Scott Gerrity

Thu Dec 10 2009 10:15

Taking the time to debate and argue whether there should be a ban or not is a waste of time. There are more important issues at hand and many more causes of accidents than cell phone use and texting. According to AIG studies based off of their claims from 2007 to 2008, the most common cause for distracted driver accidents, second only to drunk driving, is having a passenger in a car. They say 81% of accidents could be at least partially attributed to talking to a passenger. Second is distractions with radio and CD changes at 66% partial causes of accidents. And down at the bottom is all cell phone use (including texting, and talking on the phone) is only at 25% partial cause. So obviously there are more important issues at hand, and if they are going to focus on elimination causes of accidents then they need to focus on the real causes. Furthermore, according to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) the most common cause of accidents is driver distraction, but they break it down to different distractions. Number one according to them is "rubbernecking" with 16% of accidents cause by slowing down to watch and stare at other accidents. Driver fatigue ranks second, where 12% of accidents are caused. Passengers is at 9%, Radio and accessories is at 7%, reading is at 2%, and texting and other cell phone usage isn't even given a percent. They say that you have an increased chance of accidents, but is not in the 6 most common causes of accidents. We have much more important things that cause more accidents than texting.

And I believe the point Molly was trying to make wasn't that her friends are gonna miss her if she can't text, but that without her phone she has no communication, one example was picking up intoxicated friends to prevent drunk driving, but another important claim was that it hurts business men and women. By not being able to have communication that cuts into your time to work and communicate with others. I also use my phone to check emails and schedule meetings while I am in the car, and without this ability I would have much less time and my day and accomplish much less every day. The ability to multitask is what allows many professionals, and many involved students the ability to stay involved and actually get all of their stuff done.

Jon Tveite

Mon Nov 2 2009 12:56

Dear Concerned (but anonymous) Citizen:

I am not in disagreement with your concern about cell phone use on the road. Personally, I think the commission should consider making it illegal to use phones while driving. It has been shown quite clearly that people are much more dangerous drivers when their attention is directed somewhere other than the task of driving. This is especially true for younger, less experienced drivers who are already much more likely to have accidents.

I would point out that many of the original responses were indeed directed at texting, which was defended in the title but not in the article itself. So I think my original point is valid, and there is still good reason for people to take a deep breath and relax.

Your name

Mon Nov 2 2009 10:00

the title of this article and the content of this article seem to disagree...

Anonymous

Thu Oct 29 2009 23:53

There is another side to this debate: pedestrians (and cyclists for that matter) walking absently about with a cell phone to the ear. They are capable of walking and talking/texting at the same time, but drivers often use a pedestrian's body language for cues, and a cell-distracted pedestrian's vapid behavior is a danger both to themselves and others. There is a difference between a person that stops to look both ways before he/she crosses the street (as most of us were taught to do around the age of 4 or 5), and the person that aimlessly wanders off the curb then stops because his/her cell reception is poor or a particularly difficult text has fumbled their feet.
Let's not forget that wearing headphones (such as those used for ipods, etc) while driving is unsafe, has been banned by law since the early 80's, and Bluetooth (sp) devices fit the legal description of headphones. And bicycles are to follow the same traffic cues as a motored vehicle, so I guess the ban will include cyclists as well?
Wouldn't it be more time, life and cost efficient to outlaw cell phones?
Personally, I'm inclined to obey the law, regardless of it's "inconveniences". If there is a ban, so be it.

Your name

Thu Oct 29 2009 15:44

LOL now that was funny

Sad, but True

Wed Oct 28 2009 23:56

Even ag majors that can barely speak hick write better than this.

no, seriously

Wed Oct 28 2009 23:52

So...what was your point?

Pull over and answer your cell phone if you want to answer it. But then again, if your thought processes in everyday life are similar to the thought process that went into writing this disorganized and confusing article, that may be too complicated for you.

Also, the title is that the TEXTING ban is bad, but you then say that TEXTING is the only GOOD part of the ban. WHAT ARE YOU DOING? Read the words as you are typing them.

Seriously.

No really.

SERIOUSLY.

ROFLSK8S

Wed Oct 28 2009 23:30

What crackhead at the collegian entitled an article saying a texting ban is good that the texting ban hurts Manhattan?

Yet again, Collegian represents K-State for all to see. Way to go. You fail.

