back to article Get off the phone!! Seven out of ten US drivers put theirs and your lives at risk

Over two-thirds of drivers are dangerously distracted by their smartphones. That's according to a survey of over 2,000 US road users quizzed about their activities while piloting a ton or so of metal down the freeway at high speed. In all, 61 per cent of drivers admitted to sending or reading text messages while behind the …

  1. PleebSmash
    Pint

    equivalent

    Four beers: meh

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: equivalent

      Using a mobile phone distracted driving = $250 fine

      Using a new car's buitl in touch screen 48 zone climate control integrated radio panel in the wife's Prius that I can't understand even with the manual = ok

      Using my phone's sat nav = $250 fine

      Using a window mounted after market sat nav = illegal in the next state over

      Using a new cars integrated sat nav = ok

      It's almost as if the car makers and the legislators were working together somehow

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: equivalent

        It's not collusion, it's culture.

        At first, cars were dangerous but useful, and treated that way. Then people got used to them. Still, they contained only the Controls.

        Then came the Radio. People absolutely ADORED them, and happily ignored the very rare crash attributable to knob fiddling. It was just an acceptable price for the gift of music while travelling.

        The point is that people got used to a risk/reward trade-off with radios, and that carries over to any device that seems to be 'part of the car.'

        Cell phones and texting are seen as a personal thing, and so not 'covered' by virtue of proper installation.

        1. Shades
          Trollface

          Re: equivalent

          "happily ignored the very rare crash attributable to knob fiddling"

          Is that not a different, but related, discussion?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: equivalent

        Here in Oregon (Idaho awaits tomorrow) the fine for using a phone is $500 minimum.

        The Rental Cheffy Equinox I'm driving has the integrated Satnav (thanks Avis for not charging me $15/day for it) and infotainment centre. The U/I is a total dogs breakfast. It makes no sense at all but that ok because if I crash while trying to get my mp3 player to be recognised as a valid source then I won't be banged up for using a non integrated device.

        As far as pairing the phone, forget it. If it ain't an AT&T device the frigging thing don't wanna know. And this is even with my UK phone using the AT&T network.

        The Subaru I had last year was an order of magnitude more usable.

        Don't even get me started at the piss poor mpg (21.2 mile/US gal) even with a very light right foot.

        Sure Gas is $3.09/gal here in Baker but even so a modern vehicle should get better mpg than that.

        Back home in Blighty my 12yr old Saab 95 Estate can return 50mpg(uk gals) which ain't bad for a virtual tank of a car.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: equivalent

          It makes no sense at all but that ok because if I crash while trying to get my mp3 player to be recognised as a valid source then I won't be banged up for using a non integrated device

          With all due respect, but that sort of stuff you (try to) do BEFORE you drive off. If you are doing that while driving I'd applaud you being pulled off the road and being fined a fortune.

      3. big_D

        Re: equivalent

        Using my phone's sat nav = $250 fine

        Using a window mounted after market sat nav = illegal in the next state over

        Using a new cars integrated sat nav = ok

        The satnav in my last Ford disables input once the vehicle is in motion - with the exception of zooming, hitting the diversion button or selecting from the last 5 destinations. Everything else is locked, even if there is a passenger in the vehicle.

        Additionally, the satnav in the window "could" fall off and cause a distraction or block certain controls, the built-in one can't.

        I don't have a satnav in my current car; that said in the last 4 years I've probably used a satnav 3 times.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: equivalent

      Yeah, but it's American "beer", not the real stuff.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Statistics

        If 61% of people are doing this and the number of accidents aren't going through the roof it's almost as if we're not being told the truth about how dangerous it is.

        Personally I don't ever text while I'm driving but I can just about see that someone doing so while their car is stationary in a traffic jam may not cause too many problems.

        Of course the truth may be that this survey is complete bollocks.

        1. big_D

          Re: Statistics

          An awful lot of people "get away with it". That is the problem. They are on a lonely stretch of road and wandering across 3 lanes doesn't cause an accident... This time.

          I was in a car with a friend, her 4 children and her nanny. She was writing SMS as we were barrelling down the Autobahn. She drifted from the right lane onto the hard shoulder and back across all three lanes to almost hit the central reservation, before wandering back to the left lane. When she looked up, she was in the lane where she had started from! So no worries!

          Since then I have refused to set foot in a car when she is driving.

  2. asdf

    hmm

    With so many idiots on the road the self driving cars can't come fast enough. I generally trust technology more than I do the general American public for oh about everything.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: hmm

      I pray you are not so unfortunate as to be within the borders of the USA, and need not expose yourself to those rude Usaian bumpkins. Unthinkable!

