This article explores what the legal, sociological, and scientific literature tells us about risky behavior and what the law can – and can’t - do about it. The article focuses on cell phone use – and the push to regulate it - as a parable about the limits of the law in regulating two things which Americans love – advanced

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier's archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

The American College of Preventive Medicine (ACPM) is providing a set of recommendations designed to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with distractions due to texting while driving. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 12% of all fatal crashes involving at least one distracted driver are estimated to be related to cell phone use while driving. Given the combination of visual, manual, and cognitive distractions posed by texting, this is an issue of major public health concern for communities. Therefore, the ACPM feels it is timely to discuss this issue and provide the following recommendations: 1. Encourage state legislatures to develop and pass legislation banning texting while driving, while simultaneously implementing comprehensive and dedicated law enforcement strategies including penalties for these violations. Legislatures should establish a public awareness campaign regarding the dangers of texting while driving as an integral part of t...

Since 2007, many states passed laws prohibiting text messaging while driving. Using vehicular fatality data from across the United States and standard difference-in-differences techniques, bans appear moderately successful at reducing single-vehicle, single-occupant accidents if bans are universally applied and enforced as a primary offense. Bans enforced as secondary offenses, however, have at best no effect on accidents. Any reduction in accidents following texting bans is short-lived, however, with accidents returning to near former levels within a few months. This is suggestive of drivers reacting to the announcement of the legislation only to return to old habits shortly afterward

This chapter presents a review of studies on the conversational aspect of cell-phone use while operating a motor vehicle. Research has indicated that talking on a cell phone while driving poses a safety threat to people both in the vehicle and on the road. This is because cell phone conversations take considerable cognitive, visual, and physical demands on the person involved in this task. However, research has also shown that people engage in risky driving behavior, even after being cognizant of the dangers associated with it. Therefore, policies need to be implemented to thwart the use of cell phones while operating a motor vehicle, to educate people about the risks that this behavior poses, and in so doing, to make the road safer for drivers and pedestrians.

Purpose. Scholars have generally accepted that using a hand-held device such as a cell phone while driving is a distraction and dangerous. Distracted driving has become a public safety concern, which is evident by the passage of a number of city and state laws banning the use of cell phones while driving. There is no consensus on the effectiveness of legislation that bans the use of hand-held devices while driving. The purpose of this research is to evaluate the impact of the 2015 City of Austin, Texas ordinance prohibiting the use of all portable (hand-held) electronic devices while operating a vehicle or bicycle on the number of reported collisions. Method. The research design for this analysis is an interrupted time series with a comparison group. This study utilizes daily aggregated traffic accident data as the dependent variable and controls for precipitation and temperature. Data was gathered and analyzed 60 days before and after the implementation of the hands-free ordinance, while removing the 30 days immediately prior and after the ordinance to remove sensitivity. Results. The regression analysis results indicate there is not a statistically significant relationship or correlation between the City of Austin’s Hands-Free ordinance and reported collisions during the analyzed time period. In contrast, the results show a slight increase in the number of reported collisions shortly following the implementation of the ordinance. Conclusions. The City of Austin’s Hands-Free ordinance implemented 1/1/2015 did not have the desired impact of lowering the number of reported collisions during the time period analyzed. This suggests that either drivers are not abiding by the new law or that operating a cell phone hands-free is just as dangerous as hand-held.