Driving While Elderly

A study reported in the journal Human Factors finds "young drivers' reaction times slow to that of a 70-year-old when they operate a vehicle while talking on a cell phone." This is meant to be an indictment of cell phones, of course, but it could also be taken as an argument against letting the elderly drive. They're just as impaired as a teenager talking on a cell phone!

The Washington Times story also mentions a 2003 study in which "the researchers concluded that motorists who talk on cell phones are more impaired than drunken drivers"--by which the Times means drivers with a blood alcohol content of .08 percent or more. Again, the comparison is meant to show how dangerous cell phones are, but it could be turned around to question the fairness and wisdom of setting the legal BAC limit at .08 percent when it's perfectly legal in almost all jurisdictions to use a cell phone while driving, which seems to be more dangerous.

Even the few places with cell phone bans--New York, New Jersey, and D.C.--permit the use of hands-free phones. But the Human Factors study, consistent with earlier research, found that it's not holding the phone that's the problem so much as conversing with someone who's not in the car. Unlike a passenger, the person on the other end of the phone can't see what's going on and therefore can't help the driver pay attention by shutting up when appropriate or pointing out hazards.

In short, the law is wildly inconsistent in the way it treats driver impairment, explicitly prohibiting activities (driving while talking on a hand-held phone, driving with a 0.8 percent BAC) that are no more dangerous than those it permits (driving while elderly, driving while talking on a hands-free phone, driving under the influence of cold medicine). Either legislators don't pay attention to objective measures of impairment, or safety concerns are a cover for other motives (hatred of cell phones, disapproval of drinking). Or both.