I Hate When Other Drivers _____!

[Dutch]

Exploit a lane closure before finally merging

I don't understand this one, if there is a smooth flow of traffic, it's dangerous to wait for the last option to merge. If it's stop and go, it makes more sense to use up as much real estate as possible and take turns merging at the last moment.

When I was in Turkey, the Turks had this really cool rule in their otherwise chaotic street enviroment. Whomever is in front, has the right of way. If a car has a bumper in front of you, it's your responsability to break. We would literally line up 8 cars across at a red-light and when it would turn green, we all had to somehow fit into a 2 lane road. Never once did I see an accident because of the "You lose, you break" unwritten law.

Of course, I did hear a lot of pedestrians got his by speeding cars for not ever FREAKIN' looking when they cross the streets. Hell, the stray dogs would look both ways and once I even saw a dog use a crosswalk (as I've got my breaks locked up, tires screaching.....and right when I was about to bitch about all the stray dogs, I see it's on a faded cross-walk. I was stunned.

[Buccaneer]

All of these choices (including what I voted for, talking on phones while driving) can be summed up simply:

NOT PAYING ATTENTION

[vex]

Originally Posted by GoldenEagle

Toss up between take forever to turn or drive too slow.

Same here.

[vex]

Originally Posted by JeeberD

There's no excuse for that.

However, I hate it when idiots are driving two over the speed limit in the fast lane and won't move over so that I can pass them. If you're in the fast lane and someone is coming up behind you, move over to the other lane. I don't care how fast you're going, or if you think the person behind you is driving too fast, just switch fucking lanes!

I believe this is called road rage, JeeberD

[vex]

Originally Posted by sabotai

All of the studies done on cell-phone use and driving I have seen do not support your answer to this question.

Then watch me drive.

[WSUCougar]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

As for the cellphone use while driving thing, IMO this gets a much worse rap than it deserves. Are there jerks that can't handle doing both? You bet. Are there responsible drivers that can do both reasonably well? Yep. I don't doubt that talking on the phone lessens your attention while driving, but there are any number of other things that do the same thing but are perfectly legal, like getting really absorbed by what's on the stereo/radio, talking with passengers in your car, removing a tape/CD from your stereo, etc.

I think part of the demonization of cell-phone use while driving stems from an overarching dislike of cell-phones in general by certain people. I'm sure many can point to anecdotal examples of some idiot driving badly while talking on a cell-phone, but never really notice those that are driving competently while talking on a cell-phone, and I doubt any of these people agitating for restrictions on driving while talking on a cell-phone are also agitating for laws restricting things like shaving while driving, applying makeup while driving, talking with passengers while driving, etc.

I strongly disagree. While I'm sure there are many examples of responsible cell phone drivers, the majority I see on a daily basis are obviously hazardous. They're like a plague. I have no deep-seeded desire to pick a fight with cell phone users - all I see is a clear cause-and-effect between cell phone use and very poor driving.

[Sun Tzu]

.....dont give rectal trout the right of way.

[Fonzie]

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

.....dont give rectal trout the right of way.

Is there a wrong way for a rectal trout?

[21C]

I hate it when I'm driving right at the speed limit and someone passes me and then proceeds to slow down! Stay behind me if you want to go slower than me! Oh yeah, they also get upset if I dare and pass them again.

Exploit a lane closure before finally merging

When I travelled in New Zealand recently, I was absolutely amazed to see the most considerate or well-trained drivers I've ever seen. In Australia when there's an accident or roadworks and two lanes merge into one, there will always be a huge bottleneck when drivers try and squeeze into the merged lane at the last minute. In NZ, I was stuck on a two-lane road with an accident ahead and every car stayed in the one lane since they realized there was no real reason to change lanes and bugger things up.

Made me feel a bit guilty for racing up the inside . . .

[Craptacular]

Q: "I Hate When Other Drivers _____!"

A: are born

[Sun Tzu]

Originally Posted by Fonzie

Is there a wrong way for a rectal trout?

hmm...orbital?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I agree with your post darned near completely.

Heh, that doesn't happen very often...

[primelord]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Was your job really worth risking the lives of the people around you?

Well certainly you say no to this question. However it is very easy to say I am going to take the high moral ground and walk out on a job that requires me to do that. It's an entirely different thing to actually do it when you have a family to support and a tough job market. That being said I don't work there anymore.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by sabotai

All of the studies done on cell-phone use and driving I have seen do not support your answer to this question.

