Move over traffic laws

[Gunner]

Any number of studies, specific to drivers and cel phones and otherwise (e.g., with people on intercoms) have shown that there's a significant cognitive difference between a conversation with someone present in the room and at least partially within the field of view, and conversations via an electronic link. Some theorize that the lack of personal presence forces the brain to use more effort to visualize the missing cues and interpret things from sound alone. In any case, the link between even hands-free cel phone use and an increased rate of driver distraction and accidents - even OVER anything attributable to passenger distractions - is well established and not trivial.

[TXBLU]

Originally Posted by Gunner

Any number of studies, specific to drivers and cel phones and otherwise (e.g., with people on intercoms) have shown that there's a significant cognitive difference between a conversation with someone present in the room and at least partially within the field of view, and conversations via an electronic link. Some theorize that the lack of personal presence forces the brain to use more effort to visualize the missing cues and interpret things from sound alone. In any case, the link between even hands-free cel phone use and an increased rate of driver distraction and accidents - even OVER anything attributable to passenger distractions - is well established and not trivial.

Well said.

Eric

[tnollette]

Texas has such a law. A driver needs to move over, but I'm uncertain of all the details regarding to speed and traffic conditions.

[Excaliber]

First I've heard of this, but I've been doing it even since I can remember, it's all but common sense. Which I realize is in short supply.

I'm not all together sold on hands free phones as far as that goes. I found myself still fiddling with something, the microphone or having to look up a number or getting distracted in some way even with hands free. My lastest personel policy is "leave a message", I don't use the phone in the car, period. I realize that's not possible for some folks who need to, but I don't, so, I don't!

[SunDude]

For what it's worth, the U.S. Highway Loss Data Institute released a study today which shows that laws banning cellphone use in cars have had no effect in reducing the number of crashes. Seems counter-intuitive given how many studies have shown that cellphone use impairs driving ability.

[Cobrabill]

Originally Posted by SunDude

For what it's worth, the U.S. Highway Loss Data Institute released a study today which shows that laws banning cellphone use in cars have had no effect in reducing the number of crashes. Seems counter-intuitive given how many studies have shown that cellphone use impairs driving ability.

That's the problem with statistics-they exist solely to further the agenda of the author.

[Black Mamba]

Since some here need the visual of carnage:

Ccx 3208 R.i.p.

Sorry to go there,

Mamba

[Cobrabill]

[quote=Black Mamba;Sorry to go there,Mamba[/QUOTE]

You should be-it's a complete non-sequitur.

[vspeeds]

Every law will have its proponents and those who disagree. This law was designed to help ensure the safety of emergency workers as well as the general public. I work in the emergency services in the streets of San Francisco and its truly amazing to witness the speed and recklessness of drivers around an accident or other emergency scene especially during rush hour traffic.
This is a very graphic video of what goes on at an emergency scene. Can you imagine someone going 65mph crashing into the original accident making the already bad situation worse than the original? It happens more often than you think.

Anyways, I'm in the process of buying a Superformance Cobra!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0LCmStIw9E

[Jamo]

The law makes sense. It's not for folks that have half a brain and do slow down and move over a bit for anyone parked on the side of the road due to a breakdown or emergency. It's for the complete dumbasses who don't think (same dumb basturds who sit in the left lane and hold reasonable folks up because they think they're driving fast enough for everyone). Dumbasses like this should lose their entitlement to gravity and get off this planet.

As for cell phones, etc., studies just released by the insurance carriers (the folks who wanted the restrictions passed) indicates that accidents have NOT dropped since laws began being passed regarding the use of cell phones.

It's not the phones...it's whether someone is just too phuking stupid to be allowed out in the light of day amongst us.

I prefer we passed laws prohibiting stupidity anywhere at anytime...capital punishment would be ideal.

[Gunner]

Originally Posted by Jamo

As for cell phones, etc., studies just released by the insurance carriers (the folks who wanted the restrictions passed) indicates that accidents have NOT dropped since laws began being passed regarding the use of cell phones.

It hasn't been long enough for the general population's behavior to change. We spent 5+ years getting used to yakking away while driving,* it will take some time to get people to pay attention to the law, or be forced into paying attention, and actually start having an effect.

I'd love to be able to pull a Mossad and when I see, say, the stupid b*tch who ended up a carlength past the limit line at three successive lights because she was two-thumbing away, I could point my FM gun, pull the trigger, and have her phone light up, "BYE BYE" and then explode.


* My goodness, how did we ever survive without talking to someone every rolling mile?

[Black Mamba]

Originally Posted by Jamo

As for cell phones, etc., studies just released by the insurance carriers (the folks who wanted the restrictions passed) indicates that accidents have NOT dropped since laws began being passed regarding the use of cell phones.

It's not the phones...it's whether someone is just too phuking stupid to be allowed out in the light of day amongst us.

