 |
|
|
|
| AUTHOR |
MESSAGE |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: Distracted driving
QUOTE (GentleGiant388 @ December 24, 2011, 05:57)In Massachusetts, there's a law in the works that says, "If one or both offending vehicles are in possession of a cell phone, then said vehicles must submit a copy of cell phone billing for the time and day of the incident." If it's found out that one of the vehicles was on his or hers phone at the time, then they are found to be 100 percent at fault. It probably won't go through though. Just off the top of my head, what do you do if your phone is under the pay as you go?...
The company should still have use records.
|
| December 26, 2011, 14:14 |
|
newbie1011
62 / female
The Shore, New Jersey, US
|
Re: Distracted driving
Even pay as you go still have traceable records and as I said earlier the police can get that very easily.
I have several problems with that law GG. 1: you would need to know the EXACT time of the accident. 2: You would need to know if the driver was actually on the phone or the phone was just getting a message or voice mail and if the driver ever touched the phone. 3: Are you allowed to be on the phone hands free?
You can be on a phone and be hit in the back or t-boned and it not be your fault at all based on the position of the cars they can tell that. Even if you were on the phone if someone pulls out of a parking lot and hits you while you are driving down the road it is their fault not yours.That happened to me. No I wasn't on the phone. but even if I was it still would have been her fault.I bet if they charge someone for a situation like that just because the person that got hit was on the phone, it will get challenged in court and the driver would win.It's just like all these "No tolerance/ no exception" laws and rules. They have found them to be very ineffective because there are many extenuating circumstances. Example: There is a no fighting policy in the kids schools.The rule says if you are in a fight you get suspended. No matter what the circumstances are. My son was being harassed for YEARS by this one kid. Finally it came to a point where the kid pushed my son to much. He stabbed him with a pencil in the back of his head. The kid was easily a foot taller than my son. My son finally took a text book and hit the kid with it. The school was going to suspend both of them. I reminded them that this had gone on for years and they did nothing to stop it.I then reminded them that the law says you have a right to defend yourself and if he were to be suspended we will go to court. They did not suspend my son. Most schools and cities that have these no tolerance laws have changed them because they realize they just don't work.
Careless or reckless driving laws do have substantial penalties as well as points on your license. The problem isn't that there isn't a law. The problem is that the police don't enforce what we have. They themselves drive while on the phone without using a hands free device. I see it all the time.
Last week or the week before a cop drove his police car straight up a poll. Not because he was on the phone. He was reaching for a pen he dropped. My thoughts were," Was he planning on writing something while he was driving ?" Is that why he couldn't wait until he stopped to get the pen? He is lucky he didn't kill himself or someone else.So should we have a law that says you shouldn't reach for an object while driving? No, of course not. We should have a stupid people law. That encompasses all the stupid things people do.
|
| December 27, 2011, 16:03 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Distracted driving
The careless/inattentive driving do not have the penalties that are substantial enough. Rckless drving in some states do.
People don't and won't pay attention to any law until it hits thier pocket deep enough. When it costs them $500 plus court costs/time away from work.etc for first offence then they will. It was no different before the stricter DUI/ DWI laws. Then again, we had laws covering that. Perhaps those should be repealed so more can die at the hands of a drunk driver.
NTSB wouldn't be reccomending this if there wasn't a significant problem.
|
| December 28, 2011, 16:39 |
|
ashkats
65 / couple
crystal falls, Michigan, US
|
Re: Distracted driving
i drive into the lager citys and town ans when waiting on a light to turn , i see the other lane that gets the arrow ,it just amazes me that just about every car has a driver with a phone shove into it ear, i know from a fact that i looked down to change my station on the radio and i looked back and there was a deer and i totaled my car that fast, and being out on hwy 8 in the dead of the night was no fun
|
| December 28, 2011, 17:05 |
|
newbie1011
62 / female
The Shore, New Jersey, US
|
Re: Distracted driving
OOMG I guess you and I can both come up with reasons on both sides of this argument. I think it is time to say will will have to agree to disagree.
As for the NTSB. You give them more credit than you should. They are absolutely a government agency. I have attached a quote if you google them you will see this," The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency". I have had dealings with them. They report what the government wants them to. They also leave out what the government wants then to.
|
| December 29, 2011, 11:10 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Re: Distracted driving
QUOTE (newbie1011 @ December 29, 2011, 11:10)OOMG I guess you and I can both come up with reasons on both sides of this argument. I think it is time to say will will have to agree to disagree.
As for the NTSB. You give them more credit than you should. They are absolutely a government agency. I have attached a quote if you google them you will see this," The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency". I have had dealings with them. They report what the government wants them to. They also leave out what the government wants then to.