Oh, I agree that cell-phone use while driving reduces your ability to focus on driving. Despite the efforts of driver education courses, there is currently a wide disparity in the ability level of drivers on the road. Some are damn-near a hazard with no distractions. Others are very good drivers. My point is that I think some drivers can afford the distraction and still be relatively safe, or at least no worse than the questionable non-cell-phone users, while there are obviously others that shouldn't use them under any circumstances while driving.

My larger point is that I don't think cell-phones warrent special laws ruling out their use while driving - if a someone is driving in a hazardous manner while using a cell-phone, there are existing laws that cover citing them for poor driving. I don't see the need to punish those who can use a cell-phone while driving and not become a major road hazard.

If you're going to specifically outlaw cell-phones in cars, then you'd better outlaw use of shavers, makeup kits, books, any music headphone use (already a law in some parts), and possibly ban stereos altogether and ticket drivers for talking to passengers - these are all examples of activities that distract the driver from their primary task.

If you want to regulate usage to require hands-free devices, I can go along with that. But the idea that simply talking on the phone should be outlawed strikes me as ridiculous when there is no outcry on drivers talking to passengers - what's the difference?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by WSUCougar

I strongly disagree. While I'm sure there are many examples of responsible cell phone drivers, the majority I see on a daily basis are obviously hazardous. They're like a plague. I have no deep-seeded desire to pick a fight with cell phone users - all I see is a clear cause-and-effect between cell phone use and very poor driving.

I don't want to pick a fight on this topic, but it's a widely known phenomenon of human psychology that we tend to notice things that support a belief we have and not so much evidence to the contrary. I suspect you noticed some bad driving by cell-phone users at some point, came to a theory on it, and take note every subsequent time you notice poor driving to see if they're on a cell-phone and add to your examples of evidence supporting this conclusion. I'm guessing you don't notice every driver that is using a cell-phone while driving, especially the ones that are doing a competant job of driving while on the phone.

[Craptacular]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

If you want to regulate usage to require hands-free devices, I can go along with that. But the idea that simply talking on the phone should be outlawed strikes me as ridiculous when there is no outcry on drivers talking to passengers - what's the difference?

I'll admit I'll occasionally talk on my cell phone while I'm driving if someone calls me, although I try not to make calls when I'm driving and encourage others to do the same. I don't answer calls when I'm in heavy traffic. However, I do believe there is a big difference in attention levels between talking on the cell phone and talking with passengers, listening to the radio, etc. When you're on the phone, not only are you listening closely, but you're thinking about what they're saying and what you're going to say next. Generally, when you listen to the radio, you're not concentrating on the broadcast. The biggest difference between talking on the phone and talking with your passengers is that there are no other sensory cues when you're on the phone. Even if it's in your peripheral vision or in the rear-view mirror, it's much easier to connect with someone when you can see them and get a sense of body language. Often times, you're talking about something that both of you can see, which doesn't require you to use your imagination or memory.

The most convincing thing to me is just my personal experience. Often times after a phone call, I'll try to remember things that happened or scenery/locations I drove by when I was on the phone. Almost every time, I don't remember nearly as much as I normally do when I listen to the radio, talk to passengers, etc. I may not be a noticeably "worse" driver when I'm on the phone, but I admit that my attention is not focused on what it should be ... driving.

[dawgfan]

You make some interesting points; I'd love to see a study that compares hands-free cell-phone use with talking with passengers. While acknowledging your theory, I still suspect there's very little difference in effect though.

[sabotai]

Well, also one difference is you can still have both hands on the wheel when talking to someone in the car with you. I don't think you can argue that you have just as much control over a car with one hand on the wheel as you do with two.

And I think shaving or applying makeup while driver, reading the newspaper while driving and about a dozen other things people do while driving are worse than talking on a cell phone. But then again, I never see anyone do thises things. I've seen someone apply make up once every few months. I've seen someone reading while driving once. I see people using cell phones and driving all the time. At least 2 or 3 on my to work and 2 or 3 on my way home. The reason people focus on the cell phones isn'tbecause they hate them or want to ignore all of the others, it's because it happens frequently while the others rarely do.

[Fonzie]

Apologies for the academic tone of the following, but I think this topic is important enough to risk sounding pedantic:

The attention literature is fairly clear-cut on the issue of cell phone use while driving: attentional resources end up being divided between the visuomotor task (driving) and the verbal task (conversation). When attention is divided, performance on complex tasks such as driving decreases markedly, regardless of whether the phone is manipulated manually or is used via a hands-free headset. In fact, the phone itself is irrelevant - any conversation will divide attention in this way, and result in poorer driving performance. Further, the intensity of the conversation is irrelevant - any idle chit chat will decrease performance just as much as a heated argument. However, driving performance is not affected by listening to the radio or to a book-on-tape, which are much more passive tasks and require fewer attentional resources.

