Should the City of San Antonio pass an outright ban on the use of hand-held cell phones and other electronic devices such as tablets while driving a vehicle? A city ordinance bans texting while driving in San Antonio, and a state law bans the use of cell phones in active school zones.
It’s legal, however, to drive with one hand on the steering wheel and the other on a cell phone.
“If it’s not safe to drive and use a hand-held cell phone in a school zone, it obviously is not safe to do it anywhere else,” San Antonio Police Chief William McManus told members of City Council Thursday.
It’s a message McManus has delivered without success to past Councils, but this time he might make headway before he retires at year’s end.
McManus and Deputy City Manager Erik Walsh were on hand to talk about a $1 million Comprehensive Selective Traffic Enforcement Program grant the City has received from the Texas Department of Transportation. The annual grant funds police overtime for several public safety transportation initiatives.
“It pays for department overtime to combat the incidence of DWI,” McManus said.
Texas has the worst DWI rate in the nation, and San Antonio has the worst DWI rate of any major city in the state. About 10 people a day are arrested for DWI in San Antonio, and more than 40 percent of those arrested are repeat offenders. So the funds are essential to addressing the problem.
“The same grant also funds enforcement of safe pedestrian and cycling activity on vulnerable roadways, and helps us enforce the ordinance against so-called ‘distracted driving,’ including the ban on texting and using cell phones in school zones while driving,” McManus said.
Normally, the item on the Council’s “consent agenda”would have been one of several items approved without discussion or debate. District 10 Councilman Mike Gallagher, however, wanted to talk about it.
“I have received numerous complaints from people in my district and people all over the city about near-accidents they’ve suffered, and I’ve spoken with my Council colleagues and every one of them has similar stories,” Gallagher said later. “I am going to push as hard as I can to see this gets before Council and the Public Safety Committee. It should not be a big problem moving this issue forward because everyone has had a personal experience and the solution will be life saving.”
McManus said that as long as cell phone use while driving is legal, the anti-texting ordinance will be challenging to enforce.
Gov. Rick Perry vetoed a no-texting while driving bill in 2011 and opposed efforts to pass it in 2013, declaring the legislation a “government effort to micromanage the behavior of adults.” Supporters charged the governor with ignoring data that shows hand-held cell phone use and distracted driving is responsible for a growing percentage of Texas vehicle fatalities.
More than 400 of the 3,048 traffic fatalities in Texas in 2011 were attributed to distracted driving, according to the Texas Coalition for Affordable Insurance Solutions, an insurance industry trade group, which reported that reaction time for drivers texting is several seconds slower than it is for drivers who are not distracted.
Bus drivers and young, newly licensed vehicle drivers are prohibited by state law from using hand-held cell phones while driving. Critics point out that it is contradictory to suggest that such behavior is unsafe for these two groups, yet safe and acceptable for all others.
The U.S. Department of Transportation reported that 3,328 were killed and 421,000 were injured in distracted driving crashes nationwide in 2012, and that 71 percent of teenagers and young adults say they text while driving. Twenty percent of all teens admit to having extended text message conversations while driving. The occurrence of distracted driving accidents is climbing at a rate of nearly 10 percent a year, according to the federal government.
District 8 Councilman Ron Nirenberg said he was nearly run off the road this week by a distracted driver in an oversized pickup truck barreling down I-10 while talking on his cell phone.
“I drive a Prius and fortunately I was watching him come speeding up behind me and then as he was passing me at a high rate of speed he swerved right over into me,” Nirenberg said. “I swerved over to the next lane, which fortunately was empty. If I had not been focused I would have been under his axles. It was as close a call as I’ve had in years.”
Nirenberg said the same week he was heading home from City Hall on I-10 West and watched a young woman behind the wheel, “staring down at her lap, weaving across lanes and speeding, occasionally looking up.”
It was obvious she was engaged in a text conversation.
District 9 Councilman Joe Krier expressed misgivings about an outright ban on cell use while driving unless the ordinance addresses other behaviors.
“I’ve seen women putting on make-up while driving, and that’s scary,” he said.
Critics of tougher laws regulating hand-held cell phone use have used examples of people grooming or eating food while driving as reasons to block laws that ban cell phone use by drivers.
