Lets try to do something good.

[mastakilla]

My Wife, however, plays for the other team. Riding with her is always exciting, if being terrified makes you excited. (She will never, ever, own a bike if I have anything to do with it) Her approach is this: "Look out! Here I Come!" I have witnessed her: eating, on the phone and taking notes while kareening down the road (just before a loud "WTF are you doing!!!")

Somehow, she has yet to have accident, I don't claim to understand how or why...

The reason why she didn't have an accident yet, is because other people keep enough margin to correct her mistakes. Others anticipate, so they can correct the mess your wife is making on the road. One day, your wife will meet her equal on the road, and it will be messy.

I am fully in favor of a law that bans cell phones in cars. Studies have clearly shown that people are not paying attention to the road while talking on the phone, and that many have been injured or killed by careless drivers like that. Same goes for drunk driving.

The thing is : your personal freedom ends when it harms others. Feel free to drive around your own back yard drunk, hitting your own tree and killing yourself in the process. Good riddance I'd say. But stay away from all other roads, where responsible people are driving, minding their own business, and are not looking to get killed by your selfish a$$.

How will you feel if some drunk driver kills your wife, or son or daughter? Will you agree that he was free to drink and drive, that is was his choice to do so, and that you respect that? The fact that your loved one is killed, is just the price your are willing to pay for personal freedom like that?

Well not for me thank you. And don't come crying that we shouldn't be allowed to take passengers anymore or listen to the radio either, because that's not serious.

 

[wrightme43]

Well since I started this here we go. Again please do not take anything I say as a attack on anyone. I want to clarify why I feel this is a good law.

First a disclaimer. I think we have way way way to many laws. I am normally against any new law just on the principal of it being one more thing taken away as a liberty.

This is not changing the fact that people talk on the cell phone and drive. This is only requiring that a hands free device be used while talking on the cell phone and drive. No one will lose the ability to talk on thier cellular phone. Put your left hand up to the side of your face with your cell phone in it. Its like putting a blinder on the side of your head. Now sit in your car, hold your left hand up to the side of your face, grab the steering wheel with your right hand, and with out removing the phone from your ear, or your other hand from the steering wheel, use your turn signal.

This is not a unreasonable or oppressive idea for a law.

Ok on to the drunk driving. Again this is not a attack on you. I am however about to attack the idea that someone driving drunk should be allowed to continue untill they kill or hurt someone.

That is the most insane thing I have heard in a very very long time. That is like walking into my backyard and shooting at the nieghbors houses, not getting in any trouble untill a person lays bleeding to death inside thier home. That is like standing on a overpass dropping bricks, and not getting in trouble untill they smash thru the windshield and kill or maim someone. That is insanity. Holy crap man, you can not possibly believe that.


Seriously, that made my brain hurt trying to understand how that can possibly be argument in favor of allowing the continued use of handheld cell phones while driving. It undermines almost every statement you made.

 

[mastakilla]

Ok on to the drunk driving. Again this is not a attack on you. I am however about to attack the idea that someone driving drunk should be allowed to continue untill they kill or hurt someone.

That is the most insane thing I have heard in a very very long time. That is like walking into my backyard and shooting at the nieghbors houses, not getting in any trouble untill a person lays bleeding to death inside thier home. That is like standing on a overpass dropping bricks, and not getting in trouble untill they smash thru the windshield and kill or maim someone. That is insanity. Holy crap man, you can not possibly believe that.

Seriously, that made my brain hurt trying to understand how that can possibly be argument in favor of allowing the continued use of handheld cell phones while driving. It undermines almost every statement you made.

Thank you sir, for putting my thoughts into words. Perfectly said.

 

[fz6nick]

Yesterday, I was riding through a parking lot of a GM dealership looking at trucks. I was looking to my right and as soon as I looked straight, I noticed a Tahoe backing out while on her cell phone. I blared the horn and swerved to avoid her. She hit her brake causing the vehicle to rock back and forth a few times...... Thats my first really close call on a motorycle.

 

[fz6nick]

I think that people who are against the no cell phone law wrong. I guess the only thing that will change your mind is when something like that happens to you.

Its kinda like the book "A Twist of the Wrist" if your not spending your $10.00 right, then you will be one of those people that are idoits on the cell phone causing a crash. Spend $3.00 of that 10 on talking on the cell, that could be life or death.

 

[Cloned]

EVERY close call I have ever had was with a cager on their cell phone.

