NTSB recommends all states for ban on use of cell phones while driving

Chevy57

Sherlock Hound
Premium Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2004
Messages
11,353
Reaction score
5
WASHINGTON (AP) — Texting, emailing or chatting on a cellphone while driving is simply too dangerous to be allowed, federal safety investigators declared Tuesday, urging all states to impose total bans except for emergencies.
Inspired by recent deadly crashes — including one in which a teenager sent or received 11 text messages in 11 minutes before an accident — the recommendation would apply even to hands-free devices, a much stricter rule than any current state law.
The unanimous recommendation by the five-member National Transportation Safety Board would make an exception for devices deemed to aid driver safety such as GPS navigation systems
A group representing state highway safety offices called the recommendation "a game-changer."
"States aren't ready to support a total ban yet, but this may start the discussion," Jonathan Adkins, a spokesman for the Governors Highway Safety Association, said.
NTSB chairman Deborah Hersman acknowledged the recommendation would be unpopular with many people and that complying would involve changing what has become ingrained behavior for many Americans.
While the NTSB doesn't have the power to impose restrictions, its recommendations carry significant weight with federal regulators and congressional and state lawmakers. Another recommendation issued Tuesday urges states to aggressively enforce current bans on text messaging and the use of cellphones and other portable electronic devices while driving.
"We're not here to win a popularity contest," she said. "No email, no text, no update, no call is worth a human life."
Currently, 35 states and the District of Columbia ban texting while driving, while nine states and D.C. bar hand-held cellphone use. Thirty states ban all cellphone use for beginning drivers. But enforcement is generally not a high priority, and no states ban the use of hands-free devices for all drivers.
A total cellphone ban would be the hardest to accept for many people.
Leila Noelliste, 26, a Chicago blogger and business owner, said being able to talk on the cellphone "when I'm running around town" is important to self-employed people like herself.
"I don't think they should ban cellphones because I don't think you're really distracted when you're talking, it's when you're texting," she said. When you're driving and talking, "your eyes are still on the road."
The immediate impetus for the recommendation of state bans was a deadly highway pileup near Gray Summit, Mo., last year in which a 19-year-old pickup driver sent and received 11 texts in 11 minutes just before the accident.
NTSB investigators said they are seeing increasing texting, cellphone calls and other distracting behavior by drivers in accidents involving all kinds of transportation. It has become routine to immediately request the preservation of cellphone and texting records when an investigation is begun.
In the past few years the board has investigated a train collision in which the engineer was texting that killed 25 people in Chatsworth, Calif.; a fatal accident on the Delaware River near Philadelphia in which a tugboat pilot was talking on his cellphone and using a laptop computer, and a Northwest Airlines flight that sped more than 100 miles past its destination because both pilots were working on their laptops.
Last year, a driver was dialing his cellphone when his truck crossed a highway median near Munford, Ind., and collided with a 15-passenger van. Eleven people were killed.
The board said the initial collision in the Missouri accident was caused by the inattention of the pickup driver who was texting a friend about events of the previous night. The pickup, traveling at 55 mph, hit the back of a tractor truck that had slowed for highway construction. The pickup was rear-ended by a school bus that overrode the smaller vehicle. A second school bus rammed into the back of the first bus.
The pickup driver and a 15-year-old student on one of the buses were killed. Thirty-eight other people were injured. About 50 students, mostly members of a high school band from St. James, Mo., were on the buses heading to the Six Flags St. Louis amusement park.
Missouri had a law banning drivers under 21 years old from texting while driving at the time of the crash, but wasn't aggressively enforcing the ban, board member Robert Sumwalt said.
"Without the enforcement, the laws don't mean a whole lot," he said.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported earlier this year that pilot projects in Syracuse, N.Y., and Hartford, Conn., produced significant reductions in distracted driving by combining stepped-up ticketing with high-profile public education campaigns.
Before and after each enforcement wave, NHTSA researchers observed cellphone use by drivers and conducted surveys at drivers' license offices in the two cities. They found that in Syracuse, hand-held cellphone use and texting declined by a third. In Hartford, there was a 57 percent drop in hand-held phone use, and texting behind the wheel dropped by nearly three-quarters.
However, that was with blanket enforcement by police.
The board's decision to include hands-free cellphone use in its recommendation is likely to prove especially controversial. No states currently ban hand-free use although many studies show that it is often as unsafe as hand-held phone use because drivers' minds are on their conversations rather than what's happening on the road.
Hersman pointed to an Alexandria, Va., accident the board investigated in which a bus driver talking on a hands-free phone ran into a bridge despite his being familiar with the route and the presence of warning signs that the arch was too low for his bus to clear. The roof of the bus was sheared off.
The board has previously recommended bans on texting and cellphone use by commercial truck and bus drivers and beginning drivers, but it had stopped short of calling for a ban on the use of the devices by adults behind the wheel of passenger cars.
The problem of texting while driving is getting worse despite a rush by states to ban the practice, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said last week. In November, Pennsylvania became the 35th state to forbid texting while driving.
About two out of 10 American drivers overall — and half of drivers between 21 and 24 — say they've thumbed messages or emailed from the driver's seat, according to a survey of more than 6,000 drivers by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
However, the survey found that many drivers don't think it's dangerous when they do it — only when others do.
At any given moment last year on America's streets and highways, nearly one in every 100 car drivers was texting, emailing, surfing the Web or otherwise using a hand-held electronic device, the safety administration said. Those activities were up 50 percent over the previous year.
Driver distraction wasn't the only significant safety problem uncovered by NTSB's investigation of the Missouri accident. Investigators said they believe the pickup driver was suffering from fatigue that may have eroded his judgment. He had an average of about five and a half hours of sleep a night in the days leading up to the accident and had had fewer than five hours of sleep the night before the accident, they said.
The pickup driver had no history of accidents or traffic violations, investigators said.
Investigators also found significant problems with the brakes of both school buses involved in the accident. A third school bus sent to a hospital after the accident to pick up students crashed in the hospital parking lot when that bus' brakes failed.
However, the brake problems didn't cause or contribute to the severity of the accident, investigators said.
Another issue involved the difficulty passengers had getting out of the first school bus after the accident. Its doors were unusable and passengers had to exit through an emergency window. The raised latch on the window kept catching on clothing as students tried to escape, investigators said. Escape was further slowed because the window design required one person to hold the window up in order for a second person to crawl through, they said.
It was critical for passengers to leave as quickly as possible because a large amount of fuel underneath the bus was a serious fire hazard, investigators said.
"It could have been a much worse situation if there was a fire," Donald Karol, the NTSB's highway safety director, said.

