Exactly my point in some earlier posts. If this study implies what it sounds like it does, it is talking conversationally, period, that's distracting, not, as one might assume, the physical juggling of a phone and one less free hand that is problematic. Which I found kind of interesting. And I'm not sure I fully buy it. Certainly, it makes some sense that having both hands on the wheel, as my driving instructor taught me, is important. Also, if conversation is the problem, then, shouldn't we avoid it in the car, including with passengers. Plus, then passengers can't talk as well, correct? Because that would be distracting. I just can't see passing a "Don't talk at all!" law as feasible

Something about the conclusions of the study make me suspicious then that the real problem is not cell phone usage, per say, but distraction in general that causes accidents. Since we can't ban distractions, perhaps we should limit the ways certain things are used in the car (by using handless cell phones and only using cell phones on a very limited basis and not to simply chat), limit our other distractions as much as possible and in general, follow the rules of the road, a point here made by others. We need to remember we're getting into a heavy piece of machinery and need to be careful about when and how we do that. I think it's less about using the cell phone and more about good driving conduct all the way around.

i agree that using cellphones, handsfree or not, while driving is dangerous. however, the scientific discussion in the article notes that this is because of multitasking in general , i.e., talking. This implies that chatting with a passenger is dangerous too, and most of us are guilty of that.

hubby and i have some of our best conversations while driving. i guess we can now listen to music and look out the window, but if the music has words, is that too distracting too/ hopefully not! next...listening to music

...or beating up someone in the name of a cause. It's about getting the cell phone junkies to recognize (ha) that they suffer from a common disease among Americans who make more than $100 a year, i.e., I am important and I can do what I want. Getting this corps of boobs to understand their total insignificance is the greatest task before us since winning World War II. Except we won that one. Getting self-important twits and twats to put down their cell phones and ease into honest-to-God privacy is an unwinnable crusade.

The two really big problem groups are the young kids, who are inexperienced drivers to begin with and therefore should be utterly focused on their driving, and the adult-age cheating spouses who are checking up on each other every 10 minutes.

This was a good article article, good enough so that some of the commenters who didn't read it should have. No, I did not read all the comments, but enough to see some serious mistakes. And yes, Walter_map's logic is correct, even if his abrasive style leaves something to be desired.

Then you should happily go to jail after assaulting, physically assaulting people who use a phone. Would any animal rights fanatic stand by and watch a pet tortured? No of course not. Be a Gandhi, lay on the railroad tracks if that's how you feel about it. So the next time you see someone driving while talking on the phone, follow them home and beat them up. Wait for the cops to show up, get arrested and go to jail. Make a statement, start a cause. And why limit yourself to cars. I see there's many other instances that anger people here, pretty much encompassing the entire public sphere. So when you're at the movies, punch that called in the mouth. Slap that teenage girl at the mall. Swing a haymaker at that guy in the bowling alley with the bluetooth. That's what principles are for, aren't they?

Years ago I discovered (in my 20's) that I couldn't listen to anything: NPR, music, news and keep from running lights. So I just quit using my ears for anything but sirens. I've never been the world's greatest diver, but I have gotten to 70 without a collision so far. So now I am an old lady who drives with my eyes on the traffic and rear view mirrors and both hands on the wheel. It seems to be working so far, and I don't see anything wrong with that. It drives my husband nuts, but I don't drift onto the warning strip looking at birds or watching new buildings being built. Is there something just too uncool with just pulling over or off the highway to use a cell phone?

Why is all politics is local's post not an editor's choice? It's one of the best postings by anyone on any subject I've seen in a very long time.

Editors may not know what's good, but they know what they like, eh?

Take the designation of Editor's Choice with a grain of salt.

because when the emt's are scraping car crash victims off the road it's usually because someone was driving while talking on their cell phone, not shaving or putting on mascara.

noisy brats in the back seat? Yeh, i'd outlaw that too if i could

Why is all politics is local's post not an editor's choice? It's one of the best postings by anyone on any subject I've seen in a very long time.

Please check it out on Page 2 of the letters for this article if you have not seen it.

Yet another case of people needed to create oversight for something that affect almost no one. This is a typical case of seemingly liberal people (as I am one) needed to exercise their moral indignity over the heathens. Frankly, it is not as if that many people are on the phone all the time.

Further, it is not as if all roads are equal. Would one accept passing the law on highways, but not on city streets? Frankly, I see no reason why someone can't operate a phone while navigating the grid system at 15 miles per hour.

Moreover if the discussion is regarding using parts of your brain, then headsets solve nothing.... and then this would extend to having ANY conversations while driving, including with passengers.

As a city-dweller who had the decency to move out of the stix and pony up the cash so I can use public transportation perhaps the 'too many people are dying' folks would consider that in order to save lives, perhaps people should drive less. CA would provide far more safety by taxing its citizens for every mile they drive over a certain amount... I have been to California, and its citizens hop in the car at any given moment. A car ride across town for ice cream is not necessary if one was out 3 hours earlier buying groceries or coming home from work. I'd like to see a little more intrusion on THESE aspects of public health as all this driving is a health risk by numbers AND pollution.