“Cell phones are the single biggest distraction for drivers, but a distracted driving law would be even more beneficial than just banning hand-held cell phones,” McManus agreed.
In fact, federal transportation officials cite texting as far and away the most dangerous form of distracted driving.
“Because text messaging requires visual, manual and cognitive attention from the driver, it is by far the most alarming distraction,” a federal government report states on Distraction.gov, a government site created to raise awareness about the fatal consequences of distracted driving.
Forty-four states and Washington D.C. now ban texting while driving, leaving Texas as one of the few outlier states. Twelve states and Washington D.C. prohibit any use of hand-held cell phones while driving. The federal government reports the following activities as the leading causes of distracted driving crashes:
- Texting
- Cell phone or smart phone use
- Eating or drinking
- Talking to passengers
- Grooming
- Reading, including using maps
- Using navigation systems
- Watching a video
- Adjusting a radio, CD player or MP3 player
Should Councilman Gallagher and his colleagues need a high profile artist to get behind their cause they might consider enlisting the services of Texas country star and singer-songwriter Robert Earl Keen. According to an article in Texas Monthly, the Kerrville resident suggested in a tweet that drivers tweet out #X before they get in their cars so friends know not to call or text them until they sign back on when they are out of their vehicles.
The problem, of course, is that Keen’s solution requires voluntary participation. As Chief McManus surely knows, such behavior will have to be declared illegal and police will have to enforce the ordinance before everyone takes it seriously and conforms.
*Featured/top image: Photo courtesy of Flickr user Ricardo Velasquez.
Related Stories:
Police Chief’s Retirement a Loss for San Antonio
Moms Demand Action In Gun Debate
Share the Road: SAPD Launches New Program to Catch Unsafe Drivers
YES
yes!
Can’t we be left alone? Why the constant need to interfere in people’s lives?
So will they ban all the other activities suggested by the government? In my opinion, it sounds like 71% of teens will benefit from an efficient mass transit system where they could do these things without having to worry about driving. If they’re going to ban these items, the city should have some more serious discussions about mass transit.
Also the problem with tweeting out something, is that only a certain percentage of followers/friends will actually see it, so it’s noneffective. A more effective suggestion is for drivers to put on airplane mode while they’re driving so they don’t get distracted. It’s easy to turn off in case of an emergency.
YES, i’M WAITING.
We should be given texting while driving tests when we renew our license, the state can charge an absorbent amount in fees to apply and make the test difficult to pass. If some pass they should be allowed to text and drive. This way the state makes money and the small percentage of people who can text and drive won’t be discriminated against. It’s only fair since we are not all equal in visual awareness, reflexes, multitasking etc.
Drivers weaving between the white lines, speeding up, slowing down, lane drift, driving slowly in the passing lane, panic braking because traffic slows in front of them and they haven’t been focusing on the road. I’ve seen all of these behaviors in the last couple of weeks on 281 in the six or seven miles from the airport to the Pearl. On two lane roads now I drive at all times with the caution I use if for some reason I have to drive after 11 p.m. on Saturday night. Texting while driving is more dangerous than DUI and it’s time to make culturally unacceptable to do so.
The state of California has a ban on driving with hand held devices … Don’t worry San Antonio and Texas … you’ll eventually be up to par forty years from now as usual …
I spent 10 days in Calif. last month. Cell phone use is illegal there (although Bluetooth headset ok). Every time I “needed” to make a cell phone call, if it couldn’t wait, I pulled over and made it. If a call came in, I looked to see who was calling but didn’t take the call & called back when I wasn’t driving.
It. Wasn’t. A. Big. Deal.
It felt just like – oh, I don’t know – 1990 thereabouts? – when we managed to survive beautifully without constant contact. There was a certain freedom gained from keeping the cell phone option out of my driving experience. From that realization, I now use my cell phone much less when driving. And when I do resort to phoning while driving, I keep the call short. The vast majority of calls can wait a few minutes.
