DOT to ban phones in cars

[The Ween]

Anyone else remember Gilgamesh? Epic Hero:

No, but then he is "The Forgotten One".

 

[The Ween]

How did they get a hold of you before you had a cell phone?

They didn't.

I guess it's okay to wait for hours for some people, but if a loved one of mine gets hurt or even worse, I want to know about it NOW!

It's not like I use my cellphone all the time. Some months I only use a couple of minutes. I didn't even want one but my mother insisted because of all her health problems.

 

[The Mike]

How did they get a hold of you before you had a cell phone?

This kind of argument in these debates always makes me laugh. What did people do before indoor plumbing? They ____ in a hole in the ground. Some people still do. That doesn't mean you'll want to over the modern option. Just because we used to deal with not having a cell in the car before doesn't mean we'll want to or should have to learn to deal without again. Nothing against 316 of course just looking at the post which has been repeated in this thread a few times.

 

[karamazov80]

I think something that is being missed here is the fact that texting on cell phones is a relatively new phenomenon. Certainly the extensive level of texting we see nowadays. Whatever your ultimate perspective here, this deserves to be looked at in my opinion because it is a new threat to road safety, unlike anything else we've really seen before. Yeah, drivers get distracted by kids, and by food, and by changing the radio, and looking at billboards, and using the phone for a traditional call, etc. etc. etc. But texting takes specific attention for extended periods, requiring the eyes of the driver to be taken completely off of the road, and is done, in large part, by young folk who probably aren't very experienced in driving to begin with and thus are more likely to have an immature understanding of driving and what happens when you get distracted by this sort of thing. It is a dangerous issue, and despite Cruel's apparent beliefs to the contrary, there are many instances of crashes where the person being crashed into does not have the time or maneuverability to avoid being injured, no matter how defensively they drive. I don't know if it means existing laws have to be enforced differently or whether new laws need to be drafted, but I do think something needs to be done because I do see idiots doing this a lot.

 

[The Mike]

Texting is a dangerous phenomenon. No matter how good you think you are, your eyes are diverted for a moment and that is all it takes. It definitely is worse than taking an actual call IMHO.

 

[316what]

This kind of argument in these debates always makes me laugh. What did people do before indoor plumbing? They ____ in a hole in the ground. Some people still do. That doesn't mean you'll want to over the modern option. Just because we used to deal with not having a cell in the car before doesn't mean we'll want to or should have to learn to deal without again. Nothing against 316 of course just looking at the post which has been repeated in this thread a few times.

No offense taken. I'm just one of those people that just recently (3 years ago) got a cell phone. And the main reason I got one was so I could call my wife when I travelled out of town for work....hotel phones are too damn expensive. Even now between my wife and I we use less than 250 minutes per month.

In my case, it's something I could live without if it suddenly was unavailable.

 

[CelticPredator]

What if you actually read the article in the first post?? Did you seriously read it?? I'm guessing not because it clearly states it only shuts off the phone when the vehicle is in motion. When they are stopped the driver has full function of their phone. You said it yourself in an earlier post that you pull over to read your text messages. Why is it impossible to do this with phone calls in emergencies?

"While the specifics differ, the general idea is the same. When a cell phone or a vehicle exceeds a certain speed, determined by the car and transmitted via Bluetooth or by the speed of the cell phone itself as measured by cell phone towers, the phone is automatically disabled."

Yes I read it. And It's still a horrible idea. I'm a person that needs instant info in real time. I need a step by step map if I get lost.....

Text messages are different. I would NEVER use them for emergencies.

 

[CelticPredator]

Prog would probably do what he did before he had a cell phone.

And a cellphone is more of a luxury than a tool.

I disagree. Sure, most people use it as a thing...but some actually use it for the reason it was invented for. I think now it's a tool. A tool that is widely misused...but a tool.

If I didnt have a cell phone, I would've been driving around all night trying to get home...so thank god for cell phones!

 

[devilof76]

Devil that was an "EPIC" use of the multiquote feature.

If you mean Alcohol as in Drink and drive, then I have this to say

It's nice to know you play Russian Roulette with peoples lives like the Thousands of other people you have mentioned. I guess the guy who crashed into me thought like you before the accident. I think he felt differently when he saw my passenger's face covered in blood.

He probably didn't, because he was too drunk to drive competently, and I wouldn't try to drive if it was beyond my means.

And a cellphone is more of a luxury than a tool.

I'm with Mike on this. Hammers were a luxury when people had only used rocks before. Electricity was a luxury when all they had had were oil lamps, and oil lamps were a luxury when all they had had were candles. Etc. It's a tool if it's useful.