No cellphones, no texting by drivers, US urges - Yahoo! News

I dislike drivers who talk while driving. They slow down, start swerving, don't use turn signals because they are holding phone in one hand and they put other people's lives in danger.
 
I support this! I have been hit twice by other drivers that was talking on phone. Pffft!
 
I was just watching the CBS Morning Show and they had a consultant for the NTSB on there. They made their case and all and even suggested that all cell phone manufacturers have an app where it disables your phone while moving. Only problem is NO ONE is going to willingly install an app that disables your phone. You have to go apart from something people can't avoid; placing scrambler devices in all model vehicles that is enabled once the vehicle is in drive and reverse, and it turns off once the car is in park. It could be something as simple as a thin piece of a specific kind of metal that has a weak electrical current moving through it that is just enough to stop a cell phone network signal. Or they can use some type of radio frequency to scramble it. I have heard of scramblers being used in prisons, in parts of hospitals where cell phone use is to be restricted and in other places such as theatres that don't want customers distracting other customers with cell phone use during a movie.

The technology is there, we just have to use it. Perhaps such scrambler devices for vehicles can be mandatory in year model 2016 and all vehicles will be required to have it by 2026.

Until this technology becomes mandatory in vehicles as a safety feature, the police will have to aggressively enforce it.

That's just my two cents.
 
Here in Texas, there has been an effort to make it impossible to use a cell phone in the prisons. Cell phones are illegally brought into the prisons and can be used to commit crime on the outside by gang members acting on instructions over the phone from the bosses/leaders in prison.
So far, the criminals have found a way around every effort to disable the phones.

This gives an idea to how impossible it would be to prevent cell phones use while driving.
The only solution that is 100% foolproof is 10&2...hands on the wheel at 10 &2 o'clock.
That is was the way I was taught but I'll admit when Granddad and Dad were not looking broke the "law".
 
If that so, they should ban police and truck radio, they're use wireless communication as cellphone does.
 
Even though I personally support this recommendation but to disable it automatically is bad idea. There are emergency while person is driving, has it happened? Oh of course! For example, runaway truck if the phone were disabled, truck driver will have no way to alert the authorities of trouble head. Other example, stuck accelerator which can cause runaway vehicle and if cell phone were blocked, people out there will get killed anyway.
 
Yep, I read that story back then.

Here in Texas, there has been an effort to make it impossible to use a cell phone in the prisons. Cell phones are illegally brought into the prisons and can be used to commit crime on the outside by gang members acting on instructions over the phone from the bosses/leaders in prison.
So far, the criminals have found a way around every effort to disable the phones.

