Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
When one is in heavy traffic it is very easy to spot the cell phone user time and time again. They invariably take turns wide. Can't keep up with the flow of traffic. And most importantly have a delayed reaction to hitting the brakes when the traffic stops suddently.
Unfortunately you can't tell *most* people this. All distractions are not created equal. And while someone can probably search up an example of someone killing themselves because they scratched their nose, you can't ban nose scratching or form a conclusion of a sample of one. However, cell phone usage has been proved time and time again to rob you of your concentration.
I see this all the time from people NOT on cell phones. Lets be honest here people do that be they on a cell phone or distracted from other things. In recent years I have been rear ended twice by distracted drivers, their distraction? Kids fighting in the back seat.
Really I have seen more idiotic things done by people reading the newspaper, putting on makeup, stuffing their faces, and the kicker, I saw someone today shaving in their car rear end someone.
Ok if a cell phone distracts you then don't use it in your car. But to be perfectly honest all the arguments I have heard against cell phones either apply to other things or really don't make much sense.
Come on people its not the cell phone its the idiot that doesn't concentrate on his or her driving regardless of what they are doing.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I simply disagree. The cell phone is special type of distraction. We are not talking about idiotic things people do behind the wheel. We are talking about a specific type of common distraction that has been proven time and time again to rob one of their concentration.
Any type of distraction is bad, but there are necessary distractions like fiddling with the wipers or turning on the headlights. I'm all for educating drivers that applying makeup while driving at 65 probably isn't a good idea.
But a cell phone user is a cinch to spot in traffic. They are the ones that don't appear to be doing anything distracting and yet their driving is erratic.
I really think that the thing about the cell phone is precisely what you say in the above quote. Same reason why they go after speeders only and NOT so call dangerous drivers Simple to see.
It is also easy to track. Let see," you claim that precisely at 03/03/03 at 3:33 pm the precise time of the accident you were not on the cell phone. Yet the records indicate that you were on the phone for 3 mins." Case closed
It might be much harder to prove being distract whle munching down fries, as you plow into an suv, for example.
Another, in a not too distant bygone era was getting distracted while trying to put out burning cigarette embers that fell into your lap as you crashed into the car in front.
Unfortunately these days it's probably partially illegal medicinal materials.
Hmmm, well, I'd be a lot more tolerant if they were used more reasonably...but that's a popcorn side dish.
Can driving a vehicle with bad styling be considered inconsiderate?
LOL. Personally, I think among the most inconsiderate things someone can do is drive a Hummer. It just screams "inconsiderate". The H3 is less so, but the H1 and H2 are just statements that are ugly as sin, IMO.
I usually don't use the phone (except for quick functional calls) unless I am cruising on the highway. In that case, the amount of focus necessary is somewhat lower (although still quite necessary, of course). Common sense shold prevail, and of course, sometimes, it doesn't. Then things get inconsiderate :=)
But the notion of banning cell phone use is as much overkill as banning radios, eating, drinking and, well, passenger discussion.
You can't legislate good judgement. Unfortunately.
I wonder how many rear-enders were caused by long gazes.
On the other hand - I'd vote for a law that banned my family from distracting behavior in the car.
I wonder what damage has been caused by smoking while driving. Driving behind an especially noxious smoker in tight traffic makes them look very inconsiderate.
During the times that smoking was prevalent, accident, injury and fatality rates were way higher. While this does not necessarily indicate correlation, one is in the "correct church" so to speak, and you would have to look back to those times when up to 65% of the driver population was a smoker. or "right pew" The interesting thing to me would be to see if they even kept distraction statistics at that time.
I usually don't use the phone (except for quick functional calls) unless I am cruising on the highway. In that case, the amount of focus necessary is somewhat lower (although still quite necessary, of course). Common sense shold prevail, and of course, sometimes, it doesn't. Then things get inconsiderate :=)
But the notion of banning cell phone use is as much overkill as banning radios, eating, drinking and, well, passenger discussion.
You can't legislate good judgement. Unfortunately. "
I would agree!
This a rare statistical anomoly when LI Sailor and I have agreed ! Touche! Perhaps I am rubbing off on you! ?
I'll go on record to say I'm not for banning cell phone use. I'm all for healthy fines and points when law enforcement determines in it's own judgement, distracted driving behavior.
