Hopkins 1

Rachel Hopkins
ENG101
Multimodal Essay
11/20/2016

Distracted Driving Where Do You Stand?

Due to the fact that the roads are filled with more dangers than ever before, people are
putting their lives and the lives of everyone on the road at risk every time they put the key in the
ignition. Just think about that when adding a mobile device to the mix. For me this issue strikes a
personal chord. Just a few years ago, my Aunt was struck by a driver going at a high rate of
speed and T-boned her. My Aunt escaped the accident with a broken pelvis, leg, wrist, five ribs,
and her life. The driver of the other vehicle was found dead with his phone embedded in the side
of his face. The use of mobile devices while driving causes many injuries and fatalities in the
U.S. With new laws and regulation changes, many experts are debating what to do with the
growing numbers of injuries and fatalities plaguing our country.
As cell phones began to become more popular in the late 1990s a number of studies
found an increase in the risk of property damage crashes associated with drivers phone
conversations. Concerns about the risks of drivers cellphone use led to the passing of laws
limiting their use. On November 1 2001, New York became the first state to implement a law
prohibiting all drivers from talking on a hand-held device while driving (McCartt). Today, all
U.S. states now have laws in place, all of the laws allow emergency calls, most allow hand-held
dialing, and some allow talking when stopped in traffic, at controlled intersections, or on the side
of the road. McCartt states, It is unclear whether these law/bans are having the desired effects

Hopkins 2

on safety. It is hard to comprehend that with all these laws and enforcements that have been put
into place that drivers have not changed their behavior but it has been proven hard to change
such behaviors.

Figure 1

Given the increase of the issue of distracted driving in the media and among the
policymakers, there is a need that exists for data to inform the public on this important public
health issue. 51,857 fatalities were caused by distracted drivers from 1999 to 2008, according to
FARS data (FARS). The bad thing about FARS is that the fatalities that it counts for distracted
driving is not a true number. This is because the information collected from the sources can
only be as true as the witnesses/victims admit. The Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS)
database contains detailed crash information on every accident that occurs on a public road in the
U.S. that results in a least 1 fatality. Shared of distracted driver fatalities with average number of
monthly text messages sent in the US each year are shown in the graph above in Figure 1. In
2002, an average of 1 million text messages were sent monthly, or 7.2 text messages per 1000

Hopkins 3

subscribers (FARS). As you can see in the above graph, the largest percentage of increases in
texting volumes occurred after 2006, with texting volume per subscriber rising by 136% from
2006 to 2007 and by 117% from 2007 to 2008. This system collects from sources such as police
reports, states registration files, vital statistics, death certificates, hospital medical records and
emergency medical or coroner reports (FARS).
The law enforcement agencies are another entity that struggle with and fight distracted
driving on a daily basis. Part of the challenge is that the contribution of phone use or other
distractions to crashes are not fully or consistently recorded in the databases of police reported
crashes. The drivers are unlikely to admit that they were using their phones, especially if it is
illegal and there usually is no other evidence of mobile use at the scene. In 2011, only 52% of the
fatal crashes reviewed by the NSC (National Safety Council) were reported in FARS as
involving cell phones (National Safety Council). That means the involvement of cell phones was
not included as a crash factor in about half of the crashes they viewed. Driver admission of use is
the most valid way to confirm, however the law enforcement officers have found other ways to
help with this problem. Some of these include: Caller or texter on other end of the phone during
the crash reports the cell phone use, passenger reports driver cell phone use, they find unfinished
message in phone at crash scene, or a caller remains on the phone, and court documents or
testimony introduced during criminal or civil court cases, including wireless records (National
Safety Council).

Hopkins 4

Figure 2: distracteddriveraccidents.com

There is evidence that all driver bans on hand held phone conversations can have large
and lasting effects on drivers behaviors. The percentage of drivers talking on hand-held phones
was measured before and after the bans took effect in Connecticut, the District of Columbia, and
New York in control jurisdictions without bans. New Yorks hand-held cellphone ban was
implemented shortly after September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks (Jacobson, King). The economic
impact of this event may have affected travel patterns and crash rates and may make it difficult
to isolate the effects of the ban on crash rates, at least in the short-term (Jacobson SH, King DM).
Driver hand held phone use were estimated to be 24-76% lower up to seven years after the bans
were implemented than would have been expected without the bans (McCartt). Reports indicate
that in all three jurisdictions, the chance that violators would receive citations was low, and there
were no publicized sustained enforcement campaigns. In a 2009 National telephone survey, 56%
of drivers in states with all-driver hand-held phone bans reported using any type of phone when
driving compared with 69% in states without these laws, then the proportion of drivers who
talked on phones and always talk hands-free was 22% in states with bans and 13% in states
without them (McCartt). Enforcement visibility has been shown to have a positive affect with
driver compliance with the laws/bans. McCartt found that with this high-intensity enforcement of

