LaHood May Consider Banning Cell Phones In Cars

[suv_guy_19]

Funny thing is that I see cops using cell phones without hands free devices all the time! WTF!

 

I don't think that happens in Winnipeg. There is never just one officer in a car. Out on the highway, I've never seen an RCMP officer using the phone.

[Mr. Gumby]

We better ban drive thru restaurants (well you'll already be paying more tax to use them)

 

Darn, not only do we have drive thru restaurants and tobacco shops around here, we also have drive thru liquor stores!

 

Yeehaw!

[ausrutherford]

Can we just get the damn government out of our lives?

[OAC_Sparky]

Funny thing is that I see cops using cell phones without hands free devices all the time! WTF!

I dated a cop for 6 months, her Expy had 2 laptop systems. police radio, a work cell phone and her personal phone all going at the same time.

[Captainp4]

Can we just get the damn government out of our lives?

 

 

x a brazillion

[suv_guy_19]

Can we just get the damn government out of our lives?

 

Texting makes you 27x more likely to have an accident. The number for talking on the phone is 6x. If you're texting or talking while driving, it could negatively affect someone else. This is where government regulation comes into play.

[transitman]

Can we just get the damn government out of our lives?

Why, so farms can distribute a billion and a half tainted eggs. So oil companies aren't held accountable for the deaths of workers and the mess they leave. So financial institutions can run roughshod over hard working Americans and not be held accountable. So people accused of crimes can be tried in kangaroo courts instead of courts held to the Constitution and rules of law. To protect and not hold responsible reckless, dangerous people who aren't smart enough or just don't care if they kill someone while driving their car. Sometimes the Government and taxes do good things that serve and protect everyone.

[ausrutherford]

Why, so farms can distribute a billion and a half tainted eggs. So oil companies aren't held accountable for the deaths of workers and the mess they leave. So financial institutions can run roughshod over hard working Americans and not be held accountable. So people accused of crimes can be tried in kangaroo courts instead of courts held to the Constitution and rules of law. To protect and not hold responsible reckless, dangerous people who aren't smart enough or just don't care if they kill someone while driving their car. Sometimes the Government and taxes do good things that serve and protect everyone.

 

Ahhh...those tainted eggs got through already heavy FDA regulation...The BP oil rig had been inspected 1 month before the explosion...A trillion dollar stimilus bill was passed that only made the unemployment worse...a healthcare bill was passed that only made healthcare worse...

 

Seems to me, we need to have regulations on the failure of government

[suv_guy_19]

That's one strange view of reality you have there. Ah, the political ideologue.....hopefully an endangered species.

[FordBuyer]

Ahhh...those tainted eggs got through already heavy FDA regulation...The BP oil rig had been inspected 1 month before the explosion...A trillion dollar stimilus bill was passed that only made the unemployment worse...a healthcare bill was passed that only made healthcare worse...

 

Seems to me, we need to have regulations on the failure of government

 

 

So if you are out walking your dog, just walking for exercise, jogging, riding your bike, or driving your vehicle, and some driver runs into you because of blatant texting or cell phone communication, and wipes out your world there should be no severe consequences? Government should have its hands tied because of the "failure of government?" The world is becoming uncivlized enough already without anarchism reigning supreme.

[FordBuyer]

So if you are out walking your dog, just walking for exercise, jogging, riding your bike, or driving your vehicle, and some driver runs into you because of blatant texting or cell phone communication, and wipes out your world there should be no severe consequences? Government should have its hands tied because of the "failure of government?" The world is becoming uncivlized enough already without anarchism reigning supreme.

 

 

And if we say it's OK to text and talk on cell phone while driving. then how can we punish driver for doing damage while doing it? You have to make a law against it to punish those for doing damage in the first place. For example, it's not only against the law for driving while intoxicated, it's also against the law to do damage while being intoxicated. Using cell phone while driving is much the same. It's NEGLIGENT behavior and just the act of doing it deserves punishment irrespective of hurting or killing someone.

[akirby]

And if we say it's OK to text and talk on cell phone while driving. then how can we punish driver for doing damage while doing it? You have to make a law against it to punish those for doing damage in the first place. For example, it's not only against the law for driving while intoxicated, it's also against the law to do damage while being intoxicated. Using cell phone while driving is much the same. It's NEGLIGENT behavior and just the act of doing it deserves punishment irrespective of hurting or killing someone.

