Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Should cell phone drivers be singled out?



  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    There is a concept called situational awareness, which discusses the differences between talking to passengers and talking on the phone. What you as a driver are responsible for is keeping your brain engaged for proper vehicle operation.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    There is a lot of common sense information in that article.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 31,178
    I am not a fan of people talking on cell phones while driving. I see them too often not paying attention to the light when it changes to green. However, the methods they are suggesting are invasive. But what's new when you cannot even fly without being x-rayed or groped or both?

    With very little evidence, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration claims that there were some 3,092 roadway fatalities last year that involved distracted drivers. Americans ought to totally reject Hersman's agenda. It's the camel's nose into the tent. Down the road, we might expect mandates against talking to passengers while driving or putting on lipstick. They may even mandate the shutdown of drive-in restaurants as a contributory factor to driver distraction through eating while driving. You say, "Come on, Williams, you're paranoid.

    C.S. Lewis warned us about people like Hersman, saying: "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    This is the old, excuse my crudeness, picking my nose is has exactly the same loss of brainpower as texting. I reject that. Other than drunk driving, which obviously should be illegal, you can't legistlate everything. But because of the dangers of texting and talking on the phone (most so when the phone is held to the head), law enforcement should provide incentives to cut down on this, like huge fines.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 31,178
    edited December 2011
    I am not disagreeing with you on the subject of cell phone use and especially texting. I think it best left to the states as they are the ones to enforce the laws. In CA we have a cell phone to head law and I see just as many people using their cell phones as ever. If not more. I don't think the laws work. People are going to be distracted for whatever reason. Erratic driving behavior should be ticketed whether you are drinking a Starbucks or Texting your girlfriend.

    I am sure Williams was referring to the Feds sticking their noses into every aspect of our lives.

    For cities with budget shortfalls they could put on a campaign with $500 fines for cell phone use while driving. Make it a local ordinance with a sign at each end of town. I am sure there are devices that you can aim at a driver that detects a Cell signal.
    Zap you have been pegged, $$Cha $ching. :shades:
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    Do not think that a drinking coffee uses anywhere near the brainpower as talking and driving. Tests show 37 percent loss of brain while talking and trying to drive. They should do tests, mris, whatever, to find how much brain is lost taking a drink of coffee.
  • "I am sure there are devices that you can aim at a driver that detects a Cell signal. "

    If so, how long will it be until someone markets a "detector detector"?
  • fintailfintail Posts: 42,931
    I wouldn't trust our well paid highly accountable LEO professionals to operate such a device, should it ever exist. How would it distinguish a device in use by a passenger vs driver?

    "Erratic driving behavior should be ticketed whether you are drinking a Starbucks or Texting your girlfriend. "

    You hit the nail on the head. Going after the low hanging fruit will change very little.
  • Feds propose built-in limits on driving distractions

    I am more okay with this than I expected to be. So that crummy earphone that you have to plug into your ringing phone while driving 75 mph doesn't count? And still having to dial the phone manually? Or search through a list of 150 contacts while driving? Or 1500 songs on your iPod.

    If you have an integrated bluetooth system, that works.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    edited September 2012
    "Surge'ON system ... prevents a car from starting unless the driver's cell phone is secured in a box that can't be opened while the engine is running.

    Ron Pothul said the system can be installed in about 15 minutes and takes five minutes to learn to use. It involves putting a chip on the driver's phone, or the use of a bypass card for the system if another driver with a phone takes the wheel. Pothul compared the pass-card to carrying a car key.

    He said a driver will be able to hear an incoming call with the phone secured, but will have to pull over and stop the engine to answer it."

    Inventor's system keeps drivers off cell phones (Detroit Free Press)
  • ClairesClaires Chicago areaPosts: 1,222
    I remember defeating the seat belt notification buzzer when I was a kid; wonder what would stop a kid from removing the phone's chip?


    Need help getting around? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review

  • fintailfintail Posts: 42,931
    Doesn't seem very well thought out. Comments in the article sum it up.
  • vinnynyvinnyny Posts: 774
    I hate all the idiots I see doing dangerous things on the road while texting or dialing cell phones. However, the problem is going to get worse as we progress towards greater mobile connectivity. Rather than being Luddites who insist on locking up cell phones, let's try for some realistic means to minimize the inherent dangers. The idea won't be popular, but I think it's time we force car manufacturers to install hands-free devices in all new cars and require dealers to set them up for buyers. Used car dealers would be forced to retrofit their cars as well. Cell phone providers would be required to provide hands-free devices with every new phone sold. As the technology evolves to the point where all texting, tuning, etc could be done by voice commands, the requirements would evolve to include these capabilities.

    Higher costs? Yes. Less freedom? Yes. As mobile technology continues to spread and evolve, so does the danger of distracted driving. The safety benefits far outweigh the costs over the long term...
  • fintailfintail Posts: 42,931
    I think a lot of new cars have bluetooth already, or have it as a cheap option. Heck, my sister's Sonic has it. And I still see dopes in brand new 60K+ cars which definitely have it standard, with a phone to their ear, via laziness or technical illiteracy.

    The tech needs to be encouraged, along with penalties with teeth for those who won't adapt.

