NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban

Page: < 123 > Showing page 2 of 3
Author
NascarDad
Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 336
  • Joined: 2007/12/28 10:35:00
  • Location: Goochland, VA
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/15 20:38:04 (permalink)
Tony Bad

NascarDad

Talking on a cell phone is not reckless.  It is reckless only if you are being heedless, changing lanes wildly, not paying attention, etc.  And in that case the driver should  be arrested for doing those other things.


Talking on the phone = not paying attention, so you DO agree it is reckless!

Only if I agree that talking on the phone is not paying attention to the road - which I do not.
 
It is possible to pay attention to more than one thing.  Anyone who has kids has had to do it, especially if you have to work from home sometimes.  How is it different than talking to someone else in the car? 
Are you accusing the police of being reckless when they use their  radio during a car chase?
#31
Foodbme
Porterhouse
  • Total Posts : 10332
  • Joined: 2006/09/01 14:56:00
  • Location: Gilbert, AZ
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/15 21:27:38 (permalink)
NascarDad,
Whatever.
I just hope you don't get killed on your 70 mile commute by someone who was distracted by using a cellphone while driving.
#32
Tony Bad
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 5116
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/15 21:38:17 (permalink)
NascarDad
 
Only if I agree that talking on the phone is not paying attention to the road - which I do not. 

It is possible to pay attention to more than one thing.  Anyone who has kids has had to do it, especially if you have to work from home sometimes.  How is it different than talking to someone else in the car? 
Are you accusing the police of being reckless when they use their  radio during a car chase?

 
I am sure there are varying degrees to which each of us are distracted by doing two things at once, but you are fooling yourself if you think you can do two things equally as well as when you do either exclusively. You may be that person of super human ability who can drive as well on the phone as off it, but the cars I see that go through lights, miss exits, weave all over, fail to maintain a constant speed, etc, lack your multi-tasking skills. The science on this is pretty clear. If you just want to say, don't care I'll do it any way, or that I'll take my chances, that seems more honest than denying something that really can't be disputed. 
 
As for the police thing, they are not carrying on a running conversation and their communications are usually out of necessity, not because they just feel like chatting. 
#33
fishtaco
Double Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 806
  • Joined: 2010/05/11 13:44:00
  • Location: Roachdale, IN
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/16 14:14:34 (permalink)
The bottom line is here, is just why do people think that they just have to talk to someone all the time? Why dire need is there to call someone and say "What are you doing"? "Where you at"? 99.99% of call are just pure BS! "Oh. god, I tried calling your sell phone, where were you"? "I was worried"? If every cell phone stopped working today and all the towers fell down, I would be one happy dude? Had one, don't now and won't have another.
 
Gee, what did we do before cell phones?
#34
Sundancer7
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 13526
  • Joined: 2001/07/18 14:10:00
  • Location: Knoxville, TN,
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/16 14:37:57 (permalink)
Personally I get it regarding phone use and texting and other usage, however what is the difference between using hands free and any conversation going on in the cabin.  There are so many distractions.  My GPS taling to me, the radio having discussions, my passenger having discussions?
 
I have hands free and I receive frequent business calls which are not chat calls.  They last a minute or so and I do not touch my phone.
 
Anything besides driving is a distraction and quite frankly, the ruling is a great idea but it cannot be enforced.  If hands free is ruled on, then radio, passenger conversation, food, drink and anything else including manual phone, texting and other uses should be banned.
 
Just my personal thoughts.
 
Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN
post edited by Sundancer7 - 2011/12/16 16:08:54
#35
brisketboy
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 1121
  • Joined: 2007/06/11 08:48:00
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/16 15:54:27 (permalink)
I know people that can't walk and chew gum at the same time. I would not want these people even driving with their cell phone in the trunk.
#36
tiki
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 4140
  • Joined: 2003/07/07 18:31:00
  • Location: Rentiesville, OK
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/16 17:38:12 (permalink)
I JUST DONT WANT BE THE DAD THAT GETS A CALL WHEN SOMEONE TEXTING RUNS A LIGHT AND KILLS MY SON ON HIS MOTORCYLE---ALTHOUGH I WOULDNT BE THE FIRST DAD TO GET THAT CALL.

sorry about the caps--didnt catch that till i posted 
#37
felix4067
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 3568
  • Joined: 2003/12/13 02:58:00
  • Location: Near Grand Rapids, MI
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/16 17:57:03 (permalink)
brisketboy

I know people that can't walk and chew gum at the same time. I would not want these people even driving with their cell phone in the trunk.