 

You totally missed the point as usual. Drunk driving is illegal. People get arrested, fined and even do jail time. Does that stop people from driving drunk and killing people? Nope.

 

Just making something illegal will not change behavior. If you want to ban cell phone conversations then you have to ban the radio, passengers, food, drinks, etc.

 

The problem here is 1) we don't train drivers adequately and 2) we can't stop bad drivers from driving.

[FordBuyer]

You totally missed the point as usual. Drunk driving is illegal. People get arrested, fined and even do jail time. Does that stop people from driving drunk and killing people? Nope.

 

Just making something illegal will not change behavior. If you want to ban cell phone conversations then you have to ban the radio, passengers, food, drinks, etc.

 

The problem here is 1) we don't train drivers adequately and 2) we can't stop bad drivers from driving.

 

 

Read the whole frickin thread for a change before you start attacking as usual. Equating listening to the radio as same as animated phone conversation or head down looking at smart phone shows how out of touch you are, not me. And it's easy to prove with cell phone provider supplying the phone record in a court of law. Nothing scarier out there on road than being surrounded by other drivers talking on cell phone or looking down at smart phone. Only thing scarier is driver of huge tractor trailer hauling flammable liquid doing same.

[RangerM]

Just making something illegal will not change behavior.

Read the whole frickin thread for a change before you start attacking as usual. Equating listening to the radio as same as animated phone conversation or head down looking at smart phone shows how out of touch you are, not me. And it's easy to prove with cell phone provider supplying the phone record in a court of law. Nothing scarier out there on road than being surrounded by other drivers talking on cell phone or looking down at smart phone. Only thing scarier is driver of huge tractor trailer hauling flammable liquid doing same.

Handing out tickets may raise revenue, but it's not going to stop the behavior. The only people who would show deference to such a law probably weren't the problem in the first place.

 

A ban on texting is simply something else that the person (who causes an accident) can be charged with. It's no different than laws against marijuana. People who want to do it, will simply try harder to not get caught.

 

Things like this are nothing more than a tool for the politicians to be able to say, "Look what I did to protect you", while having little or no effect on an it's all about me society. Not saying the behavior should be encouraged, but the problem (itself) isn't the law; it's the lack of consideration for others (and you can't legislate that).

 

Also, once speech recognition is standard in most phones for texting (ironic that you'd need that for a phone, ain't it?), what would the law say then?

Edited October 11, 2010 by RangerM

[FordBuyer]

Handing out tickets may raise revenue, but it's not going to stop the behavior. The only people who would show deference to such a law probably weren't the problem in the first place.

 

A ban on texting is simply something else that the person (who causes an accident) can be charged with. It's no different than laws against marijuana. People who want to do it, will simply try harder to not get caught.

 

Things like this are nothing more than a tool for the politicians to be able to say, "Look what I did to protect you", while having little or no effect on an it's all about me society. Not saying the behavior should be encouraged, but the problem (itself) isn't the law; it's the lack of consideration for others (and you can't legislate that).

 

Also, once speech recognition is standard in most phones for texting (ironic that you'd need that for a phone, ain't it?), what would the law say then?

 

As I said in an earlier post, the only real way to stop it is to electronically make it so that once vehicle is put into gear, your cell phone won't work in vehicle. Force driver to park and take vehicle out of gear before phone will work. MADD understands this problem and knows that even with enforcement many drivers still leave nightspots, bars, restaurants, and so on with more than three drinks in them or two 20 oz. beers and want interlock devices installed in all vehicles. But the law does stop many from having three drinks and driving and banning using cell phones and driving will stop some from doing it. And as those who maim and kill go to prison that will further motivate some more to stop deadly practice. It's too bad devices will be needed to stop driver from driving drunk and using smart phone while vehicle is in motion, but lack of common sense in our society at times and utter lack of self discipline results in onerous measures.

[RangerM]

As I said in an earlier post, the only real way to stop it is to electronically make it so that once vehicle is put into gear, your cell phone won't work in vehicle. Force driver to park and take vehicle out of gear before phone will work.

