Why do motorists not pay attention? (sorry long)

[Momz]

Last Sunday (7/17) my wife and I went riding our Indians into Michigan's "Thumb" and it was an enjoyable yet tiring ride (nearly 270 miles) for my wife. I tend to ride much more often and much further, but we had this planned, so off we went on a days adventure.

The wind was blowing quite strong from the south but it didn't bother us until we started to head back home. From Port Huron to the western suburbs of metro Detroit,.....well I94 was our best route home. That meant we were riding into the wind a expressway speeds. I have no windshield but Pam's bike does, and that helped her from getting too exhausted,.....I just tough it out.

By the time we got near the northern Macomb county line there was a red Fusion tailgating my wife's bike. This Fusion stayed so close to Pam's fender that it became evident to me that the driver was not paying attention to the road and needed a offhand visual clue to guide her.
This tailgating went on for at least 10 miles and I was getting real pissed. I decided to wave my wife closer and slowed down. This caused the Fusion driver to sort of change her focus (at least momentarily) and she realized that we were on to her. She finally past us on the left lane. As she went by us, I noticed that she was holding and paying attention to her phone.

After she passed us she got behind a car (better a car than two motorcycles) and tailgated that car for quite a few more miles before that driver had enough of that. That car quickly changed lanes then exited the expressway. The Fusion driver then found a Semi to tailgate.

We got off I94 in Dearborn and got home only to realize how tired we both were. OK, well my wife isn't used to long rides, but my exhaustion may have been due in part with the wind, but I believe that it was mostly due to the fear and frustration of dealing with a driver that does not care about other people or the effects of her actions.
 

[sandy]

I commute in the HOV lane in Scottsdale, AZ. I tend to maintain 7-9 over the limit (65MPH). I find most people are 1-2 car lengths behind. I politely ask them to back off and 3/4 of them comply. Then I started openly carrying on my right hip. It doesn't happen anymore. This tells me they know what they're doing but don't care unless they MIGHT be threatened. Trust me, it's only a deterrent and would never get used, but it works. Sad statement of the American driver.

[dreamaker]

You just gave me an idea!!!  Have a T-Shirt with a gun in the holster screen printed on the left side.  The when the person in the vehicle looks at you just pull your jacket back quickly, they should get the idea.  Just off the top of my head! What do you think!!

[old2soon]

Same old same old. Cell phones need to cut out past 5 M P H. Simple. BUT it do NOT eliminate the 10-12% of the solid core pure dumb asses. AND they tailgate on the 2 lane also. Glad nothing happened to either of y'all. I have 3 flags mounted to the package rack of my I/S. I M H O-they-dumb asses-STILL git too cursed close. Mentioned this before but folks have cut thru the middle of a P G R mission with L E O escort. On a P G R mission last year a friend of mine on a trike got pushed to the cub by a bimbo in a cage talking on a cell phone.   Keep the situational awareness at VERY High levels and RIDE SAFE.

[Pete]

You just gave me an idea!!!  Have a T-Shirt with a gun in the holster screen printed on the left side.  The when the person in the vehicle looks at you just pull your jacket back quickly, they should get the idea.  Just off the top of my head! What do you think!!

careful in some states that could get attention from local AG and cause you a problem.

[Jess from VA]

Through the years of teaching my wife to ride and progressing from 250, 600, 800, to 1100 size bikes, she always wanted to follow me.  I wanted her to ride ahead so I could protect and watch behind us (not really her skill set), but she would not lead (and really never knew where we were going out in the sticks where we would ride).

A thing that occurred more often than you'd think was female cagers following her and watching her ride, for quite some distance.  Often to be seen talking and pointing with other females in the cage.  Female riders aren't exactly rare as hen's teeth but still it is the exception rather than the rule.  It seemed obvious that they were simply interested in watching a female ride a motorcycle.  Most of the time this watching was done by a decent driver, but sometimes they began to tailgate, or ride right next to her.  And you know if you are riding and looking intently at something, you often begin to weave and drive toward the object you are looking at (target fixation again).

