The Problem of Cellular Phone Use while Driving in Ashville, North Carolina - Research Paper Example

The Problem of Cellular Phone Use while Driving in Ashville, North Carolina I. Introduction The Main Cause of the Problem There are different factors when combining driving and cellular phone use that could result in increased occurrence of vehicular accidents. Cellular phone activities, such as talking on the phone, answering and dialing, augment the cognitive burden of the user. It deflects some attention from the activity of driving, decreasing the amount of the already limited attention faculty available for dealing out with the activity of driving which could be utilized for coping with dangers that could happen and thus increasing the probability of a vehicular accident (Strayer & Drews 2004). Even though it is apparent that both the quantity and superiority of the wireless communication technology have developed remarkably over the last decade in Ashville, North Carolina (NC), there is little agreement whether this advances a considerably sufficient risk to traffic security to merit legislation in the local area. Advocates of restrictions in Ashville, particularly the non-governmental associations (NGOs) working with various communities in the area, have claimed that the exceptional distraction caused by cellular phone use and other communication devices available inside the vehicle diverts the attention of the driver away from the road more hazardously than other activities. As Chief William Hogan of the Asheville Police Department has stated in my personal interview with him, drivers nowadays are becoming more and more irresponsible. And because of the burgeoning of sophisticated technologies people are becoming lax in their safety concerns. According to a recent survey, cellular phone use while driving is the second leading cause of vehicular accidents in North Carolina (Murphy 2009). Similarly, the DUI/DWI News confirmed that driving while on cell phone increases the likelihood of a vehicular accident in the area (DUI North Carolina 2006). Therefore, the issue of cellular phone use while driving merits legislation and significant attention from the law enforcement agencies of Asheville, NC. The only problem is how to initiate legislation and how to effectively implement it. II. Feasible Solutions to the Problem Chief Hogan admitted that they have attempted to solve the problem of cellular phone use while driving in the area by imposing penalties or large fines for those who will violate the restrictions on cell phone use, yet the problem still persists. He claimed that the importance of cellular phones takes precedence over concern for safety measures while driving which makes the successful implementation of the restriction difficult to achieve. Among the four general ways in approaching a solution to a particular societal problem, punishment and restrictions, education or awareness, and process or policy, are the most relevant to the problem of irresponsible cell phone use of drivers in Ashville, NC. Local legislation on cell phones and driving should be enforced in Ashville in order for the local legislature to have knowledge about what works and what fails. Law enforcers, particularly traffic police officers, should be vigilant in catching delinquent drivers and imposing fines and even prison terms for those who will not conform to the prohibition. Preferably, law enforcers themselves should be penalized if they fail to restrict cell phone use while driving. This proposal would definitely reduce Ashville’s public road and highway expenditures since cell phone restrictions will curb incidences of vehicular accidents. Another feasible solution to this problem is regular awareness program for drivers and other concerned citizens of Ashville. The use of hands-free devices such as headsets should be instructed in these seminars. Moreover, drivers should become aware that even the use of hands-free equipment should be limited since cellular phone use still creates a problem of cognitive burden and attention diversion. Lastly, Ashville should pass ordinances to ban hand-held cellular phones in vehicles. In terms of policy, the area should ascertain that their policy proposal would be in line with the existing prohibitions of cellular phone use in other states in order to prevent conflicts in policy implementation. III. Counterarguments and Alternative Solution There are existing problems in implementing these proposals. One is users and nonusers of cellular phones could have various points of view on other concerns associated to cellular phones. For instance, they could differ with respect to beliefs concerning the probability that a group of basic operator procedures such as answering a call makes up potential cause of vehicular accidents (Strayer & Drews 2004). Users of cellular phones may be more dead set against new prohibitions compared to nonusers. As confirmed by Chief Hogan, opponents of cellular phone restrictions while driving will argue the important of wireless phones and other communication gadgets as a basis for excluding them from regulation. Hence, one alternative solution is to impose restrictions only to drivers who have no valid reasons to carry around a cellular phone inside the vehicle. Furthermore, there is hardly any hard statistics on the problem (Sundeen 2001). Hence, another alternative solution is to just remind drivers to drive safely since legislation will not evidently be a quick remedy due to lack of data on the issue. Works Cited "Do Any States Restrict the Use of Cell Phones in Motor Vehicles." State Legislatures (1999): 2. Hazlett, Thomas W. "Is Federal Preemption Efficient in Cellular Phone Regulation?" Federal Communications Law Journal (2003): 155+. Strayer, David L. & Drews, Frank A. "Profiles in Driver Distraction: Effects of Cell Phone Conversations on Younger and Older Drivers." Human Factors (2004): 640+. Sundeen, Matt. "Driving Hazards: The Phone Factor Many Things Can Distract Drivers, but Mobile Phones Are Today's Focus." State Legislatures (2003): 26+. —. "Driving While Calling--- What's the Legal Limit?" State Legislatures (2001): 24. —. "Driving While Distracted: Inexperience Teen Drivers Too Often Take Fatal Risks." State Legislatures (2008): 20+. Online References BC Climate. “Encouraging Fuel Efficient Driving Techniques.” Driver Awareness and Education. 