You're no longer dealing with DOT, but FCC at that point. Should be fun to watch.

MADD understands this problem and knows that even with enforcement many drivers still leave nightspots, bars, restaurants, and so on with more than three drinks in them or two 20 oz. beers and want interlock devices installed in all vehicles. But the law does stop many from having three drinks and driving and banning using cell phones and driving will stop some from doing it. And as those who maim and kill go to prison that will further motivate some more to stop deadly practice. It's too bad devices will be needed to stop driver from driving drunk and using smart phone while vehicle is in motion, but lack of common sense in our society at times and utter lack of self discipline results in onerous measures.

And the first time someone (a passenger, a car-jacking victim? You can imagine other scenarios) is prevented from dialling 911 due to one of these electronic jammers, the measures would seem too intrusive.

[akirby]

Read the whole frickin thread for a change before you start attacking as usual. Equating listening to the radio as same as animated phone conversation or head down looking at smart phone shows how out of touch you are, not me. And it's easy to prove with cell phone provider supplying the phone record in a court of law. Nothing scarier out there on road than being surrounded by other drivers talking on cell phone or looking down at smart phone. Only thing scarier is driver of huge tractor trailer hauling flammable liquid doing same.

 

We're not saying that cell phone use is good. We're saying that it's just one thing that distracts drivers and causes accidents and it's almost impossible to prevent and just adding a new law won't necessarily change behavior.

 

I guarantee you that there are many cases of behaviors in vehicles that are much more distracting than carrying on a hands free cellphone conversation - e.g. a carload of teenagers, eating a cheeseburger, putting on makeup, etc.

 

The solution to distracted or impaired drivers is not to enact more laws - that's just the easiest and most visible actions and the ones that politicians can use to pad their resumes and satisfy their constituents.

[FordBuyer]

Excerpt from recent CNBC article:

 

"According to analysis in the American Journal of Public Health 16,000 people died in texting and driving accidents between 2001 and 2007.

 

Even more frightening is the warning that the problem is getting worse.

 

And yet, whenever you suggest to people that cell phone signals should be jammed for those in the front seat of a moving car or truck, they scream, "NO!!!!!"

 

Those opposed to allowing cell phone signal jamming often say two things: Drivers should have the choice as to whether they can keep connected behind the wheel or other things distract drivers (like eating fast food) so why not ban those from the front seat as well. "

 

Why should I have to maybe lose my most precious gift, my life, because some goofball with no common sense blatantly thinks of main task in moving vehicle is to text and secondary task is driving itself. And yeah, those eating while driving have no respect for the driving task also. Just yesterday on US 23 outside of Ann Arbor, MI, five people lost their lives when teenage driver veered into oncoming traffic lane and did head on. Four other people are fighting for their lives in Uof M hospital. The average speed on that road is about 85mph and at least three other teenagers were in that vehicle with the teenage driver. I wouldn't be surprised if cell phone use was factor. Teenagers as many adults are addicted to texting anywhere anyplace.

[RangerM]

Why should I have to maybe lose my most precious gift, my life, because some goofball with no common sense blatantly thinks of main task in moving vehicle is to text and secondary task is driving itself.

 

Maybe the father of this child might ask....."Why wasn't it possible for the person who saw my child's abductor on the interstate to call the police?"

 

Answer: Because the greater society needs protection from goofballs with no common sense........

[akirby]

I'm all for preventing a driver from texting or making a non hands free cell call. Just show me the technology that disables it for the driver but not the passengers.

 

And you can't turn off cell phone use altogether. In addition to Amber Alerts you have people reporting dangerous drivers and other emergency scenarios where a driver needs to be on the phone.

 

As for teens, they are far more likely to be distracted by passengers than by texting if they're in a car with multiple friends. That's why it's against the law for a new teen driver to have anyone in the vehicle other than family for the first 6 months (in GA).

 

We can't even prevent drivers with multiple DUI convictions and no license from getting behind the wheel.

 

We need extensive driver training (not "education") and more severe enforced penalties for existing laws, not new laws.

[BrewfanGRB]

I'm all for preventing a driver from texting or making a non hands free cell call. Just show me the technology that disables it for the driver but not the passengers.

