.
Feedback

Cell Phone Violations Still a Priority for New Canaan Police

A year after the issue became a high priority for the town, drivers continue to use cell phones while driving.

It was a year ago today that New Canaan was rocked by a that initiated, among other things, a dialog about distracted driving. On Aug. 18, 2010, 84-year-old Krishna S. Jayaraman was struck and killed as he collected his mail on Oenoke Ridge. According to the , Kate Regan, who is accused of hitting Jayaraman, told them she was changing a DVD when the accident occurred. 

Soon after the accident, and Police Commissioner Jim Cole announced an initiative to in New Canaan, specifically cell phone violations. In October, the CT legislature passed an .

So, how are we doing? Have New Canaan drivers put down their cell phones when driving?

According to Sgt. Carol Ogrinc of the , distracted driving is still a priority for traffic enforcement in town. She said that 1,441 cell phone violations were logged between Aug. 15, 2010 and Aug. 15, 2011. That’s out of a total of 6,767 motor vehicle stops during the same period (see chart below).

Police Commissioner Jim Cole said the numbers weren’t broken out “until this became a big subject,” so making a comparison to prior years is difficult. According to police records, in calendar year 2010 there were a total of 6,839 motor vehicle stops with 1,005 cell phone violations.

“This is frustrating to me as a police commissioner. They’re a fraction of what I know to be the actual violations,” Cole said. “Just from observing people around town. It’s constant. It’s ubiquitous. I look at these enforcement/citation numbers, they’re only a fraction of the violations.”

Police Chief Edward Nadriczny said he thinks we’ll see improvement over time, and compared the public’s response to its reaction to the 1968 federal law that made wearing a seat belt mandatory.

“I think we’re going to see them get better in very small increments, much as we did the seat belts. It was something new when it became law and people had to change their habits,” he said.

Cole thinks the challenge is greater than that.

“Over the long term it’s awareness and I’m not confident that as a society we’ll ever solve this. I hear that seat belts took care of themselves. It’s more ingrained in the culture than that,” he said.

Cole said Nadriczny gives him a report on cell phone violations at every police commission meeting, along with an assessment of trends the chief is seeing.

“I would like to see the enforcement numbers be higher," Cole said. "I would like to see people’s behavior change, but I’m not seeing it. It’s a disappointment.”

He said he'd like to see the state legislature increase the penalties for cell phone use while driving, but he isn’t expecting that to happen.

 “The legistlators genuinely feel if they make the penalties higher it still won’t have an effect on people’s actions,” he said.

Nadriczny said with people coming back from vacations and school about to start, the department will step up its awareness and enforcement campaigns. But the police can only do so much. 

“We will continue to do what we can to enforce the cell phone law as best we can,” Nadriczny said. “But the only people who can fix the problem are the drivers of the vehicles. Ask yourself the question: do you do it yourself?”

 

DATE Motor Vehicle Stops  Cell Phone Violations Aug. 15-31, 2010 264 38 Sept. 2010 487 52 Oct. 2010 831 347 Nov. 2010 742 204 Dec. 2010 491 76 Jan. 2011 419 107 Feb. 2011 442 82 March 2011 690 84 April 2011 422 25 May 2011 417 102 June 2011 695 165 July 2011 632 120 Aug. 1-15, 2011 235 14 TOTAL 6,767 1,441
CW August 18, 2011 at 11:59 am
I agree with Police Commission Cole. The problem of cell phone use while driving is ubiquitious. I jog and ride a bike around town often, and when I look at drivers in their cars, about half of them have a cell phone to their ear. It is a very dangerous, anti-social habit to drive distracted, and pedestrians and cyclists need to especially be aware that drivers are not giving the road their full attention.
Peter Rowley August 18, 2011 at 01:20 pm
While I agree with Mr. Cole, the one thing that legislators just don't get, is that talking on the phone, with the phone up to your ear, is MUCH less distracting than looking down at your phone and texting, or even dialing a number to make a call! It's the averting of your eyes that's dangerous. In some ways, the current law makes things WORSE, with folks hiding the cell phone in their lap, to dial and text. It's just common sense.
Mea Culpa August 18, 2011 at 03:06 pm
Well, you're at least partially correct. But I don't think you understand the complete facts.
No: texting bans don't work and as you say, people are now TNDWHFP (Texting N' Driving While Hiding From Police). As you say, accident rates go up (http://goo.gl/8R9a). Here's what you're not getting: hands-free isn't any better than hand-held (http://www.distraction.gov/stats-and-facts and PDF @ http://goo.gl/TZZb4). You're equal to being a drunk driver, either way. The National Safety Council says 28% of all accidents are caused by cell phone use; 25% by TALKING and only 3% by texting (PDF @ http://goo.gl/OwkTY). So why do politicians ban the lessor of the two evils, and voters concur? Worse: less than 3 people out of 100 can talk on a cell phone while driving safely (http://goo.gl/XGa3i). What does that say about the other 97 people, driving while talking, with their 3,000 pound battering-ram pointed in your direction? It's called "driving" and not "phoning" for a reason. It's time to disable all cell phones when moving, except to reach emergency services. This can be done by the phone companies using the built-in GPS of all newer phones (used to locate phones in an emergency). All we need are educated citizens with the intestinal fortitude to force the issue.
Justsayin.... August 18, 2011 at 03:27 pm
I know a lot of the NC police, but I think that they should begin setting an example. I'd say more times than not, that when I pass a police officer driving in his patrol car, he's also on a phone. It seems most people in NC are on the phone while driving, especially the suburban drivers and the police force, and I agree that talking on a phone or texting should be banned while driving, but I would like to see it also be banned for the police force. Blue Tooth, yo!
Peter Rowley August 18, 2011 at 04:02 pm
I use a Blue Tooth, but as anyone who uses one also knows, using voice dialing is anything but perfect, often ending up in calling the wrong person at best and worse, forcing you to look at your phone make adjustments to volume, etc.. As far as police being exempt from the law, it's ridiculous. Also, people have been eating, listening to music, adjusting controls, and a host of other things in their cars for decades! Somehow, the use of a PHONE in the car has become fodder for politicians' excessive legislating? Is there no PERSONAL responsibilty any more?
Nuff Said August 18, 2011 at 06:14 pm
I knew a few N.C. Police as well or I should say they knew me. JustSayin you make an excellent point. Perhaps if cell phones were around in my day Officer in question would have been texting for a DD meet up rather than nail me for crawling through a stop light at 2am and getting me in big trouble.
Back to the matter in hand. The phone. Yea whether it's an 8track or a phone or a hot jogger on South Ave people will always have better things to look at than the road in front of them. That same ol lonely monotonous road...btw I'm vibrating
Canaanite August 28, 2011 at 12:58 am
"Hands free isn't better than hand held" . . . I would argue that it absolutely is, when the car has bluetooth and you can speak voice commands to dial, etc. "Equal to being a drunk driver"? Pffft! How long then before a passenger is banned from everyone's cars because it's deemed "too distracting" to have a conversation? And then how long before radios and CD players are dismantled because listening to music is deemed akin to drunk driving? Give me a break! If anything, KIDS are distracting to drivers, but I highly doubt children will be banned from cars . . . Let's not get ridiculous about the whole thing!
Terrill Bennett August 28, 2011 at 11:56 am
Evidently Canaanite can't read, let alone talk on a cell phone while driving. Had Canaanite read the PDF@ http://goo.gl/TZZb4, Canaanite would know that talking with passengers isn't as distracting as talking on a cell phone, and would also know why. Reading the document would have prevented them from confirming their ignorance by asking "How long then before a passenger is banned..."
Yet another example of how people rationalize away the issue and put everyone else at risk rather than educate themselves, simply because it might inconvenience them. All those studies, statistics, the NHTSA, CDC, IIHS and other organizations MUST be wrong, simply because Canaanite disagrees! If you wouldn't want your pilot on a commercial flight doing something when landing at Chicago O'Hare or Atlanta air ports, then you shouldn't be doing it behind the wheel. As any good pilot will tell you, Rule #1: FLY THE PLANE!
Canaanite August 28, 2011 at 01:02 pm
Actually, Terrill, you can get off your arrogant high horse, as I DID read the article, which also says, "Vehicle manufacturers are including more wireless and voice recognition communications technologies in vehicles, but their impact on distraction has yet to be fully studied." Bottom line is that the government shouldn't be legislating and regulating a person's entire life . . . Cell phone use isn't the only thing that impairs cognitive distraction . . . As I said, screaming children in the backseat (or being late for work or irritated in traffic - or women putting on their makeup in the car - or people eating on the way to work, etc. etc.) are more likely to do that than a bluetooth cell phone, I would wager. But of course, there are no studies around that are there? (Nor will there ever be . . . no one can do a study on everything.) Not that I run my life based on studies . . . Common sense is more reliable. If people used their common sense, then they wouldn't hold a phone to their ear or try to text while driving, or fiddle with a headset when they are supposed to be paying attention - or yell at their screaming kids when they are supposed to be driving safely . . . and we wouldn't be having this conversation at all. Problem is, that no one has any common sense anymore, and that's why regulation of everything has become so popular. And that's why people like you, Terrill, feel like they can insult and preach at people like me . . .