Texting is a dangerous phenomenon. No matter how good you think you are, your eyes are diverted for a moment and that is all it takes. It definitely is worse than taking an actual call IMHO.

It can be, but like driving under the influence, it requires the person driving to pay attention to what they are doing if they are going to attempt it. If I text, I never try to write more than is absolutely necessary, and I increase the effort I put into paying attention to the road. If something comes out of nowhere, I suppose I could be in trouble, but how is that any different than closing my eyes for an instant when I sneeze while driving?

What is dangerous is people refusing to exercise the proper judgment. They don't take responsibility for being conscious at the level that their actions require for them to be executed safely. The real danger in legislation like this is that people are transferring the responsibility for their level of awareness over to an outside party (the government) and how long does it take for them to become accustomed to operating at at reduced level of consciousness? I think this is where Darth Cruel's point becomes severly relevant. Who's responsibility--ultimately--is it for your life? Cops can't be at every home waiting for a break in to occur. They can't walk every girl home at night. They can't sit outside every bar and take the keys from every person who leaves.

What they can do is persecute those whose inattention causes harm to others, to the full extent of the law.

 

[creecher]

I'm with Mike on this. Hammers were a luxury when people had only used rocks before. Electricity was a luxury when all they had had were oil lamps, and oil lamps were a luxury when all they had had were candles. Etc. It's a tool if it's useful.

You're taking Mike's post and going off on a different tangent. Mike was laughing at the repeated use of posts, like mine, asking what people did before mobile phones. The reason I laugh at posts like Mike's is that, he too, has gone off on a tangent. Asking what people did before the modern version of the phone was invented is just taking an obvious safety issue and reverting back to the safer previous invention. No one is suggesting the more modern invention is worse or less convenient, because it isn't. The water closet of today is better than a hole. The hammer is better than a rock, but a mobile phone comes with modern drawbacks such as diverting ones attention, not to mention it's ability to stimulate brain tumours, a likely cause of peoples inability to differentiate between what was said, and what they think was said. Not to single out Mike's post in particular, because others have argued along the same line. It's just his was the latest to mention it and you incorrectly followed up on it.

 

[devilof76]

No, I just couldn't help but throw my two cents in. I knew he had it covered.

But, when people get new technology, it's their responsibility to keep up with the new demands of the tech, if they're going to use it. The only drawback is people being lazy and thinking they can use the phone in the car employing the same level of awareness of their surroundings that they did standing around the house.

 

[CelticPredator]

I agree. It's hard to drive and talk. If I HAVE to i'll put it on speaker.

 

[creecher]

No, I just couldn't help but throw my two cents in. I knew he had it covered.

But, when people get new technology, it's their responsibility to keep up with the new demands of the tech, if they're going to use it. The only drawback is people being lazy and thinking they can use the phone in the car employing the same level of awareness of their surroundings that they did standing around the house.

You guys.

Yep. That's exactly it. You are able to have the presence of mind to use the tool, with presence of mind intact. You don't see too many tradesmen scratching their head with a nail gun. As with any tool, be it a car, a phone, whatever. Education isn't always the same across the board. I mean how many times do you see someone with a mobile answer it and immediately they become unaware of their surroundings. Stepping in front of people, talking loudly etc. Those kind are just selfish and inconsiderate.

 

[devilof76]

Indeed. Someone should slap them.

 

[DinoLast]

Let me ask you a question. Do you take any responsibility for this accident? If not, why don't you?

No. I was on my side of the road going the speed limit when the drunk lost control, swerved on to my side of the road and hit me head on.

Funny enough the Police did not think it was my fault either.

Maybe it was my fault for not installing James Bond ejector seats

 

[creecher]

You don't see too many tradesmen scratching their head with a nail gun.

I think I spoke too soon.

https://www.google.com.au/images?hl...gbv=2&aq=0&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=nail+gun+&gs_rfai=



Now, back to the restricting of phones on the move. Mobile phones we call them here, but if it's any consolation, we tend to follow America's lead, so I guess we'll be calling them stationary phones in the not too distant future.

 

[DinoLast]

<object width="640" height="505"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/nY41q2p19yk?fs=1&hl=en_GB&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/nY41q2p19yk?fs=1&hl=en_GB&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="505"></embed></object>

 

[devilof76]

DinoLast, I agree with you that it was entirely the responsibility of the driver who hit you to stay in his lane. You were not at fault.

DC, I'm not entirely clear on what you're saying.

 

[Kuzeh]

They should ban make-up too...
In the past few days I almost got rear-ended by two women that were putting on make-up while driving!!!!...

 

[devilof76]

Indeed! I wish I had the energy to read it

Chicken ____.