Distracted driving deserves stricter penalty
Some 10 years ago, psychologists at the University of Utah published a study showing that people who use cellphones while driving are as impaired as drivers with a blood-alcohol level of 0.08.
Interestingly, according to the study, it didn’t matter if the phone was hand-held or hands-free.
The lead author of the scientific work, psychology professor David Strayer, concluded: “Clearly, the safest course of action is not to use a cellphone while driving.”
Yes, it’s an old study and, yes, Professor Strayer’s ultimate conclusion seems a little obvious. Nonetheless, this work, and other similar studies that arrived at similar conclusions, ought to be examined and/or re-examined as part of B.C.’s move to take distracted driving as seriously as it takes impaired driving.
(For what it’s worth, the MythBusters team on the Discovery Channel actually arrived at the conclusion that using a cellphone while driving is worse than being impaired. While MythBusters is more entertainment than science, its conclusion is, um, staggering.)
Last year, the B.C. Liberals began taking the problem of distracted driving a lot more seriously than they had in the past, and certainly more seriously than many other jurisdictions in North America.
Fines for a first guilty infraction were doubled to $368. As well, an ICBC driver penalty point premium brought the total fine for a first-timer to $543.
A lot, yes, but ultimately not even the cost of a new iPhone.
A second guilty infraction, within the same year as the first, results in an additional hit of just less than $900.
That seems harsh, but, in ways, it’s less punitive than even a roadside suspension for impaired driving — and a roadside suspension for impaired driving isn’t even a proper conviction in a court of law.
If you are actually convicted of the crime of driving while affected by drugs or alcohol, the costs can be enormous — financially and in other ways.
The minimum fine for the first impaired offence is $1,000, plus a driving prohibition, plus possible jail time, plus the likelihood of having to enrol in a responsible driving program ($880), plus the requirement to install an ignition interlock system ($1,700).
If I do the quick math in my head, a first-time impaired conviction will run almost $3,600, plus a licence suspension and possible jail time. Oh, and your lawyer fees could cost $10,000 or more, so you know.
Conversely, as mentioned, a firsttime distracted driving conviction costs $543 and carries only the addition penalty of added points and a possible insurance hike.
Given that science is telling us one is as bad as the other, it makes no sense that a conviction for one can be life changing, while a conviction for the other is little more than a nuisance.
They really ought to be treated legally in the same way.
Until Mothers Against Drunk Driving came along in 1980, being gassed behind the wheel of a car in North America was pretty much a misdemeanour. It may take the will of a similar grassroots organization to put distracted driving on par.
Distracted driving continues to be a big problem in British Columbia. I am guilty of it occasionally, though I am working hard these days at keeping my phone in the trunk of my car. Making this sort of conscious effort to not be bad would be a whole lot easier if the punishment fit the crime.