Texting While Driving

Cell Phone Use While Driving Should be Banned:

A Research Essay

In Missouri in August 2010, a truck slammed into the back of another vehicle when it had “slowed due to an active construction zone” (Hart 3). Because of that collision, the truck was rear-ended by two school buses. There were two fatalities and nearly forty injuries. It was revealed that the driver at fault had “sent and received” more than a dozen messages in the minutes before the crash. Investigators determined that this distraction was the main cause of the fatal accident (Hart 3). Obviously, this fatal crash could have been avoided if the driver had not been using his cell phone at the time of the crash. Texting is one of many ways drivers can be distracted while operating

vehicles. Distracted driving is defined as driving while doing another task that impairs focus (“Distracted” 1). While phone usage is the most common, other activities, such as eating or using a GPS, are considered impairing as well (“Distracted” 1). However, the most frequent, as well as the most deadly, form of distracted driving would be cell phone usage (Hanes 1). For almost ninety-eight percent of Americans, the risk of a crash while on a cell phone increases four times. Additionally, reaction time to surroundings is comparable to someone driving drunk (Hanes 1). The US Department of Transportation says that sixteen percent of traffic deaths are caused by distracted driving (Carducci 2). However, stricter enforcement of laws must happen at the state level. Also, certain technologies can decrease distraction, but alone it is not enough (Carducci 2). Nonetheless, this often deadly habit of using a cell phone and driving that people do every day can be remedied. South Carolina legislation should enforce a law that presents a $400 ticket for using a cell phone while driving because it would encourage research and development concerning safe communication technology while driving, it would help create a society that makes better decisions on the roads, and traffic fatalities would decrease.
The enforcement of a $400 ticket and the usage of new technologies would permit the development of new technology for safe communication while driving. Currently, phone and car companies are focused on making goods that make cell phone use while driving easier (Gelbart 2). Instead of making it easier, companies should focus on innovations that limit cell phone use and hold drivers accountable for using cell phones (Gelbart 2). However, some corporations are starting to create new technologies to combat this distraction. Companies such as Samsung and Apple have already implemented “driver modes” that recognizes when the user is driving, and automatically sends responses to calls and texts (Gelbart 3). While this is a great start, there is still a long way to go. If using a cellular device while driving was banned by a fine, companies would be forced to find a way to implement communications in the car safely to satisfy the demand from customers. Overall, the stricter enforcement of the law would heavily increase the need for further development in the area of safer car technology for communication.
Tightening up the law regarding cell phone use would also assist with bettering society concerning the decisions drivers make on the road. In a study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, it was found that approximately six percent of drivers are using a phone at one moment (Hanes 2). But, in a study by AAA (American Automobile Association), it was discovered that more than half of those interviewed confessed to calling someone while driving, while about fifteen percent admitted to texting while driving (Hanes 1). However, an overwhelming ninety percent said that making a call while operating a car was very dangerous, while nearly one hundred percent of people said the same about texting (Hanes 1). By assessing this data, it is clear that, although people know and understand the risks associated with distracted driving, people still take part in this safety hazard, putting the driver and others at risk. It may be that people are busy and feel the need to use cellular devices for communication or entertainment. At the same time, drivers may feel an entitlement to break the law, putting other priorities over safety, and simply not caring about the consequences that can arise. While there are some laws in place currently in various states, a stronger and stricter type of enforcement would instill a change in drivers to obey the law more as a whole, knowing that it is a possibility to get caught and fined when doing something that could be an old habit. An example of a typical habit that was overcome through legislation would be the disuse of seatbelts:
For example, before states required vehicle occupants to use seat belts, the use was only 14 percent. After states started passing seat-belt laws, belt use jumped to 59 percent in approximately 8 years. Today, with stronger seat belt laws, high visibility enforcement, and education campaigns, seat belt usage is approximately 85 percent. (Hart 4)
While the increased use of seatbelts has the potential to happen with cell phone usage, opponents argue that drivers need cell phones, making laws impossible to carry out effectively (“Cell” 1). Although it would be a difficult habit to break, it is possible with cooperation from drivers. Additionally, others believe that despite laws and regulations, nothing can stop distracted driving but behavior in itself. Carl Gipson, a researcher in the field of technology and business, said the following: “The reality is that no matter how many laws or regulations are enacted, it comes down to personal choice. 'Do I knowingly act in an irresponsible way to the detriment of myself and others around me? Or do I act in a manner that is most likely to lead to the safety of myself and others?’” (qtd. in Carducci 1). This argument has a solid point, but, on the other hand, if a solid penalization is in place as a result of getting caught using a phone and driving, drivers would be forced to follow the law in avoidance of violations. Furthermore, this mindset of going against safety precautions and laws will have a negative impact on new drivers, causing them to follow the example. Many parents who drive oftentimes have children with them (Levey 3). Not only does cell phone use while driving threaten the driver’s life as well as the children’s, but doing this will also set an example for them as the kids grow up and become drivers (Levey 4). Young people can be very perceptive and will likely pick up on this bad habit (Levey 3). The majority of parents want what is best for the children. If parents set this instance for them, it will ultimately cause harm to them in the future when the kids are driving. The same goes for any passenger in a car with a distracted driver. Altogether, if there were to be a $400 fine imposed on violators, society as a whole would experience a new awareness for decisions made and examples set.
A fine of $400 to drivers who use a phone while driving would decrease road fatalities caused by car accidents, commonly from using phones while driving.

Some groups argue that the use of cell phones can be safe for small amounts of time (“Cell” 1). Additionally, it is believed there are many other distractions that are not taken into account, and that there is an unfair focus on cell phones (“Cell” 1). Believers of that may not know that “...texting while driving 55 m.p.h. is similar to driving the length of a football field with one's eyes closed” (Hanes 2). The reason that cell phones are singled out the most is that they are the most distracting, as well as used widespread. Even looking down at a phone for one second can distract you from the road. Not well known, driving while using a phone is just as, and if not more, dangerous than driving intoxicated (Hanes 1). Both cases have the same “reaction speed” (Hanes 1). Drunk driving is well known to be extremely dangerous and profoundly looked down upon. Yet, according to this research, both utilizing a phone and driving drunk are equally as catastrophic. Despite the similarity, many more people use their cell phones while driving than driving drunk (Hanes 1). Some challengers say that research is not strong enough to support the idea that legislation can decrease accident rates. A researching group failed to see a difference in crash rates while comparing states that ban texting while driving and those that do not (Halsey 1). The US Department of Transportation found similar

data:
While the number of cellphone subscribers has rocketed to 270 million in the US—the number of auto fatalities has remained stable, at about 40,000 deaths a year. The US Department of Transportation estimates that 6,000 of those are the result of distracted driving, but it has no specific statistics for phone-related deaths. The number of crashes has also remained steady. (Hanes 2)
This could be because drivers are finding loopholes in the law, maybe even hiding phones in laps, causing even more danger and distraction, keeping the accident rates consistent. If law enforcement were to be stricter by pulling more people over and carrying out the $400 penalty, the drop in fatalities from distracted driving accidents would definitely decline.
The enforcement of legislation preventing cell phone use while driving in the form of a $400 fine will have a positive impact on research, societal behaviors, and accident rates. Though it will be a difficult transition for many citizens to grasp, the change will be for the betterment of the community, especially in South Carolina. It takes legislation as well as a behavioral shift to make cell phone use while driving end for good. If the simple act of putting down a cell phone can obtain all of these benefits, then there is no question as to whether or not this fine should be put into effect.