      1. asdf

        Re: hmm

        Born and bred merkin who laughs at the general public nearly every day (beats crying I suppose). For some reason I never got into TMZ, Jersey Shore, or American Idol (see movie God Bless America) like a good number of my fellow country men.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: hmm

          I am too. I don't even own a TV and consider the mass culture to be pretty debased, but I prefer not to view most of the people around me as unworthy. I'm sorry that it's that way for you. I bet if you tried, you could find something noble in almost everyone you meet.

          1. asdf

            Re: hmm

            Yes individually each person can be a hoot but get them together in a group and at least half the time their individual personality disappears and pretty soon none of us are as dumb as all of us. I was more making fun of the herd than individuals.

        2. Grifter
          Headmaster

          Re: hmm

          If you are indeed a born and bred pussy wig, perhaps you meant "laughs at the general pubic"?

          Merkin.

  3. 404
    Trollface

    The Problem

    with taking pictures while driving, is they always come out pretty bad. All blurry and stuff...

    ;)

    1. Richard Taylor 2

      Re: The Problem

      Your'e doing it wrong, I get great results using both hands on the phone to steady it

  4. Mark 85

    Darwin's Law is still in effect.

    I guess most kids haven't learned it or parents don't teach it anymore.. If you challenge Darwin's Law, you will lose. Maybe not today...but you will lose.

    1. silent_count

      Re: Darwin's Law is still in effect.

      It's a delicious thought - remove all penalties, nay encourage using a phone/tablets/laptops/blow-up-dolls while driving, and let natural selection sort 'em out.

      Who are these fines for anyhow? The people who don't posess enough rational thought to realise that driving is dangerous, and driving while intentionally impairing their driving ability is a really bad idea. Therefore the fines are for people who should never have been allowed to drive in the first place.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Darwin's Law is still in effect.

        It's a delicious thought - remove all penalties, nay encourage using a phone/tablets/laptops/blow-up-dolls while driving, and let natural selection sort 'em out.

        I would be OK with that if it weren't for the fact that such idiots unfortunately have the habit of taking out innocent parties as well. Some issue as drunk driving. I am very OK with giving idiots the chance to remove themselves from the gene pool, hopefully whilst providing some amusement along the way, but the issue is that it tends to involve innocent bystanders.

        1. werdsmith Silver badge

          Re: Darwin's Law is still in effect.

          Yes, that's Darwin's Law invoking Sod's law.

          Or we could add in some Newtonian physical laws and see the drivers of larger masses killing those protected by smaller masses.

        2. silent_count

          Re: Darwin's Law is still in effect.

          "but the issue [with my master plan of voluntary bad driver culling] is that it tends to involve innocent bystanders."

          You're right, to an extent, but I see it as more of a trade-off.

          Either a one time period of increased danger to 'normal' people while the incompetent drivers remove themselves from the gene pool forever. The added danger tails off in direct proportion to the rate of culling.

          Or the continual risk of incompetent drivers only texting-and-driving if they can't see a copper nearby coupled with the increased chance of them reproducing and passing the 'dumdum' gene onto their offspring who will grow up and inflict their dumb upon the next generation.

          I'd prefer to bite the proverbial bullet and go with the first option but can't really hold it against you if you favour the latter.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Darwin's Law is still in effect.

      Youth, in general, consider each and most every one immortal. Did you not notice who fights at the front vice who does not? Texting, talking to a girl in the seat behind you face to face, drinking and/or drugging, putting on makeup, hell shaving. Nothing bad is going to happen. "I spit in Darwin's face!"

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Darwin's Law is still in effect.

      I'm all in for the natural selection of those texting behind the wheel. But when I'm cycling through a crossing with the guy in the facing truck laughing at his lap while crossing my path (a true event), I'm the endangered species :(

    4. PassiveSmoking

      Re: Darwin's Law is still in effect.

      Except these idiots can take innocent bystanders whose only crime was being in the wrong place in the wrong time with them.

      You want to die in a moronic way? Fine, do it by trying to test if your gun's barrel is blocked by putting it to your head and repeatedly pulling the trigger. Don't do it in a way that can take out an innocent third party.

  5. Dave 126 Silver badge

    Idiots! Texting whilst driving? How moronic of them. Here I am, writing on a Reg forum whilst driving home from t [ Screech BANG CRUCNH Arrg! NeeNaaNeeNaa bep bep beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep]

  6. Allan George Dyer
    Pint

    Four beers?

    Pass me two phones, I'm going to get smashed!