And it's illegal in Arizona to TEXT while driving. However the wording of the statute can be loopholed. First, you have to be pulled over for something else first, and have that fine tagged on. Second, you can text and then claim that you were only going through your contact list to find someone to call.

It's stupid.

 

[wrightme43]

Cell Phones Make Drivers as Bad as Drunks | LiveScience

NEJM -- Association between Cellular-Telephone Calls and Motor Vehicle Collisions

Car Talk


These all say that hands free is just as bad as hands on.

 

[a_sick1]

In North Carolina, they only made it illegal to talk on the cell phone while driving if you are under 18...

 

[craig007]

I think banning cell phone use and texting while driving is a good idea. My company bans it for company business. You could lose your job if you have and accident and while on the phone. My sense is that a banning law won't work. However behavior can be changed by allowing the insurance companies to do the following:

1. Offer a drunk driving policy
2. Offer a driving sober policy.

If you have an accident while drunk and have the drunk driving policy, you insurance pays. However, if you are drunk and only have the sober policy, your insurance does not pay your medical expenses, collision, AND sues you to recover any liability payment that the other party is due. The fee for the drunk driving policy reflects the accident and claims history of drunk drivers.

Since driving while on a cell phone (hands free or not) carries a similar risk as driving drunk, allow insurance companies to offer:

1. cell phone coverage
2. non-cell phone coverage.

If you have policy number 2 and have an accident while on a cell phone (allow insurance companies to check your cell phone records), your insurance does not pay.

This would have an immediate effect as the cost for policies #1 would be a factor of 2 or 3 time higher than #2. There is also a big time threat because if you cheap out and buy #2, are you willing to risk financial ruin for a cell phone conversation.

Also, the rates for both #2's should be lower because people with high accident rates would be removed from the risk pool.

In this model, there is a financial incentive to do the socially responsible thing and people have to pay for their own irresponsible actions.

 

[Rushiku]

The reason why she didn't have an accident yet, is because other people keep enough margin to correct her mistakes. Others anticipate, so they can correct the mess your wife is making on the road. One day, your wife will meet her equal on the road, and it will be messy.

I don't know what the drivers and/or traffic is like where you live, but here outside Chicago? I assure you, the other drivers on the road are definitely not why she hasn't hit something/one.

I am fully in favor of a law that bans cell phones in cars. Studies have clearly shown that people are not paying attention to the road while talking on the phone, and that many have been injured or killed by careless drivers like that. Same goes for drunk driving.

A cell phone, or a drink or two, does not cause a person to become irresponsible or careless. They start out that way and increase their inattentiveness with distractions and drugs (clarification: alcohol is a drug).

So the question came "How do we keep sloppy drunk morons off the roads so they stop killing people?" and the answer? "Start a witch hunt! Anyone and everyone who can be proven to have taken drink before driving will be guilty. Not good enough? Did I mention that part where thousands of people, who were driving along after a night out, experiencing no problems with driving what-so-ever, but happen upon our 'drunk driver stings', will be shelling out millions of dollars, right into government coffers? We already have studies that show that drivers who have Blood Alcohol Content of [varies] are Impaired, how impaired...? Doesn't matter! They're impaired and we can make them pay us money"

That's not an answer, it's a pathetic scam perpetrated upon us by our governments. I don't care how long the guy who takes out my family sits in jail, they're still dead (for the purposes of this discussion) and no law, no fine, no jail sentence will ever change that. Should he get to just walk away? He won't be walking much when I'm done with him.

 

[mdr]

Texting while driving crosses the line and should be banned - but unfortunately would be essentially impossible to enforce. The only time it would likely come to the attention of law enforcement would be after the fact, i.e. "cell phone records indicate that the driver who ran the motorcyclist off the road into the tree was sending text messages at the time of the accident...."

I'm a little weak on the details but I seem to recall a case making the news with just that kind of evidence in the last 6 months or so. Was a "car on car" wreck IIRC. The lawyers traced the phone records of the wreck victims and about 10 seconds before the wreck the driver of one vehicle had just texted something. I didn't follow the case but I suspect it was easy to win damages from the other guy with that kind of evidence. .

 

[mdr]

I think it shoul be legal for motorcyclists to carry a registered weapon and just shoot out the tires, radiator, etc. of offending motorists

Right ON. Where's Mad Max when you need him? :justkidding:

 

[blkparade]

Interesting discussion all. In New York it is currently illegal to use your cell phone unless you have a "hands free" device. I guess i don't see our legal system as oppressive as some. Many laws were created by politicians who found a great cause to champion there political standing. Laws enacted then the cops are asked to enforce. Does it S^*k, sure. Are there some that just make no sense, absolutely.

