The NTSB distracted me

NTSB recommends full ban on use of cell phones while driving
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/13/us/ntsb-cell-phone-ban/index.html

Let's review distractions shall we?
Aside from illegally driving while impaired, we have your: kids, dog, hamburger, hair, makeup, sunglasses, big gulp, heater, air conditioning, defrost, wipers, cruise control, radio, MP3, GPS and BFF. This is only a partial list. There are also bees, billboards and buxom blondes to worry about.

It annoys me that cell phones are singled out in this great crusade against distracted driving.

A couple things the NTSB got right. Distracted driving has been a problem "since the Model T". Note that cell phones were invented after most driving distractions were well ensconced within the cabs of our vehicles.

They also point out that when you are driving a car, you are driving a car. I agree. That is what you are doing at that moment. Not talking to your friends, not looking at the scenery, not wondering what you will have for lunch today. You are driving. Do that.

I have noticed over the years that many people do not seem to understand even the most fundamental principles of driving. They don't seem to realize what speed zone they are in, or how to proceed at a four-way stop, or the lane into which they should be turning at any given intersection. The problem seems to me one of licensing too many people to drive. Far too many drivers are incapable of reasoning out a simple sign that says "right turn permitted without stopping". Here in Oregon we have these signs. Here in Oregon the logic of this sign escapes many people. There is also the "20 mph - School Days - 7am through 5pm" sign. I can understand why this one seems like a Jeopardy question to a lot of folks. There is a lot of information to process there. Most people have long since given up deciphering it and just drive 20 mph - Every Day - All Day. If you ask me (and this is my blog, so your question is implicit) there are things so simple that, if a person can not figure it out, they should not be allowed to operate a machine that has the potential to destroy thousands of dollars worth of property and worse: kill or maim several other human beings at once.

Indeed, we entrust that power in the hands of our children. Young people who still throw tantrums when their younger sibling happens to infringe on one of their god-given rights (such as eating the last bowl of Fruit Loops). In addition to that, we don't seem to care about maintaining or improving upon any level of aptitude once a person receives their license. In my state the Department of Motor Vehicles simply sends out a renewal letter and requests a payment when my license expires. At most, they will ask me to come in and have the picture retaken. Do they ever ask me to answer any questions or pass another driving test? Not since I was a teenager have I proven to the DMV that I have the skills to operate a 2-ton juggernaut.

There ought to be continued aptitude tests both in written and driving form. At the very least require an open-book 10 question multiple choice test. Pick 10 things that everyone should absolutely know. Ask them the same questions every 3-5 years. Now everyone knows how to behave at a four-way stop. Simple.

-----

There is a link to a "Study" in the middle of the article. CNN reports on the study that one tenth of all fatalities last year involved distracted driving. That statistic came shortly on the heels of another pointing out how many people are willing to talk on their phones while driving. The implication is that all 3092 deaths in 2010 from distracted driving involved cell phones. I doubt that is true. It seems likely that at least one of those may have been caused by a driver distracted by scalding hot coffee in their lap. In other words, distracted driving is not equivalent to cell phones. There are other ways to be distracted.

CNN then goes on to say that Americans are "apparently driving in denial". Half of those who reported texting or emailing while driving say that "using a cell phone has no impact on their driving performance." Maybe I am too wrapped up in semantics, but there are many uses for a cell phone. Among them are texting, emailing, and talking. CNN uses their field reporter to show us "the facts". He demonstrates by driving an SUV in a closed-off parking lot while accelerating to 25 mph and then

1. inserting a CD and hitting his brakes
2. dialing a number and hitting his brakes
3. texting for 6 seconds and hitting his brakes

You can imagine the results. His SUV ended up farther down the lot after each run. How can this prove anything? Did 'inserting a CD' include digging around under the seat, or in the divider, or in the glove compartment? It didn't look like it. And when he dialed the number, he was hitting each individual number - no speed dial or voice commands. I also noticed that while he was texting, he glanced up from time to time. His eyes were not averted the entire 6 seconds.

Not very scientific. He should have also tried a few non-cell phone related things. Maybe a 7-year-old girl screaming her lungs out and kicking the back of his seat, or he could have taken a swig out of a bottled water - but oops! it fell on the floor and rolled under the brake pedal. At least this would have shown that cell phones are not the only things distracting us. But that wouldn't go over very well, would it? They expect an outcry over cell phone usage but what if it were illegal to be, for instance, gesticulating wildly as you are talking to your passenger? "Do you know why I pulled you over, ma'am? Your hands were not at 10 and 2."