This gives an idea to how impossible it would be to prevent cell phones use while driving.
The only solution that is 100% foolproof is 10&2...hands on the wheel at 10 &2 o'clock.
That is was the way I was taught but I'll admit when Granddad and Dad were not looking broke the "law".
 
I was just watching the CBS Morning Show and they had a consultant for the NTSB on there. They made their case and all and even suggested that all cell phone manufacturers have an app where it disables your phone while moving. Only problem is NO ONE is going to willingly install an app that disables your phone. You have to go apart from something people can't avoid; placing scrambler devices in all model vehicles that is enabled once the vehicle is in drive and reverse, and it turns off once the car is in park. It could be something as simple as a thin piece of a specific kind of metal that has a weak electrical current moving through it that is just enough to stop a cell phone network signal. Or they can use some type of radio frequency to scramble it. I have heard of scramblers being used in prisons, in parts of hospitals where cell phone use is to be restricted and in other places such as theatres that don't want customers distracting other customers with cell phone use during a movie.

The technology is there, we just have to use it. Perhaps such scrambler devices for vehicles can be mandatory in year model 2016 and all vehicles will be required to have it by 2026.

Until this technology becomes mandatory in vehicles as a safety feature, the police will have to aggressively enforce it.

That's just my two cents.
Not gonna work because you have passengers who want to use their phones. They are not driving. You have passengers in taxi cabs who want to use phones. What about emergency situations?
 
Even though I personally support this recommendation but to disable it automatically is bad idea. There are emergency while person is driving, has it happened? Oh of course! For example, runaway truck if the phone were disabled, truck driver will have no way to alert the authorities of trouble head. Other example, stuck accelerator which can cause runaway vehicle and if cell phone were blocked, people out there will get killed anyway.

Not gonna work because you have passengers who want to use their phones. They are not driving. You have passengers in taxi cabs who want to use phones. What about emergency situations?

very simple. 911 has a specific signal. currently - calling 911 does work in phone with no calling plan. cellphone jammer blocks out specific bandwidth regulated by FCC so that means if you know a specific bandwidth, you can still dial out.
 
Prove it?

It may sound simple, but do you realize in history when the laws were created, there are people out there that always find way to bypass the laws. Has it happened in the past? You can count on it, here is perfect example that law was created and proved failure. It was digital odometer, back in 1990's government forced auto maker to change from analog odometer to digital to prevent roll backs. Did people find a way to roll back the digital odometer? It was alot easier now, and harder to detect because digital do not show any alternation while analog, you can tell if it is rolled back. We already wasted our money on this stupid modification that fails to live itself up. So, the law has made it worse already.

Making silly laws is worse than education, history has proved already.

Many may not realize this. When there is laws, there will always be opportunities out there. There are plenty of people out there that is truly rebels and resent against authority. When the law were created, these tyrants will always get exciting and try to challenge the laws. Sadly, they really don't realize what is really behind this. That is why education beats the laws, and sadly we Americans thinks that creating laws will solve the problem and ignore the needs of education. Today our American education falls behind the rest of the world. Sad, Sad, truly sad!

very simple. 911 has a specific signal. currently - calling 911 does work in phone with no calling plan. cellphone jammer blocks out specific bandwidth regulated by FCC so that means if you know a specific bandwidth, you can still dial out.
 
Prove it?
prove what?

It may sound simple, but do you realize in history when the laws were created, there are people out there that always find way to bypass the laws. Has it happened in the past? You can count on it, here is perfect example that law was created and proved failure. It was digital odometer, back in 1990's government forced auto maker to change from analog odometer to digital to prevent roll backs. Did people find a way to roll back the digital odometer? It was alot easier now, and harder to detect because digital do not show any alternation while analog, you can tell if it is rolled back. We already wasted our money on this stupid modification that fails to live itself up. So, the law has made it worse already.

Making silly laws is worse than education, history has proved already.

Many may not realize this. When there is laws, there will always be opportunities out there. There are plenty of people out there that is truly rebels and resent against authority. When the law were created, these tyrants will always get exciting and try to challenge the laws. Sadly, they really don't realize what is really behind this. That is why education beats the laws, and sadly we Americans thinks that creating laws will solve the problem and ignore the needs of education. Today our American education falls behind the rest of the world. Sad, Sad, truly sad!
it is actually very simple. it's called law. if you break a law, you'll be held criminally liable for it and that usually means jail time if somebody got hurt or killed.

very very very simple for police to find out if you were txting/calling while driving. it's entirely up to you to break a law :)
 
prove what?


it is actually very simple. it's called law. if you break a law, you'll be held criminally liable for it and that means jail time.

very very very simple for police to find out if you were txting/calling while driving! it's entirely up to you to break a law :)

I nearly broke the law several times when I nearly got hit by drivers who were texting and driving. Every single time that happened, I wanted to kill them. I have serious road rage towards texting drivers.
 
