An end to texting and driving?

[mustang1]

I do

I assumed you had got hold of one of these driverless cars that they are talking about, if not them don't text please. Those people who think it's fine to do when stationary, obviously are so unobservant that they've not seen how it causes problems for other drivers and cyclists when they don't move at a roundabout or a set of lights or a junction.

I was just playing devils advocate and don't promote texting while driving (unless you have one of those speech to text thingies).

I just came back from the shop half an hour ago and I crossed the road in front of a van driver that was parked but ready to go. The driver was on the phone so when he accelerated and honked his horn at me, I told him I figured he wasn't going to drive while yapping on the phone. I couldn't quite hear him but I think he swore at me. Shrugs.

 

[KneesUp]

[QUOTE 3410023, member: 9609"]So are you suggesting a minimum standard that no one needs to exceed - may be we could have self assessment, and those drivers who think they are "very good drivers" could drive less carefully. My own driving is truly outstanding, so could I play online chess whilst trucking down the A1 in my 44 tonner?[/QUOTE]
I'm not suggesting anything. I'm raising points for discussion.

Saying that doing an activity when driving impairs ability and therefore should not be allowed is problematic because it raises the question of what to do with people whose ability is below that of another driver when they are doing the activity

e.g.
Driver A - 'driving ability' when fully concentrating 93%
Driver A - 'driving ability' when texting and driving 71%
Driver A - 'driving ability' when listening to the radio and driving 91%

Driver B - 'driving ability' when fully concentrating 75%
Driver B - 'driving ability' when texting and driving 50%
Driver B - 'driving ability' when listening to the radio and driving 70%

If we say that driver A cannot text and drive, it implies that we ought then to say to driver B that they cannot listen to the radio when driving.

 

[Sharky]

I gez der is no exkuse fot rexting amd dribing at tge sane tome.

Keith

Ps please exkuse tge spekking, it's deffikult balansing mi ipad om my nee, wistful dribimg at 80 nph threw uor village.

 

[KneesUp]

I assumed you had got hold of one of these driverless cars that they are talking about, if not them don't text please. Those people who think it's fine to do when stationary, obviously are so unobservant that they've not seen how it causes problems for other drivers and cyclists when they don't move at a roundabout or a set of lights or a junction.

Or they are quite capable of assessing how long the cycle is on the lights and also of using their peripheral vision.

 

[KneesUp]

Would you also be happy for drivers to have a couple of whiskys, as long as they stuck to the quiet roads?

The research into the difference between talking to a passenger in the vehicle and talking to someone on the phone, even a hands-free one, was discussed in some detail in All in the Mind, on Radio 4 the other day. It's pretty far advanced, and also very convincing - the two things are not at all comparable. The idea that some brainy people might be exempt from these effects is just ludicrous.

No one is suggesting some people are exempt from their driving being diminished by concentrating on something else - simply that one persons diminished driving might very well be better than someone else's best efforts.

 

[KneesUp]

And some people get more drunk on a glass of wine than others do on five pints. So what?

You could apply the same principles to the drink-drive limit, certainly. What would be the issue with that?

If Mr Smith is incapable after a sherry and Mr Brown is able to drive perfectly well after 3 pints, why should Mr Smith be allowed to drive and Mr Brown not? I know who I'd rather share a road with.

 

[summerdays]

Or they are quite capable of assessing how long the cycle is on the lights and also of using their peripheral vision.

I've sat behind them, wondering how long it would take for them to notice or waited for them to go at a roundabout, eventually giving up and going myself, only for them to look up realise that they could go at the same moment.

 

[Mugshot]

Me, I think (as I'm sure many on here do), that I'm an above average cyclist when it comes to my awareness on the roads, I've tried to ring and cycle at the same time on a cycle path, and I am aware that my cycling isn't of the same standard. Perhaps I'm not so good as I thought or .... It does take more concentration than we like to think.

No one else has yet, so I'd like to be the first to tell you that I certainly think you're an above average cyclist

 

[Mugshot]

[QUOTE 3410115, member: 9609"]No not at all, the effect of a couple of whiskies would cover a far greater time span than a brief phone call.
The type of brief call I refer to would be how i used to use the phone before it was made illegal - half hour from home I would phone the wife so she could get the tea on - 30 second call on a quiet road with little traffic poses no dangers, phones were made illegal whilst driving because some clowns would be making entire journeys on the phone, driving round a town centre whilst on the phone. in fact many still behave like that, I can't remember the last time I made a journey and did not see a driver with a phone held to their ear.

I agree 100% with your second statement.[/QUOTE]
I ride an awful lot on quiet roads, I'd far rather that the drivers I meet are concentrating on the possibility that I may be round the next corner than what they're having for tea.

 

[winjim]

The research into the difference between talking to a passenger in the vehicle and talking to someone on the phone, even a hands-free one, was discussed in some detail in All in the Mind, on Radio 4 the other day.

