Stumble it!
Kirtsy
Digg
A bus full of school children get into a terrible traffic accident in San Antonio. A trolley accident in Boston injures 49 passengers. Two police officers hospitalized after a Missouri man crashes into them. What caused these accidents? Alcohol? No. Drugs? No. The cause of all these accidents was texting!
A new study shows that one in four people text while they drive. The percentage more than doubles (66%) when the age group is narrowed to 18-24. Instant messaging, texting, and tweeting (through Twitter) have achieved enemy status rivaled only by drunk driving. This fun, easy way to send instant messages to friends through the cell phone has become deadly.
This has become such a problem that states have begun outlawing texting while driving. Texting presents a danger because, unlike a phone call, it requires that both the sender and the receiver take their eyes off the road. There are ways to place a phone call and talk on the phone hands-free and without visual distraction. Many states already have laws enforcing hands-free cell phone use. Texting-While-Driving, however, is getting state lawmakers’ attention primarily because of a handful of high profile text-related accidents. At this point, eighteen states have or are currently working on legislation to prohibit texting (including instant messaging and tweeting) while driving.
I have mixed feelings about such specific legislation. While there is no question that this is dangerous, it is so because it’s a distraction. How far are we willing to legislate against specific distractions? Drinking coffee, eating a sandwich, talking to children in the backseat, and having an emotionally draining day also affect driving ability and focus. This list of distracting activities in which drivers participate is endless.
I don’t think we need laws for texting. If someone causes an accident for any reason, whatever the distraction, they should pay the appropriate price. Are there laws against drinking coffee and driving? How about laws against doing hair and make-up and driving? It sounds funny, but at the end of the day lawmakers have to pick and choose which distractions get the warning label. Is it the best they can do? Or is it an ineffective way to placate constituents who are nervous about their teenagers getting into car accidents? If we saw a rash of accidents that got wall-to-wall media coverage and the accidents were caused by Drinking (Coffee) and Driving, I believe there would be an uproar over the issue, including laws against the temperature at which a cup of coffee can be served. It sounds silly. But it’s easier to select a few “vices” than it is to require greater responsibility and concentration on the road. But maybe I’m biased since I text and drive.
Do you think these restrictions are necessary? Should they be expanded beyond texting? Maybe seeing a few people go to jail for TWD (texting while driving) would make a difference? How much can we legislate? How much should we legislate? What do you think?
——
(Original photo by Samantha Celera, used under Creative Commons license.)
Loading ...
June 3rd, 2009 at 2:08 pm
I fail to see how anyone can thinking texting while driving is an appropriate thing to do. Yes, there are other distractions drivers will face while on the road, but you don’t have to take your eyes off the road to have a sip of coffee… you DO however take your eyes off the road to send a text message.
The thing I wish people would ask themselves is this : Is this text message REALLY so important that I can’t wait until I’m out of the car to send it?
June 3rd, 2009 at 4:44 pm
I have texted while driving before, when I needed to find something out before I got home or something. It’s not something I’m in the habit of, though. I think one of the problems, like Lores pointed out, is that if you make a law against texting, tweeting, etc., what if you cause an accident because you were distracted by something else? The principle is the same — you weren’t paying attention to the road — but there’s no specific law against what it was you were doing. I think it would be appropriate to take into account whether a person was allowing him/herself to be distracted by anything, no matter what it is (if it’s provable), not just pass a law against every individual thing. That way people are required to take responsibility for the manner in which they drive, not just say “Well, I can’t do this, this, this, or this, but everything else is ok because it’s not against the law.”