The public should be able to use cell phones while driving, as long as the drivers are not being reckless while using the phones, according to a story published by UPI.
A recent report released by two Washington, D.C. think tanks says the current focus by lawmakers on regulation of cell phone use while driving is a result of politicians following public perceptions, instead of research and scientific data.
The report, "The Disconnect Between Law and Policy Analysis: A Case Study of Drivers and Cell Phones," by the American Enterprise Institution-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, says there is not a strong policy analysis case for a ban phone use while driving, either for hand-held or hands-free phones, according to the UPI story.
"The public places a greater cost benefit on the convenience of using phones while driving than it does on safety," Patrick Dudley, who authored the report with Robert Hahn, was quoted.
Numerous studies conclude that health risks from talking on the phone while driving are equal to or less than the risks from other activities people often engage in while driving, such as eating and changing the car radio station, the article reported.
"We're explaining why the case for a ban isn't there, looking at safety versus economic benefits," Dudley was quoted.
"The mere existence of a risk doesn't mean we should ban it; we need to look at whether the risk is acceptable or too large. We're doing this by measuring how much people value the phone calls they no longer would be allowed to make, and looking at a ban's safety gains."
Such a ban is being debated by many states and municipalities. The UPI article reported that New York is the only state so far to pass a ban - and that is only for hand-held phones in cars - but many lawmakers and city councils have debated restrictions on cell phone use while driving because "people tend to overestimate the risk," Dudley said.
Studies quoted by the Joint Center report said a ban would result in much larger economic costs than economic benefits, UPI reproted. One study conducted by Robert Hahn and John Hird estimated the costs of a ban at $25 billion, compared to the total economic losses, including deaths and injuries, of $4.6 billion.
Link
- Read the complete article on the UPI Web site