Quote:

Why not just ban driving?

Haven't you seen the Nissan Leaf commercial where drivers don't steer their cars any more and we drive like a "school of fish"?

No, I've been too busy smoking truckloads of crack in a vain and fruitless attempt to try and make sense of the world.

It's not helping.

Oh yep, im sure he was sarcastic!

No, I've been too busy smoking truckloads of crack in a vain and fruitless attempt to try and make sense of the world.

It's not helping.


Been there.

I thought sarcasim was some virtue?
Dam.

Quote:

Ok phantom you wanna attack my 5 pound pom with your 3 ton car you go ahead and text while your at it.

Db:
First of all, I don't text. I do carry a Blackberry for business, but I only use it for phone, to read e-mails quickly while away from the office, and for music when I travel. So your Pom is safe from me texting...


The point I was trying to make is that UNTIL there is an actual event resulting in injury (monetary of physical), then there is no crime. Now, I know that our current legal system prefers the "Nanny State" model. But just because that is the case currently, doesn't exactly make it right.
If your Pom is run over by someone due to distraction, then you have a case. But it shouldn't matter if the distraction is from cell phones, kids, alcohol, passenger discussion, eating a soft taco while driving, or ANY other such nonsense. Until the actual occurence, the incident is only possible, NOT "actual". Same with your Pom biting someone. Currently only "possible", not currently "actual" though.
Hell, every gun owner is a possible murderer, and every man is a possible rapist, but just because the equipment is available to commit an act doesn't mean it is going to happen.

Make sense?

LOL whoo hey lol,cmon Phantom i just jiving yah lol.

Retract lol.

Sense? where? i havent seen any sense anywhere,when you find him lemme know.

Ohh my side hurts,i ate too mukchuk on a stick.

I work in EMS and I can tell you without a doubt, people should not be texting, calling, reading books, putting on makeup, knitting, having sex, or re-loading their gun while driving. I have been on all of those calls. There may be more examples but those are the ones that come to mind.

However, we absolutely DO NOT need another ****ing law. It is already against the law in all states, that I am aware of, to drive recklessly. How do I know this? I know the cops the write the tickets. Unless your dead, you're in trouble if you were at fault.

FWIW, you should always wear clean underwear. Your mom was right about that.

Db was being sarcastic for anyone who hasn't figured it out.

pcaldallas wrote..

, I've been too busy smoking truckloads of crack in a vain and fruitless attempt to try and make sense of the world.

Bwahahahahah

Rbarriera wrote..

Why? Because I have already done the following two things:

1- Driving while (slightly) drunk.
2- Driving while using a cell phone.

... and my driving was definitely worse in the second case.

Medical evidence to support this first appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1997.

Sneezing while driving is one thing, but I see way too many people who can't back out of their driveway in my neighborhood, or back out of a space in parking lots I frequent, without starting a call on the cell phone growing out of their ear.

The laws have been cracking down on drunk drivers in recent years, but that won't help much if those impaired drivers are replaced by cell phone junkies on the road.

You know that when you remove all distractions from the car people just start driving faster and more aggressively until it negates the safety improvement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compen....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smeed'....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_homeos....

More bull**** federal paternalism.

ban drive thrus while you're at it

oh wait, mcdonalds gets special waivers on obamacare

carry on and wait for Verizon lobbyists

I'm sorry, but I don't think all drivers are equal. I used to be an air traffic controller and I could monitor and speak with multiple people on multiple frequencies at the same time all while climbing down a ladder to get a smoke. I'm sure that I can steer and talk to my mother at the same time. I don't need a federal law equating my brain and reaction time to some 84 year old or a 19 year old mother with two screaming kids in the car. We are all different with different abilities, when we **** up, prosecute us, until then, leave us alone.

I don't care about the issue, this is NOT a federal question, and has NO business being one. What does it have to do with our common defense, or interstate commerce?

How could they even suggest such a thing? WTF is our country coming to?

What's next? Federally mandated vehicle inspection standards? Criteria for building permits?

****ING STOP IT!

Quote:

What's next?

Let's see.

1. Gun Control
2. National Sales tax
3. Wage controls
4. Card check.

It for the children.

To enforce such a law, they will have to hire enough cops to have one ride shotgun in every car in the US, to make sure that law is obeyed. Full employment program for cops...

Batgirl + 1! I've handled multiple tasks for over 20 years as a professional pilot, and believe it or not, I can actually talk and drive a car! I still pick my places, as a busy Fred Meyer parking lot is NOT the place to be talking, whereas an interstate hwy and traffic flows that match seem to me to be a no stress situation. I am against texting at any time as that diversion of attention from situational awareness can really use up the highway with no attention left for what is going on around. WA State recently changed the law making talking or texting (as of June 10th 2010) a Primary Offense.

Here is a link to all the individual state laws regarding this issue.

http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/....

Was happy to be in Montana for 10 days, ahhhhh.... the freedom to talk and drive!

Quote:

To enforce such a law, they will have to hire enough cops to have one ride shotgun in every car in the US, to make sure that law is obeyed. Full employment program for cops...

Which is irrelevant. Nobody cares if it can be enforced. So long as we get enough laws on the books to ensure every single American is a "criminal" then it can be enforced when it needs to be on whom it needs to be.

I don't mind people texting/talking on the cellphone while driving, as long as I get to shoot back.

Torn here too. Almost had a bunch of people hit me while texting. Just yesterday a guy SLAMMED on his brakes and ended up missing my rear end by about 3 inches. He was texting and we were in stop and go traffic.

In general I'm against nanny-state bs however so I really don't have an opinion on this one. 50-50 am I.

Here's the 1997 article:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJ....

"Results

A total of 26,798 cellular-telephone calls were made during the 14-month study period. The risk of a collision when using a cellular telephone was four times higher than the risk when a cellular telephone was not being used...The relative risk was similar for drivers who differed in personal characteristics such as age and driving experience; calls close to the time of the collision were particularly hazardous...and units that allowed the hands to be free (relative risk, 5.9) offered no safety advantage over hand-held units..."

"Conclusions

The use of cellular telephones in motor vehicles is associated with a quadrupling of the risk of a collision during the brief period of a call. Decisions about regulation of such telephones, however, need to take into account the benefits of the technology and the role of individual responsibility."

From what I've seen of cell phone junkies behind the wheel, individual responsibility plays little to no role.

It's not necessarily a Fed thing. Many individual states have laws covering it.

I see this type of legislation as little more than pandering: make the sheeple think the politicians are doing "good stuff".

Many (most? all?) states already have laws on the books for reckless and/or inattentive driving which cover the actual problem here. Because of this, I don't see any more laws in this arena being necessary. Just enforce the freaking existing laws!!!!

Let's face it, there are probably zillions of laws that could be written, all of which would serve the same purpose as the proposed cell phone law - where does it end? What about a law prohibiting juggling chainsaws while driving, and another one for driving while blindfolded, and another one for cutting one's toenails while driving, and another one for . . . etc., etc., etc.?

Disclosure: By personal choice, I don't even have a cell phone.