Regulating Cell Phones Behind the Wheel
When a cell phone goes off in a classroom or at a movie theater, we are irritated, but at least our lives are not endangered. When we are on the road, however, irresponsible cell phone users are more than irritating: They are putting our lives at risk. As of 2008, there were about ninety million cell phone users in the United States, with 60% of them using their phones while on the road (Sundeen 1). Many of us have witnessed drivers so distracted by dialing and chatting that they resemble drunk drivers, weaving between lanes, for example, or nearly running down pedestrians in crosswalks. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported that in 2012 driver distraction was the cause of 18 percent of all fatal crashes – with 3,328 people killed – and crashes resulting in an injury – with 42,100 people wounded. These distractions could include fiddling with the radio, smoking, eating, putting on makeup, shaving, and so on. There is no clear evidence of a direct link between cell phone use and traffic accidents. These deaths raise the question whether cell phone use while driving is justifiable. A number of states have outlawed handheld cell phone use while driving, or have banned cell phone use for drivers because they believe that cell phones impair drivers by distracting them. A ban is unwise at this time because vehicular cell phone use provides substantial personal and societal benefits. Instead of banning cell phone use, the public should be educated about the dangers of driving while phoning and prosecute irresponsible phone users under laws on negligent and reckless driving.
Cell phones in cars make life more convenient and safe: People can coordinate their errands and schedules with friends and family, parents can check up on their children, stranded motorists can call a tow truck or get help in an emergency, and motorists frequently use cell phones to report accidents and fires to police. Indeed, it is nearly impossible to quantify these everyday benefits. How does one determine the number of lives saved by the near-instantaneous deployment of an ambulance to a crash scene, or the number of people who have been rushed to the hospital in time to prevent death or permanent injury? A prudent regard for safety doesn’t imply cell phones should be banned. Americans are willing to tolerate some 41,000 annually deaths from car accidents. If we wish to decisively curtail automobile deaths, the national speed limit should be set at 10 miles per hour and vigorously enforced—yet we’re not willing to do that, because that inconvenience outweighs the pleasure and efficiency of being able to get places quickly. And a ban on drivers’ use of cell phones might not make much difference anyway. Our best estimates of accident and fatality reductions do not take into account how drivers would alter their behavior in response to regulation; if police tried to enforce a ban, drivers might simply switch to other dangerous activities. Thus, the net reduction in accidents and fatalities is likely to be overstated, so the benefits of regulatory intervention could be quite small. Also, government regulations are notoriously slow to be enacted. Wireless technology is advancing so fast that regulation could soon be unnecessary.