Banning Cell Phone, Essay Example

As of 2006, U.S. had about 240 million licensed drivers (Jones). This number should not come as a surprise since U.S. enjoys one of the highest car ownership rates in the world and vehicle is a commodity here rather than a luxury as it is in many developing countries. Similarly, 91 percent or over 285 million Americans were estimated to own wireless cell phones, according to a semiannual US wireless industry survey in 2010 (Foresman). Even though both transportation vehicles and cell phones play a huge role in increasing the life standards as well as economic productivity of Americans, their combination also imposes social and financial costs on the society. Not surprisingly, the National Safety Council recommended the Congress that states should ban use of hand-held and hands-free cell phones and similarly, businesses prohibit employees from using cell phones while driving on the job. As of April 2009, 11 states which are Alaska, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Utah, Virginia, and Washington as well as the District of Columbia had laws banning texting while driving. Another 10 states which are Delaware, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and West Virginia had laws banning teens and new drivers from texting (L., Precious, & Precious, 2009). Thus, we need a federal law bans the use of cell phones while driving because it will make the nation’s roads and highways safer by reducing automobile accidents.

Driving while distracted is responsible for 25 percent of police reported crashes (Nationwide). Similarly, an analysis of Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), which records data on all road fatalities on public roads in the U.S, showed that fatalities declined from 1999 to 2005 but the trend reversed after that. Fatalities from distracted driving rose from 4,572 in 2005 to 5,870 in 2008, recording an overall increase of 28% over the period and the analysis also revealed that crashes increasingly involved male drivers colliding with roadside obstructions in urban areas. The authors of the study estimated that from 2001 to 2007, more than 16,000 additional road fatalities were due to increased texting volumes (Wilson & Stimpson, 2010). Approximately 1 in 6 fatal vehicle collisions resulted from a driver being distracted while driving in 2008.

Studies using a naturalistic methodology suggested that drivers who text while driving are 23 times more likely to crash. In 2009, distracted driving led to an estimated 5,500 fatalities and nearly 450,000 injuries (Ban texting while driving, 2011). According to John Townsend, Manager of Public and Government Affairs for AAA Mid-Atlantic, “All it takes to cause an accident is to be distracted for as little as three seconds.” A study from the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis puts the annual financial toll of cell phone related crashes at $43 billion (Boyter).

David Strayer, a Psychology professor as well as a research team director at the Applied Cognition Lab at the University of Utah estimates that drivers are eight times more likely to get into an accident while text messaging. Similarly, a study by the Transport Research Laboratory in 2008 found that people who texted while driving failed to detect hazards, responded to hazards more slowly, and had dangerously slowed reaction times which could easily make the difference between causing and avoiding an accident or between a fatal and non-fatal collision (Boyter). Numerous studies show that texting reduces response times and greatly increase the risk of collision. A speed of just 60 MPH means that a distance equal to the length of a football field can be covered in less than four seconds which means that drivers who text are essentially driving blind for hundreds of yards (Ban texting while driving, 2011).

Banning cell phone use increases social welfare and many private companies as well as public officials realize this. The lack of progress in legal area has also been due to bureaucracy and the complicated and length process of converting a bill into a law. UPS and Verizon Communications, Inc. have a zero tolerance policy on using cell phones and other hand held devices while driving. Oprah Winfrey has partnered with the Governors Highway Safety Association on an awareness campaign called “No Phone Zone” which aims to persuade drivers to discontinue cell phone use while driving (Casale, 2010). Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood informed the audience at a National Distracted Driving Summit that nearly 1,600 companies and groups with about 10.5 million employees have distracted driving policies in place and an additional 550 entities with 1.5 million employees are expected to do so within a year (Kirby, 2010). President Obama signed an executive order in October 2009 that prohibits federal employees from engaging in text messaging while driving government-owned vehicles (HR Specialist: Employment Law). Similarly, the Transportation Department also banned drivers of interstate trucks and commercial buses or vans with more than eight passengers from texting while driving in 2010 (Aspen Publishers Inc., 2010).

The critics may argue that cell phones are not the only distraction that drivers have and there are many other factors that cause car accidents. Car accidents are also caused by bad drivers and similarly, not all distractions can be banned. Given the number of drivers on the road, there will always be car accidents as well as uncontrollable issues surrounding distracted driving habits. In addition, many people use cell phones to communicate regarding work-related issues. Banning cell phone use will affect their economic productivity and time is already a scarce commodity in today’s competitive environment.