I would see this happening and speed up and signal for her to pick it up, and if necessary, take the rear position and  slow up to force the watcher to give me some room.  

Since her package was (and still is) quite tight and cute, this occasionally was a male watcher, but mostly it was women simply curious about a female rider.  

It happened enough that we developed signals and a plan to move away or move around the watchers.

This may not have been what was happening during your ride, and I have seen plenty of drivers who seem to need to pick someone or something to lead them down the road, as if they were unable or unwilling to drive independently of something to follow.  

Of course, I don't care what the reason is, I don't like someone who is apparently tracking/pacing beside or behind me (for very long); the Valk does attract this attention, and I let them look for a while, but then I am out of there.    
  

[Gryphon Rider]

In Alberta the distracted driving penalty is $287 and three demerit points.  15 demerits is an automatic suspension.  If I see an impaired driver on the road where I can keep an eye on them for a while, i.e. traveling the same direction, I will use my helmet Bluetooth to dial 911 and report them.  Including impaired by cell phone.  The trouble with catching distracted drivers is that once they know you are on to them, they put down the phone and drive properly.  I suppose that's mission accomplished, temporarily.

Tailgating on the highway is usually solved by slowing down until they clue in and pass.

For those who usually lead another rider, but wish to switch positions to take the tailgating heat off of them, bike-to-bike Bluetooth communications is the perfect solution.

BTW, using a cell to phone 911 while driving is permitted, if done safely, as is any hands-free system for other calls.

[John Schmidt]

I've posted this story before, has to do with a young gal in her p/u on a busy four lane. It was before I retired and I often would take the bike to work. This particular morning I got caught behind a gal that obviously was chatting on the phone, and with each light change the adjacent lane would be a half block away before she reacted. When busy, it's nearly impossible to change lanes to get around such a person. After 3-4 lights and the delays caused, I ended up right behind her at the next light. I moved to the side of the lane, got off the bike and walked up to her cab only to find she was using two cell phones....unbelievable. Since her window was open, nice Fall day, I reached in and grabbed her phone, shut it off and tossed it in the truck bed....then told her to hang up and drive. She got pissed, started to get out of the truck but all the drivers around her started to yell and honk at her. She changed her mind, got back in and took off.....right through a red light. A few blocks later I passed her as a local LEO was putting his displeasure in writing. I honked and waved as I rode past, the cop just laughed and waved....he happened to be next to me at that last light. 

[old2soon]

I've posted this story before, has to do with a young gal in her p/u on a busy four lane. It was before I retired and I often would take the bike to work. This particular morning I got caught behind a gal that obviously was chatting on the phone, and with each light change the adjacent lane would be a half block away before she reacted. When busy, it's nearly impossible to change lanes to get around such a person. After 3-4 lights and the delays caused, I ended up right behind her at the next light. I moved to the side of the lane, got off the bike and walked up to her cab only to find she was using two cell phones....unbelievable. Since her window was open, nice Fall day, I reached in and grabbed her phone, shut it off and tossed it in the truck bed....then told her to hang up and drive. She got pissed, started to get out of the truck but all the drivers around her started to yell and honk at her. She changed her mind, got back in and took off.....right through a red light. A few blocks later I passed her as a local LEO was putting his displeasure in writing. I honked and waved as I rode past, the cop just laughed and waved....he happened to be next to me at that last light. 

            Good un John!    Course today you might could git shot!    When I was still driving 18 wheeler cross country I've seen dumb asses drive right off the road cuz of a frikin cell phone!  Driving off and staying off-GOOD. Driving off and attempting to git it back under control-BAD-usually.  Course driving off and hitting a solidly fixed object-VERY BAD. RIDE SAFE.

[Robert]

My experience has been the same as all of yours but I am thinking of buying a helmet cam and taping the license plate and the driver texting while driving. Most I have seen are aware people are getting smarter about texting so they hold the phone in their lap. On the bike we can see down and into the car most of the time so we can see what most would not be able to. I would say a quarter of the people I see on the road have a phone in their hand. Its pretty bad and I don't tolerate tailgaters either, there are many ways to stop this kind of thing.