 

And you can't turn off cell phone use altogether. In addition to Amber Alerts you have people reporting dangerous drivers and other emergency scenarios where a driver needs to be on the phone.

 

As for teens, they are far more likely to be distracted by passengers than by texting if they're in a car with multiple friends. That's why it's against the law for a new teen driver to have anyone in the vehicle other than family for the first 6 months (in GA).

 

We can't even prevent drivers with multiple DUI convictions and no license from getting behind the wheel.

 

We need extensive driver training (not "education") and more severe enforced penalties for existing laws, not new laws.

 

Precisely. I laugh at FordBuyer (nothing new)...who thinks the signal can be jammed for "front seat users" when the car goes into Driver. Ok, the list of questions is huge. 1) How do you block the signal for the driver, but not the passenger? (Really, are we arguing the front passenger can't use the phone?) 2) How do you block the signal for every call except 911? (I mean, I'm sure if I thought about it, the technology could work...but wow, that's a lot of effort). 3) Every individual's life is important and for the families left behind, it's devastating...but 16,000 people in 7 years across the entire country is statistically insignificant. (Keep in mind, 40,000 people a YEAR die in auto crashes overall). Since signal jamming all cell phones would just as onerous, an ignition interlock would have a far greater benefit.

[Extreme4x4]

I also laugh at Fordbuyers assertion that jamming cell phones in vehicles, is the answer to all of our woes.

 

My husband is a truck driver. In many states, it is illegal for truck drivers to use a cell phone handset. Thus, he uses bluetooth at all times. On more times than I can count, he has called in to report dangerous/drunk/etc drivers. He has reported crashes.

 

Just pull over, put the vehicle in park (where the hell is park on a 10-speed), and call. Oh really. You tell me where it is safe or legal for a hazmat vehicle to pull over. You tell me where, on mountain roads, there are places that he can pull his rig over, that is more than 3 feet from the edge of the road (the law for hazmat), and sometimes is 15ft, depending on location.

 

Or, should he just ignore those rolled over single vehicle (that also are not in park, to be able to call) accidents?? Should he just ignore dangerous drivers on the street?? Should he never be able to get any information from his wife, should she/child/etc end up in the hospital or sick or any one of dozens of emergencies that can happen??

 

Should the person who's passenger is having a medical emergency have to wait until they are stopped, and in park, before they can call anyone?? How many times do you think govt agencies would get sued over the preventable deaths that could have happened??

 

Fordbuyer, once again you have put forth an idea with little to no thought put into it, or the implications of it. Also, you have completely ignored others assertions that other distractions are just as "dangerous." Should all distractions be banned??

 

Others here have put forth the correct solution, which is better driver training, and more stringent fines. You cannot legislate common sense, nor can you technology it away............... as their are always unforseen consequences. However, as has been proven in the past, thinking past the end of your own nose, is a foreign concept to you.

[rkelso]

Jamming phones, locking out devices, whatever, all this kind of stuff is just so logistically complicated with so many exceptions that it's clearly not possible. But it is a problem that has been around as long as people have been driving... eating taco bell while cruising at 75mph, reading a book, shaving, makeup, etc etc etc, but it's a problem that only gets worse with more people on the road and our ever increasing dependence/addiction to technology. Maybe a more realistic solution is to make the penalties so absolutely severe that people will have no choice but to put down the distractions; distractions not being limited to cell phones but to anything determined so by law enforcement and/or the judicial system. I hate seeing people text while driving, I absolutely hate it, or driving like a drunk just because they are on the phone, but I don't know how I feel about the government having that kind of control.

[Noah Harbinger]

Can we just get the damn government out of our lives?

 

And your brilliant plan to do this is to re-elect the people who brought you warrantless wiretapping, secret courts, Homeland "Security"?

 

Sending a text message while driving is a sacred right, but the right to privacy of the content of that message is not?

[Noah Harbinger]

Maybe the father of this child might ask....."Why wasn't it possible for the person who saw my child's abductor on the interstate to call the police?"

 

Answer: Because the greater society needs protection from goofballs with no common sense........

 

It's perfectly legal to call 911 from your cellphone without a headset.