Ban ALL cell phone use – hands-free as well – while driving. Just like in Europe. The dangers of phoning while driving aren’t that one of your hands is engaged; it’s that a large part of YOUR BRAIN is engaged. And you can’t compare driving with a coffee cup in your hand to driving with a cell phone in your hand. A phone call is an abstract activity – you are conversing with someone you can’t see – and requires more “brain power” than conducting the same conversation were the person actually sitting next to you in the car. I contend that safe, attentive driving has declined massively even when not phoning/texting because we are accustomed to distracted driving and the inattentive behaviors persist even when not on the phone. We are in our 2nd generation of young drivers who have grown up seeing Mommy/Daddy yapping on the phone AND driving badly AND that distracted state carries over even when not on phone.
Memo to all drivers: That’s a multi-ton moving mass of metal and flammable liquid you are in charge of. Be in charge fully!
I challenge ANYONE and EVERYONE to answer this question honestly: “Am I as safe/attentive/law-abiding a driver when I’m using my cell phone for anything as I am when I’m not?” I’ll go first: NO!
Think about it – have you noticed how many drivers don’t use their turn signals? Or ignore YIELD signs on highway ramps? Or drive down the middle of the street? Or make lazy left turns that cut into the oncoming lane? Or drive through parking lots as if it were a regular street (a parking lot is just a glorified sidewalk – lots of folks on foot!)?
Yes, Gov. Perry vetoed the statewide texting ban saying that Texans are “smart enough” to know what’s the right thing to do. Really, governor? But Texan women aren’t smart enough to know what’s right for their own bodies? And if Texan drivers are so smart, why bother to post speed limits? Ain’t we smart enough to know how fast to safely drive? Why bother with holiday DWI roadblocks? Ain’t Texans smart enough to regulate their own alcohol consumption? Huh, Rick? Huh?
And, Rick, ol’ buddy, you contend that regulating something (cell phone) a person holds in his/her hand while driving (causing them to be a potential public menace) is a “government effort to micromanage the behavior of adults” but regulating something (a fetus) a women has in her body isn’t serious micromanaging?????
so , daniel, let me guess, you voted for obama and his i know how to take care of you attitude. this country is supposed to be free, i understand the need for laws and rules but there has to be a limit. we have laws now that can’t be enforced, most of us don’t want to be told where to live, what to wear, what to watch on tv, when we can speak and what about. if you want to belong to a cult go join one and leave free people alone. the chief here basically is telling us that he will stop this whether the citizens like it or not, laws are supposed to be for the people and by the people , not made by the police department. it doesn’t make sense for the police dept of any city to be able to make laws, they should not even have a voice in the process, it could only be self-serving on their part.
Really, Jimmie, there are laws regulating where you live, what you wear, what you watch on TV, and what you talk about? Really? What are you wearing right now and what law dictated that decision? I’m wearing shorts and flip-flops — sheesh, I hope I’m not breaking the law!
If you want people to be so free, then why don’t we eliminate all speed limits and let everyone be free to drive as fast or slow as they want? Why have DUI laws? Shouldn’t I be free to drink as much as I want and then go drive?
And why don’t I have the freedom from being waken by my neighbor’s barking dog at 3 AM? Your “I gotta be free” argument just doesn’t hold up. Seriously, answer me: Why is it ok to regulate driving speed but not attentiveness of the driver? Yeah, I know, accidents happen when drivers are eating, smoking, putting on make-up, etc. but cell-phone use can be a sustained activity. Some drivers are on the phone most of the time they are driving. And most cell-phone drivers do not use turn signals. Try holding a phone to your head and use your turn signals at same time.
As far as distracted driving laws being “unenforceable”….we have a rather hard time enforcing murder, rape, burglary, embezzlement laws as well. Lots of folks get away with those crimes, you know.
One more point I’d like to make: We live in the modern age. A certain amount of education is needed to function effectively — and responsibly — these days. Yet education is being undermined wildly, especially here in TX. How can we expect undereducated people to KNOW what is the right thing to do? We don’t bother to educate our kids in responsible sexual behavior yet wonder why teenage pregnancy and STD-transmission is so high. Yeah, we have laws (sort of) about watering your lawn whenever you want. Why? Because many people don’t KNOW the effects of wasting water. That’s DRINKING water folks are sprinkling all over their St. Augustine.