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Coffee/keyboard

    the real problem is that people don't know how to drive any more

    Oh, and touchscreen phones are infinitely harder to touch-type on.

    With my former-former Nokia phone I could touch type with my eyes closed in the dark. Doing the same while driving was easy since I could hold both the steering wheel and the phone in one hand (the other hand was for the cigarette.)

    Since I upgraded to a touchscreen phone, I can send a message by hitting the microphone icon and 8 tries later...maybe...send the message. Usually, I don't bother.

    <rant>

    As for distracted driving, two kids in the back seat is distracting. Picking up the map off of the floor is distracting. As someone said above, using a badly designed UI while driving is distracting.

    The problem is that some losers' kid died and they started crying about it, and, oh, look, we can pass a fucking law. God forbid making the driving test comprehensive enough to weed out the bad drivers in the first place.

    </rant>

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: the real problem is that people don't know how to drive any more

      So you think texting while driving is perfectly OK, and admit basically to still doing it (given that you complain about a bad UI)?

      I hope they'll catch you soon and fine the hell out of you.

      1. Aoyagi Aichou

        Re: the real problem is that people don't know how to drive any more

        The problem isn't the act of "texting", it's taking eyes off the road.

        1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

          Re: the real problem is that people don't know how to drive any more

          The problem isn't the act of "texting", it's taking eyes off the road.

          Numerous studies say otherwise. The problem is distraction, period. That's why hands-free phone operation is no less dangerous than holding the thing to your ear while driving.

          1. Aoyagi Aichou

            Re: the real problem is that people don't know how to drive any more

            @Michael Wojcik

            I've never seen a study trying to suggest that not looking where you drive is more dangerous than distraction. That's a nice theory, but doesn't sound very real.

    2. WereWoof

      Re: the real problem is that people don't know how to drive any more

      You drive with your eyes closed?

      1. Tom 13
        Joke

        Re: You drive with your eyes closed?

        Hey, in some part of the country, it's the only way to drive. If you open them, you'll die of a heart attack.

      2. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: the real problem is that people don't know how to drive any more

        You drive with your eyes closed?

        Only while sleeping.

    3. Triggerfish

      Re: the real problem is that people don't know how to drive any more

      "God forbid making the driving test comprehensive enough to weed out the bad drivers in the first place."

      What you mean things like keeping a decent grip on the steering wheel and not being distracted? Good grief.

  8. david 12 Silver badge

    But technically....

    "A University of Utah driving simulator study

    found drivers using cell phones had

    slower reaction times than drivers impaired by

    alcohol at a .08 blood alcohol concentration,

    the legal intoxication limit."

    In other words, using a cell phone for 5 minutes while driving is as dangerous as being drunk for 5 minutes while driving.

    I'm not in favour of the death penalty for murder, much less for being a pedestrian sharing a road with a car, but this is slightly dishonest. Drunk drivers are not drunk only for short intervals and otherwise sober. The numbers do not support the claim that testing/calling/using your hands is "as dangerous as" being a drunk driver, because drunk drivers are drunk continously.

    I wait for the day when we see an actual meaningful comparison of drunk driving and testing, because that also would be interesting

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Pint

      Re: But technically....

      Road & Track did one back in the 1990's ( I think...it may have been Car & Driver.) They had all of their columnists in a parking lot with cones and picked one to abstain. Everyone else drank. Their conclusion was that alcohol will impact your driving, but not necessarily in a bad way. Of course after that statement (which I've probably butchered) they said that they couldn't come out and say that .1BAC meant you were unable to drive.

      What they proved was that alcohol effects everyone differently....and I agree. It make some people flinch at shadows but it makes me invincible.

      Cheers

      1. Steven Raith

        Re: But technically....

        A closed course != the road, with random hazards.

        Reaction times while even moderately inebriated are much, much larger than when sober and paying attention.

        Reaction times are what matter on the road.

        1. Tom 13

          Re: A closed course != the road, with random hazards.

          The closed course with cones is sufficient for testing reaction times. That's one of the fundamentals about these sorts of things which are routinely done all the time to prove to people how alcohol affects their driving.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: But technically....

          "reaction times"

          And there you have it. You should be anticipating not reacting.

          Only in an extreme emergency should you be reacting.

          I could never understand the logic with enforcing eye-level stop lights. I'm sorry but if you need a light in your eye line before you realise that someone is stopping, you're driving too damn close in the first place.

          When one sees brake lights several cars in front lighting up, that's when you should be easing up, as you are anticipating the cars closer in front of you will, in all likelihood, be doing the same, NOT when the car immediately in front lights up it's brakes lights.