2006. http://www.toolkit.bc.ca/tool/driver-awareness-program DUI North Carolina. “Driving While on Cell Phone Worse than Driving While Drunk.” DUI/DWI News. 29 June 2006. http://www.duinorthcarolina.com/news.cfm/Article/66061/Driving-While-on-Cell-Phone-Worse-Than.html Humane Soc. “Cockfighting: Banned and Busted.” The Humane Society of United States. 18 March 2009. http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=76673378661 Murphy, Kristin Bailey. “The Seven Biggest Driving Mistakes North Carolina.” Directory/M Articles. 2009. http://articles.directorym.com/The_Seven_Biggest_Driving_Mistakes_North_Carolina-r902960-North_Carolina.html Dear client, The next page will be the document for the five solutions. Sincerely, Writer Composition Component No. 3 Examples of Solutions Implemented in Various Societies In formulating solutions to actual societal problems such as the issue at hand, there are four general means to initiate change: punishment or restriction, reward or benefit, education or awareness, and process or policy. We will discuss the feasibility of each means by providing current examples of societal problem making use of it. Afterwards, we will develop our own solution for the selected local problem. At present, the states of Washington, Connecticut, Oregon, New York, California and New Jersey impose punishment and restrictions on cell phone use for all drivers. Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia disallow all drivers from using hand-held cellular phones while driving. These restrictions are all chief implementation; a traffic police officer may penalize a driver who uses a handheld cellular phone while maneuvering in traffic (Hazlett 2003). In terms of reward or benefit, Louisiana recently declared that cockfighting and dogfighting will be banned. The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is offering $5,000 for those who will help in the arrest of any individuals involved in the said illegal games of animal fighting. This kind of reward is tendered in order to make the implementation of the ban efficient and successful (HSUS 2009, para 3). Meanwhile, an excellent example of the application of education and awareness program is the City of Toronto which provides a driver training or awareness program that puts emphasis on techniques of fuel efficient driving. It is inspired by the insight that engaging drivers establishes a lifestyle of fuel efficiency and enhances the awareness or knowledge of those usually closest to the automobiles (BC Climate 2006, para 3-4). In the area of process and policy, the concern over paramount jurisdiction usually surfaces in the United States when similar regulatory objectives are existent, such as cable television regulation, wireless telephony, and antitrust law. The state and the federal government usually have conflicting interests which make the process and policy implementation ineffective (Hazlett 2003). Enhanced regulation of the services of wireless telephone is being advanced by the state and federal legislators, posing the concern of paramount jurisdiction (Sundeen 2003). Works Cited BC Climate. “Encouraging Fuel Efficient Driving Techniques.” Driver Awareness and Education. 2006. http://www.toolkit.bc.ca/tool/driver-awareness-program Hazlett, Thomas W. "Is Federal Preemption Efficient in Cellular Phone Regulation?" Federal Communications Law Journal (2003): 155+. Humane Soc. “Cockfighting: Banned and Busted.” The Humane Society of United States. 18 March 2009. http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=76673378661 Sundeen, Matt. "Driving Hazards: The Phone Factor Many Things Can Distract Drivers, but Mobile Phones Are Today's Focus." State Legislatures (2003): 26+. Dear client, The next page will be the document for the interview summary. Kindly put page numbers with your surname beside each page number on the upper right hand corner of each document. I cannot put page numbers because I put the supposed separate three documents in one file. The page numbers are important because it is part of the MLA format. Many thanks “) Sincerely, writer Interview Summary: Interviewee: Name: William Hogan Title/Position: Chief of Asheville Police Department Institution/Employer: Asheville Police Department Phone #: (828) 259-5880 Address: 100 Court Plazas, Asheville, NC, 28801 (The following passages are responses of the interviewee to the questions regarding cellular phone use in Asheville, NC). Yes, there are quite a lot of incidences of vehicular accidents here in our place because of the irresponsible use of cellular phones while driving. The problem definitely exists because I think drivers are becoming negligent of safety measures while on the road. Sophisticated technology, such as wireless phones, has some disadvantages. We have attempted to penalize those drivers who are caught using their cellular phones while driving. We impose large fines and some penalties for those who are caught. However, the problem is still very rampant. I believe that we are having difficulties curbing this particular problem because of the viewed importance of communication. It even becomes the top priority while setting aside needs for safety. We haven’t tried alternative solutions before but currently we are attempting to discuss this problem with NGOs in the area and with the communities so that we could somehow obtain insights on how to prevent this problem from continuing. Read More