Do you really think it is easy to enforce the law? Don't you realize that in one state, they got law, and only gives out 130 tickets in just a year alone. Is it workable? It proves not.

Are you wireless engineer? How do you know it is going to work as simple as is?

Didn't you notice that I DO support the idea of restraining using these devices while driving. The problem is if create law, enforcing is NOT easy as you think it is. Education is the key, seriously.

prove what?


it is actually very simple. it's called law. if you break a law, you'll be held criminally liable for it and that usually means jail time if somebody got hurt or killed.

very very very simple for police to find out if you were txting/calling while driving. it's entirely up to you to break a law :)
 
Jiro, see? That is her challenge to defy the law. This is perfect example of her own opportunity. This is scary, really!

I nearly broke the law several times when I nearly got hit by drivers who were texting and driving. Every single time that happened, I wanted to kill them. I have serious road rage towards texting drivers.
 
Do you really think it is easy to enforce the law? Don't you realize that in one state, they got law, and only gives out 130 tickets in just a year alone. Is it workable? It proves not.
enforce? who cares? The law is there for police to charge you with and you'll go to jail. DUI law is not very enforceable but it's there to charge stupid drunk driver with when accident happened. or at random police checkpoint.

Are you wireless engineer? How do you know it is going to work as simple as is?
how do you know it's not going to be that simple? can you explain why? are you wireless engineer?

Do you understand a simple basic science of cellphone jammer technology? you can go ahead and begin with Mobile phone jammer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and HowStuffWorks "How Cell Phone Jammers Work"
 
The idea has been tried in prisons and it has failed to work anyway. There are too many people that are trying to outsmart. So, are you saying that education is not that important?

There have been decline in DUI lately. That is all because of education, more and more people realize that it is not acceptable to drink and drive.

enforce? who cares? The law is there for police to charge you with and you'll go to jail.


how do you know it's not going to be that simple? can you explain why? are you wireless engineer?

Do you understand a simple basic science of cellphone jammer technology? you can go ahead and begin with Mobile phone jammer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and HowStuffWorks "How Cell Phone Jammers Work"
 
I nearly broke the law several times when I nearly got hit by drivers who were texting and driving. Every single time that happened, I wanted to kill them. I have serious road rage towards texting drivers.

next time - don't avoid accident. get in accident so they can be criminally charged with it.

my mom got bump in the back by a distracted teenager girl txting on phone. she was charged with it. their insurance paid for my mom's medical expense.
 
Didn't you notice that I DO support the idea of restraining using these devices while driving. The problem is if create law, enforcing is NOT easy as you think it is. Education is the key, seriously.

Jiro, see? That is her challenge to defy the law. This is perfect example of her own opportunity. This is scary, really!
again..... you do not understand. slow down and think very deep.

do you understand that once you have a cellphone ban law up.... that means police officers have something to charge drivers with if accident happened.

I do not support cellphone jamming but I support the law that bans txting/talking while driving.

The idea has been tried in prisons and it has failed to work anyway. There are too many people that are trying to outsmart.
that didn't answer my question. Are you wireless engineer? can you explain why it failed to work? do you understand how cellphone technology works?

So, are you saying that education is not that important?
where did I say that? and are you saying we should abolish our existing cellphone ban law?

There have been decline in DUI lately. That is all because of education, more and more people realize that it is not acceptable to drink and drive.
I think you meant.... DUI fatalities has been decreasing but DUI cases are still too high.
 
Jiro, I think you and I are still on same page. Many states already enacted the laws. Try Utah, you won't like their law.

Seriously, in Utah if one gets involved an accident and did talk or text on phone, will result in felony conviction and send guilty driver to jail for 25 years. Their view is that doing this is like shooting guns blindly knowing it might kill somebody. I think it is justified.


The laws on these s
again..... you do not understand. slow down and think very deep.

do you understand that once you have a cellphone ban law up.... that means police officers have something to charge drivers with if accident happened.

I do not support cellphone jamming but I support the law that bans txting/talking while driving.


that didn't answer my question. Are you wireless engineer? can you explain why it failed to work? do you understand how cellphone technology works?


where did I say that? and are you saying we should abolish our existing cellphone ban law?


I think you meant.... DUI fatalities has been decreasing but DUI cases are still too high.
 
Back
Top