Bottom line - don't talk while driving, no matter how good of a driver you think you are, as your driving performance will suffer. At the very, very least, end all conversations while in moderate-to-difficult driving conditions (heavy traffic, poor weather, etc.) that require focused attention.

On the plus side: feel free to use this evidence to end unpleasant conversations with significant others while either of you are driving.


Research citations for those interested (be warned - these are from academic journals, the reading of which has been found by the surgeon general and myself to immediately induce coma):

Cell phone-induced failures of visual attention during simulated driving. Strayer, David L.; Drews, Frank A.; Johnston, William A.; Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Vol 9(1), Mar 2003. pp. 23-32.

Mental workload while driving: Effects on visual search, discrimination, and decision making. Recarte, Miguel A.; Nunes, Luis M.; Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Vol 9(2), Jun 2003. pp. 119-137.

Interference of cellular phone conversations with visuomotor tasks: An ERP study. Garcia-Larrea, Luis; Perchet, Caroline; Perrin, Fabien; Journal of Psychophysiology, Vol 15(1), 2001. pp. 14-21.

Effect of the intensity of wireless telephone conversations on reaction time in a braking response. Irwin, Marcia; Fitzgerald, Chris; Berg, William P.; Perceptual & Motor Skills, Vol 90(3,Pt2), Jun 2000. pp. 1130-1134.

[dawgfan]

Thanks for the input. Are none of these studies published online for reference? I'd like to know a few things:

• What was the methodology used to measure this? Did they use some kind of driving simulator? If so, what was the setup, i.e. how realistic was the simulator to actual driving? Were the simulated driving experiences the same for every driver? Did the tests measure the same people with and without cell-phones? If so, did they get the same simulated driving experience each time? Also, did they all do the test in the same order, or was it evenly mixed? How were the subjects selected?
• In analyzing the results, was there any attempt made to compare the range in peformance within each group, and looking at the worst of the non-cell phone group compared to the best of the cell-phone group? Did they attempt to quantify possible differences in performance based on the complexity of the driving task?

I'd also like to see the exact quotes from the study results and conclusions.

My own experience suggests to me that the blanket description of driving as a complex task may be overgeneralizing - I believe that certain elements can become so habitual and practiced that they reach a level of something akin to muscle memory. For example, I make a habit of keeping a safe following distance. The decision of whether to press the accelerator, lift my foot off the accelerator and coast, or to press the brakes has become what seems very much an unconscious, automatic response - a direct connection between my visual cortex and my leg muscles. This is an example of what I would describe as a pretty basic driving task. Situations where quick reactions are necessary, such as an object or another car veering into my path, or a sudden slow-down/stop in front of me are instinctive reactions - so long as this is happening within my vision, the response is automatic.

More complex tasks would be things like changing lanes or turning. If you are a smart driver, you'll be extra careful to check your mirrors and blind spot and look for a larger than normal opening to change lanes, and to shift down your attention on the conversation as you do so. Also, if you are in situations that are unfamiliar to you, you'll either shift most of your attention on the driving or end the conversation altogether.

I liken it to this example - dribbling a basketball is a skill that can become second nature, muscle memory. For someone that is good at dribbling a baskeball, talking on a cell-phone (or with a friend walking with you) is going to have only a moderate effect on your dribbling. You can probably even shoot OK while doing so (again, a practiced muscle memory). However, if you were having a conversation on the phone or with your buddy and you tried to write a cohesive paragraph about dribbling a basketball, you'd fail.

And the contention that listening to the radio or book on tape (or presumably music) has no effect on driving I also expect is an overgeneralization - it is possible to let your attention drift when doing these activities. Hell, it's possible to start daydreaming while driving without any outside stimulus.

I remain unconvinced that good drivers can't safely navigate their cars while holding a conversation.

[Fonzie]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Thanks for the input. Are none of these studies published online for reference? I'd like to know a few things:

• What was the methodology used to measure this? Did they use some kind of driving simulator? If so, what was the setup, i.e. how realistic was the simulator to actual driving? Were the simulated driving experiences the same for every driver? Did the tests measure the same people with and without cell-phones? If so, did they get the same simulated driving experience each time? Also, did they all do the test in the same order, or was it evenly mixed? How were the subjects selected?
• In analyzing the results, was there any attempt made to compare the range in peformance within each group, and looking at the worst of the non-cell phone group compared to the best of the cell-phone group? Did they attempt to quantify possible differences in performance based on the complexity of the driving task?