I prefer we passed laws prohibiting stupidity anywhere at anytime...capital punishment would be ideal.

I'm not sure what it's like in your area but here in Burbank I've seen no affect from the cell phone law. I think the problem there is the miniscule fine, something like $25. If it was raised to maybe $125 we may see some restraint in the usage.

Now as for naysayers about whether a cell phone is a distraction, when you answer your phone do you look to see who it is first? Are you young enough that your eyes instantly focus on the name or number shown or does it take you a few seconds. Do you ever dial the phone while driving? All of those items take up a few seconds and that's all it takes to diminish your reaction time to avoid hitting the nitwit that just turned left in front of you or the lady that jammed on her brakes in front of you because she thought she may hit the squirrel that seemed to be darting into her path.

I'm kind of amazed that people still argue point and I think that what's really at issue here is that people don't like being told what they can and can not do.

[Gunner]

Originally Posted by Black Mamba

I think the problem there is the miniscule fine, something like $25. If it was raised to maybe $125 we may see some restraint in the usage.

Confiscation of the phone and a fine to get it loose from the local impound desk. That would straighten most idiots up REAL fast. My daughter's high school implemented that policy (parents HAD to come in and sign the phone back out) and in-class phone violations dropped to *zero*.

...I think that what's really at issue here is that people don't like being told what they can and can not do.

Naw, ya think? This is AMERICA, dude. We gots the right to pay attention to anything we want, like our BFF's latest tweet, even if we are doing 75 in heavy traffic.

[DAVID GAGNARD]

Originally Posted by Jamo

The law makes sense. It's not for folks that have half a brain and do slow down and move over a bit for anyone parked on the side of the road due to a breakdown or emergency. It's for the complete dumbasses who don't think (same dumb basturds who sit in the left lane and hold reasonable folks up because they think they're driving fast enough for everyone). Dumbasses like this should lose their entitlement to gravity and get off this planet.

As for cell phones, etc., studies just released by the insurance carriers (the folks who wanted the restrictions passed) indicates that accidents have NOT dropped since laws began being passed regarding the use of cell phones.

It's not the phones...it's whether someone is just too phuking stupid to be allowed out in the light of day amongst us.

I prefer we passed laws prohibiting stupidity anywhere at anytime...capital punishment would be ideal.

100% correct on all counts....................

David

[SPF2245]

From the enforcement side, I support the original post 100%. I've had my patrol unit rear ended twice (the last time totalled the car) in ten years. Luckly I wasn't in the car in either event.
In 2009, 6 officers lost their lives by being struck by cars (accidental)...god only knows how many others were injured. The reason we do the "traps" for this law is because when we're working an incident, we can't break away from the scene to give an idiot a ticket. The "traps" let people know the law exsists and it's enforced, so when we are working on the side of the road, people yield.

[Ron61]

Originally Posted by SPF2245

From the enforcement side, I support the original post 100%. I've had my patrol unit rear ended twice (the last time totalled the car) in ten years. Luckly I wasn't in the car in either event.
In 2009, 6 officers lost their lives by being struck by cars (accidental)...god only knows how many others were injured. The reason we do the "traps" for this law is because when we're working an incident, we can't break away from the scene to give an idiot a ticket. The "traps" let people know the law exsists and it's enforced, so when we are working on the side of the road, people yield.

I agree with you entirely. Even up here in our light traffic compared to the Bay Area and other cities, we have had two CHP vehicles and three city police cruisers hit and badly damaged with two of the LEOs suffering minor injuries. The last one was by a woman driving a SUV and trying to call her friend on a cell phone to tell her about the accident she was going by. She was doing about 65 MPH according to witnesses, hit the patrol car which was well off the road, went across the divider and hit another car and truck. One person in the North bound lane was killed by her stupidity and all she would say was she had a right to use her cell phone any time she wanted. Didn't seem to give a darn about the person she had killed.

Ron

[TXBLU]

I'm continually fascinated by people that get all in a twist over laws intended to improve safety. It seems that some folks have such a high opinion of themselves, and their ability to make reasonable and rational decisions (however flawed their personal observations may be), that they are blind to the fact that there are many people that have no clue whatsoever. It's as if they feel personally insulted at having to be told what to do. This, my friends, is how a rule of law society works. If everyone always did the right thing, which would presume the ability of everyone to know what the right thing is, and then to do the right thing, there would be no use in making laws that govern our behavior.

Sadly, we all give up a certain amount of liberty for the safety of everyone. There are speed limits, drinking and driving limits, rules for right-of-way... The list is long and may seem silly to some, but the intent is to protect the citizenry at large. I understand this as being a necessary part of our civilization. I may not agree with, or abide by, all of the laws of the land, but I willingly accept the consequences of my actions if caught disregarding those laws. I have several years of racing experience and can operate a vehicle in varied conditions at speeds most people would find uncomfortable at least, and for some, downright scary. But I know the laws still apply to me, and there are places that are very bad to be speeding, so you won't see me griping about 20 MPH school zones, 35 MPH residential speed limits, etc.

