Does Banning Cellphone Use while Driving Reduce Accidents? Arthur Tom Benning’s article, “Does Banning Cellphone Use while Driving Reduce Accidents?” analyzes the effectiveness of banning cellphone use while driving as a way to curb distracted driving. Even though Tom does not tell us clearly the bans in place have had desired result, he consider how the bans affect Texas cities where have stepped forward the rule from the imperfect crash data and some researches. There are few conclusion that comes from Tom’s analysis: some people have pushed hard for the rule; distracted driving crashes still increase after enforce the rule; there are many variables affect the result; some people against the rule. In my opinion, Toms' style of organization …show more content…
Tom effectively analyze how pushing hard for banning cellphone use while driving. Tom’s use of statistics builds a sense of trust and credibility with the reader. For example, “The new ordinance resulted in 551 tickets in February alone. In all of last year, Austin police wrote 688 citations for the texting ban.” (Tom) Moreover, Tom wants to prove the importance of implement the rule. He uses some special examples from personal story to move readers’ emotion. For instance, “State Rep. Tom Craddick, R-Midland, has pushed hard for three sessions to pass such a statewide texting prohibition. Relatives of those killed in distracted-driving crashes have given heart-wrenching testimony. But concerns over enforcement and personal privacy have won the day in the Capitol.” (Tom). He use is not only personal story, but also some tragic accidents to remind us the dangerous of texting while driving. To be honest, Tom is success to explain how the rule is important in our society, and he gives a sign to reader that push hard for enforcing the rule is …show more content…
“ But is the ordinance making the roads safer?” (Tom) Tom seems very ironic and said, “it’s not ending yet.” Further more, The sense of urgency and severity of the situation that Tom opened our eyes to with his use of rhetorical question was a major appeal to the audience. For example, “Did the ordinance actually reduce cellphone use? Or did it just make drivers even more leery to admit that they had been using their phone? Or did the elimination of one distraction behind the wheel simply lead to others?” (Tom) Then he use abundant of example and statistics to answer the question. For example, “Borne acknowledged that it's difficult to know for sure. Sitting at a busy intersection, though, he pointed to the stakes. Not long ago at that spot, he saw a woman run a red light while looking at her phone. Engrossed in a text message, she never saw the light change.” Tom use this example to answer the question in order to make readers understand the main reason and read easier. This method can help Tom to grasp the attention of readers and give us the sense of urgency that further explain for reader. Indeed, Tom can conclude that distracted driving crashes still increase after enforcing the rule from the data. “Several cities saw the crash rate for cellphone-involved wrecks drop after implementing either a texting or a hands-free
She also goes on to lay out and explain the Bills and Laws that have been sent to Congress multiple times that ban using a cell phone while driving yet Farris claims that Congress has not acted (Farris, 254). Farris’ logic in her claims are supported well and she illustrates many compelling facts that prove the dangers of texting while driving to be accurate.
Every American in the U.S has an addiction of being on a phone while driving. The Public Service Announcement (PSA), “The Danger of Texting & Driving” presents an American teenager texting and driving. This PSA shows and explains what can happen when a person is in a vehicle and on a mobile device. As mentioned previously this video demonstrates what consequences can happen as a result of any American simply looking at his or her phone while driving. However, this short video also can teach and demonstrate why anyone should not get on anything that will cause a distraction to the person who is operating the vehicle. In the PSA, “The Danger of Texting and Driving” filmed by Blue Lobster Productions, the video uses pathos which overshadows both ethos and logos regarding the subject of texting and driving.
Texting and driving are activities that separately are indispensable in everyday life, but together represent one of the greatest dangers society faces on a daily basis, from the moment the car starts and transits to the desired destination. It is so easy to look at the phone while driving! Everyone justifies themselves, “it’s just a second”, but everyone also knows, that only takes a second to have a fatal accident. This is why there is the need to raise public awareness and campaigning as in the Public Service Announcement, “Don’t text and drive”, produced and air on TV by News Channel 6 ABC, where the Pathos appeal in the most powerful rhetorical device used in the PSA and Logos and Ethos are also visible, but they are inferred rather than directly enlisted.
1). Texting and using a cell phone are the two most common distractions while driving (“Distracted” para. 1). It Can Wait campaign has started to stop drivers from using handheld devices (“Distracted” para. 3). Distractions affect one’s driving performance (“Distracted” para. 5). Drivers are distracted around half the time they drive (“Distracted” para. 5).15% to 25% of crashes on all levels are caused by distraction (“Distracted” para. 5). Texting increases the driving risk, even more than regular cell phone use (“Distracted” para. 5). When cops fill out crash reports, the states should keep track of them (“Distracted” para. 6). There are many distraction while driving that may cause the driver to take focus off the road (“Distracted” para. 8). Some distraction that everyone does is : changing the radio or a CD, talking to passenger, and observing the event outside the vehicle (Distracted para. 8). There are effects on telematics on driving behaviors (“Distracted” para. 9). Some say that the electronic device companies need to inform the public about the real use of these devices (“Distracted” para.