Yeah, but that would take all the fun out of it :=)
Next thing, our politicians will start acting sensibly. Well, that nutty majority, anyway :=)
Sure, me, too, in theory. However, I've never seen or heard of a ticket being issued for fiddling with the radio too long, having a discussion and forgeting about the traffic or turning around and yelling at the kids while "driving". But tickets are issued to folks driving just fine, but talking on the phone. If tickets were only issued when a person was actually observed being distracted, that would be different (whatever the reason). But it's much easier to simply outlaw an overt behavior.
So even though I agree that there are many responsible people who take full care while talking on the cell phone (or while facing other forms of distraction), I believe we need a ban on cell phone talking because of all those idiots out there who pay no heed to others. You cannot legislate and prevent all forms of distraction! But think of it on the lines of the speed limits, you can catch someone going over the speed limit but you cannot stop someone on a death wish in any way. You can do your best and make the roads as safe as possible. But everything has a limit and you cannot eliminate all dangers altogether!
That is hilarious. The simplest solution would have been to post "recommended" speeds, similar to the caution signs used across the US and Canada with speed postings for curves and corners approaching on the roadway. The speed posting is not a requirement (it is a recommendation) but a driver can be cited for "driving too fast for conditions" should the recommendation be ignored and something happen as a result. Ah, but again, we are talking about law here and the words "law" and "simple" are mutually exclusive.
Which is why they keep legislating. The goal is to remove all individual judgement and thereby eliminate all personal responsibility. Won't the civil lawyers love that?!
The law, known hereon as "the moron law": "All vehicles are to be equipped with warning information citing all limitations of the vehicle.... blah blah blah (for another 30 pages)."
Later:
"No, your Honor, my client was not responsible for the accident, it was the auto manufacturer. If the manufacturer had not intended him to be able to take a nap while driving, there should have been a warning label clearly visible to my client at all times while behind the wheel."
"Wasn't your client driving a 1985 pickup?"
"Yes, your honor."
"That was prior to the moron law taking effect."
"The manufacturer should have recalled the vehicle to correct this safety hazard. Just because he drove an old vehicle doesn't mean he is any less of a moron or any more responsible for his own actions."
:sick: :P
Hmmm, good judgment precludes wild exaggeration and overstatement :=)
Well, it's hard to argue on that one.
Um, yes, the notion that the goal of legislation is to remove all individual judgement is wild exaggeration and overstatment. It's hard to argue otherwise. Effectively, that is. Even harder to make it topical :=)
And off topic on responsibility... the wife is runnng a summer day camp kind of thing tomorrow and had to buy some beach balls. On one panel o fthe ball, printed in about 8 different languages, is text that warns you that the product is only to be used under adult supervison. Incredible.
Yup, there's something that's run amok....moronic warnings to reduce product liability. Inconsiderate jurors that do a a bad job of considering.....the relevant and reasonable facts. Of course, they are then to blame for the equally idiotic notion of limiting lawsuit amounts...throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Some folks should have their judgement options limited :=)
Just my $.02
Ken
Sooo, the cop was inconsiderate? Might be best to keep cops in front of you lest they find something wrong on the back end of your car and pull you over.
And just think there are pro lower speed limit advocates that think we should drive like the above situation ALL the time.!!??
In a way, yes...as there was no reason not to go the limit. But I can excuse that (and you won't see me defending a cop evry often) as the actions of the other drivers were much stupider.
It was scary. I have passed cops countless times, and would have this time if I wasn't a few cars back in the bottleneck. These are paranoid times.
Here is an easy one. If an officer is within legal following distance, he can not see a MANDATORY registration sticker with 1 alpha letter and 7 digit numerical numbers on a 1x1.75 in registration sticker It would take superman using telescopic vision to see the numbers on a CA yearly registration on the already small license plate. (scale is like a postage stamp on a #10 envelope) 6x11 in license plate 1x1.75 in sticker.
So I rhetorically ask : how many folks know what the numbers are on this mandatory document colors and numbers change yearly ? So if the officer targets 100% of those cars that he can not SEE (see conditions above) he can literally stop anybody for probable cause. He already knows that a good % are expired and so therefore can bring in more state revenues by stopping folks. So what if he asks you the alpha numeric and you don't have a good answer!!???