          And what happens if the driver in front merely eases off the accelerator? Are you going to crash because you didn't see the eye level brake light? Or are you actually keeping a reasonable distance from the car in front so that when you detect yourself getting a little closer, you can also ease off the accelerator. Or as most people seem to do these days, brake, even when it's not actually needed.

          I hope you don't rely on brake lights if you are following behind me because my first action is to lift my accelerator foot, change to a lower gear if I need to slow a little more and so I have acceleration if required. Braking is my last action, and only if required following the previous actions.

          Amazingly, I have never had an accident following a few bevvies, even when I was a young fella before people cared much about drunk driving. Anticipation was the key. Do that and there is no need to 'react'. Therefore speed of reaction becomes irrelevant.

          Naturally I'm a bit more responsible these days, but even so.........

          To finish my rant, it's about time that people realised that driving a car is not sitting in your living room in a comfy seat, while you chat to people, fiddle with your CD/radio, discipline the children or any other distracting thing. You actually have to concentrate on what you are doing and drive the damn thing. I fail to see that a phone is any different or why we need a 'special' law just for phones.

          Oh, I guess that it proves that 'something is being done about crap driving'.

  9. bill 27
    WTF?

    I'm a cat?

    Granted I only speak Murican, if you speak English to me slowly and clearly I can usually understand you, but how many lives do I have? "theirs and your lives".

  10. Magani
    Stop

    An Antipodean Slant

    Queensland has just introduced a 'double demerit points' penalty for a second and subsequent offence in any one year, for using a mobile while driving. This could amount to loss of your licence for 3 bookings in a twelve month period. That's the good news.

    All the boys in blue have to do now is catch the offenders. Despite the Minister's press release and TV interview yesterday, it seems only about 2000 fines have been issued in the last year. I think I've seen more than that in my local area over a similar period, (tradies, school Mums, etc) so maybe they need a better eye test for the Police Academy?

  11. Arctic fox
    Headmaster

    Texting while driving and talking on the phone while driving are...............

    ...........two different types of activity (if you use a hands free setup for talking). If you text whilst you drive however you are obliged to:

    1. Drive one-handed whilst "thumb texting"

    2. Take your eyes off the road and other users every few seconds.

    3. Tackle two different intellectual objectives simultaneously - driving competently and composing your text.

    What could possibly go wrong?

    1. Tom 13

      Re: Texting while driving and talking on the phone while driving are...............

      All absolutely true. But...

      How dangerous is it to do that while stuck in a traffic jam and not moving?

      How dangerous is it to do while stuck in a traffic slug slow down (5-10 mph, 4 cars wide, 4 to 8 cars ahead of you)?

      How dangerous is it to do when you are the first car stopped at a 1 minute traffic light?

      All of the above count as texting while driving. One of them actually has zero danger associated with it. While the others have some element of risk, it's not the same risk as moving at speed in moderate traffic which is probably the most dangerous situation (it's where you're most likely to encounter higher delta Vs between vehicles and have unexpected changes).

      1. ecofeco Silver badge

        Re: Texting while driving and talking on the phone while driving are...............

        Zero danger? Are you insane? I see slow motion wrecks every day in traffic jams that last for hours.

        Every. Day.

  12. Christian Berger

    If I had a car...

    I'd install an VoIP ADA and a fax machine, so I can fax while driving. :)

    But seriously, at driving school we learned you shouldn't do _anything_ distracting while driving. So no eating no smoking or anything. It's just foolish to text in any situation that would require your attention.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: If I had a car...

      Eating or even smoking are not intellectually challenging activities. OK, reading some of these messages I see online makes them come under the 'not mentally challenging' category either, but you know what I mean - you don't have to think about it. No cigarette has ever struck up a conversation, and neither will the sandwich until you leave it out for too long and it develops new and interesting forms of life.

      Texting or calling, OTOH, can demand more attention than is good for your driving, with especially texting also requiring you to take your eyes off the road (especially if you have auto-incorrect enabled). That does not compare with eating or smoking (the latter I personally find revolting, but that is not a valid argument to ban it).

      1. Alan Brown Silver badge

        Re: If I had a car...

        "Eating or even smoking are not intellectually challenging activities."

        In one smash I attended, when the driver was cut out of the vehicle she was found to be still holding onto the sandwich on the passenger seat that she'd reached for just before drifting across the centreline and under an oncoming cattle truck.

        The fact that the car was 18 inches high after the event might give an indication of the survivability of the impact.

        Apparently this is a relatively common occurance.

  13. redneck

    technical

    Last time Texas had a bill approved to ban texting while driving, Rick Perry killed it.