I know I can maintain a level of concentration that allows me to have a reasonable margin of safety, even at fairly high speeds, but not everyone can do that. Even I suffer from a lack of attention sometimes, and so I usually drive within the speed limit. My concentration also allows me to avoid tickets even though I routinely speed, because I can pay attention to where I am, what I'm doing, and I know the tactics used to catch speeders. I also understand that other drivers don't have the same ability to pay attention, so I take that into consideration in traffic, and rarely drive more than 5MPH faster than anyone else on the road.
At the end of the day, I don’t have a degree in psychology, so I try to use common sense, and my own experience, to decide what’s bogus and what’s valid. I have had the experience of using a cell phone while driving and I was somewhat annoyed by how much it took away from my ability to concentrate on driving. I thought I had enough natural ability to be able to talk on my cell phone without any impact on my driving. I was wrong. I don’t do that now. I don’t know how I could handle knowing that I had caused injury to someone else because I was too self-centered and insisted on driving while using a cell phone.
When I stop to think about it, I wonder about those folks with room temperature IQs that do insist on driving while using a cell phone and/or texting. Surely, this behavior must have a negative impact on road safety. To say that fines would have no impact on this behavior is both right AND wrong, in my opinion. I believe that if law enforcement agencies had the resources, training, and motivation to aggressively enforce a ban on using cell phones while driving, this behavior would diminish very quickly. Currently, speeding and DUI get all the attention because they are the high revenue generators for municipalities and governments. Think of all the times you were ticked off because someone didn’t use a turn signal, rolled through a stop sign, or failed to yield the right-of-way (merged without looking, for example). Now imagine that law enforcement put as much emphasis on those infractions as speeding or DUI, and the fine structure made it “worth their while”. Those behaviors would start changing quite quickly, I think.
The point here is cell phone use while driving reduces an individual’s ability to concentrate on operating a motor vehicle. It’s not some nefarious scheme to relieve people of their freedom or money. Anyone that argues to the contrary is certainly entitled to their opinion, as this is still a (mostly) free country. But to suggest that enforcement of a law forbidding this behavior would have no discernable impact is to say that laws against any other deplorable and dangerous behavior (speeding, DUI, etc.) don’t work either. You may point out that people still speed and drive under the influence of alcohol and drugs, but the vast majority of people drive at a reasonable speed and are reasonably sober. I shudder to think what our society would be like without these restrictions on out behavior.
The time has come to ban cell phone use, or at the very least, the use of hand-held electronic devices while operating motor vehicles. A substantial fine or imprisonment would be the least of someone’s worries if their use of a cell phone while driving causes an accident that injures my child or spouse. I hope and pray that never happens to me, or anyone else. The reality is that this behavior does cause accidents and it needs to stop.

To those that understand, this little rant is completely unnecessary. To those that don’t, I fear no explanation is possible.

Eric

[Ron61]

My same old argument. Make the new cars so a cellphone won't work in them with the engine running. People survived well before cell phones came along and were able to actually drive to work or a store without having to be talking on a cell phone. Emergency services could and should be excepted. If the normal driver just has to make a call then let them find a place and pull over to make it.

Also someone mentioned in a previous post that some people have to look at the phone while talking. I have found that to be the case when many are talking to a passenger and we have one cop here who is a friend of mine that I am almost terrified to ride with. He is a great guy but he can't talk to a passenger unless he is looking at them. Two trips to Sacramento and back with him left permanent finger marks in his dash where I was gripping it so tight. So in his case, I doubt a cellphone would really impair his driving. And he is a great guy and I like him.

Ron

[Gunner]

Originally Posted by TXBLU

I'm continually fascinated by people that get all in a twist over laws intended to improve safety.

It's usually only a minority, and a misinformed or supremely egotistical minority at that.

The ranting objections I've seen to the move-over laws are like those that started the thread: someone, somewhere "heard" or started the rumor that it involved storm-trooper enforcement and huge penalties. Since neither of those is true, the ranting can be ignored.

[DAVID GAGNARD]

Originally Posted by Bill Bess

Has anyone heard of this being a law in their state? Move-over lane traffic law. On January 1, 2010 in California , A vehicle must move to a vacant traffic lane, and reduce their speed by 20 mph, or 25 mph when posted 25, When there is an emergency vehicle with it's lights flashing stopped on the right side of the roadway.
This is already a law in Texas and several other states. Violations in California are very expensive and add points to your driving record.
Moving to the left lane or changing to a safe lane while passing any vehicle parked on the side of the roadway/ emergency parking lane has been common practice for commercial truck drivers for years...but I guess this is now requred.
Anyway, check it out.
Bill

enacted in Louisiana July 09..........

David