I prefer to drive standard, so bluetooth is a must. Unfortunatly, my current vehicle is lacking in this department, so I just don't answer the phone.
 
For some reason, Ontario has yet to adopt this rule but I believe its going to be coming shortly --> it can't come quick enough for me. I don't care if you use Bluetooth or Onstar, just use something!

I've got a better idea:
 
How about a black box under the hood that turns on when the engine is running, and jams cellular signals within a ten foot radius? That way, if your car is running, you can't make or receive a phone call. Want to make a call? Pull over and turn off the engine.
 
Hang up the d*** phone and drive!!!!!!

i'm with syke ...
 
the truth is talking on the phone seems to cause people to drive more like they are drunk, then other in car activities.
 
And the studies show that hands free, or not, the effects are nearly the same.

While talking over hands-free sets are much better than holding the phone I think it all comes down to if the person is capable of multi-tasking well or not. And I mean personal capacity to give it 100% on both tasks while switching between the two (I can't imagine more than two) so fast that it actually makes it look like you are handling two at the same time.
 
I can do it and my wife cannot so she simply doesn't answer the phone. Using common sense is more important here than any ego.
 
I would like to see that rule in all 50 states and I don't care if you live in West Texas where traffic is minimum.
 
The scariest drivers are those who are juggling between kids in the back seat, talking over the phone while holding it, listening to music while changing the dvds per kids preference and doing all this while changing lanes in their big-size SUVs / Minivans. Very reckless and very poor use of common sense ... but I am sure they are better parents than the drivers they are :-)

I know I'm obviously in the minority here, but I for one don't support such a cell-phone ban in cars. It's not because I'm a constant cell-phone chatterer - in fact I barely use it at all. So why am I against it?
 
Simple. They already have such a law - it's called inattentive driving.
 
Now before I get jumped all over, I agree that many cell-phone users are annoying while they're driving - I've seen them all over the road barely able to stay in their lanes - at times, they can be downright dangerous.
 
BUT...
 
So are people trying to adjust their stereos
 
So are people watching DVDs on their dashboard
 
So are people trying to put on their makeup (and I'm not just limiting this to women)
 
So are people trying to attend to their unruly children
 
So are people that just don't know how to drive, and so are countless of other distractions
 
If we pass a law that intentionally targets cell-phone users, what about the people listed above that are just as dangerous? What's next - no putting makeup on while driving? Are we no longer going to have sound systems in our cars because they might be too big of a distraction? Where will it all end? Again, I can understand the emotional aspect of this - sure, the easiest thing to do to eliminate a careless cell-phone user is to try to ban him from the road... but I ask again - where does this end?
 
Answer - it already has, with the inattentive driver law. Enforce the laws we already have. We don't need "Big Brother" out there creating new ones.

Agreed. There's lots of other distractions out there, and a lot of them can be dangerous. But cell phones are getting the most heat for a number of reasons:
 
1. If you've been cut off by a non-attentive, chattering idiot, the reason he's not paying attention is painfully obvious. Just look in the window of the car.
 
2. Adjusting the radio, putting one's coffee back in the cup holder, etc., only impinges on one's driving attention for a couple of seconds. Cell phone calls can (and often do) go on forever. In fact, I run across a couple of people in my daily commute who I've NEVER seen driving without the phone to their ear. I've learned to pointedly look out for them.
 
3. Yes, that puts conversation with someone else in the car on the same footing as cell phones. Obviously, short of laryngitis, that's a problem that is unsurmountable. I'm going after something that can be dealt with (at least in theory).
 
4. The psychological factor: A lot of having a cell phone going while driving is a subtle attitude of, "I'm too important to be out of touch." Hint: NO YOU'RE NOT! The world will function quite nicely if you're out of touch for twenty minutes. Deal with it.
 
As to the 'why' regarding my attitude? Fully 90% of my commuting and general transportation is done on two wheels - motorcycle, scooter or bicycle. I'm tired of dodging drivers too distracted to notice anything smaller than a Mini.
 
For the record, I'm not crazy about cup holders, prefer to eat at a restaurant, keep my laptop in the back seat (when I drive), and normally drive with the radio off. I like the silence, and enjoy the visceral feel of driving my car or truck. And it's a big reason why I prefer to commute on two wheels.