Hopkins 5

all-driver hand-held and texting ban, the rate of observed conversations while driving declined
by 57% in Hartford, CT (McCartt).
The various types of laws that restrict mobile use include hands free usage while driving,
texting bans and the prohibition of teens, novice drivers, school bus drivers and commercial
drivers from using their phones while driving. Connecticut and the District of Columbia
implemented laws prohibiting drivers from texting in 2004 and 2005, respectively, but
Anyanwau reports that no states had texting bans prior to 2008. No state banned all drivers
younger than 20 years old from using a mobile device while driving in 2000-2009; rather, states
did restrict some drivers younger than 20 years from cellphone use (Anyanwau). In some states,
the laws are categorized as either a primary law or a secondary law. If the cell phone law is a
primary law, being caught using the mobile device while driving is enough to be stopped by law
enforcement and fined. Under a secondary law you must be found violating another law, or be
found driving carelessly, and if it is discovered by law enforcement that you are using your cell
phone only then will you be fined for using it. Congress is looking at several proposals that
would effectively ban text messaging while driving nationwide (Hands-Free Info). If this study
concludes that cell phone laws are indeed saving lives, U.S. Congress may be motivated to pass
the bill enacting the texting ban as a federal law. If the cell phone laws were deemed ineffective,
it would be important to then determine what about the law(s) are ineffective, and then possibly
implement more ways to reduce accidents resulting from distracted driving (Hands-Free Info).

Hopkins 6

When are you on your mobile device while driving?

Stop signs

Red lights

Driving in the city

Driving on highways

Pulled over on the side of the road

Never

Figure 3

Take the graph above in figure 3 that I personally collected data on to find out when and where
drivers where using their mobile device on the road. I wanted to find out a general idea on when
individuals were on their devices and using them in their vehicles. So maybe the enforcement
agencies can find studies relayed to my fieldwork and help localize their sittings to help limit this
problem.
With the number of fatalities and injuries caused by the use of devices while driving, it is
easy to see that with all different laws and regulations that have been put into place, there are still
a number of problems that we need to come together and work on. For others, agreements were
met across the board and have made an impacted. Law enforcement agencies and other
authorities have put forth a great effort to make the roads safer; along with government agencies
putting their two cents in will hopefully bring forth a more positive outcome to a much needed
national safety problem.

Hopkins 7

Figure 4: vtti.vt.edu/featured/?p=193

Hopkins 8

References
Anyanwu Odinakachi. Estimating the Impact of Cell Phone Laws on Car Accident
Fatalities.DigitalCommons. Pepperdine Police Review, 20 Apr. 2012. Web. 7
Nov. 2016
HandsFreeInfo.com. Cell Phone & Text Messaging Laws & Bills - Distracted Driving.
http://handsfreeinfo.com/ (accessed November 5, 2016)
Https://www.facebook.com/DistractedDriverAccidents/. "Almost 12,000 Distracted Driving
Citations in Nevada -." Texting And Driving. N.p., 03 June 2013. Web. 04 Dec.
2016.
Jacobson SH, King DM, Ryan KC, et al. Assessing the Long Term Benefit of Banning the
Use of Hand-held Wireless Devices While Driving. Transp Res Part A.
2012;46:586-93
McCartt AT, Hellinga LA, Strouse LM, et al. Long-term Effects of Hand-held Cellphone
Laws on Driver Hand-held Cellphone Use. Traffic Inj Prev. 2010;11:133-41.
[PubMed]
"Medscape Log In." Medscape Log In. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Dec. 2016.
National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration. Did You Know Archive.Did You
Know.USA.gov, n.p. 2014. Web. 07 Nov. 2016
National Safety Council. Crashes Involving Cell Phones. Distracted Driving Documents.
Nationwide Insurance, 2013. Web. 5 Nov. 2016

Hopkins 9

"Virginia Tech Transportation Institute." New VTTI Study Results Continue to Highlight the
Dangers of Distracted Driving | Virginia Tech Transportation Institute. N.p., n.d.
Web. 04 Dec. 2016
Wilson, Fernando A., and Jim P. Stimpson.Trends in Fatalities from Distracted Driving in
the United States, 1999 to 2008. American Journal of Public Health. American
Public Health Association, Nov. 2010. Web. 07 Nov. 2016.