[ohio]

Originally posted by Damn True
Seat belt laws aren't about the Govt. trying to protect you. Cell phone laws aren't about the Govt. trying to protect you.

The exist because insurance companies are some of the strongest lobbies in existance. If the number of injuries goes down the amount the insurance companies pay out goes down and they keep more of the money we pay them.

Boy it sure stinks when insurance prices decrease, accidens decrease, and american corporations make a larger profit. That's the worst.

I agree somewhat with the posts saying we have laws that deal with this already and it's rather unecessary, but the fact is, many people are too stupid and too cheap to purchase hands-free kits... when they increase safety enormously at a very low price. I believe they should be mandatory. People can keep talking, just in a much safer way. To ban cell phones ENTIRELY in cars would cost the country BILLIONS in lost productivity.

Are you all aware that it is already illegal to use headphones while driving in most states? We need laws like that because a good portion of the public lacks the mental capacity to make the link between cause and effect.

 

[myNAMEis]

Originally posted by Damn True
Ban cellphone use in cars. Why? Because some pretty model was hurt in a wreck in which the other driver was on the phone? Because of the distraction?

Well if that is the case I would love to see cops write tickets to drivers who are doing things that may distract them while driving.

Write a ticket to the guy changing the CD
to the guy fishing out then lighting a cigarette.
to the guy eating a burger
to the woman putting on makeup

Same thing right?
Is cell phone use any more distracting than any of the above?
No. Why is there no outcry to ban mascara use while driving?

You have somewhat of a point. And I think if a cop saw you doing any of these things you could very well get pulled over. But seriously, changing a CD is far different then talking on the phone. Your distraction is only for a short time with the CD. You can look down in a quick moment almost as if you were checking a mirror. When you talk you are in a conversation sometimes which requires a visualization with respect to what you are talking about. It is not just the physical aspect of holding a phone. It's almost like: try reading and listening to something at the same time. It is hard to do both at once. As compared to eating and reading. You can do both.

Regardless. All these things do cause drivers to be distracted. I notice this on my bike all the time. Drivers doing more then just driving tend pull out on you cut you off, etc... ...phones seem to be the worst. I really don't see too many women putting on mascara.

 

[laura]

Originally posted by Damn True
Ban cellphone use in cars. Why? Because some pretty model was hurt in a wreck in which the other driver was on the phone? Because of the distraction?



Write a ticket to the guy changing the CD
to the guy fishing out then lighting a cigarette.
to the guy eating a burger
to the woman putting on makeup

Same thing right?
Is cell phone use any more distracting than any of the above?
No. Why is there no outcry to ban mascara use while driving?

when you are in your car is every other person you pass putting on mascara, eating , changing a cd ect.

no.

when i am in my car, probably one in every 3 people i pass is on the phone.

my name is had a great point too. putting in a cd or stuffing some food in your face takes a very short time and distracts much less than talking on a phone. phone conversations can last for the duration of someone's drive.

 

[ummbikes]

Originally posted by ohio


Boy it sure stinks when insurance prices decrease, accidens decrease, and american corporations make a larger profit. That's the worst.

Where is your data, my own anecdotal experience tells me that my insurance rates are rising. I have a clean driving record, so no it's not that. The insurance companys are the number one leech on our society...

 

[dirtgirl]

Originally posted by ohio


Boy it sure stinks when insurance prices decrease, accidens decrease, and american corporations make a larger profit. That's the worst.

yeah, what's really terrible is that a lot of people in my field (public health) lobbied for seat belt laws not to protect the idiots from themselves, but to protect the innocent children from their ignorant parents. children are a lot like projectiles in car accidents when they aren't belted in.

personally, i think, let any adult who doesn't want to wear a seat belt not wear one, natural selection will eventually take care of them (i have the same feeling for helmet laws). but, at least give their children a fighting chance and some protection against all the morons that call themselves adults.

 

[zibbler]

Originally posted by dirtgirl


yeah, what's really terrible is that a lot of people in my field (public health) lobbied for seat belt laws not to protect the idiots from themselves, but to protect the innocent children from their ignorant parents. children are a lot like projectiles in car accidents when they aren't belted in.

personally, i think, let any adult who doesn't want to wear a seat belt not wear one, natural selection will eventually take care of them (i have the same feeling for helmet laws). but, at least give their children a fighting chance and some protection against all the morons that call themselves adults.