SHOULD the city do so? Unequivocally YES!
WILL the city do so? Who knows?! After all, San Antonio gleefully kills attempts at creating viable alternatives to the autocentric lifestyle. Might we truly expect our “leaders” to suddenly become proactive?
Honestly, the cancer that is “distracted driving” should have never been ignored in the first place! How many more people must die before the voices of those who decry presumed efforts to “micromanage the behavior of adults” are finally drowned out by those who espouse common sense?!
Garl B. Latham
I read of a study that found that driving while on cell phone decreases your perceptions & reactions to that of a person legally drunk. Hang up and drive safely, folks.
Yes please. Many other cities in the country do. Accident rates have been proven to be lowered due to.
I don’t understand why cell phones in a 20 mph school zone are more dangerous than cell phones on I-410 at 65 mph. If it is concern for child safety…uh, aren’t, there children in the cars on 410?
I think it’s kinda crazy this is now being an issue … People will drive slower talking on their phones. I have seen police officers talking on their phone unaware an accident just happened… Ear piece please…
Yes. I use my headphones if I have to talk. And even putting them in my ears is probably hazardous while driving:/. Next car will have one of those things where I can be completely hands free. I drive long, long miles to my job sites and often have to check with suppliers and tradesmen. Yes, I see too many traffic nightmares caused by people holding their phones. Make it better please,)
they can ban it all they want. If it’s not enforced, they what’s the point?
Driving has become a mundane exercise. We now look for distractions. To be a safe driver, one must be focused on driving. I agree that banning hand held cell phone use will not solve the problem but it will reduce driver distracted accidents considerably. The law could be made very clear and would be enforceable.
Absolutely!
I wish there was a ban every time some fool in a large tank almost runs me over with their nose buried in a glowing screen. Or when a light turns green and the fool in front of me sits there for several minutes while texting. They should pay a fine. We could even call it an a—–e tax.
Couple of reflections. Our DWI rate is atrocious. How can we even have a legitimate discussion about cell phones when that elephant is sitting in the room? 40% repeat offenders? Did I misread that?
Second, and perhaps this is further upstream, but as long as our city continues a sprawling growth pattern, we will continue to be plagued by dangerous commuting. The more people on the road, for longer periods of time, simply means higher risk exposure to accidents. Whether from cell phone distractions, people putting make-up on, or straight-up boredom and complacency, this problem isn’t going away. If we’re really concerned about minimizing accidents and making our roads safer, we should start encouraging people to drive less. Or work on alternate methods of getting folks from A to B. Rant->Complete.
Drivers here suck!
Just jail them on first infraction for 30 days. Need punishment that actually makes them think about the consequences of stupid texting while driving.
State Law in Texas and has been for over 7 years
No! Enforce the distracted driving law that is already on the books!!!
No victim no crime. Besides it is nearly unenforceable. Look at seatbelt laws they started as a ticket but, not a stoppable offense. Now they run roadblocks. Ftp
No victim? Tell that to the parents of the 7-year-old boy playing on the sidewalk who was KILLED here in SA last year by a driver who was fumbling with his cell phone.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Boy-on-sidewalk-dead-after-getting-struck-by-4222144.php
Driving is a serious responsibility. If you are talking on the phone while driving, then you are being irresponsible. It’s as simple as that.
Did you even read that article? The driver was an intoxicated minor. Do you honestly think stricter cellphone use laws would have made a difference in this case?
Yes, I read the article when the incident occurred. The driver was unlicensed as well. Three wrongs there — unlicensed, DUI, trying to use a cell phone. Well, to answer your question…yes, I think the child wouldn’t have been hit if the driver were just DUI and unlicensed. But it was fumbling for his cell phone that caused him to lose control of the car and hit the kid on the sidewalk. I STILL contend no one (or very few at least) drives as well when using a cell phone as they do when they aren’t. Moot point now, as SA will implement cell phone ban in January (although I disagree that “hands-free” is any safer than “hands-on.”
Yes.
YES! Hello….