    If you wanna see how prevalent texting while driving is, just watch people driving by at night; many have a phone glow on their faces.

    It has gotten so bad that I've begun thinking of converting my Subaru (with a big wide sunroof) into a technical so that I can mount a howitzer and blow those effing morons off the road ...

  14. Big-nosed Pengie

    Is the US the last country on the planet to ban hand-held mobes while driving?

    1. Fred Flintstone Gold badge

      Is the US the last country on the planet to ban hand-held mobes while driving?

      Well, on the plus side, they have the right to carry arms.

      This one can be solved *really* quickly. All it takes is some pragmatic joined up thinking :)

    2. Mark 85

      I believe that most States do have the ban in effect. It doesn't stop the idiots however.

    3. Tom 13

      @Big-nosed Pengie

      As a mollycoddled European, you are obviously unaware of one of the finer points of Americana: The country doesn't set road laws - each State does. So it's actually impossible to pass a national law banning the use of cell phones. Even the so called national 55 law didn't actually create a national law. Instead it cut off highway funding if States didn't adopt a max 55 law. And once the idiocy of the law was fully revealed, even that was modified.

  15. Aoyagi Aichou
    Alert

    The annoying trends

    And yet cars are becoming more and more just smartphones that also provide transportation as seen on the latest Mitsubishi's infotainment system for Cadillacs.

  16. werdsmith Silver badge

    I've just been reading a local news story about a woman who was driving erractically, struck a parked vehicle, and refused to stop when asked to do so by a police car.

    Her reason was that she was under extreme pressure from her bladder and simply had to find a loo, she was using a phone satnav in one hand to find a loo and she wasn't going to stop for anyone!

    1. Steven Raith

      Maybe it's just me, but taking a piss at the side of the road out of the way is less embarrassing than crashing into a parked car.

      Then again, me dad was a major petrolhead (and so am I) so maybe he just instilled some odd values into me? :-)

      Steven "has a wee before driving" R

  17. adam payne

    A car however useful is still a lethal weapon in the wrong hands and when driver is distracted.

    I've had my share on run ins with distracted drivers.

    I had a close call a few years back with a lady talking on her mobile phone. She did a u turn and shot out of a junction clipping me with her driver side wing mirror as I was crossing the road. She was completely oblivious to what she had done and drove off.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Poster please "Mental agility test"

    Images of the dead passengers funeral and

    last text sent - "Driving drunk woo."

    Can you spot the most obvious mistakes?

    It's not grammar.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The trouble with texting whilst driving is that it distracts me from shaving and putting my shoes on.

  20. disgruntled yank Silver badge

    the numbers seem high

    I see a lot of folks driving phone in hand, but I'd estimate fewer than a third actually text.

  21. Tom 13

    I don't care what margins of accuracy the polling firms are claiming

    One way or another these numbers are completely bolluxed.

    There's no way that you can possibly have 70% of drivers on the road every minute of every day 4 beers drunk and have accident rates as low as we do. Which is not to say our accident rates are especially low, or that fiddling with your smart phone while driving is safe, only that they are too low to support the claimed results of the survey.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    FAIL

    Shame India can't spend all that money on education, health and preventing young girls form being raped and then murdered or baby girls being murdered at birth !

  23. Bucky 2

    Which one am I?

    When I'm shouting "I'm-headed-to-the-store-period-do-you-need-anything-question-mark. Send" at my phone, does that make me part of the 61%, or the 39%?

  24. nilfs2
    Boffin

    Synchro-boxes, disk brakes and isolated interiors are to blame

    If you have ever driven a car with a non-synchro gearbox, drum brakes and non-isolated interiors, you will notice that there is little to no time to get distracted when driving if you don't want to crash, today car interiors are designed to feel like 5 stars hotel rooms, with better sits than those you have at home, so you can easly fall asleep driving, outstanding suspension and almost zero outside noise so you can't hear the motorcycle you just crashed and ran over on the lane next to you, and those wonderful auto gearboxes that makes possible for any moron to pick up the keys and "drive".

    1. david 12 Silver badge

      Re: Synchro-boxes, disk brakes and isolated interiors are to blame

      Which reminds me that on the old car, you didn't take your hand off the wheel to text or eat, because without power steering, it took both arms to drive the thing.

      1. nilfs2
        Thumb Up

        Re: Synchro-boxes, disk brakes and isolated interiors are to blame

        Nothing like some direction wandering to keep the driver busy

  25. bedge

    Part me me things that everyone should be made to watch the Welsh driving/texting PSA, but I have to admit that it's quite graphic. Maybe that's whats needed.

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

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like