its about time

[junior]

http://news.yahoo.com/no-cellphones-no-texting-drivers-us-urges-212935010.html

[Stanley Steamer]

They banned texting in GA......but i still see a LOT of ppl doing it.......especially here in this college town.......

[Jess from VA]

As much as I disdain Federal regulations, I'm all for this. 

Whether the Fed has the constitutional authority to do this is questionable.  Interstate Commerce has been stretched and abused to the limit already.

Enforcement is difficult, so up the ante and start using forfeiture laws and just take their cars and trucks and sell them to defray public expense.   

[Moonshot_1]

Gave this some thought.

As to banning cell phone usage in cars and such...

The federal government can't do it. Don't think the Constitutional authority is there.

The States can do it, but enforcement would be haphazard at best and really doesn't solve the problem.

But, what if you can program a phone to not work (not send or receive) if it going faster than 15 mph. The phone could do this through a GPS application embedded in ALL phones. Or something along that line. You can make a law for that.
You could even allow certain people and their phones (emergency personnel for example) to override the application.


Just a thought.

[Jess from VA]

Passengers in a vehicle can text/talk/tweet/facesit/diddle/dribble to their heart's content.  Only drivers should be affected.

There is supposedly a technology in the works to only block driver-use in vehicles (some kind of proximity sensor).  But I'm not sure how the G forces the providers and mfgrs to use it.

Cops already have pretty sophisticated comms to detect radar detectors/scramblers, but even if they could detect phone use, it would be for anyone in the car.

They may have to enforce it the old fashioned way..............

[The Anvil]

Gave this some thought.

As to banning cell phone usage in cars and such...

The federal government can't do it. Don't think the Constitutional authority is there.

Driving is a privilege, they absolutely have the authority if it poses a significant risk, just like driving while intoxicated. But here's the part that troubles me: "It would apply to hands-free as well as hand-held devices, but devices installed in the vehicle by the manufacturer would be allowed, the NTSB said."

Sounds like a forced up-sell in a vehicle to me. There's no reason why you should not be able to use a hands-free device. By that logic the communicators many of us use on our group rides would be illegal. If pilots flying commercial jets can use radios while flying then drivers should be allowed to talk hands-free.

[Sludge]

Im against texting, but simply talking hands free?  Thats no more distracting than the radio.  Actually, I am more distracted trying to find a cd track or a radio station than talking on a phone.

[keepinon]

Such an asinine proposal. Watched the NTSB witch on the tube say cell phone use is distracting...

Hell, women putting on make up while driving are distracted, folks tuning the radio or installing a CD are distracted, talking/tuning on a CB can be distracting, fetching a dropped item from the floor is distracting...  where does it end?  

I don't need big gov to keep me safe, I'll do my level best for myself, thank you. And *accidents* do happen from *distracted* drivers. Fine or imprison them accordingly, but leave the rest of the drivers alone.

[junior]

thats why they call it distracted driving,and yes its aimed just to the driver and i can see them doing this...............a cell phone to the ear is just like getting caught with a beer to the lips. and they can use your phone agenst you via time stamp and its about freaking time. i have read alot of you people complainning about almost getting whacked dy some silly brod/teeenager/sightseeer on thier cell. so what is it this time> it might hinder your cell time? or it might wind up being an inconveinance to you if this law does pass? i think its for the best and about time.
this fall in the same footsteps these people with the u-drive it homes that have a GVW of 26,000 or more, and the tagalong campers that weigh more than 10,000 gvw  if it wasnt a rec vehicle you need a cdl licence i havent figured why they are exempt? tonage is tonage. isnt that right joe?)yes i am dragging the smoking one into this) seeing that he is the one that has the most exsperance at pulling the heavy loads.

[junior]

Such an asinine proposal. Watched the NTSB witch on the tube say cell phone use is distracting...

Hell, women putting on make up while driving are distracted, folks tuning the radio or installing a CD are distracted, talking/tuning on a CB can be distracting, fetching a dropped item from the floor is distracting...  where does it end?  