Mass transit? Great idea.. But not w/Republicans in control-
Yes
No
Talking isn’t the problem, texting is. And applying makeup. Eating. Kids. Pets. Conversations with passengers… but let’s single out talking on a phone. Yeah, that will make a huge difference while simultaneously not contributing to our present police state environment where law abiding citizens can barely breath legally, but thugs run the streets robbing, stealing, killing, raping. How about you just enforce the laws we have already. Starting with the illegals and the gangs operating openly with impunity. That should keep you plenty busy McManus. Welcome to sunny San Antonio : / …
Talking on phone IS the problem. It’s been proven that a driver talking on the phone reacts the same as if .08% blood alcohol level. In other words, if you’re driving while on cell phone, then you’re driving the same as you would when legally drunk. But, nooooooooooooooo, we have to be sure everyone has their FREEEEEDOM. Freedom to be idiotically irresponsible. If you want to benefit from what society offers you (roads, bridges, food inspection, etc.) then pull your part and don’t drive distracted.
how about people driving with earphones/headphones?? not the Bluetooth variety, but the headphones people use for music..
Then they better ban radios, fast food, children, passengers, putting on makeup…..
we had the same problems long before we had cell phones, this is just another example of too much government. we all have seen the way numbers are manipulated by different groups. the problems are going to exist even with a law banning use of cell phones, eating, gps devices, making out or groping each other, putting make up on, drinking coffee and the list just goes on. we have more important issues than cell phone use, a bigger problem is so many drivers that have no clue as to how to drive safely, they don’t know how to merge in traffic, tailgate, cutting each other off, go ask any random driver how many feet it takes to stop an average car from 60 mph. and why not stop the music coming from the “gangster” type that set off alarms and open garage doors they are so loud, do you really think these drivers aren’t distracted.
Yes
If the individual that kills someone while distracted actually took responsibility I’d be against this law. But what does responsibility mean? Are they going to provide at least the money the deceased was going to make for his wife & kids? Or do they even go to jail for as long as the deceased stats dead? No? That’s right, they only get a couple if hundred dollar ticket! Just wrong. So yes to the law.
No.
YES…..Invent something that blocks it from working when the car starts….allow people to buy them and see if they don’t fly off the shelves…..
While I would support an awareness campaign, I think the constant need to micromanage residents and criminalize them is unnecessary. We don’t need a law for every single bit of bad behavior. The police would either be distracted from more important tasks or need to increase their presence to actually “crack down” on this. Otherwise it would be another law on the books like spitting on the sidewalk that goes ignored. There is already an additional charge of inattentive driving that can be added on to a ticket or charges if an accident occurs. This would be a horrible example of over government.
We’ve had a ban on texting for a couple of years but I haven’t seen where it has stopped that. The only reason we should enact this ordinance is if we want another law on the books that is both unenforced and unenforceable. Did anybody else notice the article kept referring to how dangerous texting is and used that as justification to ban talking on a phone? McManus, who will tell you that his officers are so busy that they can’t work traffic accidents or direct traffic, would prefer for everything to be illegal so he could play big brother and protect you from yourself. He is also being disingenuous when he talks about those grant programs because he fails to mention that the targeted offenses, or in this case one he wants to make an offense so they can target it, are the only enforcement activity that the officers are allowed to take during that time. He also fails to mention that the reason the grants pay overtime is because these “overworked” officers have already worked their 40 hours and they are working the grant programs on their time off to earn extra cash. I oppose this ordinance because it isn’t the governments job to protect you from every possible mishap.
“The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”
~ Ayn Rand
Studies have shown such laws may actually cause MORE accidents…because people who are determined to use their phones keep them down low, which means their view is taken farther away from the the road each time they look down to use it.
More nanny state action! There are already laws on the books that deal with inattentive driving. This is like in kindergarten when you punished the whole class because one kid did something wrong. What is next..ban people with ADD from driving because they can’t pay attention? Ban people who only have one arm from driving? Ban people from talking to their passengers while driving? Ban people from drinking a bottle of water while driving? Ban people from chewing gum while driving? Ban people from listening to talk radio or singing along with the radio while driving? Once again San Antonio’s “leaders” are going to make us a laughing stock. You wanna be like Washington DC, then move there!
