| Technology,
it is said, works like a double-edged sword. On
the one hand it produces goods that we all strive
hard to acquire. On the other hand these new inventions
have a bad influence on our habits and health.
Automobiles have made our lives so convenient
but have rendered us dependent , as we cannot
do without the car.
This cuts down physical activity such as say walking
to and from the bus stop. This denies us the opportunity
for physical exertion so the calories accumulate
which creates health complications. Television
takes away the time, which we would otherwise
have spent, in intellectual pursuits like reading.
So is the case with mobile phones. One can say
some a great deal of confidence that the cellular
phone, by itself, has been largely imposed on
the people by big business through massive advertising
and publicity campaigns. This has got the people
’hooked’ having become addicts, hostage,
and slaves to the habit. Billions of dollars have
been poured in the industry and there is to be
a return on this investment. It is the payback
time now and corporate monster must have its pound
of flesh. The demand for the mobile phone has
been artificially created to a very large extent.
Sure, the demand may have been there for some
professionals. Someone who is stuck on the highway
or has lost his way in a new town or woods will
find it helpful maybe lifesaving.
The police and the surgeons and doctors on emergency
duty have benefited from it though they already
had their communication through walkie-talkies
with the help of special frequencies allotted.
The only groups that were not given special frequencies
were the gangs involved in crime, the underworld,
and they would be having a field day now with
the use of this device.
If one surveys the arguments in defense of mobile
phone use while driving the available arguments
will be seen to be to be quite superficial and
less than convincing. Consider this:
Individual/Family Benefits
• Peace of Mind • Reducing the number
and
duration of trips
• Expanding productive time
• Contacting emergency services
• Strengthening social networking
Community Benefits
• Decreased accident response times
• Improved knowledge about
emergencies for emergency response
teams (e.g., how to get to the scene,
what equipment to bring)
• Improved life-saving outcomes
• More effective apprehension of
Criminals (such as drunk drivers)
Consider yet another opinion • The risks
appear to be small compared to other daily risks
but are uncertain because existing research is
limited and of uneven quality.” The reference
to ‘existing research proves the point made
in the preceding paragraphs.
Only contacting emergency services, that too from
a highway or the woods, appears convincing. Rests
of the ‘benefits’ are dubious, at
best.
The industry has billions of dollars in investment
and such ‘spin doctoring’ is not surprising.
The risks and dangers in using the cellular phone
while driving are abundantly clear. The driver
is putting his own life and that of his co-passengers
on the line. He is endangering the lives of other
motorists and the pedestrians. A moment’s
lapse or diversion of attention can easily lead
to a fatal accident is a real possibility. This
is an invitation to disaster. Even if there is
no fatality a major crash can be a traumatic experience.
There are signs on the highways, particularly
on those sections, which are within the city limits
that say ‘please concentrate on driving
safely you can always talk later’. And this
refers to talking to the co-passenger/s not to
the remote party on the mobile phone.
With the increase in motorized traffic on the
roads and highways driving is a hazard anyway.
It becomes more so when there is snow on the roads
or when road conditions are not perfect or during
the twilight hours, the lighting then is dicey
with the road lights yet not having their full
effect against the backdrop of a setting sun.
For what possible reasons should we raise the
stakes for traffic accidents even higher, high
as they are already. Even if the device is hands
free. It is a sudden comment or exclamation or
any other unexpected expression that can make
the driver to lose his concentration. That’s
all it takes to ram into the car ahead which is
braking or to lose control of the steering for
the driver to come in front of the car in the
next lane.
Continuing the argument further we know that the
landline telephones are everywhere. They are in
workplaces, offices, homes, and schools. And they
are free. In the sense that no additional charge
is involved other than the flat monthly fee. Even
the pay phones are within easy access.
They are installed at bus stations, airports,
cinemas, roadsides, subways, restaurants, parks
and any other public place one can think of. They
are ubiquitous and it only is a quarter. It is
not that the distantly located payphones and other
than the payphones would hinder the reporting
of an accident. As a matter of fact the presence
of a cellular phone provides a temptation to call.
A person talking on his mobile feels himself or
herself to be important. If the person had a landline
phone there are very good chances that the person
would not have made that call in the first place.
The point being made here is that allowing driving
to become unsafe for reasons of ego or is stretching
the point too far. Out of everyone one thousand
calls made by the drivers how many would be for
reporting ‘accidents’.
There are some good suggestions that merit consideration.
These include using the call forward or voicemail
options. Also let the co-passenger, if there is
one; handle the incoming or outgoing call. Also
find a safe place to park or traffic conditions
to improve if a call has to be made. The caller
may be warned that you are driving and may cut
of the conversation. (Cellular Phone and Driving
2004)
The cost of seat belts, child safety features,
crash bags etc. was considered impractical but
these are now a standard feature. Similarly the
cost of enforcing the ban on cellular phones will
also not prove exorbitant.
|