation. First, opponents are quick to point out that cell phones save lives when used in emergencies. This is merely a red herring. No legislation has been proposed that would penalize someone for having the phone available for use. Instead, legislation would regulate safe and responsible use of a cell phone while a person is actually operating the vehicle. Most emergency calls are made when traffic is stopped and witnesses attempt to render aid at the scene of an accident.
Second, they argue a lack of statistics showing a need for such regulation. There are, however, statistics showing a very serious safety problem with using cell phones while driving. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, 350,000 to 730,000 crashes occur each year due to cell-phone use in moving vehicles. In those accidents, 600 to 1,200 people are being killed annually. The number of crashes is expected to double as more consumers purchase cell phones. More people have died each year from the use of cell phones than the cumulative number of people who have died from faulty tires on SUV's or faulty air bags. Studies show a person using a cell phone is as impaired as someone driving while drunk. How many more studies and statistics do our legislators need to convince them that cell phones are a serious safety hazard?
Finally, cell lobbyists argue that specific cell-phone laws are not needed because every state already has careless driving laws on the books. At one time, this same argument was made by the liquor industry. According to the co-author of a U.S. Department of Transportation report on this subject, "Some behaviors such as drinking or phoning while driving are so commonplace, and yet so potentially dangerous that they require special laws.
Laws are effective in two ways: They establish appropriate punishment for willful behavior, and they create guidelines for law-abiding citizens. The public needs to learn that talking on the phone while operating their vehicles impedes their performance. Without laws, this message will never be adequately delivered."
Ruth H. Schmidt is Utah chapter president of Advocates for Cell Phone Safety.