texting and driving

[Hickok]

I ride motorcycles,...… I don't even want to get started on drivers texting, females primping while looking into the mirror, cars in a hurry to pull out in front of me and then turning off 100 feet down the road.

[mold maker]

Come on fellows. Owning something legally sold is a right. Just like the ownership of legal guns. It's the misuse that is bad on both counts. It angers me as much as you that the misuse has become so prevalent, but totally restricting all passengers is an irresponsible reaction. While hard to enforce it's the driver whose actions need refinement. Stiff penalties and the loss of drivers licence is in order. Making a TV and media promotion and then severe scrutiny by LE would flood the courts, but would have the desired reaction. Most here would recognize the loss of driving privileges as a severe restriction to our life style. A progressive mandatory fine and revocation of license with steep ins increases, would all but solve the problem. Although state laws would definitely help, it needs to be a universal federal law.

[Lloyd Smale]

owning a quart of jack Daniels is legal too. Does that give me the right to slug it down driving down the interstate? Nope. WHY? because its been proven to cause accidents and kill people. Just having an open bottle in you car is illegal here even if your not drinking it. Why should phones that have been proven to cause accidents and deaths not be subject to the same laws. Laws the give a fine for using one while going down the road are about impossible to enforce. A much easier to enforce law would be that there not allowed in a vehicle period. If you got pulled over for speeding ect just like a search for alcohol or drugs they could do a search for your phone. Best answer ive seen on here is to make the cell phone manufactures put an automatic shut off and block when its moving more the 10mph. Wear a pager like in the old days and if the pager goes off pull over and STOP and return the call. Why would anyone be against this????

[Hannibal]

Come on fellows. Owning something legally sold is a right. Just like the ownership of legal guns. It's the misuse that is bad on both counts. It angers me as much as you that the misuse has become so prevalent, but totally restricting all passengers is an irresponsible reaction. While hard to enforce it's the driver whose actions need refinement. Stiff penalties and the loss of drivers licence is in order. Making a TV and media promotion and then severe scrutiny by LE would flood the courts, but would have the desired reaction. Most here would recognize the loss of driving privileges as a severe restriction to our life style. A progressive mandatory fine and revocation of license with steep ins increases, would all but solve the problem. Although state laws would definitely help, it needs to be a universal federal law.

I'm going to have to disagree. Drunk driving/driving under the influence laws have not solved that problem, cell phones will be no different.
The stupid, young or those with little to nothing to lose will continue the behavior. As a general rule, I'm not for the restriction of freedoms, either. However, particularly with the younger generations, they have no self control. I've seen people get fired by my employer because they can't leave their stupid cell phone alone.
And no one is advocating a ban on cell phones. Just limits on how/when it works. And as for passengers not being able to use a phone while riding that is an unfortunate consequence.Perish the thought that the passenger might have to engage the driver in conversation or look at the passing scenery.
As for your legally owned firearm, you can't legally drive down the road waving that around, either. For obvious reasons. But watch the news, because folks still do that, too.

[Thundarstick]

owning a quart of jack Daniels is legal too. Does that give me the right to slug it down driving down the interstate? Nope. WHY? because its been proven to cause accidents and kill people. Just having an open bottle in you car is illegal here even if your not drinking it. Why should phones that have been proven to cause accidents and deaths not be subject to the same laws

Boy, this is a 180 degrees from the "owning certain dog breeds" thread, exactly 180 degrees from the same brain!

[Love Life]

Yep. Don’t infringe on my preferred made up rights, but it’s cool to ban stuff if you don’t agree with it.

The hypocrisy made me laugh.

[Lloyd Smale]

Dogs have much better character then some people. I love dogs. I don't love cell phones or drunk drivers.

owning a quart of jack Daniels is legal too. Does that give me the right to slug it down driving down the interstate? Nope. WHY? because its been proven to cause accidents and kill people. Just having an open bottle in you car is illegal here even if your not drinking it. Why should phones that have been proven to cause accidents and deaths not be subject to the same laws

Boy, this is a 180 degrees from the "owning certain dog breeds" thread, exactly 180 degrees from the same brain!

[Lloyd Smale]

So you think there should be no laws at all. Should be ok to slug down that jd. Now we wouldn't want to infringe on your rights or make you out to be a hypocrite. You see, I have a right to my opinion on each subject and so do you. That's what we have laws for. To tell us what are our actual rights and what are our personal opinions and neither of our opinions are worth one penny more then the others. Id bet you my last dollar that texting and talking on cell phones while driving in this country has killed more people then all dog breeds combined in the last 5 years and that's just the cases that can be proved. Now throw in drunk drivers and the numbers skyrocket. Hypocrite? hardly. Just that a few here don't like hearing commons sense when it interferes with there "smart" phone. Don't like to see family's have to go to the cemetery because you want to tap on a phone while you drive. Pretty sad state of affairs in this country when dogs are hated and phones are loved. that some feel they have the right to take the life of someone elses dog but wow be to anyone that limits there use of a phone. Even when using it obviously endangers others. Ill keep my dog in my yard and you keep your phone turned off in your car.

Yep. Don’t infringe on my preferred made up rights, but it’s cool to ban stuff if you don’t agree with it.

The hypocrisy made me laugh.

[Love Life]

But, but, but being able to do a dangerous thing should be a right just like owning a dangerous animal.

You lambasted several members over stepping on your rights, and for being just like those nefarious gun grabbers blaming the object and not the character.

Now you are doing the exact same thing, blaming objects and not people and wanting to ban something.

