Motorists fume at cell ban proposal

I’m still digging out from under a pile of hostile e-mails after last week’s column about criminalizing cell phone use on the road.

To recap, I lashed out at the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association for endorsing a USA Today editorial that skewered cities such as Brooklyn, Ohio, for banning cell phone use while driving. The story in question, you’ll recall, says the new no-talk laws are “misguided” and suggests that chatty drivers are statistically just as safe as any other motorists.

I wondered if readers like Gordon Livingston, who wrote in to criticize me for being “way too emotional” about this issue, have a valid point. He notes that other activities, like driving while smoking, finding a radio station, talking to other passengers, or applying makeup while steering a car, are equally dangerous. Why not ban them?

On the other hand, I wondered if Clark Coffee, who said “I’d rather drive with a well-behaved drinker than a cell phone user any day” doesn’t make my analysis seem rather levelheaded. All I had proposed was treating talking on a cell phone and driving just like driving under the influence of alcohol, since the two pose about the same risks.

But then I got the following e-mail:

“I felt compelled to send you a note,” wrote Alice O’Kane. “Last month, my 29-year-old niece, Shelly, was visiting her dad in Colorado. She and a male friend were driving on a winding mountain road – Shelly was behind the wheel – when a call came into her cell phone. She answered it, lost control of the car, and it went plummeting down a ravine.”

“They spent the night out there, and when the paramedics found them in the morning, Shelly was in a coma. At the hospital, her father, his wife and Shelly’s mom made the decision to stop life support, as Shelly was brain dead. Her companion survived to tell what happened. I don’t know who called her, nor do I ever want to, but can you imagine how that person must feel, knowing? Shelly was a sweet, golden girl – tall, blond. What a terrible waste,” she writes.

That put everything into perspective.

I’m aware of the danger of using anecdotes to make a point, but those of you who wrote to remind me that there are no reliable statistics on cellular phone use while driving will concede that anecdotes are the next best thing. And as far as stories go, that one makes me even more upset than I was when a chatty trucker rear-ended me on the New Jersey Turnpike.

Herbert Bracewell took me to task for letting my accident influence my feelings on this controversy. “Come on now,” he wrote. “Admit your prejudice and stop trying to blame a particular behavior.” Fine. I admit that I’m biased because I got mowed down by a truck – and by Shelly’s senseless death, too.

I may be biased, but I’m not wrong. In Singapore, your license is suspended for six months if you’re caught driving and using a phone at the same time, reader Julian Winsor points out. In Switzerland, you’re looking at a $70 fine if you’re pulled over for driving and talking on a cell phone, Gian-Marco Rampone reports. Ron Yatziv wrote in to say that the fine is $150 for the same violation in Israel.

I believe it’s only a matter of time before there’s a federal law banning the use of cell phones while driving.

Michael Janay wouldn’t be too happy with that. “Millions and millions of drivers use their phones safely,” he argues. “That is why the industry calls the 100 deaths number insignificant. You can’t regulate stupidity. It’s not talking on a cell phone that makes us a menace on the road; it’s being a poor driver. Look, I feel for the victims of these accidents, but all accidents are preventable – if we make driving illegal.”

Others wouldn’t mind seeing at least some form of cell phone use criminalized. “[We should] ban drivers from using any phone they must hold to their ear, or any phone they must take their eyes off the road to operate,” says Diane Scholfield. “I’m betting that 90 percent of all cell phone users live in urban areas where road traffic is always moderate to heavy.”

If the phones aren’t made illegal, then she suggests the cellular industry should at least update its guidelines for using a phone in the car. The guidelines on its Web site are vague and unhelpful.

But a fair number of this column’s readers were steamed that I didn’t make a distinction between hands-free users and handheld cell phone users. John Verbrugge asked me if I would clarify in a follow-up column, which I am only too happy to do.

Yes, technically there’s a difference between the kind of phone you have to pick up and dial and, say, a “hands-free” or a “headset” cellular phone. I know there’s a difference, but I don’t think it matters. All of these devices, to some extent or another, take a driver’s mind off the road. You still have to reach down to dial a cell phone that has an earpiece. You still have to focus on the conversation when you’re on a hands-free phone.

In my opinion, there’s no such thing as a safe cell phone for motorists. Only varying degrees of deadly.

Christopher Elliott is the author of Scammed: How to Save Your Money and Find Better Service in a World of Schemes, Swindles, and Shady Deals. Critics have called it “eye-opening” and “inspiring” — it’ll “grab your attention and won’t let go.” Order your copy now on Amazon, Barnes & Noble or iTunes.

Be the first to comment