Distracted driving instances rising

By Kelli M. Dugan
Posted 3/17/11

BAY MINETTE — The use of wireless devices while driving is on the increase in Baldwin County, leaving local municipalities scrambling to protect citizens but grappling with how to govern personal conduct in private vehicles.

“I have a …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Subscribe to continue reading. Already a subscriber? Sign in

Local reporters keeping you informed across the Alabama Gulf Coast.

You can cancel anytime.
 

Please log in to continue

Log in

Distracted driving instances rising

Posted

BAY MINETTE — The use of wireless devices while driving is on the increase in Baldwin County, leaving local municipalities scrambling to protect citizens but grappling with how to govern personal conduct in private vehicles.

“I have a teenager, and we’ve threatened his life if we ever caught him texting in that truck,” said Lionel K. Rider owner of Rider Insurance Agency in Bay Minette. “It’s dangerous, and I see it all the time, but the sad thing is, it’s not just kids.”

Despite a recent flurry of municipal ordinances across the county aimed at curbing what can best be described as “distracted” driving, Rider said the impact on the insurance is imminent but fuzzy at best so early in the process.

“We don’t handle the claims directly, so it’s hard to say how it’s impacting the underwriting side, but there’s no question as the (incidents) continue, the actuaries are going to be looking at claims consistencies, and it’s going to figure into the claims consideration,” Rider said.

Whether it’s checking an important e-mail from work or answering a text about what to pick up for dinner, the list of excuses for the practice is almost as long and varied as the makes and models of cars on the road, and Duluth, Ga.-based State Farm released one week ago results from a study showing an “alarming” number of drivers who acknowledge using wireless devices while driving.

Of the 912 drivers polled – all of whom reported having a valid driver’s license, driving at least one hour per week and owning a smart phone – almost one-fifth admitted using the Internet while driving. The top five reasons cited for the activity included:

r Finding and reading driving directions

r Reading e-mail

r Looking up information of immediate interest

r Viewing and interacting with social media sites

r Composing and sending e-mail.

State Farm spokesman Roszell Gadson said in a written statement the insurance company is trying to understand the behavior in order to better address it.

“We are working to prevent crashes and save lives, and this research takes us one step closer to understanding the driver distractions that affect everyone on our roadways,” Gadson said.

Rider said his own business has been impacted directly only slightly by the practice to date, with only one texting-related accident reported during the past year. Of course, he concedes people are not always 100 percent honest about the circumstances surrounding wrecks.

“It’s not good. That’s for sure,” he said.

The city of Fairhope became the most recent municipality to adopt a formal ordinance prohibiting the distracted driving and enacting a penalty for violators.

Almost identical to the ordinance approved by the Daphne City Council four months ago, Fairhope’s law was approved unanimously Monday night and carries a $100 fine or 10 days in jail for the first offense. Subsequent offenses increase fines and jail time.

Specifically, the ordinance prohibits driving while “using a wireless communication device to send, receive, download or view any electronic or digital content … including electronic mail, instant messaging or text messaging.” It does not, however, ban talking on cell phones while driving.

The City of Spanish Fort is also working toward adopting a similar ordinance but has been careful in discussions not to prohibit the receipt of information because drivers cannot control what is delivered to their devices. It would, however, prohibit viewing or responding to such communications.

Police Chief David Edgar said the difficulty arises in the enforcement of offenses that, at this time, would be considered secondary violations, meaning offenders could be cited for breaking the wireless device law but only in the commission of a more serious primary offense.

Edgar has likened the issue to the initial passage of Alabama’s mandatory seatbelt law that made driving without safety restraints a secondary violation that could only be assessed if a primary violation such as speeding, running a stop sign, weaving or executing an improper lane change occurred. The offense has since been upgraded.