I agree that drivers need to be aware of what activities constitute distracted driving. However, none of the activities you list compares to cell-phone use while driving. It has been proven that operating a car while talking on a cell phone results in a person’s attention, reaction time, awareness, and driving accuracy diminishing to the same level as s/he were legally drunk. One-armed people must pass the same driving test as anyone else — which includes parallel parking. Cars can be adapted with special controls for folks missing an arm (same for foot pedals). Singing along with the radio has been recommended as a way to combat drowsiness; fiddling with the radio/CD, however, is a distraction (a driver in California was changing CDs causing the car to drift to the right, and she plowed into four cyclists killing all of them). As for drinking water while driving — the driver can CHOOSE when to pick up the bottle/cup. S/he would probably not do that while making a turn, changing lanes, passing, etc. But once on a call, the average driver just keeps on talking regardless of the traffic situation. As for talking to another passenger…that passenger is in the “real world” of the driver, not in an abstract phone conversation, and would be reacting to the traffic situation and could point out things to the inattentive, or maybe say, “Let’s talk later — you need to pay attention to your driving.” The person on other end of the cell phone conversation wouldn’t know to say that. How about if the “nanny state” gave each of us the right to decide when we are sober enough to drive?
Question: Are you as good a driver when you are using a cell phone as you are when not? Really? Has there ever been a situation where you got off the phone because you felt it was impeding your driving? If so, then you have just proved that cell-phone use while driving is dangerous.
I assume that every other person on the road IS drunk and I drive DEFENSIVELY, even when on the phone. Just because you are incapable of doing that, is no reason to deny me that freedom. The cell phone has proven to be an invaluable tool for many of us who spend a lot of time on the road. We are able to get business issues handled quickly and efficiently. It is also a great tool to use for advising others of our expected delays due to traffic so that they can also make better use of their time. As for studies…like everything else, the studies find different results. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/distracted-driving-study-cell-phone-dialing-texting-dangerous-talking-less-so/ What many of you do not understand is this law is designed to make it easier for the police to stop you without any evidence that you are endangering anyone!! They can’t stop you for DWI unless you are driving in a manner that suggests you may be DWI. But with this law, all they will need to do is see you on the phone and they can stop you, even if you are driving perfectly fine. Lastly, for those who are so willing to let “nanny gov” control their lives even more…is it okay to drive while using a handsfree device? And if not, how are you going to control that?
Miguel —
I salute you for having such skills that you possess the identical driving skills when not using a cell phone as you are when you are making business deals on the phone while driving. How about when having an heated argument with someone? Are you really the same driver? Really? Great if you are so well-wired that your brain can handle all that. Not everyone is as brilliant as you are. You have to use a good bit of your brain to participate in such conversations. That reduces the amount of your brain available to the various tasks and perceptions (audio, visual, depth perception, peripheral, rear-view mirror use, etc.) needed for driving.
How many times have you had to honk at the person in front of you when the light turns green because they are lost in their cell phone and weren’t paying attention? Have you ever been honked at in such a way?
I think your contention that SA Police want to stop people without evidence reveals paranoia on your part.
As for driving defensively to be on guard for drunk drivers….I spend a helluva a lot more attention dealing with bad drivers on cell phones. Many are OBLIVIOUS to what is going on around them. How many times have you been in the right-of-way and some cell-phone driver enters from driveway or side street and you have to hit the brakes? That driver is OBLIVIOUS to oncoming traffic courtesy of cell phone.
So if someone has more than 0.08% alcohol in blood stream and manages to be driving ok when they pass by a cop, yet 5 mins. later are driving the wrong way on a one-way road, then that’s perfectly fine and holiday road checks are just nannies working overtime?
You sound like a very intelligent, responsible, responsive, alert human. The same cannot be said about everyone behind the wheel. Do you agree with that?
As far as the convenience of cell phones for drivers. I agree, very convenient. But at what price? And how did we ever manage to be on time and get things done without cell phones for all those decades? Life in 2014 ain’t THAT much more complicated than it was in 1986. We are just more self-important than we were in the past.
I agree that the cell-device driving distracted issue is complex. But to refuse to acknowledge there is a problem, as you seem to be doing here, is, in my opinion, missing some awareness of what happens every minute of the day on our roads.