[Gryphon Rider]

Most I have seen are aware people are getting smarter about texting so they hold the phone in their lap.

[Moonshot_1]

Thought about this before and might have even posted some thoughts on the subject here before as well.

First off, it would be difficult to pass an effective law or laws directly affecting phone use. I mean we all pretty much take the speed limit signs as suggestions and not "LAW" even though it is. Even with laws limiting phone use while driving folks will still text and talk away and cause tragic "accidents". They are not "accidents" really, but gross negligence. But the damage is done, even with the law.

So, what is a real solution?
What can work?
Laws that would open up the service providers to liability for "accidents" that their customers are responsible for while using their product or service while driving.

I'd bet in no time at all we'd have technology that would disable data functions after x-mph. Figure 15 -20 mph as determined by GPS.

Can't eliminate the talk aspect because it is very possible that a driver may need to communicate with someone in an emergency while in motion. We may need to know where the Zombies are, for example.
Or a doctor getting updates on a patient in distress while on his way to the hospital.

While I wouldn't like anyone using their phone in any capacity while driving I can come up with many scenarios where it would be right and proper to speak on it.

But back to the point, if we can open up the providers to liability for deaths and injuries from using their service that their subscribers used while driving, I believe we would movement on this issue in a very positive way. We would see solutions that would be effective BEFORE the accident.

[sandy]

Your idea is the same as suing the firearm companies for deaths they caused. I feel the MPH cutout is a better idea with 911 still being available at higher speeds

Thought about this before and might have even posted some thoughts on the subject here before as well.

First off, it would be difficult to pass an effective law or laws directly affecting phone use. I mean we all pretty much take the speed limit signs as suggestions and not "LAW" even though it is. Even with laws limiting phone use while driving folks will still text and talk away and cause tragic "accidents". They are not "accidents" really, but gross negligence. But the damage is done, even with the law.

So, what is a real solution?
What can work?
Laws that would open up the service providers to liability for "accidents" that their customers are responsible for while using their product or service while driving.

I'd bet in no time at all we'd have technology that would disable data functions after x-mph. Figure 15 -20 mph as determined by GPS.

Can't eliminate the talk aspect because it is very possible that a driver may need to communicate with someone in an emergency while in motion. We may need to know where the Zombies are, for example.
Or a doctor getting updates on a patient in distress while on his way to the hospital.

While I wouldn't like anyone using their phone in any capacity while driving I can come up with many scenarios where it would be right and proper to speak on it.

But back to the point, if we can open up the providers to liability for deaths and injuries from using their service that their subscribers used while driving, I believe we would movement on this issue in a very positive way. We would see solutions that would be effective BEFORE the accident.

[cookiedough]

cell phones,  probably playing pokemon go or so other nonsense out nowadays.

Just recently 2 people got killed at night driving playing pokemon locally.

UNREAL!!!!  If not walking in front of cars doing pokemon,  then driving while doing that is double dumbness. 

[art]

Lots of dumb people out there. I've seen in the last few months OLD ladies on cell phones while driving as if being old isn't bad enough. Old and flapping their lip is downright stupid.

[Moonshot_1]

Your idea is the same as suing the firearm companies for deaths they caused. I feel the MPH cutout is a better idea with 911 still being available at higher speeds

Thought about this before and might have even posted some thoughts on the subject here before as well.

First off, it would be difficult to pass an effective law or laws directly affecting phone use. I mean we all pretty much take the speed limit signs as suggestions and not "LAW" even though it is. Even with laws limiting phone use while driving folks will still text and talk away and cause tragic "accidents". They are not "accidents" really, but gross negligence. But the damage is done, even with the law.

So, what is a real solution?
What can work?
Laws that would open up the service providers to liability for "accidents" that their customers are responsible for while using their product or service while driving.

I'd bet in no time at all we'd have technology that would disable data functions after x-mph. Figure 15 -20 mph as determined by GPS.

