Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-05-2014, 01:30 PM
 
7,996 posts, read 10,350,166 times
Reputation: 15006

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacepup View Post
Except it is: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration sets standards for driver distraction and operability for built-in systems but does not (yet) do so for dash mounted GPS or smartphone apps.
Then the standards aren't very high. As I mentioned in a previous post, my husband's relatively new car (year old) has the radio controls and such all integrated into one big touch screen. It's impossible to adjust anything on it without looking at it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-05-2014, 03:15 PM
 
3,836 posts, read 5,739,865 times
Reputation: 2556
I have a simple question for all of you so quick to want a ban on cell phones:

Would you still be in favor of the ban if the data showed that such laws actually result in a increase in collisions?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2014, 03:55 PM
 
Location: The People's Republic of Austin
5,184 posts, read 7,249,913 times
Reputation: 2575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacepup View Post
Except it is: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration sets standards for driver distraction and operability for built-in systems but does not (yet) do so for dash mounted GPS or smartphone apps.
Those standards are all pretty much common sense. They should apply to any device used in a car - built in or not:

• displaying video not related to driving;
• displaying certain graphical or photographic images;
• displaying automatically scrolling text;
• manual text entry for the purpose of text-based messaging, other communication,or internet browsing; and
• displaying text for reading from books, periodical publications, web page content,social media content, text-based advertising and marketing, or text-based messages.

The issue is, NHTSA CAN make standards for in-car, and nothing else. I don't think anyone is proposing the free use of handhelds to do any of these things.

NHTSA has done research into driver distraction. What they found was that "dialing a hand held device" was #6 on the list. Right before "inserting/retrieving CD". "Talking/listening to a hand held device" was #10, right above "drinking from an open container".

How about an ordnance to criminalize #5 on this list?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2014, 04:31 PM
 
127 posts, read 297,047 times
Reputation: 39
Eventually, anything that can take your mind from steer wheel or eye from the windshield is going to be banned, for safety purpose....

Quote:
Originally Posted by scm53 View Post
Those standards are all pretty much common sense. They should apply to any device used in a car - built in or not:

• displaying video not related to driving;
• displaying certain graphical or photographic images;
• displaying automatically scrolling text;
• manual text entry for the purpose of text-based messaging, other communication,or internet browsing; and
• displaying text for reading from books, periodical publications, web page content,social media content, text-based advertising and marketing, or text-based messages.

The issue is, NHTSA CAN make standards for in-car, and nothing else. I don't think anyone is proposing the free use of handhelds to do any of these things.

NHTSA has done research into driver distraction. What they found was that "dialing a hand held device" was #6 on the list. Right before "inserting/retrieving CD". "Talking/listening to a hand held device" was #10, right above "drinking from an open container".

How about an ordnance to criminalize #5 on this list?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2014, 05:26 PM
 
7,742 posts, read 15,059,904 times
Reputation: 4295
most of you are missing the key question. Do these laws do anything to positively impact traffic safety? If not then we shouldnt have the laws.

<<Oddly enough, there is no conclusive evidence. Since 1990, the number of cell phones in use has gone from four million to 322 million nationwide. But the number of crashes has gone down.

The Highway Loss Data Institute studied several states where bans produced major drops in cell phone use while driving, but no reduction in crashes.

In several states where texting was outlawed, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety actually found an increase in collision claims from people hiding their texting.

In Hawaii, for three years before the ban, the number of crashes went down. Since the ban in July 2009, the number of crashes has gone up. No one knows why. The numbers don't prove anything. >>
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2014, 05:58 PM
 
7,996 posts, read 10,350,166 times
Reputation: 15006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin97 View Post
most of you are missing the key question. Do these laws do anything to positively impact traffic safety? If not then we shouldnt have the laws.

<<Oddly enough, there is no conclusive evidence. Since 1990, the number of cell phones in use has gone from four million to 322 million nationwide. But the number of crashes has gone down.

The Highway Loss Data Institute studied several states where bans produced major drops in cell phone use while driving, but no reduction in crashes.

In several states where texting was outlawed, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety actually found an increase in collision claims from people hiding their texting.

In Hawaii, for three years before the ban, the number of crashes went down. Since the ban in July 2009, the number of crashes has gone up. No one knows why. The numbers don't prove anything. >>
The number of crashes going down can be explain by better safety features on cars. Anti-lock brakes, stability control, and reverse sensors/cameras have made accidents more avoidable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2014, 06:10 PM
 
Location: The People's Republic of Austin
5,184 posts, read 7,249,913 times
Reputation: 2575
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm57553 View Post
The number of crashes going down can be explain by better safety features on cars. Anti-lock brakes, stability control, and reverse sensors/cameras have made accidents more avoidable.
If that's the case, as all of those things became more widespread, then crashes should go down every year. Yet in Hawaii, they went down until then ban, then went up. That data flies in the face of your hypothesis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2014, 06:20 PM
 
2,283 posts, read 3,840,961 times
Reputation: 3680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
I have a simple question for all of you so quick to want a ban on cell phones:

Would you still be in favor of the ban if the data showed that such laws actually result in a increase in collisions?
While there are some studies that suggest this very thing, the majority of the data is too difficult to truly isolate hands free laws as the culprits.

What has been proven is that these laws do nothing to reduce accident frequency, seasonality or severity.

Cellphone bans fail to reduce crashes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2014, 06:28 PM
 
1,588 posts, read 2,305,336 times
Reputation: 3371
If you outlaw cell phones only outlaws will have cell phones!

Wait!

Sorry.

Wrong forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2014, 09:52 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
207 posts, read 462,144 times
Reputation: 236
Quote:
Originally Posted by scm53 View Post
If that's the case, as all of those things became more widespread, then crashes should go down every year. Yet in Hawaii, they went down until then ban, then went up. That data flies in the face of your hypothesis.
I would be very interested to see those numbers given just how much noise is involved in crash data. Are the crash numbers normalized by vehicle miles traveled, or are they raw? How does it compare with nationwide trends? With other islands (Oahu is the only island in the state that implemented a ban)? With year to year variability? How about how it splits out by season? By determined cause of crash? by driver age? There are a billion inputs but you are attributing it to a single law.

That some people will violate a law isn't a reason not to have it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top