As do I, and the fact that they are allowed behind the wheel of a car at any time whatsoever for any reason frightens the crap out of me, cell phone or not. You can't regulate stupidity, unfortunately.
#38
ann peeples
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 8523
  • Joined: 2006/05/21 06:45:00
  • Location: West Allis, Wisconsin
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/16 19:02:36 (permalink)
I am really questioning my thoughts on this. I have been guilty of a DUI, and understand the total danger of driving after having had a few cocktails. I have avoided people on the road, who were weaving, only to pull up next to them, seeing them on their cell phone. Texting absolutely should be against the law while driving.
I know of many businesses that tell their people to ABSOLUTELY pull over to take a business call, hands free or not. I agree with that. All I have to say- lets be safe, people.
#39
ScreamingChicken
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 5168
  • Joined: 2004/11/05 14:36:00
  • Location: Stoughton, WI
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 13:27:31 (permalink)
ann peeples

I know of many businesses that tell their people to ABSOLUTELY pull over to take a business call, hands free or not.


I'd like to think that this is out of concern for the safety and well-being of the employee and others on the road, but my jaded side tells me that it's a CYA move because the company might be found liable in civil court if an accident occurred...
#40
ann peeples
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 8523
  • Joined: 2006/05/21 06:45:00
  • Location: West Allis, Wisconsin
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 14:33:49 (permalink)
That is right Brad.They dont care about the employees, the company doesnt want to be responsible.
#41
Sundancer7
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 13526
  • Joined: 2001/07/18 14:10:00
  • Location: Knoxville, TN,
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 16:10:49 (permalink)
ann peeples

I am really questioning my thoughts on this. I have been guilty of a DUI, and understand the total danger of driving after having had a few cocktails. I have avoided people on the road, who were weaving, only to pull up next to them, seeing them on their cell phone. Texting absolutely should be against the law while driving.
I know of many businesses that tell their people to ABSOLUTELY pull over to take a business call, hands free or not. I agree with that. All I have to say- lets be safe, people.

 
Ann, I am a fan of yours but I have to question your thoughts on hands free?  Do you talk to passengers while you drive?  Do you listen to the radio?  Hands free is nothing more that talking to your passenger or youself???
 
You simply push a button and conversate.
 
Just a personal thought?
 
Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN

#42
Tony Bad
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 5116
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 16:28:12 (permalink)
Sundancer7
 Do you talk to passengers while you drive?  Do you listen to the radio?  Hands free is nothing more that talking to your passenger or youself??? 

Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN

 
Not true Paul. Check this out.
 
http://perspect.siuc.edu/06_sp/car_talk.html
 
A quick google search can provide many more references. There is a marked difference between talking to a passenger and talking over the phone. 
 
Any distraction is bad, but cell phones appear to be one of the worst.
#43
Sundancer7
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 13526
  • Joined: 2001/07/18 14:10:00
  • Location: Knoxville, TN,
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 16:43:37 (permalink)
Tony:  You can find anything you want to debate dicussion on the handsfree or simple conversation.  Perhaps you are correct but I disagree.  I fail to see the difference.  Conversation is conversation.  There is no difference.  Do you talk while driving?  If you do, you are distracted as much as anyone else.  Do you listen to the radio?  That is a distraction.  Certainly you do not eat or do anything else.
 
Respectfully
 
Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN
#44
Bruce Bilmes and Susan Boyle
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 1350
  • Joined: 2000/07/12 11:09:00
  • Location: Robbinsville, NJ
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 16:50:14 (permalink)
That seems to be true, Tony.  I used to think of it the same way as Paul, but the facts say otherwise.  I don't understand why that would be, though.  Some people say it's because a passenger in the car is more aware of what's going on, and knows when to refrain from speaking, but I'm skeptical, and that certainly doesn't apply to kids in the back seat - I doubt they're any more aware of the driving conditions than the person on the other end of the call.  Yet the data says phone calls are more dangerous.  Strange.
#45
jman
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 1365
  • Joined: 2007/12/25 17:26:00
  • Location: berea, KY
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 16:53:23 (permalink)
Would it surprise anyone to find out that the NTSB misled the public in their report?  Sure, talking on the cellphone probably has lead to accidents, just as a multitude of other distractions have.  Everything we do while driving can be problematic if we allow them to distract us from full concentration.  The list is very long. Slippery slope.
#46
Bruce Bilmes and Susan Boyle
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 1350
  • Joined: 2000/07/12 11:09:00
  • Location: Robbinsville, NJ
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 17:13:37 (permalink)
"Misled the public" is not accurate, jman.  Different people and organizations may differ on the actual number of deaths caused by cell phone use, but the differences aren't really material.
 
I do, however, agree with your general point: there are plenty of things that can occur in a car that can reduce everyone's safety.  The question is, should we allow everything, ban everything, or try to find some sort of sensible middle?
 
Shooting up just before getting behind the wheel seems like a bad idea, and I think most people would argue it should not be permitted by law (even if shooting up was otherwise a legal activity).  Same with taking a nap while driving, or driving a car with brakes that don't work.  Driving after having a fight with one's spouse, I'd bet (or while under any number of stresses) probably causes accidents, but I doubt many people would want a law that makes it a crime to drive after fighting with your spouse.
 