Can't eliminate the talk aspect because it is very possible that a driver may need to communicate with someone in an emergency while in motion. We may need to know where the Zombies are, for example.
Or a doctor getting updates on a patient in distress while on his way to the hospital.

While I wouldn't like anyone using their phone in any capacity while driving I can come up with many scenarios where it would be right and proper to speak on it.

But back to the point, if we can open up the providers to liability for deaths and injuries from using their service that their subscribers used while driving, I believe we would movement on this issue in a very positive way. We would see solutions that would be effective BEFORE the accident.

I would look at it as if a gun manufacturer didn't put a safety mechanism on their gun and people were getting shot because of it. I'm looking for the service providers to put a "safety" on their potentially deadly weapon.

[dreamaker]

Drunk driving use to be .1 alcohol level and from .09 to .07 was impaired.  Then they changed drunk driving to .08, and impaired was from .09 to whatever.  They come up with a term of “Buzzed Driving” so basically buzzed driving can be one beer. Now on TV they say Buzzed Driving is the same as Drunk Driving, trust me, around here they don’t mess around, they take advantage of it. Now I am not defending buzzed driving, but at least they are paying attention somewhat. The point is, they should treat cell phones and texting with the same actions as buzzed driving.  Guns are weapons, and must register and if you start waving them around you get penalizes, so point is, vehicles are also weapons that cause death, damage and destruction, and some of the root cause is cell phones. So I feel it is as dangerous as buzzed driving or even more so.

[Valk_Ridin_Soldier]

Drunk driving use to be .1 alcohol level and from .09 to .07 was impaired.  Then they changed drunk driving to .08, and impaired was from .09 to whatever.  They come up with a term of “Buzzed Driving” so basically buzzed driving can be one beer. Now on TV they say Buzzed Driving is the same as Drunk Driving, trust me, around here they don’t mess around, they take advantage of it. Now I am not defending buzzed driving, but at least they are paying attention somewhat. The point is, they should treat cell phones and texting with the same actions as buzzed driving.  Guns are weapons, and must register and if you start waving them around you get penalizes, so point is, vehicles are also weapons that cause death, damage and destruction, and some of the root cause is cell phones. So I feel it is as dangerous as buzzed driving or even more so.

I agree with you.  Physiologically, once alcohol enters the blood stream, you begin to become impaired.  The question is only a matter of how much you are impaired.  At some point it is too impaired to perform a given function effectively.  In many places, .08 BAC is considered to be the "presumptive level" at which it is legally assumed that you are impaired.  At this level, your reflexes and judgement are slowed to a certain fraction of what they normally are.  I don't know what, if any that specific number is, but let's just say it's 85%.  Could be less, could be more, pick a number that works for you.

So consider this...You have 1/3 of what it takes to get you to that level. You've lost 5% of what you normally can do in terms of physical and mental response to a given task.  Say that task is driving...or riding a motorcycle, or flying a plane.  Under normal conditions, you may not need 100% of your abilities.  Riding along, all smooth and easy.  No problem.  But if you drive/ride/fly into a situation that requires 100%  of your ability, you are done.  You've impaired your reaction time by fractions of a second...and that's enough to make you dangerous. 

Same goes with distractions...  You look down at the phone...hell, even look down to pick it up...you've lost entire seconds of time to deal with things that happen in fractions of that time.  IMO, it's as bad, if not worse. 

[dreamaker]

Drunk driving use to be .1 alcohol level and from .09 to .07 was impaired.  Then they changed drunk driving to .08, and impaired was from .09 to whatever.  They come up with a term of “Buzzed Driving” so basically buzzed driving can be one beer. Now on TV they say Buzzed Driving is the same as Drunk Driving, trust me, around here they don’t mess around, they take advantage of it. Now I am not defending buzzed driving, but at least they are paying attention somewhat. The point is, they should treat cell phones and texting with the same actions as buzzed driving.  Guns are weapons, and must register and if you start waving them around you get penalizes, so point is, vehicles are also weapons that cause death, damage and destruction, and some of the root cause is cell phones. So I feel it is as dangerous as buzzed driving or even more so.

