In terms of public safety, it's probably correct to say that banning cell phones would reduce the number of traffic accidents. But I think, more accurately, it depends on the person. Some people are operating on, shall we say, lower power CPUs in their heads to begin with. They might be zoned out on prescription drugs, and when you add a cell phone to the equation, they do become a danger to the other drivers on the road. But there are individuals who are perfectly capable of talking on the cell phone or operating other non-visual electronic devices while they are driving. For example, I'm recording this article while I'm driving, and I have a perfect driving record.
I think the real test of driver safety should be determined by the reaction time of individuals, not simply noting whether they using a cell phone or other portable electronic device. Some people need to be taken off of the roads just the way they are, even without any distractions, because they have about a two-second reaction time. Those people are a danger to other drivers, regardless of what electronics they might be using. And of course, when they pick up a cell phone, their reaction time might double to four seconds, and then they're more than likely going to hit somebody.
So if we're going to go through the trouble of banning mobile phones in automobiles out of concern for driver safety, I think we should go all the way and just ban drivers with low cognitive function and slow reaction time. Why isn't reaction time one of the tests when you go get your license renewed? When someone sees a red light, shouldn't they be required to respond in one second or less? Isn't someone who takes longer than one second to respond to a red light and apply pressure to the brake pedal a danger to other drivers, and aren't slow people in fact far more dangerous than drivers who carry cell phones? I think they are. I mean, if we're going to get serious about driver safety and ban cell phones, we should ban anyone who's taking a great number of prescription drugs from driving.
I was talking with a traffic control officer here recently who said that as many as 30 to 35 percent of all traffic accidents are caused by people who are dosed up on prescription drugs. Another third or so are caused by people on alcohol or illegal drugs. So prescription drugs are causing just as many accidents as people doped up on cocaine, marijuana and alcohol. And occasionally there are really bad drivers -- people who are taking antidepressant drugs, smoking pot, drinking beer and trying to talk on a cell phone to hook up their next drug deal. They're an accident waiting to happen. But fortunately, that's not what you will normally see on the street.
So should cell phones be banned from the hands of drivers? Should we outlaw the use of portable electronic devices by people who are operating automobiles? I would only support that if we also ban drivers with slow reaction times and actually start testing people for reaction times. It's easy to blame the problem on cell phones, but that's sort of like going to Rwanda, finding out that 800,000 people have been slaughtered by machetes, and then blaming the machetes. It's not a machete problem, and it's not a cell phone problem. It's a problem with reaction times of drivers, and in the case of Rwandans, human decency. I say, stop blaming the electronics, and start holding drivers accountable for their mental states.
And in terms of real dangers to public safety, cell phones don't even come close to the dangers posed by prescription drugs and over-the-counter drugs. Approximately 40% of all drivers are on at least one drug at all times, and if you include nicotine and caffeine, that number goes up to around 70%. The abuse of drugs is the root cause of the vast majority of automobile accidents.
Driving with a cell phone is a lot less dangerous than driving on prescription drugs