+1 to yankeez.
 
Karl I appreciate you getting the word out about the BT integration options drivers have. Consumers knowing they have options other than headsets and factory integration will help drive the ridiculous option pricing down on things like Nav and BT. I had no idea you could get a head unit with BT until I randomly got a Crutchfield catalog about a month ago and starting browsing it. IF I get an aftermarket head unit in the future, it WILL have BT. It seems like the best way to go to me.
 
Scenario: Music blaring, windows down, enjoying the drive. Under these conditions there's a 50/50 chance I won't even hear my phone ring. With a BT enabled head unit, the stereo will alert me, both audibly and visually, that I have a call coming in. If I choose to take the call, the music is paused, the call comes through LOUD AND CLEAR through my audio speakers, and I can talk hands free comfortably. When the call is terminated, by music starts back up where it left off, beautiful. I was considering going with a portable nav system that supported BT until I learned about BT enabled stereos. I've heard the portable nav versions can be a chore to use, given the single tiny speaker.

Have you ever heard people's lame cell phone conversations when they chat away in the checkout at the grocery store or fast food queue? Or when husbands and wives leave the office and place a cell call while walking to their car that lasts until they arrive home? Just get off the damn cell phone and make the crap call at a more suitable and respectful time. Suitable meaning when you're in your office/cubicle. And respectful meaning when you should pay attention to the person fulfilling/processing your order.
 
It's difficult to properly conversate (sorry, I like using that word) and do anything else except to sit down and lift an adult beverage to your mouth. I used to routinely go out to lunch with a coworker that would look to his left and try and make eye contact with me while I was driving. That was even more distracting than (please use 'than' instead of 'then', folks) being on a cell phone.

BTW, I saw one hardwired kit that was a bit less intrusive than others. It was one that replaces the rear view mirror. When a call comes in, the caller ID number shows up inside the mirror glass.

Interesting studies done by Professor Strayer research group at University of Utah. A couple of the conclusions:
- Hands-free cell phones are no less dangerous while driving than hand-held cell phones because the conversation itself is the major distraction.
- Drivers talking on cell phones are as impaired as drivers with the 0.08 percent blood alcohol level.
- Drivers talking on cell phones drive slower and change lanes less. This is enough to significantly contribute to traffic congestion.
  
The following article gives more info: http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=121907-2

Yep, every study I've seen says there's no difference in safety with hands-free cell phone use vs. regular. This could actually make things WORSE, people might think that hands free is OK, use it more, and have MORE accidents.

Yay new laws that probably won't be enforced. :(

I'm against the little box that jams the signal. Reason: when I drive my wife takes the call (when we are together in the car) and talks.
 
I don't pick up the cell while driving.
 
Another idea against distractions:
steering wheel should have sensors. Once one hand is off the wheel it should give the driver about 10 sec. and then beep like the seat belt reminder. If both hands are off the wheel - beep immedeatly. That simple.

"Another idea against distractions:
steering wheel should have sensors. Once one hand is off the wheel it should give the driver about 10 sec. and then beep like the seat belt reminder. If both hands are off the wheel - beep immedeatly. That simple."
 
I would never drive a car like this.

For me, the question that remains is whether a conversation on a cell phone is more or less distracting for a driver than a conversation with someone in the passenger seat.
 
And if one is more distracting, why is that? If talking in your car to a passenger is distracting, could that also lead to legislation? Would they train police to read lips to they can pull you over for having a conversation of any sort in your car?
 
(insert end of the world comment here)

"Another idea against distractions:
steering wheel should have sensors. Once one hand is off the wheel it should give the driver about 10 sec. and then beep like the seat belt reminder. If both hands are off the wheel - beep immedeatly. That simple."
 
They how can you hold hands with your sexy passenger??

Karl, does a wired earphone count as a hands-free kit? That's what I've been using so far.
 
gmg66, I just don't buy that argument. No one can convince me that talking on a cellphone with a hands-free kit is as unsafe as talking with the phone with one hand holding the phone and only one hand on the steering wheel. No way.
One can argue that many drivers drive with only one hand anyway, but if the other hand is not operating a cellphone, it can always ready to assist in the driving when there's trouble.
Besides, if the driver has to change gears manually, having a phone in one hand is dangerous unless driving is at a slow speed.
 
yankeez, talking on the cellphone takes way longer than changing a CD and some other distractions. Banning cellphone use without hands-free kits make a lot of sense, although I wonder how it can effectively be enforced.
 
tiruvan, there's traffic in West Texas! :) We have cities, interstates, traffic jams (hardly), and highways just like anywhere else!