Your name

Wed Oct 28 2009 19:26

I'm a non traditional student here at K-State. I came here to learn not to walk around or drive around texting, talking on the phone, checking emails, etc. I have a social life and I have family and friends that call, email, and text me all the time as well. For my personal safety and for other around me, I sit still to look at my phone. I dont even look at my phone while I'm walking. Not that I cant, I do it for my protection. If a student or a business man or woman feels thier phone is so important that they are unable to use it sitting still, then maybe they should NOT have a phone. I strongly believe that banning cell phone use in a motorized vehicle would lessen the amount of accidents and make people more aware of their surroundings. I'm all for banning the use of cell phone activity of any kind while operating a vehicle of any kind. Motorized or not.

L Shovar

Wed Oct 28 2009 19:16

Why dont you clean the lint out of your belly button so you can see with your head up your ass. I sorry if MY safty gets in the way of your pathetic social life.

Amber C.

Wed Oct 28 2009 18:03

I am a K-State Alum and I live in Washington State, where it is now illegal for drivers to use a cell phone while driving, UNLESS they are using a hands-free or Bluetooth device. There have been no discernible adverse effects from this law, however there have been fewer accidents and fewer deaths. Perhaps it would be wise for Manhattan to take guidance from the six states that already have a cell phone ban in place. Kansas is one of 21 states that has passed a cell phone ban for novice drivers. It would not be such a stretch for that to apply to the remaining population. Since common sense has become less common, laws like these have become necessary.

Your name

Wed Oct 28 2009 16:24

This article is poorly written.

cthompson

Wed Oct 28 2009 13:26

While this article mentions the 4 seconds taken away from the road while looking at a text message, what people don't understand is how far you can drive in that 4 seconds. I have actually read another article that explains in that 4 seconds away from the road a driver can drive about the length of a football field in the amount of time taken while looking at the text message... the length of a football field!!! that is quite a distance if you think about driving blind... (as in looking at the phone and not the road) what all could you possibly run into or worse-hit-in that length and time? texting while driving is dangerous...

KSU senior

Tue Oct 27 2009 23:49

Personally I saw a college student messing with their cell phone while driving on Anderson by the Alumni Center and the result was them turning when pedestrians were in the cross walk and just about hit one of them. The ped. had to jump to get out of the way and the driver was completely oblivious to what was going on. When you can drive around town and narrowly avoid getting hit and say to yourself "they were probably on their cell phones" and are right 90% of the time, then we have a problem. Like many others have said, no conversation to your friends is worth potentially spending the rest of your life in jail for vehicular homicide. (obviously an overstatement but the concept is the same.)

Thoughtful Citizen

Tue Oct 27 2009 22:11

Jon Tveite:

Hostility is towards the fact that Molly's argument is that we should allow a practice that is the leading contributor of auto accidents of high school and college students because: "we have to talk to our friends", "when my friends are illegally drinking, they need rides and can't call me and set up a time earlier in the night, or I can't pull over to ask people when they want picked up", "students decide their colleges based on the traffic tickets they get in the city and NOT on the quality of the campus, attractiveness of the degree fields, or the price/location", and, my personal favorite, "Since our small town is such a THRIVING METROPOLIS and everyone needs on their Blackberrys to keep up with, say, the stock market value of Gumbys, business people are adversely effected."

If you can read those reasons and think, in Manhattan, they outweigh the concerns of high schoolers dying, then I guess you're confused about a lot more.

Jon Tveite

Tue Oct 27 2009 21:51

I think the editors did a lousy job of choosing the title for this column -- very misleading. That is probably the source of most of the hostility in these comments. People need to calm down.

Your Name

Tue Oct 27 2009 21:20

wah wah wah I need my cell phone to talk to my friends wah wah wah

Say that to every family that's lost a loved one because some sorority girl was too busy texting Chad about their next date instead of watching the road in a school zone. Jerk!

Valiant Conservative

Tue Oct 27 2009 21:18

I would have rather read another Beth article.

Elaine

Tue Oct 27 2009 20:16

They've been doing this in California. Just get a hands-free device. If your drunk friends need a ride, they can call Safe Ride.

Alice

Tue Oct 27 2009 20:13

It's a little more than ironic that ppl are berating the writer for her ''lack of reasoning'' when they apparently didn't read the article (or didn't understand it). Do you know that part where it says ''Anything BEYOND the ban of text messaging in this city ordinance is going too far''? Guess what: it refers to things other than texting. You'd think someone would have picked up on that, with all the examples she gave abt TALKING on the phone, you know?