I wore a seatbelt long before it was law. I have always made not only my children wear them, but also any passenger that gets in my car as well. Florida recently started allowing people to ride motorcycles w/o helmets (with higher insurance of course) I think anyone who rides a motorcycle without a helmet is a complete moron.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by dirtgirl


children are a lot like projectiles in car accidents when they aren't belted in.

hahahahahahhahahahah!

Oh..........sorry.....i just got a vision of that.

 

[ummbikes]

I'm also one of those "put on your damn seatbelt, or we just sit here all day" kind of people.

My three year old, will also hype out on people. She told told my buddy "Brett, put on your SEAT BELT, or you will end up like Bubba (my parents roadkilled Lab) dead on the road with really, really, really bad bleeding everywhere". Which is both a sweet and sad statement, it's cool she's looking out for a 6' tall ex-marine, but sad she is still focused on the loss of grandpa's dog...

But really, common sense is rare. Oh, and the insurance companys are "really, really, really, sucky".

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by ummbikes


Where is your data, my own anecdotal experience tells me that my insurance rates are rising. I have a clean driving record, so no it's not that. The insurance companys are the number one leech on our society...

I haven't dug around for the data, but if your insurance rates are increasing you can blame it on a litigation happy country and the increasing size of vehicles on our road. You certainly can't blame it on seatbelt laws.

Seatbelts reduce the severity of injuries in an accident. No one will argue against that. More people wear seatbelts now that they are mandatory by law. Few people will argue that. That saves insurance companies money, yes. Whether they choose to pass that savings on to everyone is up to your insurance company, but they function in a competitive market, so if one company doesn't take advantage of the savings, another will... Even if they don't lower prices, their aditional profits still ake it back into our economy. Everytime someone is injured or a good is destroyed (e.g. wrecking a car), there's a net cost to society. Reduce the severity of those accidents and injuries and you're saving the country money in one way or another.

 

[Damn True]

Originally posted by ohio


Boy it sure stinks when insurance prices decrease, accidens decrease, and american corporations make a larger profit. That's the worst.

I agree somewhat with the posts saying we have laws that deal with this already and it's rather unecessary, but the fact is, many people are too stupid and too cheap to purchase hands-free kits... when they increase safety enormously at a very low price. I believe they should be mandatory. People can keep talking, just in a much safer way. To ban cell phones ENTIRELY in cars would cost the country BILLIONS in lost productivity.

Are you all aware that it is already illegal to use headphones while driving in most states? We need laws like that because a good portion of the public lacks the mental capacity to make the link between cause and effect.

I don't know about you, but I am paying more now for insurance than ever. The companies don't pass on savings to customers, they pass on profits to stockholders. If they find a way to decrease their costs it is to increase profit not out of a sense of grattitude to customers.

 

[El Jefe]

Originally posted by Damn True


I don't know about you, but I am paying more now for insurance than ever. The companies don't pass on savings to customers, they pass on profits to stockholders. If they find a way to decrease their costs it is to increase profit not out of a sense of grattitude to customers.

Actually, USAA sends me a check every year, so I have no complaints.

As for cell phones, when radios were first introduced in cars, accidents increased and there was a big to-do about it (or so I read in some news article). But of course, now there isn't much said about them. It passed, and people got used to adjusting the controls safely.

Holding a phone in your hand is not as good as holding the wheel, but people who are going to be distracted, will be distracted - cell phone, radio, vanity mirror, child in the rear seat, etc.... Cell phones aren't the problem. Inattentive drivers are. No law banning cell phones will make innattentive drivers pay attention to the road.

 

[Ranger]

Servus!

Tru Dat Jefe! My old man works for USAA, so I had the cheapest full-coverage insurance in the world as a 20 yr old single sportscar driver can get!

And the check at the end of the year was just icing on the cake!

 

[mrsdove]

Originally posted by Damn True
Ban cellphone use in cars. Why? Because some pretty model was hurt in a wreck in which the other driver was on the phone? Because of the distraction?

Well if that is the case I would love to see cops write tickets to drivers who are doing things that may distract them while driving.