These were all published in peer-reviewed journals, most of which I believe have an online presence but probably require a subscription for access. I have the articles in PDF format, and as such can't easily copy and paste large swaths of the articles for you. However, I can address a few things:

- some of the studies used basic reaction-time type tasks in an automobile setting, such that if the subject saw a red light they needed to depress the brake pedal as quickly as possible. Others used very sophisticated driving simulators complete with the entire cab of a vehicle and multiple computers modeling automobile handling properties and displaying a 180 degree visual field. Thus, the tasks ranged from simpler-than-normal-driving to standard driving experiences - none, that I can recall, used anything like an "emergency" type of driving scenario (although those studies are out there).

- some of the studies I cited used a repeated-measures design, with all subjects experiencing all conditions, while others used a random assignment design, where each subject was randomly assigned to one of several conditions. Those who saw all conditions had the order of condition presentation counterbalanced.

- in some studies undergraduate students were recruited - in others community dwellers were recruited. In none of the studies did I see any indication of compensation, so I can only assume they're volunteers/did the study for course credit.

- I don't recall any of the studies attempting to explore individual difference variables that might render some folks more or less susceptible to the effects of divided attention, but I suspect that's a question addressed better by the broader literature on divided attention, and not this subset of that literature. So, I don't think they attempted to identify exceptional performances in the way you described.

- The studies all, as I recall, maintained equivalent driving scenarios while varying the presence/absence of a cell phone, the intensity of the conversations, and so on.

I should also add that these were just a few studies that I cited - there are many more, which come to similar conclusions.

I'd also like to see the exact quotes from the study results and conclusions.

Here're a few tidbits from the abstracts:

From the Recarte study: "The effects of mental workload on visual search and decision making were studied in real traffic conditions with 12 participants who drove an instrumented car. Mental workload was manipulated by having participants perform several mental tasks while driving. A simultaneous visual-detection and discrimination test was used as performance criteria. Mental tasks produced spatial gaze concentration and visual-detection impairment, although no tunnel vision occurred. According to ocular behavior analysis, this impairment was due to late detection and poor identification more than to response selection. Verbal acquisition tasks were innocuous compared with production tasks, and complex conversations, whether by phone or with a passenger, are dangerous for road safety."

From the Strayer article: "Dual-task studies assessed the effects of cellular-phone conversations on performance of 48 Ss (aged 18-30 yrs) on a simulated driving task. Performance was not disrupted by listening to radio broadcasts or listening to a book on tape. Nor was it disrupted by a continuous shadowing task using a handheld phone, ruling out, in this case, dual-task interpretations associated with holding the phone, listening, or speaking. However, significant interference was observed in a word-generation variant of the shadowing task, and this deficit increased with the difficulty of driving. Moreover, unconstrained conversations using either a handheld or a hands-free cell phone resulted in a twofold increase in the failure to detect simulated traffic signals and slower reactions to those signals that were detected. The authors suggest that cellular-phone use disrupts performance by diverting attention to an engaging cognitive context other than the one immediately associated with driving."

From the Garcia-Larrea article: "The use of mobile phones has been shown to increase drivers' reaction time (RT), but whether this results from interference with attention, stimulus identification, or response production remains unclear. The authors recorded RTs and event related potential (ERP) reflecting speed of stimulus processing, attentional allocation, and preparedness to respond during a visual reaction task performed with or without the concomitant use of a mobile phone, in either "hands-free' or "phone-in-hand' operating modes. There were 10 Ss (aged 24-42 yrs) who participated in this study. As expected, maintaining a phone conversation increased RTs to visual targets, this effect being associated with complex ERP effects. Results suggest that two mechanisms contributed to degrade performance in this experiment: first, a general decrease of attention to sensory inputs, characteristic of "dual-task' situations, probably acting through a delay in sensory-motor transfer times. This effect was independent of whether the phone was handled or "hands-free.' Conversely, the second factor was specifically sensitive to manipulation of the phone and caused a weakening of the readiness to respond with a motor act."

And the contention that listening to the radio or book on tape (or presumably music) has no effect on driving I also expect is an overgeneralization - it is possible to let your attention drift when doing these activities. Hell, it's possible to start daydreaming while driving without any outside stimulus.

The key element here is that talking on a cell phone usually involves talking, and verbal generation, which usually draws upon long-term memory stores and semantic knowledge networks, places much greater demands on attention than simply listening. And I agree that there are certainly many other ways one's attention can be influenced and lead to poor driving, as by your "daydreaming" example, but I'm not sure how they bear on this discussion.

