NTSB Recommends Cell Phone Ban

A local morning show DJ here in El Paso made a good point when they played a national news network story on this recommendation. The reporter asked "How dangerous is using cellphones while driving? Well according to a study, XXX,XXX accidents were attributed to "distracted driving".......yada yada yada." Which is a nice figure to throw around but doesn't answer the question. Like the DJ said, distracted driving is a broad categorization, including messing with the radio, AC, talking to a passenger, yelling at your kids to shut up, etc. and as the DJ said, turning your head to look at a hot chick, lol.

This is a simple case of the government looking for an easy answer and cell phone use is a good one since it's an easy "do as I say, not as I do", issue, since, for example, the author of the local ordinance here in El Paso has been spotted using her cellphone while driving.

 

And who do you think would be a better one to write the ordinance?

One without personal experience of how distracting the texting/cell phone actually is while driving? Or the one with the experience and know-with-all of just how distracting those devices are?

See....local government went right to the experienced source!

 

NTSB can investigate accidents on our roadways and that data is provided for review and even presented to Congress and Senate if it is requested.

But alone the NTSB has no authority to change anything.

 

When have you seen the NTSB investigate anything except accidents involving "passenger carrying vehicles"? Bus and aircraft and "sea going vessels"...the CMV (cargo) is handled by DOT.

You're like a dog with a bone aren't you?!

 

The fact they have authority to investigate was my point and for the record it doesn't have to be passenger events they investigate.....
Dang it is hard being a bobtail around here. I'd say originally it was partly my fault because I was "expecting" all you senior folks knew so much and I couldn't confuse anyone.

 

Otter the NTSB dose investigate major truck crashes that involve major loss of property or where alot of people are killed.

 

The way you phrased your opening response was so "absolute" that left no "lee way" for how the different regulatory agencies (grab a chair for this)....actually work together and try not to step on each others toes. The NTSB has, on a very rare occasion, been involved in the investigation of CMV accidents. But the "step out level" for them has always been when Haz Mat and/or multiple death incidents. Haz Mat always, and multiple death would include 10 or more persons being killed. Example...the 50 or more car pile ups on the 99 or I-5 region of CA with a fog incident...think back a few years.

Key word here Pete is "major"...Haz Mat and/or multiple death (over 10) are the minimum standards to bring NTSB investigators into the highway/CMV incidents.

For both of you...and other readers...here is the agenda the NTSB had for 2011 in their Press Releases. Please note the only time you see "Truck" mentioned is in conjunction with Haz Mat, and one instance of a study involving "Bus and Truck". Otherwise, the NTSB shows aviation, vessel (water movement), and multi death incidents. The DOT (Fed) handles [in cooperation with State agencies] highway CMV incidents that don't come up to the minimum standards to deploy NTSB investigators. I worked right along side the NTSB investigators on one incident up on HWY 50...a tour bus (18 killed, 36 injured) went off the road and down an 85 foot embankment into the American River, just above Pollock Pines.

http://www.ntsb.gov/news/press_releases.html

 

nuff said already on the subject. Everyone know the rules of the road and that is that!

 

I think that people on a bus, train or taxi wouldn't like that too much.