Cheers TMN , just listened to that on i player. Also interesting was the bit at the end about lookingbut not seeing . Well worth a listen for those interested in this thread.

 

[the_mikey]

Rather than inventing ways of stopping people from texting, perhaps a little lateral thinking can come up with a solution to alow texting whilst driving.

By this, I mean something that is completely hands free, a built in docking station in the glove box so there is no temptation to use the device and full use of automatic text to speech and voice recognition and full control via the latter.

Make it safe and desirable, then people will want it and everybody will be safer.

It's complicated, but users of Android phones already have the option to send SMS text messages using only their voice, try saying "OK Google, send SMS to 'contact name'" and see what happens. The implementation of Bluetooth would need to be changed to make it work in cars fully since most cars manufacturers still fail to supply even a digital radio, or when they support digital media it's often only mp3 and nothing else because they would owe tech companies a lot of money for the rights to implement the technology. Maybe in 20 years time the manufacturers will catch up, but by then society and technology will have moved on rendering the whole thing almost obsolete before it arrives.

 

[summerdays]

No one else has yet, so I'd like to be the first to tell you that I certainly think you're an above average cyclist

I could be wrong of course

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Don't know about radio. It's one way & doesn't demand a response.
Passengers are definitely distracting. The best example is with under 25 drivers. I remember reading a report which stated that an under 25 driver is four times more likely to crash with a passenger in the vehicle and that likelyhood doubles again with a second passenger.

What's the biggest killer of women under 25 in the UK?




Their boyfriend's driving.

I got a lift to work this morning. We nearly had a head on collision because the driver, was having and animated debate with his passenger, me.

 

[Ganymede]

Would you also be happy for drivers to have a couple of whiskys, as long as they stuck to the quiet roads?

The research into the difference between talking to a passenger in the vehicle and talking to someone on the phone, even a hands-free one, was discussed in some detail in All in the Mind, on Radio 4 the other day. It's pretty far advanced, and also very convincing - the two things are not at all comparable. The idea that some brainy people might be exempt from these effects is just ludicrous.

Some while ago I heard a very interesting piece on R4 (cannot source it alas) which was discussing the difference in brain use when listening to a digital transmission of a voice compared to a person sitting next to you in the car. The digitalised voice uses different, more effortful brain processes because it is not natural speech, and has no other "living clues" to read. I do think conversation is distracting, and I often switch off the radio or say "hang of a bit" to my interlocutor when I get off the motorway and into a town where I have to find my way and watch for turnings. I also use my voice-activated bluetooth in the car, but I limit this severely as I can really tell how much more distracting it is:

*press hands-free button on stem*
*listen for beep*
Me: "Call Home"
*Wait for weird artificial voice*
WAV: "Call... CALLUM, confirm yes or no" (this happens when there is a lot of noise eg motorway; works first time when on a quiet road)
Me: "no"
WAV: "Process terminated"
*press hands-free button on stem*
*listen for beep*
Me "Call 'ome"
*Wait for weird artificial voice*
WAV: "Call... HOME, confirm yes or no"
Me: "Yes"
bip bip bip bip bip bip bip
rrring
*Mr G picks up*

This really is distracting and I only use it when I must must must make a call eg family emergency, sudden change of plan which would involve a major mess-up if not communicated. Really as little as possible. Receiving calls is a far easier thing, it rings, you press the button on the stem and bob's yer uncle, but you still are talking and still somewhat distracted.

And just to add - you can't ban conversation in cars. The only person who has any power is the driver, who can say "please be quiet" or SHUT UP but might be ignored. Many's the time as kids Dad has ground the Austin Cambridge to a halt and said we're being thrown out of the car to walk if we don't shut up. Well, not many, but it shut us up!

 

[Mugshot]

[QUOTE 3410631, member: 9609"]Misunderstanding on the "quiet roads" I would agree that quiet country roads is a time when drivers need to be at max concentration - I was thinking more of quiet moments on big straight trunk roads when there are few other vehicles about, or crawling up a big hill at 15mph, this is when I used to often make brief calls, press speed dial without looking at the phone, then say something like "just coming over soutra, should be back within the hour" Something like that would be no more distracting than changing CD, switching radio stations, adjusting the heating, lighting up a smoke etc.

And note the past tense i used above -[/QUOTE]
I had noted the past tense and wasn't trying to suggest that you still used your phone, however, I believe it is wrong to suggest that making a call on a quiet road with no traffic poses no danger, it breeds complacency. The next time the road is a little busier or a little narrower or a little more winding and as the chances of getting done for it are virtually zero you soon find you're in the situation you describe where you can't remember a journey where you didn't see a driver playing with their phone and some of those will be drivers that started out making calls on quiet roads because they felt it was safe to do so.

Edit: I assume if you're crawling up hill at 15mph you're in a lorry?