I remain unconvinced that good drivers can't safely navigate their cars while holding a conversation.

Oh, they certainly can, as evidenced by the fact that they do it all the time. The point here is that their attention is still by definition divided when they engage in both tasks, and that division reduces the attention that can be allocated to the driving task regardless of driving ability. Fortunately, the margin of error in normal driving situations is such that they can get away with having slower reactions times and occasionally missing important visual cues - thanks in part no doubt to the defensive driving abilities of those around them. But they should not be fooled into thinking that doing so is safe just because they get away with it much of the time (though, clearly, not all of the time, even under normal circumstances), as "normal" driving situations can rapidly and unpredictably become abnormal, it is at those critical times that attention is most necessary.

I agree with you, though, that "good drivers" are probably the folks who modulate their attention at important times - they will slow or disengage from conversation when turning, changing lanes, approaching intersections, noting a traffic slowdown, etc. It would be interesting to see a study selecting those folks and exposing them to the types of experimental conditions noted above. One cautionary note, however: the vast majority of people view themselves as "good drivers" when, in fact, they are quite average (by definition). Thus, the findings described above are going to bear on the vast majority of drivers.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by primelord

I was thinking about this a lot the other day as a guy was screaming at me from his car because I was driving while on my cell phone. (It was odd considering it's not like we even almost had an accident or anything. He was sitting at the light in the lane next to me. Glanced over and noticed I was on the phone and just started yelling.)

Anyway I don't even like talking on the phone while I am driving, but my job requires it. We have emergencies and customer situations that demand I deal with them sometimes right away regardless of where I am. So I could take the moral stand that I will not talk while driving, but then they will just find someone who will.

So then people usually give me the argument that I could pull over to the side of the road while I am talking. Again this not always possible with the work I do. So I guess what I am saying is I didn't appreciate you cursing at me out the window Coug. What do you want me to do?

Studies have shown that talking on a cell phone while driving reduces your reaction times as much as driving drunk.

[RPI-Fan]

I hate it when someone makes a RIGHT-hand turn directly in front of you off of a sidestreet, cutting you off, then drives significantly under the speed limit.

[WSUCougar]

This thread has gone off in a direction I did not foresee (or intend), but let me add a couple more admittedly unscientific comments:

> In response to dawgfan, I too do not want to pick a fight (really! just discussing), but I must again disagree with your reply to me. What holds for me is that I see erratic driving, and a vast majority of the time subsequently identify that the individual is using a cell phone. I'm not feeding some foul hatred of cell phone users. To contradict your point, where are all the instances where I should see erratic driving behavior WITHOUT a cell phone involved? Why am I not thinking to myself, "Well, at least it wasn't a cell phone user?" It just doesn't happen that way of late. It's almost always a cell phone user.

> I think there is a different kind of attention given to a phone coversation than a regular conversation. I can sit here typing on my computer and hold a discussion with someone in the room, but if I'm talking on the phone my attention is much more focused. I'll leave it to the scientists to break that down further.

[Fonzie]

Originally Posted by WSUCougar

> I think there is a different kind of attention given to a phone coversation than a regular conversation. I can sit here typing on my computer and hold a discussion with someone in the room, but if I'm talking on the phone my attention is much more focused. I'll leave it to the scientists to break that down further.

Actually, several studies (cited above) show that the effects of both types of conversations on attention are comparable. Any time attention is divided among multiple moderate-to-seriously taxing tasks performance on those tasks will suffer. My guess would be that the difference that you're perceiving likely has to do with the consequences and noteworthiness of subtle errors in a driving context versus the consquences and noteworthiness of subtle errors in a typing context (much wider margin for error on the latter than the former). In addition, one could argue that a driving scenario places much greater demands on attention-moderated cognitive processes (visual perception, object tracking, visuomotor planning and execution, etc.) than does typing at a computer (although that would depend on the topic!), which would make any attentional reduction that much more critical.

[Fonzie]

Originally Posted by RPI-Fan

I hate it when someone makes a RIGHT-hand turn directly in front of you off of a sidestreet, cutting you off, then drives significantly under the speed limit.

Hey now, what's with this attempt to get the thread back on topic?!

[WSUCougar]

Originally Posted by Fonzie

Actually, several studies (cited above) show that the effects of both types of conversations on attention are comparable. Any time attention is divided among multiple moderate-to-seriously taxing tasks performance on those tasks will suffer. My guess would be that the difference that you're perceiving likely has to do with the consequences and noteworthiness of subtle errors in a driving context versus the consquences and noteworthiness of subtle errors in a typing context (much wider margin for error on the latter than the former). In addition, one could argue that a driving scenario places much greater demands on attention-moderated cognitive processes (visual perception, object tracking, visuomotor planning and execution, etc.) than does typing at a computer (although that would depend on the topic!), which would make any attentional reduction that much more critical.