Write a ticket to the guy changing the CD
to the guy fishing out then lighting a cigarette.
to the guy eating a burger
to the woman putting on makeup

Same thing right?
Is cell phone use any more distracting than any of the above?
No. Why is there no outcry to ban mascara use while driving?

Ok, so I agree that people do all those things, but I see maybe 5 people a day doing that and at least 15 people a day on cell phones. The fact that the number of cell phone drivers is far greater than any other offenders, I think calls for some type of legislative restriction.

 

[knulfing_forest]

i cant drive yet so i dont care...wait lemme rephrase that statement... I cant "legally" drive yet so i dont care hehe

 

[Ranger]

Servus!

Originally posted by mrsdove
Ok, so I agree that people do all those things, but I see maybe 5 people a day doing that and at least 15 people a day on cell phones. The fact that the number of cell phone drivers is far greater than any other offenders, I think calls for some type of legislative restriction.

Sorry Mrs. D, but your logic dosen't pan out. Legislation is required simply because you see more people doing one thing than another?

Here's something to think about - everyone sees people yakking on their cell phones a million times a day. How often do you see a traffic accident, esp on a street that you regularly travel on?

 

[dirtgirl]

Originally posted by Ranger
Servus!



Sorry Mrs. D, but your logic dosen't pan out. Legislation is required simply because you see more people doing one thing than another?

Here's something to think about - everyone sees people yakking on their cell phones a million times a day. How often do you see a traffic accident, esp on a street that you regularly travel on?

I see 2-3 accidents per day (on a slow day) on the 12 mile commute to and from my school. I don't exactly live in the safest spot for driving.

 

[Ranger]

Servus.

Originally posted by dirtgirl
I see 2-3 accidents per day (on a slow day) on the 12 mile commute to and from my school. I don't exactly live in the safest spot for driving.

Do you live in the infield at Indianapolis Speedway? How many of these 2-3 accidents per day are directly caused by cell phone usage?.

I lived at Ft. Campbell KY for two and a half years. The highway running the length of Ft. Campbell is U.S. 41a, rated top five most dangerous roads in the U.S. I saw (on the average) about one accident every two weeks. As an MP, I responded to 42 traffic accidents in five years.

I now live near one of the fastest roads on the planet with over 550,000 automobiles passing my exit every day. Maybe one accident a day along a 250 km stretch.

I ain't making these numbers up people. Am I missing something?

 

[dirtgirl]

Originally posted by Ranger
Servus.

Do you live in the infield at Indianapolis Speedway? How many of these 2-3 accidents per day are directly caused by cell phone usage?.

I live just outside Baltimore/DC metro area and I work inside Baltimore. I wasn't trying to imply that the accidents are all cell phone related (and they are mostly minor crashes, severe/fatal crashes aren't a daily occurrence). Just that there's a freaking large amount of accidents in my area! I think we're supposed to be the 4th worst driving region in the U.S.

The problem here is too many cars, too little urban planning & funding, and RAMPANT driver ignorance.

Cell phone use without the aid of handsfree kits just add to the chaos.

 

[Ranger]

Servus!

Originally posted by dirtgirl
The problem here is too many cars, too little urban planning & funding, and RAMPANT driver ignorance.

Cell phone use without the aid of handsfree kits just add to the chaos.

Now I'm with you! Having a handsfre set is the way to go -that's how we do it here in Germany at 150 mph without killing ourselves.

Same thing with the urban planning. We have a problem here that everyone has a car but not everyone has parking - lots of fun when you decide to go downtown...

That's why I use public transportation.

 

[Brian HCM#1]

I have it all figured out, there are some people capable of driving while on a phone(me) I have had a phone in my car since 1990. The DMV should give a driving test while people are talking on their phone, if the pass their registration sticker will look alittle different on their lisense plate stating that they are capable. If they fail it will be another type and if they are cought driving while talking, then its ticket time.

 

[Shortbus]

I have it all figured out, there are some people capable of driving while on a phone(me) I have had a phone in my car since 1990. The DMV should give a driving test while people are talking on their phone, if the pass their registration sticker will look alittle different on their lisense plate stating that they are capable. If they fail it will be another type and if they are cought driving while talking, then its ticket time.

Here's a shortcut to your theory... Write down people's IQ on their plates.... But then again, if we started banning people from driving by IQ (let's say min. would be IQ of 65), the DC Metro Area would have no one on the roads