There are already books full of traffic laws against weaving out of your lane, obstructing traffic, blowing stop signs, etc.
 
Is driving like this less dangerous to those you're sharing the road with if you're doing it without a phone simply because you're stupid?
 
And if you have the coordination to drive reasonably well even when impaired by a phone, or the conditions are a straight, empty highway where you don't need much coordination in the first place, then why should you be punished for someone else's inability in a different circumstance?
 
Like most of the rest, this law is an ass.

I don't think it's cellphones per say that are distracting, but the duration one is on the cellphone. I admit I use the handset on occassion, but I keep my conversations very brief. In fact, I usually preface my convos with "Yo, I'm on the road so make it quick."

blackadder5639 - and you would be wrong. Hands free/ Hands on phone, studies have proved you drive like if you are drunk.
 
Talking to a person right next to you is worlds different then on the phone. Your brain works differently. And the passanger next to you is aware of conditions around you, the person on the phone is completely unaware.

"And the passanger next to you is aware of conditions around you."
 
Depends who you drive with. Have you ever driven with one of those people who when sitting in the passenger seat, turns to face you to talk to you? Thats really awkward.

talking on the phone is a distraction period. Having BT doesnt make a bit of difference and I have yet to see any data proving that these bans will reduce cell phone related accidents. How in the hell is the fact that you are "hands free" going to ensure that you are paying attention to the road.
 
"Talking to a person right next to you is worlds different then on the phone. Your brain works differently. And the passanger next to you is aware of conditions around you, the person on the phone is completely unaware."
 
THANK YOU! I was about to say the same thing. Its so obvious to me. The passenger can keep an eye out for hazards and will give you an extra measure of protection. The person on the phone is totally disconnected from you and has no idea what is happening in your environment.

dougtheeng - I'd tell that person to sit normal. if they turn to look at me at a 90deg angle, i'd be werided out.

"Once one hand is off the wheel it should give the driver about 10 sec. and then beep..."
What about the guy that killed Dr. Richard Kimble's wife?
 
yankeez, amen to that.
blueguydotcom, agreed another stupid law that won't be enforced, unless another infraction gets you pulled over.

Sorry, blackadder, the studies simply don't bear out your wishful thinking. If anything, your refusal to believe the results indicates an overconfidence in your own abilities. The issue is about brain activity, not whether your second hand is free to hold the wheel.
 
I do agree, however, that our present laws should be enforced. I'm not sure we need yet another overly specific law on the books when we have an appropriately general one already available.

Well, it's been proven that hands-free technology has proven to be almost as, if not equally dangerous as holding the phone. Until then, bluetooth is a sweet technology, and when you have a blackberry, you can do voice dialing in it too. Now that's hands-free!

"yankeez, talking on the cellphone takes way longer than changing a CD and some other distractions."
 
And how do you KNOW this? What if the offending driver is trying to reload a multi-CD changer..?
 
I'm guessing that since cell-phones are a relatively new item (generally speaking) and some accidents have been attributed to errant cell-phone usage, a typical knee-jerk reaction is to ban them all entirely while driving, to which has the bureaucrats foaming at the mouth to pass a new law to give the ILLUSION that everyone will be "safer" from passing such a new law when, again, all they REALLY have to do is just enforce the laws already on the books.
 
But then... what kind of fun would THAT be...?

But yankeez, don't you know that "we're always just a few laws short of nirvana."
 
It still astonishes me, but there are people that think this way. "Society could be PERFECT -- if only the lawmakers would make new laws to force people to act right."
 
And when you query these folks on existing laws that already address the situation: "Well, those laws obviously haven't worked, so the solution must reside in NEW laws."
 
Uh-huh -- more legislation. That's the ticket!

You could argue that a new law at least makes it clear what behavior society thinks is wrong, for the people who are responsible enough to care. It also probably helps the legal/judicial community apportion blame if a crash or other problem ensues.

