Driving drunk is illegal, shouldn't driving with cell phones also be?

The problem is not the cell phones. It's anything that can distract certain drivers (eating, adjusting the radio, talking to a passenger..etc). Cell phones just happen to be the most common thing people use, so it's always a target.

Once we target cell phones, where does it stop? Do cops pull people over for eating? Talking to others in the car? What about chewing gum?

I can use a cell phone and drive at the same time without it having any effect on my driving. Why do I need to be penalized because there are so many people that can't?

People need to take responsibility for themselves and know their own limits and stay with in them. What they need is a simple test people could take that would show them that they really shouldn't talk and drive. One simple question could be: Do you often miss your turn or exit when talking and driving? I bet a lot of people would say yes to this.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 30 2006, 08:51 AM) [snapback]279108[/snapback]</div>

absolutely cellphones should be banned. we all know that. think of all the near misses you have had and looked over to see the other driver on a phone. Be honest and think of yourself and the occasional times you have 'spaced out' on your driving while on the phone and 'could' have been in an accident if circumstances were right. Just because phone companies are pulling the same excuse as gun dealers do ie"guns don't kill, people do" It's not the acutal physical phone which causes accidents it's the drivers USING the phones who cause accidents. Fine, but then leave the phone in the car and remove the driver and all will be well!!! Driving while phoning is an unquestionable hazard and should be banned. One of my many personal experiences illustrating the point is the following. Lady in front of me was on the phone. Car ahead of her stopped. She never even touched her brake and slammed into the car in front of her. My car slammed into her (remember she showed NO brake lights before the accident). Three cars involved because one fool had to gossip instead of drive. Dangerous. They say hands free phoning helps, but it is still not as safe as NO PHONING while driving.

 

Well, if they ban cellphones then they'll have to ban driver conversations in general.

Or do you expect a "handsfree exception" so that one can talk if both hands could be on the wheel? Doesn't sound like a two-handed driver would have been paying more attention.

So the cops should do a 180 every time they see a driver talking.

And if you can't stop in time to avoid hitting someone, you were too close, brake lights or not. The two-second rule isn't just for highways...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mikepaul @ Jun 30 2006, 09:33 AM) [snapback]279153[/snapback]</div>

I think it will be one of those that the cops don't enforce as they like to talk on the cell as much as everyone else. I thought it was a 3 second rule??

Wildkow

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Jun 30 2006, 12:36 PM) [snapback]279158[/snapback]</div>

Too true...

http://autorepair.about.com/library/glossary/bldef-782.htm

Three is just safer, I guess...

 

Distracted driving should be a crime. I suppose that anybody driving with a screaming child in a car seat, anyone with a cup of coffee, or a fast food delight, or a dripping ice cream cone would also be banned from the road. I would wager we should also ban navigation systems that function while the car is in motion, cd players, ipods, and passengers while we are at it... How about the poor driver crossing his legas because he has to pee or someone driving while looking at the "instant mpg" display?

The banning of cell phones may happen because the people against cell phones have enough statistical information to make a case. However to wait until a distraction has statistical supporting evidence is the wrong way to save lives as too many lives have already been lost. The big problem is drivers, not their choice of distractions.

I am amazed at states that do not allow gambling but feel fine about running a lottery. I can't remember the last time I saw the economic uppoer class standing in line to buy lottery tickets but every time social security checks come out our less fortunate senior citizens are waiting to throw their money away in hopes of winning the big one.

I choose to pull over 99% of the time I need to use my phone and those few times i keep driving are on clear roads when all i need to do is say "yes" to my wife in regards to picking something up at the store.

 

The most blessed site on the road is a 16 year old girl in a BMW with 2 or 3 friends.... She's all cute and giggly and obviously enjoying her conversation with her boyfriend on her cell phone as well as having a conversation with the passengers in the car.

Odds on crash are pretty high here.

I'm not sure if they should be banned, but in the event of an accident, the penalties should be stiff if they can determine you were on the phone.

Pretty soon, someone will 'get off' because they will use the defense that they were talking on the phone and totally unaware of the driving situation in front of them, so they couldn't possibly be held responsible for the carnage that took place in the accident. (cell phone insanity defense)..

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tnthub @ Jun 30 2006, 01:01 PM) [snapback]279178[/snapback]</div>

I really do believe it's already a ticketable offense. What it isn't is regularly enforced. I tend to take a drink of my pop when no cop is in sight.

Well, when the state gets its cut, all is good. Bookies rarely share the wealth, but 7-11 operators keep good books or else...

 

I would have to agree with the of banning handheld cell phones, Hands free would be ok if voice activated....

I can't tell you how many drivers we see blast through red lights or run over pedestrians while talking on their cell phones see the below links.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/...51209113320.htm

http://www.autoblog.com/2005/11/30/teen-dr...hones-dont-mix/

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,201586,00.html

 

I guess the real question is have the actual accident rates gone up proportonately to cell phone use or is it simply easier to quantify the distrction of choice for the Darwin Award candidates?

 

Hey, does that mean that my Prius should be banned?!?!?!?!

I have the built-in blue tooth feature and as ALL the evidence shows, its the distraction of the conversation and not the phone itself that allegedly causes accidents.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 30 2006, 11:51 AM) [snapback]279108[/snapback]</div>

Since we're talking about making distractions while driving illegal, I don’t think it should be legal to have children in your car.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Devil's Advocate @ Jun 30 2006, 01:40 PM) [snapback]279202[/snapback]</div>

EXACTLY! It's not the "holding a thing in one hand" that causes the distraction; it's the "talking on the phone." This is why all of these "must use hands-free" laws annoy me; they're not addressing the real problem. Talking on the phone while driving is a significant distraction; all evidence shows that actually holding the phone is only incrementally more distracting.

 

How safe do you want to be? How much government protection can you stand?

We could let some states try it and leave others alone and see how much difference it really makes.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tumbleweed @ Jun 30 2006, 02:31 PM) [snapback]279231[/snapback]</div>

http://www.cellular-news.com/car_bans/

I guess we just need to keep an eye on how it goes, but usually it goes badly for a bunch of people before things change...

 

makes one think why auto-piloted vehicle systems arent being pushed harder. the technology has been here a long time but no one wants to take on the formidable expense of implementing a system. that would take care of drunks, space cases and overworked truckers all in one fell swoop.

considering over 50,000 traffic fatalities a year (most due to inattentive or impaired driving) what is the value of a human life?? a million dollars?? might be a bargain for an elderly person, but not so for teenager. but if it was a million, then we are spending FIFTY BILLION DOLLARS a year in humanity to save the cost of a program that would save a huge proportion of those lives. would that program be that expensive??

probably more than 50 billion. but that would be installation. maintainance would surely be much less and remember the traffic deaths is a yearly cost to us. but then again, we need to look at the Darwin theory that says that people who dont deserve to live will find a way to kill themselves off hopefully before procreating thus increasing the intelligence and value of the human gene pool.

but as usual, the #1 opponent to technology that will most certainly raise our standard of living will be the auto industry. woe to them should they not have the abundance of totalled vehicles that need to be replaced every year. then we would surely have to contend with them designing flaws that appear after 5-7 years or normal use.

 

I guess the other report about cold meds have been lost or forgotten.

Cold/allergy meds (etc) are as bad, or worse, than alcohol as some even contain a little of it.. There was another report about that you're just as bad when you've just woke up.

It's not about how buzzed you are, but how slow your reaction is.

Ban human driven vehicles!