I agree with you.  Physiologically, once alcohol enters the blood stream, you begin to become impaired.  The question is only a matter of how much you are impaired.  At some point it is too impaired to perform a given function effectively.  In many places, .08 BAC is considered to be the "presumptive level" at which it is legally assumed that you are impaired.  At this level, your reflexes and judgement are slowed to a certain fraction of what they normally are.  I don't know what, if any that specific number is, but let's just say it's 85%.  Could be less, could be more, pick a number that works for you.

So consider this...You have 1/3 of what it takes to get you to that level. You've lost 5% of what you normally can do in terms of physical and mental response to a given task.  Say that task is driving...or riding a motorcycle, or flying a plane.  Under normal conditions, you may not need 100% of your abilities.  Riding along, all smooth and easy.  No problem.  But if you drive/ride/fly into a situation that requires 100%  of your ability, you are done.  You've impaired your reaction time by fractions of a second...and that's enough to make you dangerous. 

Same goes with distractions...  You look down at the phone...hell, even look down to pick it up...you've lost entire seconds of time to deal with things that happen in fractions of that time.  IMO, it's as bad, if not worse. 

In your explanation of percentages, you are make and basing the assumption that as we are all the same.  But the truth is, we are not, so that has to enter the equation, even at 100% some can't make the cut!!! Then giving them booze or a cell phone, and they complain as our system is singling them out. It's like say we are taking away their right to commit crimes and violate the law.

[doubletee]

Thought about this before and might have even posted some thoughts on the subject here before as well.

First off, it would be difficult to pass an effective law or laws directly affecting phone use. I mean we all pretty much take the speed limit signs as suggestions and not "LAW" even though it is. Even with laws limiting phone use while driving folks will still text and talk away and cause tragic "accidents". They are not "accidents" really, but gross negligence. But the damage is done, even with the law.

So, what is a real solution?
What can work?
Laws that would open up the service providers to liability for "accidents" that their customers are responsible for while using their product or service while driving.

I'd bet in no time at all we'd have technology that would disable data functions after x-mph. Figure 15 -20 mph as determined by GPS.

Can't eliminate the talk aspect because it is very possible that a driver may need to communicate with someone in an emergency while in motion. We may need to know where the Zombies are, for example.
Or a doctor getting updates on a patient in distress while on his way to the hospital.

While I wouldn't like anyone using their phone in any capacity while driving I can come up with many scenarios where it would be right and proper to speak on it.

But back to the point, if we can open up the providers to liability for deaths and injuries from using their service that their subscribers used while driving, I believe we would movement on this issue in a very positive way. We would see solutions that would be effective BEFORE the accident.

Like the idea, because I'm as adamant as anyone about drivers not using mobile phones for anything (voice or data) while driving, but I can't reconcile prohibiting passengers from using their phones. I don't have any idea how technology could be used to discriminate between driver and passenger.

[doubletee]

I've posted this story before, has to do with a young gal in her p/u on a busy four lane. It was before I retired and I often would take the bike to work. This particular morning I got caught behind a gal that obviously was chatting on the phone, and with each light change the adjacent lane would be a half block away before she reacted. When busy, it's nearly impossible to change lanes to get around such a person. After 3-4 lights and the delays caused, I ended up right behind her at the next light. I moved to the side of the lane, got off the bike and walked up to her cab only to find she was using two cell phones....unbelievable. Since her window was open, nice Fall day, I reached in and grabbed her phone, shut it off and tossed it in the truck bed....then told her to hang up and drive. She got pissed, started to get out of the truck but all the drivers around her started to yell and honk at her. She changed her mind, got back in and took off.....right through a red light. A few blocks later I passed her as a local LEO was putting his displeasure in writing. I honked and waved as I rode past, the cop just laughed and waved....he happened to be next to me at that last light. 

Reaching into someone's car is probably a good way to get shot in today's world.

