The Smile Politely Editors are comprised of Justine Bursoni, Seth Fein, Joel Gillespie, Doug Hoepker, Brian McGovern, Ryan Neaveill and Dan Schreiber. They, along with the website designer Mason Kessinger and founding Editor-in-Chief Chris Maier, decide to highlight certain events going on in Champaign-Urbana in a democratic fashion, without bias, in order to best bring to you the finest information on the entertainment around town.
In late March, Alderman Charlie Smyth introduced an ordinance to the Urbana City Council that resulted in a packed council chamber and so much discussion — a vote on the proposal was postponed until April 14.
During the next committee as a whole meeting of the city council, the members will revisit the ordinance that could potentially ban cell phone usage while driving in the City of Urbana. Although, some members were in favor of a hands-free cell phone ban — similar to ordinances in cities such as Chicago and New York City — Smyth's bill calls for a full ban on the use of cell phones, including Bluetooth devices, while behind the wheel.
Smyth argues that a hands-free ordinance would not be effective because there is no difference cognitively between using a hands-free set or a hand-held device; both options take the driver's mind away from operating the vehicle.
Most any driver has been annoyingly cut off only to pass the culprit, whom — surprise! — is talking away on a phone. However, with a comprehensive ban, questions arise about how to enforce a ban on hands-free electronic devices; how to educate the public about the new ordinance; and in two cities separate by name only, how to spread the word that when you enter the city limits of Urbana, it's time to end the conversation.
After much debate, the council opted to further the conversation and have City Attorney Ronald O'Neal draft a new ordinance addressing questions raised at the March 25 meeting.
Comments (5)
Saturday, April 5, 2008 7:25 AM
I think it's totally stupid. If the reasoning is that talking distracts us from driving (evident from the fact that even headsets are proposed for banning), then why not just ban talking period? No talking to other people who are present in the car with you.
Then we should also ban CB and ham radios and we should also remove communication devices from police cars since they should follow the same laws.
Dumb.
Saturday, April 5, 2008 8:42 AM
Yes!!
And no, talking does not impair one's ability to drive a car! That's just absurd. But to immerse yourself into a cell phone conversation while trying to drive with one hand is TOTALLY different from immersing yourself into a conversation with someone that is in the car with you. When you talk to someone that's in the car with you, if you ever have to pause or interrupt the conversation because of something that's happening on the road, your passenger will thank you for it. But when you are on a cell phone it's different - the person you are talking to might not realize that you're trying to drive a vehicle (something which should be taken more seriously than it is).
As far as my perception - the vast majority of people that do stupid things while driving ARE on a cell phone. That's not scientific BUT when I'm riding a two wheeled motor vehicle the concern for my safety is heightened. It's happened on numerous occasions that I've needed to swerve away from people who just aren't paying attention and every time they are on a cell phone.
Is it the cell phone to blame or just bad driving overall? Either way, removing as much unnecessary distraction (note: this doesn't mean banning radios in cars or other absurd ideas) will simply help make our roads safer.
Saturday, April 5, 2008 3:51 PM
I'm not sure, according to the diction of the ordinance, that banning radio (etc.) from cars is any different from banning blue tooth-type devices: If the ordinance, indeed, intends to remove items that take the driver's attention away from the road, why shouldn't we take away music, too?
We shouldn't, of course. But this is all to say that there's a sort of black sheep at hand regarding bad driving. Cell phones *do* distract the driver. I'm not saying that. And there *is* something to be said for the fact that oftentimes, when encountered by an act of bad driving, you find that the person is on the phone. This only reminds me, however, of being in driver's ed, when my teacher -- sitting next to me -- pointed out that an Asian woman had just cut me off, and proceeded to inform me that most cliches come from the truth. To say that cliches often step from the truth is, to some extent, true, but in the context it is also ludicrous.
There are countless other reasons that people drive badly, among them being people distracted by so many other things -- music, cigarettes (another of C-U's pet black sheep), conversation from within the car, children, roadside spectacle, billboards, etc. -- that it simply can't be blamed on cell phones alone. Many times, people simply don't seem to know the rules, or are consciously breaking them.
I don't doubt that an ordinance banning cell phones while driving would curb bad driving. I'm more trying to examine the complications of such an ordinance. Basically, trying to eliminate cell phone use while driving isn't going to eliminate bad drivers. If, to the community, it's worth that small step, then I say give it a shot -- see how it works. We're apparently all going to have face cancer from using cell phones anyway, so who cares? We should probably be using them less anyway. There's generally probably not a really great reason to be on the phone while driving from one place to the next in C-U -- nine times out of ten, I'm sure that conversation could wait the whole maximum ten minute drive time across town.
If there was a way to distinguish between talking on the phone and texting while driving, however, I'd get behind that: of course, I only know from experience, but texting while driving is quite a detriment to one's attention to the road.
Saturday, April 5, 2008 10:08 PM
There are a few elements at play here, and you guys have touched on a couple of them, but I thought I'd respond:
"If the reasoning is that talking distracts us from driving (evident from the fact that even headsets are proposed for banning), then why not just ban talking period?"
There are multiple reasons that talking to someone in the car is different than talking to someone on a self phone:
1. You can see the person you are talking to in the car.
2. Their voice is not being fed through some crappy little speaker in your phone.
3. Body language and visual cues can aid communication.
4. The person in the car is also aware of the surroundings and can react appropriately (by not talking when you need to focus on driving, or saying "jesus, you're about to hit that van!", etc."
5. There are many subtle psychological differences between the two, such as how much working memory a conversation on the phone requires compared to the working memory required for a conversation with someone in the car. You can't just equate the two because they both involve listening and talking.
The issue here is that people think they are wanting to ban "anything that distracts drivers." Don't even go into that, because such an ill-defined ban would never get passed and wouldn't be enforceable, and just wouldn't make any sense. The statement "they are banning cell phone use because it distracts drivers" is true, but does not convey the complete picture.
The issue at hand is banning an activity that is statistically proven through scientific research to impair a person's driving ability significantly more than most other common activities while driving (outside navigation devices or browsing the internet, which come close).
Please read this page about this topic:
http://www.psychologymatters.org/driverdistract.html
Notice that they mention that a phone being handheld or hands-free makes no difference in the amount of distraction.
-t
Friday, April 11, 2008 5:51 AM
Why not ban usage and music players with ear plugs use from those entering traffic on foot and bike? They are part of the problem on a much larger part of the scale. To not regulate them puts the entire thing on cars. Someone on foot or bike can cause indirectly just as much damage being "plugged in." Unless of course someone on a cell phone riding a trek on the side walk at commuter speed...