Its seems several people here feel that each is responsible for his own actions. I more than anyone agree with that and it is a primary life lesson my children are taught. We are responsible for what happens around us and to us directly, indirectly I don't care. That being said this society continues forward with fewer and fewer people who will take responsibility for their actions. That in turn makes it necessary for someone to create laws (politicians) and for someone to enforce (police, courts) them so as to help those trying to do the right thing.

We shouldn't need all these laws, unfortunately the thinking of few dictates a much broader response. This country is doing pretty well so far. When we quote important people from the past we must sometimes realize it was just that the past, and is not always a reflection of the present.

Finally I realize many may not agree with my view and that is a good thing. I do ask anyone that drinks and gets in a car stays the hell out of the City I live in. You are a danger not only to me and my family and friends but yourself. And if someone is at the legal limit I hope the offender gets jacked up then nailed by the courts. Our ability to disagree is what makes this a great place to be. But I wonder without many of our laws, who decides what is right or wrong when these disagreements occur.

 

[mastakilla]

That's not an answer, it's a pathetic scam perpetrated upon us by our governments. I don't care how long the guy who takes out my family sits in jail, they're still dead (for the purposes of this discussion) and no law, no fine, no jail sentence will ever change that. Should he get to just walk away? He won't be walking much when I'm done with him.

When you're done with him? Seriously that's just macho talk that one would expect for an insecure 14 year old. Get real.

The whole point is that your family wouldn't be dead in the first place if the guy hadn't been drinking, or hadn't been talking on his phone while driving.

Even the most careful and responsible people get distracted while talking on their phone in the car, so they can just as easily cause and accident. I don't see how any sane person can be against such a law. I'm talking about texting or having the phone against your ear while driving, I think hands-free can work.

 

[Rushiku]

You sure know how to hurt a guy

Here's the thing: no law will ever stop everyone from doing something, like...let's say speeding. We all know speeders cause accidents, yet you, yourself, do it anyway. Why? Because, it's cool, you know what you're doing, no problem.

I don't know about Belgium, but here it is a Federal crime to remove a catalytic converter from your vehicle - how many people on this very forum think it's OK for them to do it anyway because: they get an extra hp or two? it's cool, it's just one bike and won't cause the failure of the environment all that much faster? They think the exhaust sounds better?

Hands free can work, you're right. But there's a downside: it is not economically feasible as a law. As soon as Hands-Free becomes law, the lawsuits will begin. Yokels v Government: I can't afford a hands-free device for my phone, the gov't should pay me money for pain and suffering.

I, for one, have had enough with paying more and more taxes so my so-called 'fellow' countrymen can get a free ride on my back - I will not support such a little and ridiculous thing!

You want to go hands free? Go flipping hands free! (I did) That way you can spend more time watching out for the morons who are on the phone, reading books (really, I've seen it - not a map, an actual paperback), putting on make-up, eating, sleeping, and who knows what else they find to do while behind the wheel instead of driving.

 

[dako81]

There's been a lot of great posts on here.

And no, I don't think people should get drunk and drive, that's just stupid. We ALL know that. If I caught one of my friends doing it, I'd beat their butt, and I have. And if something is "legal" it doesn't mean everyone is going to jump out and do it. If they made heroin legal tomorrow would you go out and do it? Polls have shown that over 98% of people said they wouldn't. Are there people that will? Yes, but those are the same people who are doing it anyways.

I was just trying to make a point about the laws about it, and just give a different perspective on the idea. Maybe to give the idea that if people want to change something in society, they can do it without laws. I just think it's funny that you drink and drive and hit someone, you pay the state thousands of dollars and rarely pay the family or individual your hurt to attempt to make them whole again. And if you did, it was some small arbitrary judgement or something from civil court. What damage does the state incur when you have an accident with someone else?

Some may say, "well the officers and other people have to get paid for dealing with the accident", but the fact is they're already getting paid out of our tax dollars. "But if you crash in the middle of the night and someone's on call and they have to come out and blah blah blah", they're still getting paid. If the officers don't have to deal with anything and spend any time working over time, is the state going to give you the tax dollars back that would have went towards their pay? No.

The fact is that driving and doing anything else, or being impaired, is bad. Plain and simple. When you're driving, you should be driving. Doing nothing else. But, you're never going to be able to force everyone to do, or not do something while they're driving with laws.