Is NOT.

[Fonzie]

Originally Posted by WSUCougar

Is NOT.

Touché!

[dawgfan]

Fonzie - thanks again for the info.

A few more comments in reply:

- It appears that most of these studies were done using a driving simulator of some kind. Presumably subjects were solicited in some way, and then introduced to the simulator and given some form of instruciton on what to do. As a proxy for normal driving conditions, this is already a flawed setup. Human psychology is such that subjects brought into a study like this are going to tend to treat these situations like a test; after all, they're being observed and/or measured in whatever it is that they're doing - human nature will dictate that people try to do the "best" job they can under these situations, whatever it is they assume the best job to be is. My point being, for those who are proxying drivers not engaged in a conversation (with a passenger or on the phone) will be giving their full attention to the driving task. Those with passengers or a phone engaged in a conversation are more likely to focus heavily on the conversation and much less so on the road. No matter how realistic the simulator, human nature is such that the element of self-preservation is lost - at a basic level, the subjects know that nothing bad will happen to them if they get into a simulated accident, and won't suffer the same amount of guilt at driving poorly.

- If any of these studies were performed under actual driving conditions, it would be instructive to know what the methodology was for measuring performance. Was it by an observer making objective measurements? Was there some type of equipment installed that attempted to measure visual cues and tie them into driving reactions? How were conditions controlled to present comparable data? Again, I suspect that whatever means were used would heighten that tendency in human nature to perform well under observation, leading to a greater degree of focus on the driving task in the no conversation control group than is normally the case with actual drivers in normal conditions. Those asked to hold a conversation with passengers or on a phone while driving would probably not be as prone to focusing on the conversation as those in the simulator studies because of the presence of actual physical danger if the driving suffered, but there would still be a greater average drop in performance than is actually the case if indeed the control drivers were more focused on the driving tasks than they would otherwise normally be.

Essentially, my argument is that it would be very difficult to design a study using driving simulators that actually yielded representative data on baseline driving - for many people, driving is very routine and attention isn't 100% focused on the task, relying instead on muscle memory and defensive driving principles (i.e. keep a safe following distance, give enough clearence when changing lanes, check mirrors and blinds spots before changing lanes, etc.)

I agree that the difference between someone giving 100% focus to their driving task will perform markedly better than those that are holding a conversation, and reading those results it would be easy to conclude that driving while talking to a passenger or on the phone is dangerous. My counter to that is that I don't think most people drive with 100% focus, so the actual difference in driving ability is not as great as these studies might suggest.

I also contend that some drivers are smarter about they multitask, i.e. increasing their following distance while talking on the phone, not being as aggressive in changing lanes/double-checking their mirrors and blind spots, shifting focus to driving when faced with more difficult tasks, etc.

I have no problem with regulations that would require drivers to use a hands-free device while driving, and I'd welcome a safety campaign that encourage drivers to only use cell-phones while driving when absolutely necessary, and to promote safe, defensive driving techniques while on the phone.

But any attempt to place a blanket ban on driving while using a phone is going overboard IMO.

[Desnudo]

People used to wink at drunk driving also. Studies have shown that the distraction isn't completely related to having the phone in your hands. Additionally, a specific grievance I have, is how do you drive well using a stick and a cell phone? You can't. You need both hands. Also, I can't tell you the amount of times I've seen someone fail to signal for a turn due to having one hand on their cell and the other on the wheel.

Apparently humans have great difficulty talking to air and concentrating at the same time. I also think it's bit daffy to think that someone doing two things at once can do it as well as one. But time will tell I suppose.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

People used to wink at drunk driving also. Studies have shown that the distraction isn't completely related to having the phone in your hands. Additionally, a specific grievance I have, is how do you drive well using a stick and a cell phone? You can't. You need both hands. Also, I can't tell you the amount of times I've seen someone fail to signal for a turn due to having one hand on their cell and the other on the wheel.

Apparently humans have great difficulty talking to air and concentrating at the same time. I also think it's bit daffy to think that someone doing two things at once can do it as well as one. But time will tell I suppose.

Let me be perfectly clear here - I have no doubts that talking while driving reduces your reaction times compared to talking while not driving. My contention is that most drivers are not giving full attention to the road even without any conversation going on. The actual difference between the average driver on the phone/talking to a passenger and that same driver in normal conditions is likely not as great as the studies are suggesting, because in normal driving conditions drivers are unlikely to be giving 100% focus on the task at hand.

