University of Michigan associate research professor speaking at national Distracted Driving Summit today
A meeting in Washington about the dangers of distracted driving is making big news today after the U.S. Department of Transportation announced nearly 6,000 drivers a year are killed in the U.S. because of distractions.
According to a study released by the department today, driver distraction was involved in 16 percent of all fatal crashes in 2008. That’s about 150 fatal crashes in Michigan alone.
Enemy number one, it seems, is cell phones. Secretary of Transportation Roy LaHood called distracted driving a “menace to society,” the Associated Press reported at the start of the Distracted Driving Summit today.
David Eby, a University of Michigan research associate professor and head of social and behavioral analysis at the U-M Transportation Research Institute, is pegged as a panel speaker at the event at 3:15 p.m. today.
The panel will discuss the impact of current and future technology on distracting drivers and the impact certain technology might have to prevent driver distraction.
Those who are interested can check out the U.S. DOT’s Web site to watch live Web casts of the summit today and tomorrow.
At the Detroit Economic Club yesterday, the Detroit News reported AT&T chief executive officer Randall Stephenson's speech discussing the company's push against customers' text messaging while driving. Other media outlets, such as the Dallas Morning News, reported the federal summit will target bans on texting while driving.
Comments
aaman
Wed, Sep 30, 2009 : 8:52 p.m.
If you read the research you will find that using the phone is fundamentally different than fiddling with the stereo, talking to the kids or someone else in the car. The fact that the other person on the phone is not in the car is the factor that if different. Eating or putting on makeup is also not like the phone - both of those activities and many more are under the complete physical and psychological control of the driver - talking on the phone is not.
CynicA2
Wed, Sep 30, 2009 : 4:52 p.m.
There is considerable research (some of it done at UM Transportation Research) showing that some form of distracted driving is the biggest risk factor in most fatal collisions. I have read that the risk of being involved in a collision while driving and talking on a cell phone is equivalent to driving while under the influence - and the risk while texting would be even higher! "Distracted" could mean anything from fiddling with the stereo, to fiddling with your significant other, but the point is if your attention is somewhere other than the task at hand, you are at an increased risk of being in an accident.
fjord
Wed, Sep 30, 2009 : 3:12 p.m.
No two ways about it: if you text while driving, you are a danger to yourself and everyone else on (and off) the road. Your license should be taken away until you're responsible enough to understand basic road safety. It seriously alarms me that so many people have indicated in this poll that they text while driving. Cut it out, folks. I don't want to die because you simply had to text Muffy about what Dirk said last night.
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Sep 30, 2009 : 2:22 p.m.
Drunk driving is a crime as defined by our legal system. It's a rather inconsistent law. Drinking alcohol is legal. But operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol is not, because alcohol intoxication occupies otherwise useful brain components. Using a cell phone is legal, yet operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of cell phone use remains legal. Yet using a cell phone occupies brain components vital to driving safely. I'm not certain if either should be prohibited. You could also occupy those brain components having intercourse in the car, or messing with your dog, or playing a card game with your kids. But if one distraction is illegal, all distractions should be illegal. Personally, I'd rather have a law that says if you cause an accident, you have to take responsibility. And if that's through personal negligence, that may mean a criminal charge.
treetowncartel
Wed, Sep 30, 2009 : 2:01 p.m.
What about using headphones while driving. you see tons of people doing that and it is illegal already.
djm12652
Wed, Sep 30, 2009 : 1:34 p.m.
If drunk driving is a crime???? Seriously??? It is a crime. As far as talking on a cell phone or texting while driving, I believe those actions also should be moving violations. We don't need the government to protect us, but rather punish the offenders and get them off the roads.
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Sep 30, 2009 : 1:27 p.m.
If drunk driving is a crime, then talking on a cell while driving should also be a crime. I'm not sure how I feel about penalizing people for either, unless they cause an accident. But I feel it's my responsibility to society and to myself to engage in neither activity.
aaman
Wed, Sep 30, 2009 : 1:13 p.m.
"Government" is protecting those of us who don't do stupid things like drink and drive or stare at a cell phone while attempting to drive. I'm not worried about protecting me from myself - it is entirely appropriate for our government to protect me from idiots. Blaming things on "government" is a facile statement. The "government" is no more or no less than what the majority of the voters want. People who make statements that the "government" is doing this or that don't seem to understand that there is no entity that operates completely independently of the voters. Having said that I agree that there is certainly bureaucratic inertia, but that is a two edged sword. Just as most thoughtful commentators now agree that term limits are/were a bad idea, replacing all the bureaucrats with ones that the next majority might like better is also a bad idea.
David Bardallis
Wed, Sep 30, 2009 : 12:34 p.m.
Seriously, there is a "National Distracted Driving Summit"? I guess government always needs to find new ways to protect us from ourselves.