People make decisions every day based on what they know. If you teach them (and they actually learn not just throwing a textbook with a bunch of pages tagged for them to read), they will be able to make a more informed decision. Will people still make bad decisions? Yes, they will. You'll never change that.

My company bans it for company business. You could lose your job if you have and accident and while on the phone.

This is just one example of how this problem can be solved effectively without tax dollars. I also like the idea about the insurance policy. I'd imagine the drunk driving policy would be more than a house payment every month. And if you had an accident w/o the drunk policy while "intoxicated", defined however the insurance company you sign a contract with defines it, you have a personal obligation to not drink and drive to keep enough money in your pocket to support your family or pay your bills because I'd imagine the payment would be pretty high as an incentive to not drink and drive. Plus you would have already agreed and understood all of the ramifications of your decisions since you would have willingly signed a contract.

 

[SirIsaac]

I'm sorry you think people are so stupid.

I don't think people are stupid. I just don’t think that trying to “educate” them to not use a hand-held cell phone or text while driving will help. The people that will listen to such a message are the responsible ones that wouldn’t do it anyway. The ones that do do it will continue to think that while others cannot or should not do so, they are special and certainly have the skills to do what they want.

If they just cared for themselves, wouldn't you think they wouldn't want to wreck their own vehicles and sort of protect their property and things? Why would someone WANT to crash into a bike?

Sorry, I didn’t meant to imply that anyone would intentionally wreck their own vehicle or intentionally hit a bike. Do you disagree that there are a whole bunch of people who sort of blunder and careen through life without any clue as to the effect they have on others? They don’t consciously think that they might wreck their car or hit a bike – they just don’t think period.

Does it really matter what people do while driving so long as they don't hurt someone else or violate one of the uncountable laws that are already on the books?

If they crash or hurt someone they will pay the penalty anyway. The only difference is that if the officer finds out they were using their cellphone and caused the accident, they'll add another fine if it becomes a law.

Now, wouldn't you think that if you inflicted harm or hardship on someone it would only be fair to have to pay THEM to make them whole? Ask youself this: what does paying a monetary fine to the government do to make the person you hurt whole? I don't think it does anything at all towards making the person whole.

Now, if all the fines and things that you had to pay when you hit someone went to the person you had hit, I might see more of a reason why a fine should be added for the extra stupidity of a cell phone related accident.

Also I wonder if this became a law, if all accidents would become cell phone related accidents if there was even just a cell phone in the car? It seems like that's how it has gotten to be with alcohol. There can be 1 drunk passenger and the sober driver can cause a wreck and the accident will be reported as alcohol related.

I think I mostly agree with the above, making more laws will not necessarily make anyone safer. Like I said, I don’t think cell phone use by the driver of a car should be banned. After all, you can talk to passengers in your car, adjust your radio, etc. But Steve’s point that having a cell phone held up to your ear limiting visibility is a good one. It not only limits visibility, it limits control since you then only have one hand available to steer. The texters that I see use two hands to text, and of course their eyes to read the messages. How can you safely drive a vehicle with no hands, not looking at the road? So yes, even though it would be hard to enforce and many would still do it, I think it should be illegal to text while driving.

Thank you for giving the correct quote, although mine was somewhat close.

You are welcome, I hope you did not take offense at my correction. You were quite close, in fact I think there is some debate as to the exact quote. It just happens to be one of the quotes or sayings or pearls of wisdom that I have printed and taped to my file cabinet, so I figured I’d present it.

 

[dako81]

...They don’t consciously think that they might wreck their car or hit a bike – they just don’t think period...

I agree, but I think this is because a lack of understanding responsibility.

...You are welcome, I hope you did not take offense at my correction...

None taken, it's been a great conversation. We're all pretty much on the same page; we understand that being distracted while doing anything could be dangerous, that's just the human condition. (If people don't understand that then their brain is a sponge because everybody has done something and got distracted and gotten pinched, burnt, cut, etc.) I just really enjoy seeing what everyone else thinks, thanks for the responses.

 

[mastakilla]

I don't see how such a law would lead to a tax increase? Officers on patrol would be able to fine somebody who's texting or talking on the phone while driving, period. What more is there to it?

I think it's pretty clear by now that people are not going to change their behaviour, unless it will cost them if they don't change. So make it a law, fine them, and get rid of the problem.

 

[wrightme43]

You know Brad we probley agree on more than either one of us will ever know. I think the drug war is a freaking evil. If it didnt cause so much harm it would be a joke, but it destroys lives.

You and I and others disagree on this. I think your discussion of cell/drunk insurance is a good idea, but it wont happen. This is something we can get done.