Hergott: Cell phones vs. passengers

Lawyer Paul Hergott discusses talking to your passenger vs. being on your cell phone while driving

How is it any different from talking to a passenger?

We hosted a small gathering for my step daughter’s 30th birthday. She got to hear my road safety pitch about the ridiculousness of banning hand held, but not hands free cell phone use, “for the 500th time”.

The topic just sort of came up when I was chatting up one of her friends. It always comes up. I’m like a child at show and tell with some shiny cool thing I’m dying to share.

She might have thought it was cool the first time. Noting that it was “for the 500th time” is a strong clue that any shine it might have had has been lost.

RELATED: Targeting driver’s attitudes

Her friend kindly showed interest in what I had to say.

His immediate response was a predictable one because 500 of 500 folks I share my pitch with respond with the same question: “How is it any different from talking to a passenger?”

It’s a very reasonable question, because my pitch is based on a similar kind of comparison.

We all agree, I think, that hand held cell phone use is dangerous and illegal. My pitch is that since the hands free version has been scientifically proven to pose the same level of danger, it should also be illegal.

The flip side of that coin is that talking to a passenger is legal and, presumably, safe. Hands free cell phone use seems a lot like talking to a passenger. Therefore, shouldn’t hands free cell phone use be legal as well?

Please understand that I take no credit for the “heavy lifting” of scientific study and analysis that forms the basis of what I am about to share with you. I do have over 20 years of experience sorting out what causes car crashes and the science and analysis fits my experience, but please don’t discount what I tell you on the basis that I might be some crazy maverick.

And if you have any doubt at all about what I am sharing with you and have a genuine interest in learning about this stuff, please ask and I will send you some reading material.

Fully 50 per cent of the car crash cases I handle arose when a driver inexplicably failed to notice that the traffic ahead had come to a stop and drove into the back of a stopped vehicle.

Most of the other 50 per cent are a mix of all sorts of other driving scenarios where the offending driver was simply not attentive to what was going on. A driver looking in the direction of an approaching vehicle but somehow not “seeing” it, looking out the windshield but somehow failing to notice a stop sign, etc.

That’s what the science says occurs when your brain is elsewhere, talking on a cell phone while driving. You are looking out of your windshield, but “missing” up to 50 per cent of what’s there.

A passenger is another set of eyes. How many times have you played “back seat driver”, alerting the person behind the wheel that he is about to miss a turn? Or alerted with a, “Hey!” and/or noticeably bracing yourself when the driver was roaring up behind stopping traffic at a changing light or seeming to miss other road hazards?

And please, next time you’re chatting away with a passenger, notice what happens when traffic becomes the least bit complicated. The pace of discussion automatically slows as both of your brains become more engaged with the roadway.

As I was explaining this to my step-daughter’s friend, I was delighted to see that his eyes weren’t glazing over. And after puzzling about it a bit, he came up with another piece that I had not read about nor come up with on my own.

Chit-chat with your passenger is more likely just that: chit-chat. The polite filling of dead air space to avoid an uncomfortable silence.

A cell phone discussion is more likely to be a purposeful and engaging communication. You don’t pick up your phone and call folks to fill dead air space. And when you’re done talking you hang up.

I haven’t seen any science on this point, but it makes sense to me that a purposeful and engaging communication is more likely to be cognitively distracting than idle chit-chat.

The problem with cell phone use while driving is that you are engaging your brain in something other than the road ahead of you, leading you to “miss” up to 50 per cent of what is going on in your field of view, and that this is no different whether you are talking hand held or hands free.

Is it similarly distracting to engage your brain in a discussion with your passenger? I imagine so, and please keep that in mind!

But idle chit-chat discussions with your passenger are unlikely to be as distracting as purposeful and engaging cell phone discussions. And a passenger is another set of eyes, able to alert you to things you miss and adjust the pace of the discussion to fit more complicated traffic situations.

Are you ready to support me in pushing for an all-out ban on cell phone use while driving?

Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Just Posted

Kootenkoff: “Legalization” Delayed – What Took them So Long?

—By Susan Kootnekoff Was the impact on road safety just an inconvenient… Continue reading

5 tips for talking to your kids about cannabis

Health officials recommend sharing a harm reduction-related message.

B.C.’s proportional representation referendum: The case against switching to PR

Opponent says there’s more accountability with ‘first-past-the-post’

Kelowna teen to speak to agriculture minister for World Food Day

Justin Kulik will present his petition to the Ministry of Agriculture on World Food Day

B.C.’s proportional representation referendum: The case for switching to PR

Proponent says PR will give B.C. better political representation

Video: An up-close look at beluga whales in Hudson Bay

An up-close look as some belugas greet whale watchers off the coast of Churchill, Manitoba

Resolution found in Vernon car-surfing death case: defence

Byron James Walterhouse will appear to fix a date for disposition Oct. 18

NHL players say Canada’s legalization of marijuana won’t impact them

NHL players say the legalization of marijuana in Canada won’t change how they go about their business.

Automated cars could kill wide range of jobs, federal documents say

Internal government documents show that more than one million jobs could be lost to automated vehicles, with ripple effects far beyond the likeliest professions.

Vernon pair arrested in connection with 2017 homicide

Incident happened July 19 at Vernon apartment; man, woman arrested without incident

Early morning fire destroys Shuswap home

Owners of Tappen house away as structure undergoing renovations

Private marijuana stores should shut down, Mike Farnworth says

B.C. has approved 62 licences, but they still need local approval

HPV vaccine does not lead to riskier sex among teen girls: UBC

Girls are less likely to have sex now than they were a decade ago

Koreas agree to break ground on inter-Korean railroad

The rival Koreas are holding high-level talks Monday to discuss further engagement amid a global diplomatic push to resolve the nuclear standoff with North Korea.

Most Read