"Sorry, blackadder, the studies simply don't bear out your wishful thinking. If anything, your refusal to believe the results indicates an overconfidence in your own abilities. The issue is about brain activity, not whether your second hand is free to hold the wheel. "
 
Ewilfong, it's not so much that I'm overconfident in my own abilities. I also know that any driver (me included) would be distracted whether s/he's using a hands-free kit or not.
What I find hard to believe from the studies is that driving with two hands wouldn't be safer than with only one hand in challenging situations (whether the driver is talking on a cellphone or not). My own experience has easily taught me that it's harder to drive with only one hand and I question any study that claims otherwise. I guess that's why these laws are being passed in spite of what the studies say.
 
I'm assuming that other countries with similar laws have ended up reducing cellphone-related accidents and that's why many of our states are now interested in these laws.....I don't think (well, I hope not) the laws are being passed just for the sake of more legislation!
 
BTW, are there any studies that have found that hands-free cellphone use DOES reduce accident risk compared to the alternative? I bet there are many......
 
"And how do you KNOW this? What if the offending driver is trying to reload a multi-CD changer..? "
 
LOL! Who in their right frame of mind would reload a CD changer while driving?

We are installing bluetooth into the wife's car in preparation for the new law (socal). I have not found a satisfactory solution except hardwired into the car (like Parrot).
I already installed a new BT headunit in one of my vehicles. Love it. Still have one more to go (my daily driver!)
 
The GPS/BT is one I did not consider... that might be a good solution, however having a big portable nav might invite theft and putting it away every time might prove cumbersome... plus all the wires dangling about... but another option none the less.
 
I don't like the earpiece- it gives me a headache and the dork-factor is too high. So if you take it off often, it becomes a distraction in itself. You pretty much have to have it permanently attached to the side of your head for it to be useful.
 
I strongly agree that you can't legislate stupidity. It won't work and there are always hidden collateral effects that are sometimes much worse than the stupidity it is trying to legislate.
 
However, this cellphone law is good. How many times have you seen someone run a red light, totally oblivious; or nearly cause an accident; run over a pedestrian; weave in and out of traffic; etc etc - all because they are busy dialing or talking on the phone?
I have seen it many times and I don't drive much- I'm sure many of you have seen much more.

blackadder5639 - the problem isn't having your hands on the well.
 
the problem is the human brain works different when its talking to someone on the phone.
 
I dont know for sure... But I'd geuss it might have to do with how are mind visuallaze things. That when you talk on the person, your brain tries to picture the person, and that prohibts good reaction time.
 
Theres been studies that show people talking on phones driver ~10mph SLOWER, then when they were not talking... almost as if the brain needed that much more chusion to process both activities.
 
still on my geussing chain of though: I would bet that having a person next you removes alot of that 'visual' processing in your mind, even when you are not looking or seeing that person. Because they are right there.
-----
 
People tend to overestimate their ability to get out of an accident. (for exampling thinking with a smaller/more nimble car they would be able to turn out of the way better then in a huge truck).
 
The reality is, avoiding getting trapped in a situation where you are in trouble, is much safer, then being able to avoid the problem after the fact.
 
I had an accident when I feel my car did not get total simple because I had newer & higher quality brake pads/rotors. And I was able to stop 6in sooner when I saw the guy running the red light. But no matter what car I would be in, the accident would have happened.
 
When I worked at an airport, there was a sign that roughly said.
 
'superior pilots use their superior knowledge to aviod having to use their superior skill'

"Theres been studies that show people talking on phones driver ~10mph SLOWER, then when they were not talking... almost as if the brain needed that much more chusion to process both activities. "
 
This happens a lot in my experience and it is annoying. 90% of the time when someone is creeping along in front of me they are on the phone. Many times they are using BT to talk. Having "hands free" technology doesn't mean squat when it comes to being distracted and unfocused when driving. Some of the most annoying drivers I encounter are chatting away on their BT headsets.
 
NJ has had such a law for a while now and I have heard no stories about enforcement. In fact, I believe the law states you cant be pulled over just for talking on your phone.

It's easy enough to test; play a racing video game while holding a philosophical or political debate with the person sitting next to you. You won't win both, I promise.