You need to understand the road a little bit. My office is on a huge plot of land off the Interstate. You need to take an exit which then becomes an overpass of sorts over a few small roads and on the descent, it curves quite sharply to the right, and it is on this descent [non-permissible content removed] curve that you first have a speed hump and then a couple of barricades (the bar is up all day and you need to stop and use your badge to lift the bars at night). Immediately after crossing the barricade you come up to a roundabout. It is an engineering disaster (we recently had a trailer plough through the barricades). Still they do have some warning signs.
So I am driving back after getting some lunch, doing 75 on a 65 highway. Suddenly I see this black SUV looming up rapidly in my rearview mirror. He had to be doing at least 100 the way he just appeared suddenly. Then he swerved into the exit at a good speed. I am guessing many sedans would skid out or topple over at such speeds on the exit (I have a Celica GTS and anything beyond 85 feels scary at that exit). I guess it is a tribute to Porsche that the SUV actually made it through that turn.
Further up, he slowed down a bit but approached the hump a good speed. The SUV went flying over the hum (I saw all 4 wheel lose contact with the ground!) Then he approached the roundabout at a rapid speed. Vehicles already into the roundabout always get the right of the way. I could see an explorer already into the roundabout but this guy just went straight in. I thought this was a sure crash but the explorer guy slowed down and averted the crash (a very small bit of me was disappointed, I wanted to see what happens when these SUV people go head to head against each other).
All said and done, he is a disaster waiting to happen. I agree a Porsche is an amazing machine but there is just that much of an extent to which you can push the laws of physics!! I just hope he doesnt take out other people with him.
Anyways, I have not yet some across any cop going below the speed limit so this guy mustve been upto something.
People's lives can be ruined when they try to abuse their power. Trouble me in an out of control manner, you'll end up regretting it, in time.
I once got passed on I5 by a guy in a Cayenne who was going maybe 110. He had a big dog in his 4-wheeled overcompensator. I was thinking...if he wrecked it, it would be more of a loss if the dog got hurt than the driver.
A small example I was going 85 mph from Santa Barbara to LA when I spot a very fast moving and overtaking light flashing vehicle far in the rear. Since I was using the left lane to pass only, when the truck got to within action range, I moved over to let it go by... (BIG MISTAKE?) It took me 15-20 cars to get into the passing lane after this BOMB truck went by .
I agree, and they should exercise it well because they are charged with the public's trust (as sappy as that may sound).
Ruking, I am not sure I followed you on the example. "It took me 15-20 cars to get into the passing lane after this BOMB truck went by ." Will you please clarify this closing sentence?
It's happened to us before, when some 1980's Suburban literally pushed us out of the fast lane and into the middle lane. We couldnt go in the passing lane for a while, not until a good number of cars passed.
When your walking down the street, do you expect someone to walk inches from your [non-permissible content removed] because your walking slow? Of course not. There's no social shame in tailgating some grandma in a Buick Century. She might flip you off, but there's no other repercussion.
People rarely honk their horn, atleast in my area. You can drive down the expressway and easily point out the drivers that "must break thru at all costs" to arrive home two minutes early. What can you do? You can't shout out the window, "Hey jerk! Keep your pants on, your dinner ain't going anywhere!", he's already a half mile down the road.
Maybe we could put our useless camera phones to use and snap pictures of these idiots and post them to: AsinineDrivers.com ... I'm sure that site would be overloaded with photos - but coupled with an easy way to lookup driver name and address from a plate, then maybe the inconsiderate drivers might feel some shame in knowing that they've be outted in a public forum, like sex offenders do today. Hmmm, I can hear someone saying..."Honey, I found out our neighbor Wally is an inconsiderate driver. I think we should move."
-----------------------
Here's an idea for some of you entrepreneurs out there. How about an Internet service that allows you to send a plate number and they figure out who the driver is and sends them letter explaining partially in French how you really feel about witnessing his four lane change and cutting you off.
Maybe include a pamphlet that outlines good driving techniques and a bumper sticker reading: "The truck in front of me isn't towing my car, I'm actually tailgating him!" or "I'm driving like a lunatic because I need to go pee!".
You might actually get highlighted on CNBC and then watch your business take off! If you make it big, please remember me, I'm pretty good at stuffing envelopes.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle