Regulators Ask Smartphone Manufacturers To Reduce Driving Accidents

Status
Not open for further replies.

jonny27

Commendable
Nov 23, 2016
4
0
1,510
0
I don't get what's so hard about doing what almost every other country already does, and prohibit using the phone while driving.
 

Hellcatm

Distinguished
Dec 2, 2008
46
0
18,530
0
Wouldn't it have been better to ask the companies that make the OS. Really what are the phone manufacturers going to do? Add more shit to their already crappy skin? Sure they can some how make it so when you're in the car your phone doesn't work but if they do that then the passenger wouldn't be able to use their phone. There are apps for your phone when you're in the car that have big buttons for the functions you need but I'm guessing people don't use them. Also Google doesn't have voice texting built in, you need to download an app that will help you with it and its still not great. Windows Phone's approach was much better. You get a message, it asks if you want to read it, you say yes it reads it and asks if you want to reply, if you say yes it lets you reply and then send. So if you have your phone connected to a headset or bluetooth device it would do this automatically.
 

targetdrone

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2012
304
2
18,785
0
Typical Leftist nonsense. Go after an inanimate object and not the stupid, irresponsible "people" that are unfit to live in society because they cause death, destruction, and mayhem instead.
 

targetdrone

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2012
304
2
18,785
0



Yeah I'm sure that works as well as posting signs that you're not allowed to drive above 55 miles per hour.
 

targetdrone

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2012
304
2
18,785
0



How many of those accidents were caused by people on their phones vs other forms of distracted driving, like changing the radio station, futzing with the GPS, swigging a Big Gulp in one hand while eating a meat ball sub in the other, putting on make-up or day-dreaming?
 

PC-Cobbler

Honorable
Jun 12, 2015
37
0
10,530
0
"people look away from the road for 23 seconds on average when they send or receive a text message ... it also wants concrete tasks, like picking a song, to take no more than 12 seconds to complete""

12 seconds is 1/2 23 seconds and that's the limit the NHTSA wants to establish? Imagine how many school children could be killed in 12 seconds, let alone 23.

Research has proven that texting while driving is worse than DUI with respect to response time. Make the penalties for texting the same as for DUI, with no plea bargains allowed. Allow police officers to stop someone for suspected texting.
 

jonny27

Commendable
Nov 23, 2016
4
0
1,510
0


As someone who lives in a country that enforces this, it does. Getting caught talking on the phone or texting grants you an instant 125€ fine minimum, and we have a low count of accidents by distraction. Hands free car kits are obviously allowed, and encouraged to use.
 

anbello262

Distinguished
Sep 27, 2013
1,171
0
19,660
117


Because being fat only kills you. Driving while texting kills other innocent people.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Why not ask gun manufacturers to reduce gun shootings while they are at it?

This responsibility lies strictly with the drivers, driver education and driving codes. Leave phone and tablet manufacturers out of it, whatever you force them to implement will cause more inconvenience and drivers who still insist on driving while texting will find a way to get around the locks anyway. Ex.: put a piece of tape over the camera.
 

RedJaron

Splendid
Moderator
Because the US is so unlike most other countries but most people don't understand that, especially foreigners.

First, consider the US Constitution. While many countries have charters and documents modeled after it, very few explicitly limit the national government in the way the US Constitution does. In particular, the First and Fourth Amendments are taken very seriously. Anything that prevents someone from being able to express themselves how they wish or that tampers with their personal privacy and security send up an immediate red flag to most Americans. It's just a common trait most have this side of the pond.

Second, consider the size. The continental United States is as big as all the European countries combined ( minus western Russia ). Texas alone is bigger than any western European country. My home state of Utah is twice the size of England and is half the size of France. Me going to southern Utah or Vegas is farther than going from London to Paris. Some co-workers were coming to Salt Lake from Mumbai. They said they wanted to visit Chicago on the weekend, thinking it was a short train ride. It's 1400 miles ( 2250 km ) away. That's the same distance as Dhaka to Mumbai, or Berlin to Madrid.