    I have a better hands free device in all of my cars. Phone rings, I don't answer. If it's important, they will leave a message. :shades:
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    Recently, while stopped on a road (that has 45 MPH limit) at stop sign waiting for traffic to clear so that I can cross, up comes a guy in an SUV holding a cell phone to his head in his left hand. He is waiting for opposing traffic to clear so that he can turn on the road I am on. Sure enough he is blabbing away while waiting, then when an opening in opposing traffic, he makes his left turn in front of me steering apparently with his right hand, blabbing away while turning.
  • fezofezo Manahawkin, NJPosts: 10,333
    I almost met my end with a woman in an Expedition doing nearly the same thing. Had I not anticipated it I'd be gone.
    2013 Mazda 5 Grand Touring, 2010 Toyota Prius IV. 2007 Toyota Camry XLE, 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999 Mazda Miata
  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    "Simply stated, handheld portable devices must be rendered unoperable whenever the automobile is in motion or when the transmission shaft lever is in forward or reverse gear," they wrote in a Viewpoint essay in Wednesday's edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association. "Automobile and cell phone equipment manufacturers have the engineering capabilities to implement these safeguards, and they should be required to do so."

    Cellphones shouldn't be able to work in moving cars, experts say (Anchorage DAily News)
  • vinnynyvinnyny Posts: 774
    If only they could spell "inoperable".

    Strange how it always seems to be the least skilled drivers who insist on texting & driving...
  • fintailfintail Posts: 42,931
    I hate phone yappers, but that sounds like more half-baked bluster from the overpaid detached world of academia. Disable a phone by a car being in gear? And just how would that be implemented? A "transmission shaft lever"? What world do these people live in? Not even the nanny state Euros are this dumb.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    edited March 2013
    "Automobile and cell phone equipment manufacturers have the engineering capabilities to implement these safeguards, and they should be required to do so."

    What about GPS? If all cell phones had this technology, seems that engineers that design cell towers could figure out how to determine if a phone was moving. Except for a 911 call, they should be able to put in some hardware and/or software to simply terminate the call in progress.

    Also, believe that cell technology is continuously monitoring both the strength of the signal from the cell talker and also determine movement with triangulation. This must be done to determine when to pass off the cell talker to the next cell tower in the direction of the talker's movement. So, there already is technology/software/hardware in place that "knows" that the cell talker is moving. Would seem not that difficult to take next step of software that then terminates call when sufficient data on the talker is in that he/she is moving.

    Of course, cell service providers will strongly resist any efforts by government that would require them to terminate moving cell talkers. Loss of revenue to them.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 42,931
    Not to mention streaming music through the phone etc that has nothing to do with talking, usage by passengers, phones that don't have GPS (many people still use "dumb phones"), software hacks that could easily defeat such technology, etc. Just more academics trying to earn their salaries. Enforcing the laws is a simpler solution.
  • vinnynyvinnyny Posts: 774
    terminate moving cell talkers

    Now there's an idea worth considering!

    How about we just make bluetooth connectivity for both text and voice mandatory? I hate the nanny state stuff, but the situation is really getting out of hand.
  • sandman_6472sandman_6472 Coral Springs, FLPosts: 4,279
    Perfect solution really...Bluetooth would solve these issues except texting but talking is really so much better than texting. Am looking into replacing my factory radio for a unit that is Bluetooth capable to make life a bit easier. Though I normally do not talk and drive, it sometimes has to be done. Even rentals should have this Bluetooth function as lost tourists always use their devices to call for help or directions. Eventually, smart phones are going to be so integrated into daily life, it won't be funny. I predict the days of the "dumb phone" as numbered. Heck, even I came over to the dark side last month with my android HTC unit and love it and what it can do. Just wish the price for data plans would go down with the amount of data given go up which eventually, will have to happen. It has to be made more economical so everyone will be able to use this function.

    The Sandman :) :sick: :shades:

    2015 Audi A3 (wife) / 2015 Golf TSI (me) / 2009 Nissan Versa SL Hatch (daughter #1) / 2008 Hyundai Accent GLS (daughter #2)

  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    Funny craigslist ad today:

    ^!^2005 Chrysler Town & Country^!^COME FOR A TEXT DRIVE
  • steverstever Posts: 52,683
    edited September 2013
    "Motorists in need of a texting break can look for designated pull-off areas to park and safely use their mobile device."

    NY Installs 'Text Stops' Along State Highways (
  • tpe said:

    Yes, I use a hands-free device. While I have the opinion all wireless communications should be banned, I stay within the law and the spirit of the law. Meaning I do use the hands-free. But I never claimed I didn't.

    That's interesting but I already assumed that you did. What exactly do you mean by the "spirit of the law". In most states there is no ban on cell phones at all. So I guess anyone using a hand held device is within the law and the spirit of the Top Dui classes. Also, I'm not entirely sure how you reconcile your personal behavior with these studies you believe so strongly in and your "if it could save one life" mantra.

    BTW, I'm not criticizing you for using a hands free device because I've stated numerous times its the driver, not the device that causes the hazard. Remember, guns don't kill people, people kill people.

    I heard about that, The local authorities banned the wireless communications devices in most of the states of USA.But people still uses those devices. So what type of change should be applied in the DUI Law....
Sign In or Register to comment.