SPEECH essay

Shouldit be legal to drive while talking on the cell phone with a hand freedevice?


Speechin the argument against legalization of driving and using a cellphonethrough the handheld devices.

CentralIdea or Thesis Statement

Cellphone usage with a hand`s free device while driving significantlyincreases the risk of a crash due to the cognitive distractionemanating from the conversation.

&shy&shy&shy&shy&shy&shy&shy&shy&shy I.An increasing number of research indicates that driving while talkingon a cell phone device can significantly distract drivers.

II.Despite the alarming statistics showing the number of lives lostthrough accidents associated with driver distractions, many stateshave failed to enact laws that prohibit the use of mobile phones orhands-free devices while driving (Olsen, Shults, &amp Eaton, 2013)

III. Varied opinions have been presented regarding the inability toenforce effectively laws banning the use of hands-free devices whiledriving. Opponents of efforts to enact such laws argue that it wouldbe impossible to ban such deeds considering that the drivers engagein other distracting activities such as eating, listening to musicand talking to other passengers on board.

IV. Because of the same, it would be illogical to outlaw one of theactivities. However, what the opponents fail to realize is thataccidents that have been witnessed emanate from distractions in theuse of hands-free devices. Focus of the paper will be highlighting onwhy it should be illegal talking on a cell phone with a hands-freedevice. Evidence regarding the topic would be drawn from previouslyconducted research regarding the issue.



Driverdistraction has been identified as a significant cause of roadaccidents. Among the primary distractors are cell phones used forcommunication by the drivers while driving. Accidents witnessed inthe roads emanate because drivers are engaged in other activitiestaking much of their concentrations away. Those unable to efficientlybalance between driving and the distractive factors end up crashing. Sub pointoneCell-phoneuse through a hands-free device results in the drivers having tobalance between concentrating while driving and keeping theconversation with the other person on the other hand. The inattentionthat results from holding cell phone conversations has led to severeinjuries and extreme cases, fatalities (Tseng, Nguyen, Liebowitz &ampAgresti, 2005). With the increase in some lives lost on a dailybasis, it may be mandatory for states to introduce strict measuresregarding the prohibition of driving while talking on a cell phone ona hands-free device. If State governments were to allow the use ofhands-free devices while driving, then they should prepare to getmany cases of fatalities arising from the same. Fortunately forStates that have identified the issue to be of primary concern, theyhave decided to consider legislation on the issue of driver use ofcell phones when they are driving (Tseng, Nguyen, Liebowitz &ampAgresti, 2005). Driving is an important activity requiring a highdegree of attention from those executing the task. Drivers need tounderstand that they not only are in charge of their safety but thatof the passengers on board, pedestrians on the road and drivers fromother vehicles. Sub pointtwoDrivers havebeen distracted by different factors such as smoking, eating ordrinking. Despite the dangers that are imminent from conducting theactivities, none of them is close to the danger associated withtalking on the cell phone using hands-free devices causes. The braincan multitask and manipulate other objects while one is driving, butit needs to focus on what it is doing physically while at the sametime monitoring what is happening around. For example, texting whiledriving has been determined to be dangerous negating the need to havestrict laws that curtail the same (Ferdinand, Menachemi, Sen, B.,Blackburn, Morrisey, &amp Nelson, 2014). Driving entails a varietyof physical processes ranging from the need to maintain the pressureon the gas pedal, steering, to braking the vehicle when it becomesappropriate. Through the distractions emanating from cell phone usagevia hands-free devices, drivers may not be in a position to respondto events that are unpredictable such as the lead vehicle breaking(Tivesten &amp Dozza, 2005). “However,drivers may fail to sufficiently increase safety margins to allowtime to respond to possible unpredictable events (e.g., lead vehiclebraking)” (Tivesten&amp Dozza, 2005)The decisionfor a given driver to decide to talk using the hands-free devicemeans they have to focus their minds on the conversations they haveat the expense of the physical process of driving. The effect of sucha move is an increased chance of a crash. Legalization of talking onthe cellphone while driving should be the last thing states decide toundertake.Main PointLegalizationof driving and talking on a cell phone using a hands-free deviceshould be banned as a way of promoting responsible road use amongdrivers. Individuals who opt to use their phones in the course ofdriving can be perceived as being reckless and having little regardfor not only their lives but that of others. Because such individualshave failed to exercise the moral responsibility of employing cautionwhile driving, application of the law would be the most appropriatemethod to discourage such unwelcome acts. It is a requirement that asindividuals, one has the legal mandate of ensuring that they protecttheir lives and those of others. Sub pointoneDrivers whodecide to talk using cellphones through the handheld devices areevidently putting their lives and those of others. The degree ofdistraction resulting from manipulation of the handheld devices hassignificant effects on their concentration. The situation is worsenedby the fact that at least six out of ten drivers have been found tohave cell phones, furthering increasing rates of distractions (Tseng,Nguyen, Liebowitz, &amp Agresti, 2005).“Basedon telephone interviews of 4,010 drivers in the United States, NHTSAand the Gallup Organization conducted a national survey of distractedand drowsy driving attitudes and behaviors in 2002. The resultsuggested that 6 in 10 participating drivers have a mobile phone.Three in 10 of all drivers nationwide used mobile phones whiledriving on at least some of their driving trips” (Tseng,Nguyen, Liebowitz, &amp Agresti, 2005) If suchindividuals cannot adhere to the moral responsibility of protectingtheir lives and that of others, the law should be applied to compelthem to act in the right way. The law should prohibit motorists fromusing cellphones and handheld devices while driving. Sub pointtwoLegalizingthe use of cell phones through hand-held devices would mean that thestate has to grapple with an increase in medical costs associatedwith tending to victims of road accidents. The healthcare system inthe country is already burdened with patients presenting withdifferent kinds of ailments. Lawmakers have the mandate of making theright decision regarding whether or not it would be justified tolegalize the use of cell phones and handheld devices while driving.The question lawmakers need to consider is the current state of thehealthcare system in the country. Funds used in the management andtreatment of victims of road accidents can be channeled to othercrucial sectors such as cancers and other chronic diseases. The lawshould take a stance that seeks to discourage the use of cellphoneswhile driving because of the detrimental effects it is associatedwith. The law should draw the line where drivers are subjected toconducting themselves in a responsible manner by desisting from cellphone usage while driving. Laws that have previously been passedbanning cell phone usage while driving have not been effective inreducing traffic accidents since they can be perceived as beinglenient (Johnson, Reiley, &amp Muñoz, 2015)“Inlight of recent evidence that these bans do not reduce trafficaccidents, this article asks whether this is because the laws areineffective in reducing usage” (Johnson,Reiley, &amp Muñoz, 2015)CONCLUSION

Asignificant amount of lives continues to be lost courtesy of roadaccidents. A greater percentage of traffic accidents are associatedhuman error mainly linked to distractions making it difficult for thedrivers to be in control of the vehicles. Individuals have failed totake responsibility when it comes to road usage. Because of the same,it could be time to come up with restrictions that instill somediscipline on road users. A law that prohibits driving and using acell phone through the hand-held devices should be passed to curb thebehavior.


Ferdinand, A. O., Menachemi, N., Sen, B., Blackburn, J. L., Morrisey,M., &amp Nelson, L. (2014). Impact of texting laws on motorvehicular fatalities in the united states. American Journal ofPublic Health, 104(8), 1370-7. Retrieved fromhttp://search.proquest.com/docview/1549549127?accountid=87314

Johnson, R. M., Reiley, D. H., &amp Muñoz, J. C. (2015). DO CELLPHONE BANS CHANGE DRIVER BEHAVIOR? Economic Inquiry, 53(3),1420. Retrieved fromhttp://search.proquest.com/docview/1728408973?accountid=87314

Olsen, E. O. M., Shults, R. A., &amp Eaton, D. K. (2013). Textingwhile driving and other risky motor vehicle behaviors among US highschool students. Pediatrics, 131(6), e1708-e1715.

Tivesten, E., &amp Dozza, M. (2015). Driving context influencesdrivers` decision to engage in visual-manual phone tasks: Evidencefrom a naturalistic driving study. Journal of Safety Research, 53,87. Retrieved fromhttp://search.proquest.com/docview/1680747810?accountid=87314

Tseng, W., Nguyen, H., Liebowitz, J., &amp Agresti, W. (2005).Distractions and motor vehicle accidents: Data mining application onfatality analysis reporting system (FARS) data files. IndustrialManagement &amp Data Systems, 105(9), 1188-1205. Retrieved fromhttp://search.proquest.com/docview/234907057?accountid=87314