Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-27-2012, 05:37 AM
 
Location: Inwood
552 posts, read 736,655 times
Reputation: 255

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
Do you deny that productivity will decrease when people are forbidden from conducting business by phone in their vehicles?
They've got this amazing new technology called bluetooth...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-27-2012, 05:50 AM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,223 posts, read 23,643,056 times
Reputation: 38579
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
U.S. ban sought on cell phone use while driving - TODAY News - TODAY.com (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/47197722/ns/us_news/ - broken link)

I am really not much of a cell phone user but every now and then I will answer a call while driving even though it is flat illegal in my state (WA). I've never found it to be dangerous. I have no problem keeping my focus driving while talking.

The biggest hazard I see on the roads are a) unsafe lane changes; b) slow drivers, which create an obstacle and constant stream of people trying to get around them, an obvious accident waiting to happen. Neither of which, of course are ever targeted by law enforcement.

This is all about rent-seeking, writing tickets, and grabbing cash. Yet another reason to give Pres. Obama the boot on Nov 6, 2012.
Once again, this should be left up to individual states to decide, NOT the federal government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2012, 10:17 AM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,400,602 times
Reputation: 4190
There are already laws against distracted driving.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2012, 01:29 PM
 
46,889 posts, read 25,860,181 times
Reputation: 29354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Do you change radio stations or talk to passengers? if so you are just as distracted.
So, if we can't stop every distraction, we shouldn't stop any? That's some fine logic there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2012, 01:35 PM
 
Location: Blankity-blank!
11,446 posts, read 16,159,318 times
Reputation: 6958
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
Do you deny that productivity will decrease when people are forbidden from conducting business by phone in their vehicles?
You talk a lot on phones? I've heard that constant cell phone usage causes brain damage! Voila!
Maybe some business people can wait a whole 20 seconds to pull over, safely out of traffic, and take care of business.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2012, 01:57 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,082,097 times
Reputation: 9408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachgns View Post
30 years of running a successful department of a very successful company, and then running my own consulting business, so that now, in my 60's, I serve only in a volunteer capacity.

I stand corrected however if someone can show that the majority of in-car cellphone users are conducting business. I seriously doubt that even 5% are doing so, and of those that are, almost every conversation can wait the minutes until the driver can get to his office or parking lot.
It's not about the percentage of people doing business, although i'd reconcile that far more than 5% of drivers talking on the phone are having business discussions, whether working for a company or actually owning the company.

Back in 1999 or so, one of my employees asked me why I needed a phone in the truck as we were headed to a job site. He went on to say that he despised talking on the phone and didn't ever see himself having a cell phone. (He has since reneged on that philosophy, no doubt.) I could actually sympathize with that sentiment, as I hate talking on the phone as well. But I also saw the benefit of not being tethered to a desk or a pay phone just to relay simple but important messages. Without a doubt, cell phones have made businesses more efficient by orders of magnitude.

I understand what you're saying when you believe that most calls can wait, but that's the whole point of efficiency....not making something wait if it doesn't have to. Personally, I believe human capability has evolved to a point where multi-tasking is a regular and recurring part of our lifestyle. Some people can't multitask, but most can talk and drive at the same time. I know I can. (Texting is a different matter)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2012, 03:02 PM
 
14,941 posts, read 8,555,251 times
Reputation: 7360
I have been growing more and more annoyed with the increased use of cell phones, and particularly the nitwits who choose to text while driving ... every day I see people with what appears to be a permanent growth on the sides of their heads, seemingly incapable of doing anything without talking and texting. It's like an epidemic mental disorder.

That said, I also realize that you cannot outlaw "stupidity" , and it will always be there no matter how many laws you have. So, I'm not in favor of outlawing it because we have too many laws already being abused by law enforcement authorities, and laws like this that often seem to be a good idea at the time, tend to become another of those laws that are eventually taken to extremes by over zealous law enforcement, for no other purpose than revenue generation.

DWI laws are a classic example ..... of course nobody supports driving while intoxicated .. it's very dangerous, and there can be no rational argument that could claim otherwise. However, these DWI laws have become a cash cow for the police and for the legal system, and over the years, the criteria for what was considered "intoxicated" have been reduced year after year. Then, the "Driving under the influence" DUI began riding shotgun alongside DWI, with virtually the same penalties, but "under the influence" slowly became a "judgment call", rather than a legally fixed blood-alcohol level. Now, if you dare have a beer or a glass of wine with dinner at your favorite restaurant, you could be in jeopardy of such harassment and the extremely costly and unpleasant consequences of being arrested as a "drunk driver".

This happened to a friend ... he was pulled over and charged with drunk driving. In our new leftist nanny state, he's guilty until proven innocent and was required to have a breathalyzer installed in his vehicle as a condition of keeping his driving "privileges" until trial ... which he also had to pay for. As it turned out, the BAL turned out to be well under the .08 limit, and the case was eventually dismissed. But that didn't eliminate the pre-trial punishment and the costs to him, including legal fees. And, appropriate to the topic, this breathalyzer not only was needed to start the vehicle, but went off periodically as he drove, requiring him to blow in it repeatedly, else a report was sent, and he'd be in violation of the agreement (an in vehicle camera was also part of the apparatus). This frequent alarm and need for retesting his breath ... sometimes separated only by 5 or 10 minutes in between was most certainly a distraction while driving ... and a pretty stupid one too ... at 1:00 pm he's driving, and at 1:05pm the alarm goes off ... he has to blow into the device ... then at 1:15pm again it goes off? ASININE law run amuk.

In Britain recently it was reported that a Brit was fined for eating a sandwich in his car, while parked. The law was written such that any activity conducted behind the wheel that might be distracting, is against the law ... no stipulation was made as to whether the driver was actually driving or parked. So if you park ... best you hop out of your vehicle quickly ... and take no chances like looking for something in your glove compartment ... eat a sandwich ... or put your sun glasses away.

This is the problem with these "nanny laws" .... we have too many of them already, and we don't need more, in spite of how dangerous and annoying stupid people can be.

I've got a much better idea ... and it's not new ... it was around for most of history ... if some idiot harms you or screws up your car or property as a result of their stupidity ... lets make it legal to beat the ever living daylights out of the idiot. That will leave a more lasting impression than a $50 fine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2012, 03:49 PM
 
Location: Blankity-blank!
11,446 posts, read 16,159,318 times
Reputation: 6958
Another distraction that no one mentioned yet is having your hand just above your girlfriend's bare knee while you drive. But that's more fun than listening on the phone as your wife yaks (complains) endlessly about her relatives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2012, 04:01 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,095 posts, read 25,956,059 times
Reputation: 6128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
Another distraction that no one mentioned yet is having your hand just above your girlfriend's bare knee while you drive. But that's more fun than listening on the phone as your wife yaks (complains) endlessly about her relatives.
I've gotten into a minor fender bender while engaged in this type of behavior. Fortunately, it happened in a drive thru lane and I knew the owner of the car I hit - he laughed and waved it off. No big deal - and the lady wasn't mad either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2012, 04:04 PM
 
Location: California
37,097 posts, read 42,098,467 times
Reputation: 34962
I know someone who puts her phone on speaker and talks to people hands free while commuting. I don't see a problem with that. When you see the word "ban" you know there is stupidity afoot. Things aren't always black and white and there are always exceptions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:36 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top