So don't give me that slippery slope nonsense, because we're already on that slope and have been there since the first cars hit the road.  Decisions have to be made.  I don't know if cell phone use should be banned while driving or not, but we certainly shouldn't allow it on slippery slope grounds.
#47
Foodbme
Porterhouse
  • Total Posts : 10332
  • Joined: 2006/09/01 14:56:00
  • Location: Gilbert, AZ
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 17:56:28 (permalink)
I think we all agree on 2 points---Cell Phones distract Drivers. Many other things distract drivers.
So why not try to eliminate as many of those distractions as possible and hopefully eliminate some of the numbers of accidents and deaths. Reducing cell phone usage is something everyone can do to help. Since most people don't have the good sense to do that, then new laws are a poor but necessary partial solution.
We Humans suffer from the "It Ain't Gonna Happen To Me" syndrome. 
You need to decide. Am I gonna be part of the solution or continue to be part of the problem?
Look at it selfishly---Lower accidents and deaths = Lower insurance premiums.
You do have insurance don't you?????
post edited by Foodbme - 2011/12/19 18:00:08
#48
Tony Bad
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 5116
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 20:54:31 (permalink)
Sundancer7

Tony:  You can find anything you want to debate dicussion on the handsfree or simple conversation.  Perhaps you are correct but I disagree.  I fail to see the difference.  Conversation is conversation.  There is no difference.  Do you talk while driving?  If you do, you are distracted as much as anyone else.  Do you listen to the radio?  That is a distraction.  Certainly you do not eat or do anything else.

Respectfully

Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN

 
Paul, please don't think I am judging you or anyone on this. I am probably guiltier than most of foolishness behind the wheel. I am just relating things that seem to be becoming accepted as fact. I know many will disagree. I have a friend who insists he drives better when he drinks, and know people who deny cigarettes are bad for them, but the facts seem pretty clear to me.
#49
DawnT
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 1286
  • Joined: 2005/11/29 11:01:00
  • Location: South FL
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 21:36:44 (permalink)
 
Putting this into perspective, I happened across a copy of an old Allied/Howard Sams handbook on tape recording dating to the 60's. The last chapter discussed the new "Lear Jet Stereo Cartridge system" which later became the 8 track tape as a mobile entertainment device. It contrasted it with previous attempts at fitting cars with shock proof record players that apparently many of the Detroit manufactures had dabbled with. The chapter discussed the anticipated driver distraction by transportation authorities with cartridge changing and selecting the tracks (original must only had 2 tracks). Interestingly enough, it compared the same concerns decades earlier when states attempted to ban broadcast radio receivers and windshield wipers for the same reason. Their rhythmic, mesmerizing effect was expected to hypnotize drivers and be the cause of numerous fatalities.
#50
wanderingjew
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 7923
  • Joined: 2001/01/18 18:49:00
  • Location: East Greenwich/ Warwick, RI
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 22:01:25 (permalink)
Tony Bad

 I am probably guiltier than most of foolishness. I am just relating things to be be accepted as fact. I know many will agree. I  drink, and  the facts seem pretty clear to me.

 
You said it I didn't! 
#51
Foodbme
Porterhouse
  • Total Posts : 10332
  • Joined: 2006/09/01 14:56:00
  • Location: Gilbert, AZ
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/19 23:48:15 (permalink)
Dawn T,
So what's your Point? That doesn't put anything into perspective. People were distracted then and people are distracted now. People ran into each other and killed one another then and people run into each other now and kill each other now. So that makes it OK to talk on cell phones because people are going to kill each other anyway?????????
One factor that does need to be taken into account are the numbers of cars that are on the highways. There are many more vehicles today than back then traveling on higher speed highways, (Unless you live in LA or Houston). Slower reaction times while distracted at higher speeds = more wrecks.
 
 
post edited by Foodbme - 2011/12/19 23:49:56
#52
Bruce Bilmes and Susan Boyle
Double Chili Cheeseburger
  • Total Posts : 1350
  • Joined: 2000/07/12 11:09:00
  • Location: Robbinsville, NJ
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/20 01:05:53 (permalink)
I think DawnT makes two good points:
 
1) People can become accustomed to things that may initially be distracting, with the result that perhaps they are no longer a danger.  For instance, windshield wipers.  When I bought my first GPS I found it so distracting that it actually scared me a little.  I was mesmerized by it.  Now I barely notice it's there.
 