As for talking on the phone while driving a stick, there are 2 options - use a hands-free device, or only do so in either free-flowing freeway traffic (when you're in 4th or 5th gear and have no need to shift) or in stop and go traffic (where you're unlikely to need to get out of 1st).

I also seriously doubt that talking while driving is as bad as driving drunk. In the one case, your attention is distracted from the task, but the motor skills are unaffected. In the second, attention is not only easily distracted, but the motor skills are impaired, so even if the drunk sees the car ahead of him slamming on the brakes, he is physically incapable of reacting as quick as he would were he sober. This impairment of motor skills increases with the amount of alcohol in the bloodstream.

[HornedFrog Purple]

All I can tell you is when I go out on a call with lights flashing and horns blaring and there is a car that doesn't pay a bit of attention and keeps on cluttering up the lane refusing to move over for 2 seconds, that person is 9 times out of 10 on a cell phone. I see it all the time.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by HornedFrog Purple

All I can tell you is when I go out on a call with lights flashing and horns blaring and there is a car that doesn't pay a bit of attention and keeps on cluttering up the lane refusing to move over for 2 seconds, that person is 9 times out of 10 on a cell phone. I see it all the time.

Sounds like the moron cell-phone drivers are going to ruin the privilege for those of us that are careful in our use.

[Easy Mac]

I hate when they have sex and then get in a wreck and the girl gets stuck in the steering wheel.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Sounds like the moron cell-phone drivers are going to ruin the privilege for those of us that are careful in our use.

I should be fair about that, the other 9 out of 10 cell phone users are fine.

The other 1 out of 10 that don't move over are usually mom with kids and vans/trucks with limited range of vision.

[AgPete]

I voted for slow drivers. I believe in that old George Carlin monologue: "There's no such thing as a leisurely f*cking drive! I get in my car and go from Point A to Point B!"

The way I see it, the people causing accidents are the slow drivers. The fast alert driver sees a crash occuring and swiftly veers around it. Meanwhile, the slow cautious driver sees the same crash and freaks the f*ck out, slams on the brakes, and causes a 52 car pile-up. As far as I'm concerned, the slow lane in the highway should be 70mph minimum.

[Easy Mac]

Just so everyone knows, the legislature in South Carolina intends to make it a fineable offense to drive in the left hand lane without passing people. So if you are holding up traffic, even if you are going the speed limit, you can get up to a $150 fine.

This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Yeah, I hate the fuckers who ride on the left slower than I am, but there shouldn't be a law, just educate the fuckers.

[HornedFrog Purple]

As far as I'm concerned, the slow lane in the highway should be 70mph minimum.

If that happens I am retiring.

The natural speeder will go 75, the showoff speeder will go 80+. Of course there is no cure for the showoff speeder anyways, but adding even more mph to the natural speeder is the danger there. You would be surprised what 5-8 mph difference does in an accident. Not just for the car(s) involved but the reduction of reaction time for everyone behind them.

[AgPete]

Originally Posted by HornedFrog Purple

If that happens I am retiring.

The natural speeder will go 75, the showoff speeder will go 80+. Of course there is no cure for the showoff speeder anyways, but adding even more mph to the natural speeder is the danger there. You would be surprised what 5-8 mph difference does in an accident. Not just for the car(s) involved but the reduction of reaction time for everyone behind them.

I believe in reaction time. Preach on! That's another thing that ticks me off about drivers - speeders that don't know how to speed. If you're going to hit the highway at 85 mph, don't freaking drive ten feet behind the car in front of you! I usually find myself in the fast lane and I hate when someone sees that there's enough room between me and the car in front to fit in when in fact I'm doing that on purpose in case something were to happen. It's not NASCAR, there's no need to be bumper to bumper.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by AgPete

I believe in reaction time. Preach on! That's another thing that ticks me off about drivers - speeders that don't know how to speed. If you're going to hit the highway at 85 mph, don't freaking drive ten feet behind the car in front of you! I usually find myself in the fast lane and I hate when someone sees that there's enough room between me and the car in front to fit in when in fact I'm doing that on purpose in case something were to happen. It's not NASCAR, there's no need to be bumper to bumper.

This happens to me all the time. You're supposed to leave a few car lengths between you and the car in front of you so you have time to react to their actions. So many drivers don't realize this...GET OFF MY ASS!! I find myself yelling a lot while driving.

[corbes]

This thread is too long to read.

