© 2009 by Michael Swickard, Ph.D.
“Safety is something that happens between your ears, not something you hold in your hands.” – Marine Lt. Colonel Jeff Cooper
While the legendary shooting instructor Jeff Cooper was talking about large-caliber pistols and his beloved Scout Rifle in the above quote, the issue of safety is the same for things that could distract you and others to death. Your safety is in your mind, not your hands. No one can make you any safer than you wish to make yourself.
My favorite Jeff Cooper quote is, “One of the notable aspects of the democratic process is that one need not know anything about a subject in order to pass laws about it.”
An example is municipalities that have banned holding cell phones while driving with no regard to the research about how cell phones potentially make drivers unsafe. According to the research, it is not physically holding a cell phone that is potentially dangerous as much as it is two other factors: first the visual distraction, which is the same for navigation screens, computer screens and texting; and second the effect of emotional conversation on eye refresh rate.
You can say, “Wassup?” to your posse without changing visual refresh rates. However, if your spouse asks loudly for a divorce while you are driving, you may drive into a tree you literally did not see. Importantly, it does not matter if you are together in the car or on a cell phone (hands-free or not); the effect of emotions on your visual refresh rate is the same.
The politicians who advocate “hands-free cell phone use” are missing this point.
Members of law-enforcement do drive “distractomobiles” full of computers, radar and radio communications. Still, most are safe since they think about how distracting all of these things are and take steps to monitor themselves.
Texting while driving is by far the most dangerous. Partially it is not having enough cognitive ability to safely look down at the screen and back up at the changing dangers out the windshield. Some drivers may be better than others but all will lose situational awareness, especially if they ponder a new abbreviation like YDIAWT, your driving is awful while texting.
It could be dangerous if you look at the navigation screen and realize you just missed your freeway exit, and, at that same moment your spouse says you are an idiot for having an expensive toy and not listening to it just as you do not listen to her. Not that most spouses would say something like that out loud.
Where do we draw the line?
Moreover, for those politicians who want to pass a law that will make us completely safe drivers by banning every distraction: What about crying kids, dropped cigarettes, spilled-in-the-lap hot coffee, talk radio, sneezing, attention-getting signs, scantily clad pedestrians, hiccups and funny bumper stickers? All of these people who want to stop distraction know where they want to start, but where do we draw the line? A friend says, “No law can stop someone who really wants to be stupid.”
Perhaps we should test each person’s distractibility. Beginner drivers can only have one other teen in the car. Should we have a distractibility standard?
Maybe we can take a giant step forward for all men and pass a law to stop all emotional conversations while in a car. That would be something most men would heartily support. “Sorry Puddin, we simply cannot talk about my buddies while I am driving, it is not allowed by law. It is not my law, it is the law.”
It would not work, though. If you stifle your spouse from commenting on your choice of buddies or activities you do with those aforesaid buddies, that chilly glance would still be there and likely would cause the refresh rate of your eyes to diminish.
Maybe no politician can really pass a law to stop stupidity in driving.
Swickard is a weekly columnist for this site. You can reach him at michael@swickard.com.