2) It seems insensitive to put a price on life and death, but it's what we do all the time.  If 100,000 lives a year could be saved by doing something that barely inconveniences us, we do it.  If 1000 lives a year would be saved by setting a national speed limit of 30, we won't do it.  That doesn't mean that those lives have no value; just that the cost to everyone of a 30 mph speed limit is too great to save them.  So for each safety measure we need to do the calculus: how much are we willing to give up for those extra lives?  Do we want to require no eating in the car?  No talking?  No radio?  No night driving?  No trips longer than 2 hours?  The list can go on forever.  Each action we take will save lives.
#53
joerogo
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 4545
  • Joined: 2006/01/17 17:33:00
  • Location: Pittston, PA
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/20 07:46:40 (permalink)
Tony Bad

Sundancer7

Tony:  You can find anything you want to debate dicussion on the handsfree or simple conversation.  Perhaps you are correct but I disagree.  I fail to see the difference.  Conversation is conversation.  There is no difference.  Do you talk while driving?  If you do, you are distracted as much as anyone else.  Do you listen to the radio?  That is a distraction.  Certainly you do not eat or do anything else.

Respectfully

Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN


Paul, please don't think I am judging you or anyone on this. I am probably guiltier than most of foolishness behind the wheel. I am just relating things that seem to be becoming accepted as fact. I know many will disagree. I have a friend who insists he drives better when he drinks, and know people who deny cigarettes are bad for them, but the facts seem pretty clear to me.

 
What?  You still don't believe me?
#54
ann peeples
Sirloin
  • Total Posts : 8523
  • Joined: 2006/05/21 06:45:00
  • Location: West Allis, Wisconsin
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/20 08:09:18 (permalink)
Paul, my thoughts on the hands free are still up in the air. It is definately better than actually holding a phone. But I am adamant about texting and driving being against the law.
#55
joerogo
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 4545
  • Joined: 2006/01/17 17:33:00
  • Location: Pittston, PA
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/20 08:17:17 (permalink)
Kidding aside, texting and driving is stupid.  I have had many a close call from people(mostly college age)texting and driving.
 
They slowly creep into your lane while texting, you beep the horn to wake them up, and they flip you the ace.  Texting is not the same as eating a Whopper while driving.  The Whopper doesn't make you think. and concentrate.    
#56
Tony Bad
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 5116
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/20 20:47:36 (permalink)
joerogo

Tony Bad

 Paul, please don't think I am judging you or anyone on this. I am probably guiltier than most of foolishness behind the wheel. I am just relating things that seem to be becoming accepted as fact. I know many will disagree. I have a friend who insists he drives better when he drinks, and know people who deny cigarettes are bad for them, but the facts seem pretty clear to me.


What?  You still don't believe me?

I used to Joe, I used to...
 

#57
Tony Bad
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 5116
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/20 20:48:11 (permalink)
wanderingjew

Tony Bad

I am probably guiltier than most of foolishness. I am just relating things to be be accepted as fact. I know many will agree. I  drink, and  the facts seem pretty clear to me.


You said it I didn't! 

 
Remind me not to hire you as a speech writer if I ever run for office.
#58
Sundancer7
Fire Safety Admin
  • Total Posts : 13526
  • Joined: 2001/07/18 14:10:00
  • Location: Knoxville, TN,
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/20 21:39:57 (permalink)
This whole issue has got me to sorta wondering?  How many folks in the USA are in contact with some sort of media.  Taxi drivers, fire dept, police dept, ambulance drivers, Fedex, all delivery services, all service personnel and how many others. Most of these services are needed with the exception of taxi.
 
My yard guy is a Capt. with the fire dept.  He is a 20+year veteran and if I would win the lottery, I would hire him as my personal driver.  He is very good at his job, however as he was responded to a minor call a few years ago, he totaled a $1,000,000 firetruck do to a call??
 
I do not dispute texting as it is a no brainer but I sincerely question handsfree as it is absolutely no different than conversating.  I am sure that you can find instances that will dispute that.  Stats are that and You can also find the opposite view.
 
Ban texting, ban phone use conventional but personally, I do not believe the hands free can be totally disputed.
 
Sincerely and respectfully
Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN
#59
felix4067
Filet Mignon
  • Total Posts : 3568
  • Joined: 2003/12/13 02:58:00
  • Location: Near Grand Rapids, MI
  • Status: offline
Re:NTSB Proposed Mobile Cellphone Ban 2011/12/20 22:42:13 (permalink)
Sundancer7

This whole issue has got me to sorta wondering?  How many folks in the USA are in contact with some sort of media.  Taxi drivers, fire dept, police dept, ambulance drivers, Fedex, all delivery services, all service personnel and how many others. Most of these services are needed with the exception of taxi.
 

 
How do you figure taxis are not needed? Is it just because they deliver people rather than packages? I'd say that makes them equally important to delivery services, although certainly not ambulances or fire trucks.
#60
Page: < 123 > Showing page 2 of 3
Jump to:
© 2014 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1