Many people have lost their lives on the road and caused other’s deaths because they were distracted with doing something while driving. In 2012, 3,328 people were killed in distraction-related crashes (“Statistics on Texting & Cell Phone Use While Driving” n.d.). Distractions while driving that result in these accidents include texting/making a call or becoming intoxicated and having high blood alcohol concentration. Many laws have been brought forth to help regulate the amount of people drinking while driving and using a cell phone while driving. Not only do people put their own lives in danger, they are also putting other’s lives in danger. People who take part in these distractions are not being responsible when making these rash decisions while driving and creating a hazardous environment for those around them.
C. Central idea: Cell phones are as common in the market today as a wrist watch on your arm. Everyone has one including the very young as well as the extreme elderly. People are constantly talking, texting, playing games or surfing on
II. Thesis Statement- Did you know that texting while driving can be more dangerous than driving while drunk?
C: Conclusion about this detail: It is very important to first acknowledge the dangerous impact of this distraction’s alarming statistics that shows about the safety of driving while texting. Many people don’t see and think about the consequences that can occur in this situation. More and more companies are implementing new strategies, for instance, signing a pledge not to use the phone while on the road, and these new changes are adding more responsible drivers. But it is still not enough to say that we have gained control over the problem.
Enforcement problems arise because the offense is hard to detect except through erratic driving behavior (Gardner, 2010). Traffic stops such as those used to check for seatbelt use may help enforce bans, as officers may ask to check cell phones for evidence of very recent texting activity (Gardner, 2010). Another difficulty in enforcing these laws involves the individual drivers themselves ---many of whom believe laws do not have an effect on them (Sherzan, 2010). Many drivers simply ignore the law because they think they are safe drivers and any possible punishment for a violation will be minimal (Sherzan, 2010). Another reason drivers continue to use cell phones while driving is because they do not fear being prosecuted or convicted of crimes if they are actually caught (Sherzan, 2010). In addition to enforcement issues, statistics seem to indicate there has not been a reduction in the number of crashes in states where such a ban is in place (Sherzan, 2010). The following section will illustrate how cell phone usage contributes to automobile
Advancing technology in wireless communications is presenting a growing concern for distracted driving due to using cell phones and other electronic devices while driving. Although distracted driving accidents and fatalities have risen in the last decade, placing a ban on the use of a cell phone or other electronic devices while operating a motor vehicle as some states have will not resolve the issue. In fact a ban on cell phones and driving may very well increase the accident and fatality rate because drivers are now more involved with concealing their illegal behaviors. More citizen participation and drivers safety management should be more carefully considered in a transpiring situation such as this. More Americans should be
Central Idea: Texting and driving is a hazardous plague on the United States that is most likely illegal, distracting, and endangers all those around you.
Having your phone with you driving has become a big part of our daily lives. While it is a great tool to have if there was an emergency, it’s also leading to our destruction. Every single day I watch in horror as driver’s text whilst they are driving. We have all heard for years that it is dangerous to use our phones while operating a motor vehicle, so why does a greater part of the population, mostly teens, continue to practice this dangerous act? I believe it is because the laws are not strict enough to be a deterrent.
Despite an effective way of communication, using cell phones during driving results in the distracted attention of driver increasing road safety concerns.
Even though in today's time everyone has a cell phone and that it's not new to the world. There are some disadvantages and advantages on having a cell phone. One advantage is that it helps with communication with family and friends in today's time. One disadvantage with having a cell phone is that when people receive a phone call or text they want to answer it right away no matter if you're driving or not so it causes distraction and it's dangerous to text and drive. People should not text and drive because it’s against the law, people could die, and it’s unnecessary.
It is known that the use of cell phones, specifically handheld use such as texting, while driving decreases driver awareness and the overall safety of roads. In response to this knowledge, some states have passed laws that have outlawed the usage of handheld devices, and while there should be laws that definitively outlaw handheld usage, is there enough empirical evidence to outlaw hands free usage of cell phones? In other words, does handsfree usage of cell phones, via bluetooth, speakerphone, etc., distract drivers enough to the point where states should legally ban the total use cell phones while driving. The following essay will introduce arguments for both sides of this topic, one for hands free cell phone usage and the other against cell phones usage entirely.