I don't need big gov to keep me safe, I'll do my level best for myself, thank you. And *accidents* do happen from *distracted* drivers. Fine or imprison them accordingly, but leave the rest of the drivers alone.

you might not need them to keep you safe, but i know for a fact thay you would be one of them looking for justice if some silly bitch teeniebopper  killed your loved ones ( heaven forbid)cause she was talking or texting on the cellphone

[solo1]

I suppose from a theoretical standpoint, laws written a certain way, would work.  However, from a practical viewpoint, they wouldn't.  A law for example, that makes it illegal for a driver to talk or text would probably bring lots of complaints about LEO's looking at their onboard computer screens and texting.  The same for all emergency services. Or how about amateur radio operators doing the same in their volunteer duties.  The list goes on.

The problem is essentially lack of judgment on the part of the driver.  It's what's between the ears (or what's not between the ears.)  Driving is a full time job and communicating while driving should be left to the judgment of the driver but clearly THAT AIN"T WORKING.

I would've got my arse kicked back when I was at the reins (beat you to it) of a car and did something to take my mind off driving.

[Karen]

There may be some super mentally gifted people out there (I'm not one of them) that can carry on a telephone conversation and also pay 100% attention to everything else that's going on around them, but the vast majority of us just aren't wired that way. Studies have shown that hands-free phone conversations are just as likely to contribute to accidents (please don't ask me to tell you which studies, I read them, and not while driving) as conversations on a hand held device. Back when I was first learning to drive, my mom had to take over for me once because I couldn't keep up with everything that was going on in busy traffic. Over time I learned how to process all that input, but it really is still a full time job. I can't even make a call using speed dial if I'm driving, it simply my eyes away from the road for too long a time. Have you ever been behind someone in the left lane of a busy road, when they start slowing down? Every time this has happened to me and I was fortunate enough to be able to pass them on the right, they have been on the phone. As far as I'm concerned, carrying on a conversation with someone who is not in your vehicle is impaired driving. Your brain simply can not be in two places at once.

[The Anvil]

Studies have shown that hands-free phone conversations are just as likely to contribute to accidents (please don't ask me to tell you which studies, I read them, and not while driving) as conversations on a hand held device.

I've read those studies and the data supporting them is questionable at best. You're often more distracted by your passenger, especially children. So you you ban passengers? Or a cone of silence for everyone? Where does it stop? I'm all for banning handset use while driving but hands-free is a bridge too far.

I use my hands free bluetooth a lot now. I'll grant that there are times when they can still be a distraction (pulling out into a busy two-lane from an intersecting street for instance) but I do the same thing that I do with passengers; I tell them to hold on a second while I concentrate on what I'm doing. As Solo said; it's a judgment call.

[Hoser]

I use the On star service when driving, hit one button on the mirror, everything else is verbal, including number dial up and hang up.  I fail to see any danger in this system, and I will continue to use it, and big brother can kiss my a$$.  Hoser   

[solo1]

Both Karen and Anvil have a point.

 My Mazda has hands free talking through whatever it's called, wireless and the car speakers, I don't use it.   Mostly there's no call important enough for me to interrupt driving. Heck, i can't even chew gum and drive.  I don't feel that I'm good at multitasking driving and talking on a cell.

Some years ago I was driving to Michigan with my buddy behind me. We were chewing the fat (that's kicking tires to you that are not up to old geezer sayings).  Both of us were ham operators and using 2 meter handhelds. I realized that I had driven 50 miles on an interstate and didn't remember any of the exchanges and intersections along the way.  I speak only for myself   

However, it's definitely great to communicate, especially with a business and service organizations.  Beats the heck out of special licenses and big Motorola radios............OR, ready for this............Pay phones!.

[3fan4life]

As far as simply talking on a phone
I don't see that as any different than talking to a passenger, especially if the phone is hands free.

Texting and driving is just plain dumb, I don't know of ANYONE that can multi task well enough to text and drive (well) at the same time.

I don't believe that additional laws are the answer however.

Most if not all states have laws against Texting and driving, so how about just assigning stiffer penalties to the laws that already exist.

For example, a $500 fine if your caught texting and driving. And if you're in a MVC due to texting and driving the fine doubles and your license is suspended for 90 days. With both of these penalties being even greater for repeat offenders.

I might even go as far as suggesting that if Texting and driving leads to an accident that causes a death that the charge be involuntary manslaughter.

My point is that additional laws won't help, hitting people in their pocket books and taking away their permits might.