These laws may have unintended consequences - as in more drivers will constantly be in distant coversations with hands-free devices. This probably was coming anyway, but the law just speeds it up. And, it probably makes our roads more dangerous with more impaired drivers whose minds are elsewhere.
 
A Seattle paper referenced a study concluding a driver's response time while engaged in a cellphone conversation was similar to that of a DUI driver. The conclusion was the principal impairment was not related to holding or dialing a phone.
 
Bottom line: this is a law that lawmakers CANNOT RESIST because everyone is irked by the image of a careless driver with a phone on their ear, and the law increases demands for new products. Nevermind the law is unnecessary and possibly comes with negative consequences.

and Just and FYI. I feel like others, specfic laws like this are un needed.
 
and 100 years from now, people will be wondering, what the heck we were thinking with laws like this on the books

Anyone know what the fine is for this? Sounds like one more thing to ticket you for, just more revenue generation.

It's pure politics. Frequently it's more important for the powers that be to appear to be "doing something" about a problem (whether real or perceived) than it is to actually address the problem in a meaningful way. Hands-free laws definitely fall into this category.

lvr,
 
They'll probably use it more like the license plate laws - it's an excuse to pull someone over.

Politicians make a livelihood and a career making laws.
Each politician must pass his/her own law. If they don't have a bunch of laws on their CV then they get fired/voted out of office.
 
Therefore politicians must push more laws. More laws for all! Not making more laws makes a politican unimpressive and we the people vote them out of office.
 
That must mean we love more laws, because obviously we vote for politicians that push more laws.

Not to mention anytime a rich hot blond white girl gets killed, a new law gets passed within the month.
Is the cell phone law a dead rich hot blond white girl law?

billt9 thanks for that racist comment

"Not to mention anytime a rich hot blond white girl gets killed, a new law gets passed within the month."
 
so true. If certain kinds of people get hurt politicians are quick to propose new laws (sometimes named after a particular victim) to show they are all about protecting the public.

Karl,
thought I'd update and tell you we got a PARROT CK3100 installed in the wife's car. It is AWESOME!
The control is just like operating a radio or ipod control and your address book is all there too.
Yes, it is safer and simply more convienent than using the cell in the car.

My experience with Parrot products suggests they are a solid option.

Salespeople may tell you that Bluetooth earpieces are the low-cost solution to hands-free calling -- but a closer look reveals these claims to be misleading.
 
Here is a list of disadvantages that the earpiece manufacturers and resellers don't want you to know about:
 
Nearly all Bluetooth earpieces have an internal battery that can't be removed. These batteries have a short life of approximately 300 charges, or approximately one earpiece per year (less if you recharge every day). And prices range from $20-$300, averaging about $50.
The earpiece can't be used while it is charging.
The earpieces don't fit everyone comfortably. One size definitely doesn't fit all; yet you cannot try the earpiece before you buy.
The earpieces are uncomfortable for those who wear glasses or sunglasses.
For reasons of hygiene, the earpieces should not be shared.
Earpieces are easily lost, stolen, or broken.
Bluetooth headsets, on average, last just 26 hours when not in use and only 2 to 3 hours when talking.
The life of the lithium ion battery starts to decline the day it was manufactured whether it is being used or not, the talk time and standby time will continue to degrade over it's short life. The advertised talk time and standby time is only valid when the unit is new and even then the claims are likely overstated.
Many users purchase more than one Bluetooth earpiece, then finally give up and buy an integrated Bluetooth car kit.
Potential harmful effects from radiation through the earpiece.
Most people find the earpieces uncomfortable and ugly, and/or experience lousy audio quality.
Many people will buy the earpiece believing it is more cost effective, ultimately they end up buying an integrated car kit because they just find it cumbersome to use.
 
For the person who talks on the phone for business or wants the best audio quality each and every second of their calls, there is no substitute for a Parrot hands free car kit. No batteries to die, no ear pieces to buy every year, even if you plan on selling your car in 5 years, your car will be worth an extra couple of hundred dollars because of the Parrot Bluetooth car kit option. The value propostion is clear as day, make the prudent choice!
 
www.safewireless.com
 
Take a car kit for a spin at the "car kit demos link".