The critics are right that there are other factors but just because not all factors can be controlled is not a justification for ignoring other measures that could make the roads safer. Driving under the influence of alcohol is banned and one could argue that it should not be so because other factors also cause accidents. Similarly, many states have additional requirements old drivers. For e.g. in Iowa, drivers over 70 can only receive two years licenses (Span). More than half the U.S. states have one or more renewal provisions specific to elderly drivers (National Institute for Highway Safety). The point is that there will always be risks on the road but lower risks are always preferable to higher risks and statistics show that a significant proportion of accidents occurred due to cell phone related distraction. As far as bad drivers are concerned, the law does punish them for each instance of accident and even insurance carriers jack up their insurance rates. Similarly, the fact that so many private organizations prohibit their employees from using cell phone on the road demonstrates that they understand the potential costs of using cell phone on the road outweigh the benefits in the long term.

Cell phone use while driving should be banned because it is also morally and ethically right thing to do. The reason smoking has been banned in public places across the nation is because smoking carries social costs. Besides the smoker, it also affects others who may not themselves be smokers through second-hand smoke. Similarly, driving under influence is prohibited by the law because it puts the safety of others in danger as well. It is the responsibility of the society to protect its citizens from undue harm. Similarly, drivers who use cell phone while driving not only put themselves in danger but also others on the road who otherwise may be responsible drivers. No one should be made to pay the price of other’s mistakes and when the law has an ability to minimize risks, it should take steps to do so.

Studies have proven that cell phone use results in lower attention on the road, reduced response time, and huge losses in terms of lives and economic costs. Some states have taken steps but they vary in their coverage as well as severity of punishment. Moreover, different laws may create confusion among drivers so a better option may be for states to work together to create similar laws regarding cell phone use while driving. The facts mentioned above should convince the readers that such a law will not infringe upon anyone’s right to drive but instead make sure that all of us enjoy the driving privilege responsibly without being a source of harm to others on the road. Cell phone use on the road is not only a concern in the U.S. but a global issue. Cellphone use while driving is banned in countries including Austria, Australia, Brazil, Egypt, France, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Poland, Portugal, Switzerland, and U.K. Some countries even impose prison sentences on violations including Bahrain, Ireland, and city of New Delhi in India. Many countries most of whom are in Europe were quite swift in responding to the potential risks of cellphone use while driving. Germany imposed ban in February 2001, Denmark in July 1998, Brazil in January 2001, Japan in November 1999, and U.K. in December 2003 (Cellular-News). This demonstrates that U.S. has been quite late to the game and any more delay should be avoided. The fact that many countries impose much harsher punishment for using cell phone on the road emphasizes the dangers posed by cell phone use while driving.

References

Aspen Publishers Inc. “Transportation Department Bans Texting by Truckers, Bus Drivers.” 2010.

“Ban texting while driving.” The Herald 7 January 2011.

Boyter, Jennifer Horne. “R U DRIVING?” State News (Council of State Governments) May 2009: 12-15.

Casale, Jeff. “Effort to ban texting by drivers gains traction.” Business Insurance 3 May 2010: 12-13.

Cellular-News. Countries that ban cell phones while driving. 10 April 2012 <http://www.cellular-news.com/car_bans/>.

Foresman, Chris. Wireless survey: 91% of Americans use cell phones. 2010. 10 April 2012 <http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2010/03/wireless-survey-91-of-americans-have-cell-phones.ars>.

HR Specialist: Employment Law. “‘No texting while driving,’ Obama tells federal staff, as more states outlaw texting for all drivers.” November 2009: 5.

Jones, Charisse. Getting a Driver’s license to get harder. 14 March 2006. 10 April 2012 <http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-03-14-drivers-licenses_x.htm>.

Kirby, Paul. “At Summit, LaHood, Others Cite Progress, Challenges In Combating Driver Distractions Such as Texting.” Telecommunications Reports October 2010: 3-5.

L., Janice, Habuda Precious and Tom Precious. “Supports grows to ban deadly texting while driving.” The Buffalo News 25 April 2009.

National Institute for Highway Safety. Q&A: Older drivers. December 2010. 10 April 2012 <http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/older_people.html>.

Nationwide. Driving While Distracted: Statistics To Know. 10 April 2012 <http://www.nationwide.com/newsroom/dwd-facts-figures.jsp>.

Span, Paula. Unexpected Findings on Elderly Drivers. 17 November 2010. 10 April 2012 <http://newoldage.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/unexpected-findings-on-elderly-drivers/>.

Wilson, Fernando A. and Jim P. Stimpson. “Trends in Fatalities From Distracted Driving in the United States, 1999 to 2008.” American Journal of Public Health November 2010: 2213-2219.