[MaryB]

Having the phone disabled while moving more than 10mph isn't a ban. It is a limitation. ALL rights have limitations, can you yell fire in a theater? NO! Brandish a pistol to scare someone? NO! etc etc etc...

[Love Life]

I believe it can be agreed upon that owning a phone is not a right. Da’ gubmint can limit phones all they want. For drivers, passengers, bicyclists, etc. I’m just pointing out the hypocrisy.

[smokeywolf]

If the phone is disabled by movement exceeding 10 MPH, you won't be able to use your phone on a bus, subway or any other rail car.

By the way; pretty sure the law in most states is, 'you can't intentionally incite panic in a crowded venue'. I don't believe the word "FIRE" is specifically prohibited.

[glockfan]

if a majority of people had just a decent level of common sens, a lot of problems would be avoided from the get go......unfortunately,common sens and simple logics these days....

to me driving a 2000lbs car in streets and highways filled with half good drivers is serious business ; how on earth adding a cell phone into the equation is reasonable?...

[lefty o]

until we start to treat texters driving the same as we do drunks driving the problem will continue. caught texting, you can sit in a cell until you can see a judge and explain why you think its ok for you to endanger everyone else on the road, fine them the same as drunk driving too.

[Lloyd Smale]

aren't you doing the exact same thing by wanting to ban pits but allow phones in cars? Must be different because its something you want! YOUR rights! Difference is I never condoned owning a pit or any other dog and not doing what was nessisary to make is safe for my neighbors. Show me once where I said you should let your pit or any dog run free if a neighbor is bothered by it. Show me where I said the government should take away your phone and destroy it. All I said is when it becomes dangerous (and it has) to others then regulations need to be put in place to protect others from stupid and they might even cause a bit of inconvience. Personaly I think treating someone who uses one while driving at about the same level as someone who gets a ticket because his parking meter is expired is a joke. Give them the same penalty's as a drinking and driving driver gets even if he isn't in a wreck. Your the one that wants banning. I just want logical controls put on phones. Whos the one that is for infringing on our rights?? Whos the hypocrite?

But, but, but being able to do a dangerous thing should be a right just like owning a dangerous animal.

You lambasted several members over stepping on your rights, and for being just like those nefarious gun grabbers blaming the object and not the character.

Now you are doing the exact same thing, blaming objects and not people and wanting to ban something.

[Lloyd Smale]

I see no big deal in that. For the half hour your on the bus or subway the worlds not going to end if you don't answer your text or call. like I said get a beeper or even have the phones that shut off with motion automatically go into a beeper mode. When you get off the transport return the call. What on earth do some of you do when you fly and have to turn your phone off? How on earth can you sit in a deer blind for 3 hours with it turned off? Do you tuck it in your trunks when you go swimming? What about in church? Why would anyone even argue against having to pull to the side of the road to make or answer a call. Is your life so busy that you cant waste 5 minutes pulling over? Does anyone have a job that there phone is so critical that it cant be turned off taking the subway to work?? How is ANY OF THIS IMFRINGING ON YOUR RIGHTS OR FREEDOMS! Bottom line is driving a car is not a freedom or right its a privilege. One that can be taken away if your unsafe.

If the phone is disabled by movement exceeding 10 MPH, you won't be able to use your phone on a bus, subway or any other rail car.

By the way; pretty sure the law in most states is, 'you can't intentionally incite panic in a crowded venue'. I don't believe the word "FIRE" is specifically prohibited.

[Thundarstick]

All I said is when it becomes dangerous (and it has) to others then regulations need to be put in place to protect others from stupid and they might even cause a bit of inconvience.

Just like regulations on owning dangerous breeds of dogs. It's really just an inconvenience on those who choose to own these large dangerous dogs, to protect others from stupid.

See how that works? Is just what is in YOUR interest that you defend, that you defend!

[smokeywolf]

Lloyd, I hope you understood that I'm not stating that inability to use a cell phone on a bus, train, subway, etc. is a problem for me or my family. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I've been a victim of an idiot on a cell phone while driving. I was stating a side-effect that had not been mentioned.

Also, while I agree completely that driving and/or using a cell phone are not Constitutional rights. That's a slippery slope. It is also not a Constitutional right to ride a train or fly on an airplane. There are a whole raft of things we do or own or use in everyday life that are not Constitutionally protected.

[lefty o]

im amazed at how many think a priviledge is a right.

[Love Life]

aren't you doing the exact same thing by wanting to ban pits but allow phones in cars? Must be different because its something you want! YOUR rights! Difference is I never condoned owning a pit or any other dog and not doing what was nessisary to make is safe for my neighbors. Show me once where I said you should let your pit or any dog run free if a neighbor is bothered by it. Show me where I said the government should take away your phone and destroy it. All I said is when it becomes dangerous (and it has) to others then regulations need to be put in place to protect others from stupid and they might even cause a bit of inconvience. Personaly I think treating someone who uses one while driving at about the same level as someone who gets a ticket because his parking meter is expired is a joke. Give them the same penalty's as a drinking and driving driver gets even if he isn't in a wreck. Your the one that wants banning. I just want logical controls put on phones. Whos the one that is for infringing on our rights?? Whos the hypocrite?

I never stated I supported or wanted to ban pit bulls. You can go back and read for yourself.

All I’m doing is pointing out how hypocritical it is to have your current position on cell phones, when you argued so vehemently to protect a fake right (owning a dog).

States are currently working on the cell phone issue and it will probably be hashed out in the next couple of years.