[Moonshot_1]

Thought about this before and might have even posted some thoughts on the subject here before as well.

First off, it would be difficult to pass an effective law or laws directly affecting phone use. I mean we all pretty much take the speed limit signs as suggestions and not "LAW" even though it is. Even with laws limiting phone use while driving folks will still text and talk away and cause tragic "accidents". They are not "accidents" really, but gross negligence. But the damage is done, even with the law.

So, what is a real solution?
What can work?
Laws that would open up the service providers to liability for "accidents" that their customers are responsible for while using their product or service while driving.

I'd bet in no time at all we'd have technology that would disable data functions after x-mph. Figure 15 -20 mph as determined by GPS.

Can't eliminate the talk aspect because it is very possible that a driver may need to communicate with someone in an emergency while in motion. We may need to know where the Zombies are, for example.
Or a doctor getting updates on a patient in distress while on his way to the hospital.

While I wouldn't like anyone using their phone in any capacity while driving I can come up with many scenarios where it would be right and proper to speak on it.

But back to the point, if we can open up the providers to liability for deaths and injuries from using their service that their subscribers used while driving, I believe we would movement on this issue in a very positive way. We would see solutions that would be effective BEFORE the accident.

Like the idea, because I'm as adamant as anyone about drivers not using mobile phones for anything (voice or data) while driving, but I can't reconcile prohibiting passengers from using their phones. I don't have any idea how technology could be used to discriminate between driver and passenger.

Perhaps the screen could become disabled when in excess of 20 mph. Audio still available. Voice phone still available. Passengers would still have limited access to phone while in motion.

I'm fairly certain that if we go down this path (liability path) there will be new tech ideas on how to address the access issues while eliminating possible liability.

[Pete]

I do not drive and phone and I wish no one would.
Every day I see someone driving with phone and doing something really stupid.

The only way I see to approach it is to make it a liability issue or civil issue.
Example: violate a traffic law while phoning - double the penality.
Example: At fault accident while phoning - double the award to the injured party.

Make it a negligence issue/charge.

[cookiedough]

I do not drive and phone and I wish no one would.
Every day I see someone driving with phone and doing something really stupid.

The only way I see to approach it is to make it a liability issue or civil issue.
Example: violate a traffic law while phoning - double the penality.
Example: At fault accident while phoning - double the award to the injured party.

Make it a negligence issue/charge.

great idea and should be enacted, but not like we don't know someone who actually drives around daily with NO vehicle insurance even though laws require it.  People just don't give a hoot anymore is all it boils down to.  let them get fined or get sued,  they just don't care and will continue to do stupid stuff.  Happens daily.  

Maybe if we enact a law/penalty that if found guilty of causing any type at all of an accident while on the phone, you will get an automatic 1-10 years in jail with no early parole, that might change people's minds, but still doubt it, even if in a small fender bender accident get 1 year jail time if proven cell phone use.

make the risk of jail time not worth the reward of a stupid text or cell phone call that could have waited anyways.

[BF]

I've posted this story before, has to do with a young gal in her p/u on a busy four lane. It was before I retired and I often would take the bike to work. This particular morning I got caught behind a gal that obviously was chatting on the phone, and with each light change the adjacent lane would be a half block away before she reacted. When busy, it's nearly impossible to change lanes to get around such a person. After 3-4 lights and the delays caused, I ended up right behind her at the next light. I moved to the side of the lane, got off the bike and walked up to her cab only to find she was using two cell phones....unbelievable. Since her window was open, nice Fall day, I reached in and grabbed her phone, shut it off and tossed it in the truck bed....then told her to hang up and drive. She got pissed, started to get out of the truck but all the drivers around her started to yell and honk at her. She changed her mind, got back in and took off.....right through a red light. A few blocks later I passed her as a local LEO was putting his displeasure in writing. I honked and waved as I rode past, the cop just laughed and waved....he happened to be next to me at that last light. 

Reaching into someone's car is probably a good way to get shot in today's world.

Probably a darn good way to get yourself an assault charge too.