Distracted Driving Crackdown

[MAPearce]

The big difference between cell phone use and most of the other distractions people have mentioned is that texting or talking on a cell is a drawn out situation. Changing the station on the radio is a one off, lighting or putting out a smoke is quick, biting a sandwich or sipping a drink etc.

These activities don't take the amount of concentration that talking or texting do.

I remember back before it was illegal driving blocks in town whilst yakking away for one reason or another and when I disconnected the call, I had no clear memory of the time in between.

Then add ANYTHING like speeding , tailgating ( follow too close ) , illegal lane change, running a red light , disobey traffic control sign or device to the mix and it's just as bad , if not WORSE ....

[Poindexter]

The big difference between cell phone use and most of the other distractions people have mentioned is that texting or talking on a cell is a drawn out situation. Changing the station on the radio is a one off, lighting or putting out a smoke is quick, biting a sandwich or sipping a drink etc.

These activities don't take the amount of concentration that talking or texting do.

I remember back before it was illegal driving blocks in town whilst yakking away for one reason or another and when I disconnected the call, I had no clear memory of the time in between.

Then add ANYTHING like speeding , tailgating ( follow too close ) , illegal lane change, running a red light , disobey traffic control sign or device to the mix and it's just as bad , if not WORSE ....

Distracted driving is what happens when you're not engaged in the act of driving or when one is more involved with what's inside the car than that's what's going on outside. The list you wrote out has their own set of issues making them dangerous drivers but being distracted isn't one. I can tell when someone is on thier phone because they actually don't do any of these things. They typically slow down and/or leave an inordinate amount of space between them in the car in front. Personally, I'd rather not share the road with any of these drivers but if I had to make a choice, I'd rather share it with an aggressive driver than one texting.

[dle]

Link to Tim Shewe's Castanet column today:

https://www.castanet.net/news/Behind-th ... statistics

[my5cents]

To answer that , I can only say that the RCMP were hiding behind the portable sign on Enterprise at the Ramada AGAIN today ...

Cherry picking for distracted drivers going a maximum of 5 kmph at 3:05 pm

It's obvious to me that the RCMP have INDEED "opted out" of investigating anything but serious collisions and get those "stats" by simply collecting them when it's easy for them and when they need them .

I think it's called "targeted enforcement" .

I'd like to see some REGULAR traffic enforcement across the board . Then I'd believe those "stats" .....

But that's not where stats that DETERMINE what type and were enforcement is conducted should be obtained. It's not where lots of violations occur it's where collisions occur.

[my5cents]

I think we all basically agree, it's just our definition and usage of the word stat and distracted driving.

Stats indicate that distracted driving causes a huge percentage of our collisions. BUT we are also learning that a fair amount of the distracted driving caused collisions may not have involved a cell phone. Yes many did but many did not.

I think the problem is caused by the way the collision stats are obtained, likely something like "What was the main reason for this collision ?", "What were contributing factors ?" Any inclusion of distraction in either section gives us distracted driving as a cause.

As for stats, there are ticket stats and collision stats, two different things. Also just because there are lots of collisions at a location somebody still has to figure out what is causing the collisions. It could be violations or perhaps engineering.

If the collisions are caused by violations, it could be argued that police enforcement action (high visability) in the area may alleviate the problem even if the enforcement action is targeting the wrong type of violation.

[Ken7]

The point of the item is that distracted driving is a major cause of collisions, BUT distracted driving is a whole bunch of things people do when they should be paying attention. Eating, tuning the radio, changing CD's, slapping a kid, looking at a pretty girl, lighting a cigarette, lots of things, including but not limited to the use of a cell phone.

I have investigated hundred of auto accidents and realize there are more distractions then just a phone. Cigarette smokers used to have their share, drop your cigarette...wow hot stuff.

IF human error was ever removed as a factor, there would be likely 95% less accidents or greater.

[MAPearce]

I think we all basically agree, it's just our definition and usage of the word stat and distracted driving.

I agree

As for stats, there are ticket stats and collision stats, two different things. Also just because there are lots of collisions at a location somebody still has to figure out what is causing the collisions. It could be violations or perhaps engineering.

I'd be willing to bet that this could be taken care of by all drivers having a higher level of attention in general ..

I doubt that anyone gets up in the morning and goes to their cars thinking " I'm going to cause a collision today " but I also highly doubt that most people go to their cars with the attitude of " I will do anything I can to NOT cause an accident " ..

Wouldn't that be nice if more people thought that way ? If so , engineering would be moot .

[Grandan]

I agree


I'd be willing to bet that this could be taken care of by all drivers having a higher level of attention in general ..

I doubt that anyone gets up in the morning and goes to their cars thinking " I'm going to cause a collision today " but I also highly doubt that most people go to their cars with the attitude of " I will do anything I can to NOT cause an accident " ..

Wouldn't that be nice if more people thought that way ? If so , engineering would be moot .

I am concerned with the proliferation of roadside billboards and video display screens on the Westside causing a distraction for drivers.
It seems insane that distracting billboards would be allowed along a high volume highway.

[MAPearce]

I am concerned with the proliferation of roadside billboards and video display screens on the Westside causing a distraction for drivers.
It seems insane that distracting billboards would be allowed along a high volume highway.

I know , right ??

Then add the equivalent of a sports stadium " Jumbo Tron " powerful enough to give you a sunburn , and it just gets worse .

[my5cents]

I'd be willing to bet that this could be taken care of by all drivers having a higher level of attention in general ..

I doubt that anyone gets up in the morning and goes to their cars thinking " I'm going to cause a collision today " but I also highly doubt that most people go to their cars with the attitude of " I will do anything I can to NOT cause an accident " ..

Wouldn't that be nice if more people thought that way ? If so , engineering would be moot .

Good point and I agree.

Good quality driving will perhaps reduced the number of potential collisions caused by faulty engineering but poor engineering still should be addressed.

I would add to your "I will do anything I can to NOT cause an accident", "I will try to foresee actions by others that could cause a collision and do my utmost to avoid a collision caused by them".

We've all heard of people who have had a large number of collisions all of which are "not their fault".

[MAPearce]

We've all heard of people who have had a large number of collisions all of which are "not their fault".

yeah .. like the chick who killed my dad ....

And Allan wonders why I "care" so much ... sigh ..

[alanjh595]

I wonder much more about why you don't drive.

Too many accidents and acquiring too much in surcharges to be able to afford insurance ?

Legal prohibition imposed for too many infractions ?

[MAPearce]

I wonder much more about why you don't drive.

Too many accidents and acquiring too much in surcharges to be able to afford insurance ?

Legal prohibition imposed for too many infractions ?

You need a bigger shovel allan......

I gave up driving 9 years ago ... Anything you have said would have since lapsed .

Even the administrative sanctions that were over ruled in court play NO part in why I don't drive anymore ... It's having to sit across the table from an ICBC " adjuster" and listen to them "devalue" the life of the family patriarch so they can lessen the payout .... A payout that wouldn't have happened IF the broad that stroke my old man twice knew what pedal her foot was on ...

But you're perfect .. I didn't happen to you ..

You'll never know . Shathead .

[alanjh595]

That's what adjusters do, it is their job. They, like lawyers, take the personal feelings out of the equation.

[MAPearce]

That's what adjusters do, it is their job. They, like lawyers, take the personal feelings out of the equation.

You enjoy kicking a dead man ???

seems like it .