Next, population and population density. The US has roughly half the population as Europe ( again, excluding Russia ). And half the US population is concentrated in 5% of the land. Meaning that's lots and lots of open road all over the US. How far does the average American commute to work? Average Brit? Frenchie? Spaniard? German? How viable is public transportation? Hint: it's really easy to get reliable and usable mass transit in small, highly populated cites. It's a lot harder when you have hundreds of thousands of people spread out over hundreds of square miles, like anywhere between Missouri and Nevada, North Dakota and Texas.

So, how do you plan to enforce this? It's easy to pass a law. It's a lot harder to enforce it, and most people either forget or don't know that. Yes, phone manufacturers could make their products disable themselves if they detect they're going faster than 5 mph. How is it supposed to detect if you're the driver or passenger? How does it determine if you're in a cab or on a train? How many people would buy those devices? How many would hack the system and work around it? How would the phone report abuse? How would that reporting system be secured against intrusion and abuse?

In short, when someone asks "why can't this work there where it works here?" the usual answer is "Because 'there' works very differently than 'here' and you don't know all the variables."

However, the US already has numerous laws against driving while distracted. It's up to the various executive branches to find ways to enforce laws ( or modify them if they're unenforceable ), not kick it down the road for others to do their job.
 

falchard

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
2,360
0
19,790
4
They do ban phone usage while driving in many states. This is a federal agency and has no authority over state laws. It's like the Department of Education. They leave guidelines, but a state can choose to ignore them.
I really hate it when someone is the first car at a red light while using their cellphone. Then they don't notice the light go green for 15 seconds.
 

RomeoReject

Reputable
Jan 4, 2015
239
0
4,680
0
Yes, those people are incredibly annoying. I usually put the clutch in and rev at them. There's a distracted kind of panic when they think someone is about to rear end them because they haven't been paying attention.
 

virtualban

Distinguished
Feb 16, 2007
1,232
0
19,280
0
But officer, as you can see from the cloud logs, the app was activated and therefore I must have not been using the phone. The other phone was in use by the passenger.
 

wildkitten

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
816
0
18,980
0


There should be fines, hefty fines, for texting and many states have those. But how do you propose stopping talking on the phone? Many people these days have hands free devices and smartphones can be used to dial with voice commands. Talking on the phone is less dangerous than talking to a passenger in the vehicle. When you talk to someone in the car, a person has the tendency to turn their head every so often to look at the person they are speaking with. It's human nature, instinct, and isn't going to change. That is taking someone's attention off the road a lot more than someone just talking on the phone where they never take their eyes off the road.
 

wildkitten

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
816
0
18,980
0


No, someone who is obese uses more medical resources, increases insurance rates for everyone else and cause other issues for others.
 
G

Guest

Guest


Here's it's the same, just not at the Federal level. For example, in New York, first fine is $200, a second offense within 18 months is $250; and a third or subsequent offense is $450. And you also lose 5 points on your license every time.

Doesn't matter, people still do it.

Our number of accidents by distraction is 10%, I would say that's a low count.

I love arrogant foreigners that criticize the USA but have no clue how anything works here.
 

astonerii

Distinguished
Oct 30, 2006
59
0
18,640
1
How do they know someone is driving and is not a passenger? Do I need my phone knowing what I am doing other than what I am telling it to do?
 

leeb2013

Honorable
Aug 5, 2013
1,967
0
12,460
203
10% due to distracted drivers or due to drivers distracted by their phone?
Anyway in Australia its illegal to even have a phone on your lap and some people have been fined for having on the passenger seat. The fine is greater than for carrying and unlicensed gun in public!
 

leeb2013

Honorable
Aug 5, 2013
1,967
0
12,460
203
Ironically though it's ok to use your in car entertainment display and spend 10 seconds trying to find the right setting. There's a reason to have physical buttons, because you can find them with barely looking.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

While Mythbusters may not be the most scientific reference, their limited tests showed that talking on the phone is just about every bit as distracting regardless of how you do it as soon as the conversation requires actual thinking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS