|
Ron Jackson's Perspective
The Sunday Journal
Kankakee, Illinois
October 5, 2008
Cell phones bane to
today's society |
 |
|
Train tragedy example of a growing problem
Cell phone kills
25 people. That may sounds like a headline from a checkout counter
tabloid. Actually, it’s a true story, but it will never be reported
that way.
Last month in Los Angeles, a Metrolink commuter train ran a red
light and crashed into a freight train. The wreck killed 25 people,
including the engineer. National Transportation Safety Board crash
investigators are trying to determine the exact cause.
Through cell phone records, the preliminary report has
determined that the engineer sent a text message 22 seconds before
the train ran through a red light. Further investigation discovered
the engineer had sent or received 57 messages while on duty the day
of the crash. That is an average of seven messages per hour during
an eight-hour shift. When was this guy conducting the train?
Secondhand texting resulted in 24 deaths. Will it take cell
phone-related deaths to equal alcohol- or smoke-related deaths
before someone calls for a ban on cell phones?
It is now a violation for railway workers to use cell phones
while working. The Federal Railroad Administration issued an
emergency no cell phone ruling after it was determined that the
commuter train engineer had sent a text message just seconds before
his train wrecked.
What happens if someone violates the emergency no cell phone
order? They may be fined. They may lose their job. Even after the
loss of 25 lives due to human, preventable error, there is no
unambiguous consequence for violating this safety rule. Then why
implement a rule to save lives if it carries no definite penalty?
What happened to the days when no meant no? When it comes to
cell phones, the word no has come to mean maybe, sometimes, or OK go
ahead. The meaning of no now has as many exceptions as the “i”
before ”e” rule. The only zero-tolerance policy people seem to
observe is the no cell phone rule in the courthouse. That doesn’t
mean people won’t try to sneak them in. The courthouse entrance
screenings and the several warning signs work wonders.
Even in places where human safety is not paramount, other
public places could use some no cell phone policies. Out of sheer
respect, movie theatres and any place of business where a line is
required to get service quickly come to mind. No customer should be
allowed to conduct personal phone conversations while their
transaction is in progress. If a conversation is so important, why
is it so hard to step away and allow the next person in line to
proceed?
Even public schools are grappling with student cell phone usage
policies. Many schools that began with a no cell phone policy have
relaxed the rules. Some schools now allow students to bring their
phones to school but they must keep them in student lockers. Other
schools allow students to wear phones to class but the phones must
be in the “vibrate” position.
Why do students need cell phones in school? Who needs to call
the student during the school day other than a parent? And what
about the old-fashioned way when parents would call the school and
leave important messages for their kids? “Yes, this is Mr. Doe.
Please tell my son Johnny to go straight home from school. Yes, I
am aware what he means to tonight’s game, but I have taken him off
the team because of his grades. Please tell him to go straight
home. No, he doesn’t need to call home for clarification. No more
sports means no more sports. Thank you.”
To this day I still adhere to the no gum in school rule. Or
has that been changed, too? |
|
|
Thanks for stopping by! |
|
|
Home
| About | What's New |
Books | Columns |
Archives |
Seminars | Search |
Contact |
|
|
|
|