Perhaps they do and perhaps they don't. From thier findings over many years, it's what's happened or what the facts have dictated. IF you take the time to explore thier findings, you'll realize that too.
I've stated facts as I've seen them in my travels. The NTSB data bears out what I see far too many times per day. What the NTSB found is true, it's unfortunate that so many think they know better. Of couse, those are the ones who insist they aren't the problem. It's ALWAYS the other person.
|
| December 30, 2011, 21:19 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Distracted driving
So, since newbie brought this up, where would a stupid law sstart and stop? Who would decide what's stupid or not? What would it cover?
Some think drving truck is stupid.
Some think "pro" sports are stupid.
Some [including me] think spending 20million dollare on a stadium for multi-millionaries is stupid.
Some think living in New Jersey is stupid.
So, what's your thoughs?
|
| December 30, 2011, 21:23 |
|
ashkats
65 / couple
crystal falls, Michigan, US
|
Re: Distracted driving
20million dollare on a stadium for multi-millionaries is stupid.
sprnding that kind of cash for the brewers and packers and then wanting taxpayers to pay for it now thats stupid....
|
| December 31, 2011, 02:14 |
|
niceguy29
44 / male
Winnemucca, Nevada, US
|
Re: Distracted driving
Can't believe I didn't see this thread until now. I agree that laws do need to be out there, but only affect those that are incapable of doing more than one thing at once. Yes, basically target the idiots.
They should have an endorsement for a license which people have to pass a test to find whether or not they are able to drive safely while doing the things that everyone is saying is "unsafe" to do while driving. Along with that, they could issue a special colored sticker for the license plate so that if someone is doing something that is categorized as "unsafe" and seen by a police officer, the police officer can see that the person has passed the test and is capable of multitasking.
By passing these laws, the governments (both state AND federal (since they approve of the states passing these laws) ) are implying that they believe that all Americans have the same intelligence and reasoning capabilities, and that those capabilities are at a very low level.
I know I'm going to be criticized for what I'm saying, but I'm not going to change my mind. Everyone is unique. All people are NOT the same. That means that a law that groups all people into a category that defines all people as stupid, idiotic, self-absorbed, irresponsible, and unable to reason properly shouldn't be able to be passed.
Another issue I have with this is that police officers (at least here in Nevada) aren't even enforcing the laws already on the books. Why are we going to waste taxpayer dollars on making new laws that won't even be enforced?
I really don't care about the hands free law. I actually prefer to use my Bluetooth hands free thing and even use it when I'm at home. What I do have an issue with is that I can't check what e-mails I'm getting in my hour drive to or from school. If I leave home and 3 minutes into my drive, an e-mail comes through that says that the class is cancelled, I won't find out until I'm at school. I am already dictated to by my instructors when I can and can't text, check an e-mail on my phone, answer a call, and even have my phone on. Now the government is dictating to me when I can and can't do anything on my phone, when anyone can and can't do anything on their phone, and everyone is agreeing with it. What happened to all this talk about the government putting so many restrictions on citizens? I think if the government wanted to keep people from typing texts on their phones, they should get together with mobile phone manufacturers and work to design voice recognition software for the phone so that people can talk their texts into their hands-free devices and the phone will translate speech to text.
|
| January 1, 2012, 02:39 |
|
newbie1011
62 / female
The Shore, New Jersey, US
|
Re: Distracted driving
Andy there is voice recognition software that reads and lets you speak and it types you words into your phone. I use it for text but they also work with email. Depending on your phone there are different apps. I think one is called "drive safely". My phone has some of these features built in. It reads who is calling if I get a call and I can speak and tell my phone what to do with the call. It also reads texts and and lets me speak texts.
My sons professors and PA's all send out a mass text as well as the school admins if there are any issues like classes being cancelled or school closings or delays.
The problem with testing someone and labels is that it changes by circumstance. For example,If someone is tired or not feeling well they might be distracted more easily than a a day they feel better. I think it should be kept simple. If you are doing something that is causing you to drive out of lane or slow down or any of the other stupid thing people do when distracted you should get a ticket.
|
| January 1, 2012, 11:33 |
|
User no longer registered.
|
Re: Distracted driving
I've been thinking about the license endorsement thing too. I think that would be a good way to handle this. For both driver and thier vehicle.
The one good thing about NV is that people tend to drive more sanely around semis. They never know if a state patrol is in the truck or not. 
|
| January 1, 2012, 20:31 |
|
|
Web Naughty Forums »
General Discussion »
Distracted driving
|
|
|
