WITH THE ambitious travel plans students make for spring break, it is no surprise that a lot of Virginia students spent some time on the interstate highway system this past week. I was one of these students and meandered home to beautiful New Jersey by automobile for some well-anticipated relaxation. As soon as I hit the Jersey state line, I was greeted with several notices. Aside from the generic "Buckle Up -- It's the Law" and "Do Not Litter" signs that crop up at the first toll on the New Jersey Turnpike, there was a digital readout, the orange letters of which no motorist could ignore. "NEW CELL PHONE LAW ENFORCED" was the ambiguous warning that first alerted me to my home state's new policy on cellular phones in moving vehicles, and though I was initially pretty irritated about the inconvenience, strict regulations are an important step towards making the roads safer. Cell phone laws like New Jersey's should be adopted by more states because convenience should never take precedence over safety.
Many people enjoy using or need to use their cell phones while they operate a vehicle. When New Jersey followed New York's 2001 precedent and instituted a ban on using cell phones while driving in 2004, most drivers gave the prohibition little or no attention. After all, long highway drives are a great excuse to call friends that you forgot were even in your phone book or put in serious time softening your parents up for additional funds at school. Plus, the bans on cell phone use was a secondary offense, meaning that police were not permitted to pull drivers over solely for talking on a hand-held phone.
The loopholes in this ban were a major factor in its relative ineffectiveness in New Jersey, New York, Connecticut and Washington D.C., the four places that currently have such legislation in place. In fact, in a study published by InjuryPrevention Online in 2004, this type of ban was shown to have an underwhelming effect: In New York, cell phone usage increased one year after the ban was set in place in 2001, and cell phone violations represented under two percent of all traffic violations issued in that year. Like the majority of drivers in New York State, I took little notice of cell phone laws because the enforcement was spotty at best, and every time I made the call, I had a little chuckle at the expense of the New Jersey police.
A few years later, someone in New Jersey recognized this approach to curbing cell phone usage in vehicles was convoluted and ineffectual and began a process to put more enforceable laws in place. Two weeks ago, New Jersey became the first state in the United States to place a ban on text-messaging while operating a moving vehicle and elevated any cell phone use without a headset to a primary offense, meaning, a police officer no longer needs an excuse to pull you over if he sees you ripping it up in T9Word. While that sign on the Turnpike (like almost everything else about the Turnpike) aggravated me somewhat, the ensuing traffic gave me some time to consider the issue. Few can claim that cell phone use in a car has no effect on their driving, and I cannot be alone in admitting I have had several close calls because I was busy talking to someone rather than eyeing traffic around me. GoogleImage search "cell phone driving accident" and the pictures that greet you look like something from a MADD pamphlet. Indeed, talking and driving mix just as poorly as drinking and driving in some cases. Given the potentially dangerous impact cell phone use can have on both perpetrators and other motorists alike, the law makes sense. For the first time in recent memory, I am proud to be from New Jersey because the Garden State's government is finally setting a precedent that others should try to follow rather than desperately avoid.
Every state should adopt cell-phone specific legislature and should pursue the enforcement of that legislature like New Jersey has. The statistics pertaining to this issue all but speak for themselves: when drivers use a headset, they are 71 percent more accurate at steering and 100 percent faster to respond when braking is necessary than when a hands-free device is not used, according to a Consumer Reports study in 2004. With numbers like these, states have no excuse for failing to impose cell phone legislation.
The thought of waiting to complete one's drive before placing calls seems horribly arcane in today's world of instant gratification, and I'll be the first one to ridicule the morons who wander around town with Bluetooths clipped to their ears, but purchasing a headset for your phone and leaving it in the glove compartment is a relatively cheap and inconspicuous way of practicing safe driving. Furthermore, states should not balk at instituting laws banning cell phones just because they are reluctant to inconvenience drivers; the state is responsible for keeping highways safe avenues of transit, not convenient locales for impromptu conference calls. More important than just instituting these laws, states must enforce them, because talking while driving is often too tempting for motorists to avoid without threat of real consequence.?
David Infante's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at dinfante@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 7 hours agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | YesterdayInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
RASHID: Noncitizen students are under attack, and the University must act
By Muhammad Ali Rashid | 2 days agoNow is the time to act, proving our commitment by protecting and expanding programs that keep the University open and accessible to all.