My only (well, one of two) accident was a direct result of using my cell phone. Actually, it was the first day I had it!

I was driving a company van, and following another company van down to the Philadelphia airport. We were in 0-20mph stop and go traffic. They stopped, I didn't.

I just bruised up the front right of my van and the back left of their van. Fortunately, we didn't have to stop and compare insurance information. They knew where I lived.

As a side note, it makes a good impression when you go to pick up VIPs from the airport in dented courtesy vans.

[Mustang]

I always enjoy 1 of 2 things.

1. I'm going eastbound and I need to make a turn and pull up past the left turn lane. Westbound is making a left turn but, doesn't pull up and effectively blocks my line of sight of the westbound traffic. (Usually a bigger vehicle..)

2. I'm making a right hand turn and waiting for traffic to clear. Someone pulls up to my left to make a left hand turn and they pull up even or ahead of me and block my line of sight so, I inch forward to see over their vehicle.. and then THEY pull up a little.



"Everyone driving slower than me is an idiot and everyone driving faster than me is a maniac." - George Carlin.

[rkmsuf]

I hate it when other drivers........drive. Traffic sucks...

[Craptacular]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

Just so everyone knows, the legislature in South Carolina intends to make it a fineable offense to drive in the left hand lane without passing people. So if you are holding up traffic, even if you are going the speed limit, you can get up to a $150 fine.

This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Yeah, I hate the fuckers who ride on the left slower than I am, but there shouldn't be a law, just educate the fuckers.

Have you ever seen the signs that say "Keep Right Except to Pass" or "Slow Traffic Keep Right"?? Notice how they look like speed limit signs ... rectangular, white background, black text, black border. That means they are regulatory signs, and are enforceable by law, just like the speed limit. Perhaps SC doesn't have those yet, but I believe that most states do.

[sabotai]

And they are promptly ignored, just like the speed limit.

[Craptacular]

Originally Posted by Mustang

I always enjoy 1 of 2 things.
2. I'm making a right hand turn and waiting for traffic to clear. Someone pulls up to my left to make a left hand turn and they pull up even or ahead of me and block my line of sight so, I inch forward to see over their vehicle.. and then THEY pull up a little.

I especially love this at a traffic signal, with left turners and through vehicles. Often times they pull up well past the stop bar. I wish they would have their window down so I could yell "Where the f%& do you plan on going during this red light?!?!"

[condors]

for me without a doubt the #1 thing (although i can relate to most of them) is when a person making a left turn on yellow/red and they have no actual room to make that turn and block the intersection(hey if i wanted to i could have blocked the intersection 5 minutes ago) Then the chain recation happens the people who now have a green light and can't move are furious and proced to block the intersection when the light turns green for me again. There are some terrible intersections at rush hour that can take 10-20 minutes to move 500 feet. If there is no room for you to go then don't freaking go!

just for the record i was a defensive driver until i started having to drive in philadelphia every day. If you drive defensivley you will constantly breaking because everyone and his brother will cut you off for no apparent reason. People will use shoulder,bikelines,turning lines(when they are not turning) I am forced to leave less than a car length for defensive reasons. I also have been rammed into while sitting still in a turning lane waiting to turn and the person behind me was very upset i wasn't going straight and tried to go around me very quickly hitting my car and instead of breaking hitting the gas and proceding to push my car into traffic while slow working over the entire side of my car. If i could have opened my car door i would have been sent to prison that very day. just an fyi it was a 68 gto that i spent countless hours and lots of dollars into it making it a freaking dream car and i am still looking for another to replace it

[Airhog]

heres another one. How about when people are turning left, and its a light with a green turn signal and a regular green light. So they decided to pull all the way out into the intersection. Of course traffic is bad enough that they are forced to wait until the light turns red before they can turn.

[Craptacular]

Originally Posted by Airhog

heres another one. How about when people are turning left, and its a light with a green turn signal and a regular green light. So they decided to pull all the way out into the intersection. Of course traffic is bad enough that they are forced to wait until the light turns red before they can turn.

I'm not sure if I totally understand you. Do they have a green turn arrow and a green ball illuminated. If they have an arrow, there shouldn't be any opposing traffic. If you're just talking about someone who pulls out on a green ball and has to wait for the yellow / red to actually complete the turn, that's different. Just so you know, signal timings are usually designed assuming two vehicles can do that every cycle. They are called "sneakers". Vehicles should pull out into the intersection on green, and wait and turn on yellow if necessary. Of course, stopped cars that haven't entered the intersection yet shouldn't gun it when it turns yellow and red.

[WSUCougar]

Bump, since it's become a hot topic again.