A few members of Congress are looking for ways to get us to ST&D.
That’s “stop texting and drive” to those, such as myself, who posses a limited vocabulary when it comes to abbreviations used widely in text and instant messaging.
Don’t worry if you feel like you’re behind the times. So is Congress, which is just getting around to working on legislation aimed at the use of cell phones by drivers. Many states, including Maine, have passed legislation curbing the use of cell phones behind the wheel. That’s why Sen. Bill Diamond (D-Windham) had the ear of members of Congress last week in Washington, D.C., at a distracted-driving summit sponsored by the Department of Transportation.
A couple days later, however, as I was driving a box truck full of my belongings from Maine to New York, I looked up from my GPS just in time to hit the brakes before slamming into the back of a car. At that moment, a couple things occurred to me:
First, “OMG, I nearly died.”
And second, “What constitutes a dangerous distraction?” (Alright, there was some lag time between the two.)
While I understand the need for setting some common-sense limitations on the use of electronic devices in the car, it’s a fair question. Legislators have their work cut out for them if they’re going to pass something that actually improves safety on our highways and doesn’t infringe on my right as an American to develop an excessive reliance on electronic devices.
As someone just old enough to remember what it’s like to be an adult without a cell phone, I do occasionally look around in amazement at just how ubiquitous mobile electronic devices have become. Just a decade away from those days of innocence, I’m frustrated when I can’t take and make calls anytime and anywhere. I can’t imagine a day without the convenience of text messaging or navigating a foreign city without the aid of a GPS.
As all of these devices invade our lives with increasing frequency, people are going to push the boundaries of acceptable usage further. In New York, I’ve seen people text messaging while riding their bicycles in heavy traffic. Although I prefer juggling while riding my unicycle, I both admire the dexterity and question the sanity of these people.
Putting them behind the wheel of an automobile – or worse, a box truck – is definitely a dangerous mix. But I wonder how we separate these people from those of us who are simply trying to get where we’re going by looking at our GPS devices, which are actually standard in many new cars, or tuning the radio or turning around to tell the kids to be quiet. What’s the difference – whether we get in an accident or not?
It’s a classic slippery slope, and I’m not convinced that Maine’s law, which doesn’t ban specific devices but leaves the question of extra fines and penalties up to police and judges, is the answer. What police and judges think constitutes a distraction could vary widely, and in many cases, they will be relying on people to be honest about what they were doing just before an accident.
Ultimately, what many of these new laws are targeting is people using poor judgment, and that’s difficult to legislate.
Ironically, technology may be the answer. Some cars are now coming equipped with warning systems that alert drivers when they are too close to other vehicles or tell drivers at the end of a trip when they were close to an accident. This technology, which isn’t widely available right now, would seemingly have some flaws, one glaring one being that the warning could easily come too late.
But if technology can solve all of our other problems, why not this one?
Brendan Moran is the former executive editor of Current Publishing.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