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New Canaan Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Thomas Paine June 18, 2013 at 01:46 pm
Why is it the panel for this event does not include a single advocate for gun-owners' rights? WithRead More all due respect to Chief McNamara, why does the panel no include a person who can speak to gun safety from a gun-owning civilian's perspective? ML, you claim that the assembled folks "do not offer judgements about gun ownership" but they are not including a single voice that can offer perspective on gun ownership. I have been to "education" sessions sponsored by Meg's March for Change and they are one-sided indoctrinations into gun control advocacy. >>>> I was in Hartford for the public hearings in January when both Meg and March co-founder Nancy gave their personal testimonies and they all but threatened the legislators on the panel with election day retribution for all those who did not tow the gun-control line of thinking (i.e. March and CAGV). To suggest that Meg "does not offer judgements" if fallacious at best, disingenuous at worst.
Porter Gladstone III June 19, 2013 at 06:27 pm
I guess people can organize discussions with agenda as they see fit? Just checked some NRARead More sponsored meetings and this was the sample of speakers:attendees joined in honoring Friends of NRA Volunteers of the Year from across with country. Attendees also listened to speakers from the event's sponsors Cabela's, U.S. Law Shield and Universal Coin and Bullion. Former NRA President David Keene encouraged NRA members to stand and fight for their American freedoms, and R. Lee Ermy "The Gunny" reinforced the message by surprising guests and autographing a Glock pistol for one winner. Now unless "the gunny" was the invited person who spoke on behalf of gun control, I cant find the parrallel you demand be accomodated for this groups agenda.
Penny Riordan June 10, 2013 at 01:00 pm
Sorry Elmcrest! We don't like the spam either! As Lisa said, our engineers are working hard toRead More prevent those spammers from attacking our 900+ sites across the country.
Elmcrest June 11, 2013 at 07:45 am
Good luck! Just today, Tuesday, June 11, there have been over 350 of those spam posts since 3:30 AM,Read More and it’s not even 8:00 AM yet!
Ed Smith June 13, 2013 at 12:02 pm
Yup, "US Open Golf" is doing it right now, posting a new blog every 2 minutes.
Diane McEvoy June 18, 2013 at 09:48 am
US Representative Larson is now on board, which leaves Rep. DeLauro and Senator Murphy. Neither ofRead More their staffers are forthcoming about why they have not co-sponsored. Please call their DC offices and urge them to stop up. Murphy has supposedly received only 40 calls on the subject.
monique thomas June 7, 2013 at 05:14 pm
Unknown to most parents, children’s data is being shared beyond the school district with sixRead More agencies inside the Utah Data Alliance and UTREX, according to Utah Technology Director John Brandt. The student data is further being “mashed” with federal databases, according to federal Education Dept. Chief of Staff Joanne Weiss: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/inside-school-research/2012/07/ed_urges_states_to_make_data_s.html While John Brandt assures us that only a handful of people in Utah have access to the personally identifiable data of children, recent alterations to federal FERPA (Famly Education Rights Privacy Act) regulations which were made by the U.S. Dept of Education, have radically redefined terms and widened the window of groups who can access private data without parental consent. For more on that, see the lawsuit against the U.S. Dept of Education on the subject: http://epic.org/apa/ferpa/default.html But first, an interjection: I want to introduce this article: http://seattleducation2010.wordpress.com/2013/01/02/your-students-privacy/ I like this article because it exposes the facts plainly, that parents are unaware that their children’s information is being shared without parental permission, beyond the school, beyond the district, and even beyond the state. It is verifiable and true. What it means: Courses taken, grades earned, every demographic piece of information, including family names and income, is being watched by the U.S. government via schools. Verify for yourself: The U.S. Dept. of Education’s own explanation is here, showing why SLDS systems exist: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/slds/factsheet.html
Tasin Sumaia June 9, 2013 at 01:55 pm
http://directwatchliveonline.blogspot.com/2013/06/watch-france-vs-brazil-livestream-online.html
1CarGarageinNC June 6, 2013 at 06:16 pm
Why does ANY of this surprise you? You can take the man out of Chicago... Where is the outrageRead More across the land? Why do we sheepishly respond to these multiple malfeasances? Obama will stay in office and do what he wants until 2016 for one reason. Two words. President Biden.
Glen K Dunbar June 7, 2013 at 02:49 pm
I have and always will respect whoever our Pres was/is and will be. Is one person over the otherRead More really going to change my life?? NOPE. I am still going to be spinning my wheels in poverty. As for IRS> I think IRS should be closed too. Nobody wants to pay taxes. Why can't the Govt just print more money Problem solved!! Also, USA needs to stop wasting money overseas and take care of our own...like my bail out
Marie-Pierre Graf June 5, 2013 at 04:55 pm
I feel so blessed to have had those 37 great young people in my life for the last 3 years! I willRead More miss them so much!