Cell phone bill a logical call

The state senate's recent decision to pass a bill prohibiting the use of cell phones while driving, save for the use of hands-free technology, is a good call.

My first reaction upon hearing the news of the proposed law, Senate Bill 5160, was, "Well, that's logical. Almost a 'Duh!' bill."

It seems like a no-brainer to limit the use of cell phones to hands-free equipment. In fact, one could make the argument (and many already have) that the bill does not go far enough, as several statistics show that hands-free cell phones carry just as much dangerous distraction as regular cell phones.

Cries of "1984!" and "Big brother is watching you in your car!" are over exaggeration. The government is not trying to limit our freedoms in this circumstance; it is trying to keep us safer by cutting down on one more distraction whilst on the road, when many people have, time and again, demonstrated an unwillingness to take the steps themselves.

The simple truth of the matter is, the bill makes sense. A driver's responsibility in the course of transportation is to be safe, first and foremost. Anything that limits or impairs that responsibility should be restricted.

Sen. Tim Sheldon, D-Potlatch, said in a recent Associated Press article that the bill is "really Big Brother. It's taking away something that's yours. It's your car, it's your castle … it's Big Brother coming to rescue you in your car from yourself."

This is a ridiculous sentiment; neither the car nor the cell phone are inherent rights. They are privileges, and to abuse either should mean a fine or punishment.

Besides, the bill makes using a handheld cell phone a secondary offense, meaning a police officer couldn't pull over someone simply for being on the phone. The person would have to be committing another violation, such as speeding. The cell phone violation would be a moving violation, subject to a $101 fine.

In the same article, a 2001 study sponsored by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, which analyzes five years of car crash data, determined that 12.9 percent of crashes involved distracted drivers. Of those, 1.5 percent were distracted by using a cell phone, compared with 11. 4 percent distracted by the radio, tape or CD player and 10.9 percent distracted by a passenger.

I wonder how much overall cell phone use has increased since the years prior to 2001, and if accidents caused by cell phone distractions has increased proportionately to that ratio.

"It wouldn't be too much of an assumption that cell phone ownership has increased since 2001," said Fairley Washington, director of communications for the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. She said that no new research has been done since 2001, and added that the study was the first phase in a distracted driving study.

For the second phase in 2003, researchers used in-car video cameras to see how drivers behaved behind the wheel of their own cars. The study showed that every driver is distracted some of the time. According to the press release, available on the foundation's Web site at www.aaafoundation.org, 97.1 percent of drivers were distracted while reaching or leaning; 91.4 while manipulating music or audio controls; 71. 4 percent while eating or drinking; 77.1 percent while conversing; 45.7 while grooming; 44.4 percent by a passenger; 40 percent while reading or writing; 30 percent while using a cell phone and 7.1 percent while smoking.

Those numbers are alarming. On the surface, cell phones don't appear to be as much of a threat as the radio, food or passengers, and one could wonder how long it is before the government takes the next step on the slippery slope and outlaws nachos in the car, or passengers themselves, in the interest of safety.

But just because cell phone use doesn't appear to be the most dangerous in a long list of distractions doesn't mean we should ignore it altogether. It means we seriously need to take a look at our overall priorities and precautions taken to ensure safety on the road.

Those alternative circumstances also fall under a driver's responsibility to put safety first: Eating, grooming, reading and writing, manipulating sound effects or tending to the needs of passengers are also situations best dealt with safely on the side of the road.

Accidents can happen for a variety of reasons, and a responsible driver should do his or her best to minimize the amount of reasons he or she would have control over.

If our business call is really that important, or if the child is squalling that loudly, then it's our responsibility as a conscientious driver to pull over safely and deal with the situation in a parked vehicle.

"People often underestimate the seriousness of distractions because not every distraction leads to a crash," said AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety president Peter Kissinger in a statement following the 2003 phase two press release. "But if you are distracted just when someone pulls out in front of you, your lack of attention can be catastrophic."

Amen. Try explaining to your relatives — or the police or, worse, a grieving family — that a large traffic violation fine — or worse — happened because you were too busy grooming yourself.

Matthew Weaver is the business and agriculture reporter for the Columbia Basin Herald.