Brain flash re: cell phones and driving...good idea?

[Law Dawg (ret)]

Yeah, it hurts when I do that (beat y'all to it ).

In another thread the topic turned toward cell phone use by cagers and my though went this way;

How about a law that requires phone companies to insert a program that causes texting and other functions of the phone shut off when traveling above a certain speed? Most (if not all) phones now have a GPS function and the program could be implemented so a 911 call overrides it. Just my redneck technotard solution. Copyrighted but you can run with the idea (call your Congressman etc) as a better/safer solution...

So rather than have all those stupid unrealistic enforcement expectations we could just nip the problem right at the root. Seems to me that if a call is important enough to take it would not be too much to expect cell users to fricken pull over to chat...just like in the good old phone booth days. What do y'all think?

[B650E]

That would be good for drivers, but what about passengers with phones? They are travelling at the same speed.

[demenshea]

While I agree in principle, I am sad that people can't make adult decisions and just not text or chat while driving. Since we have initiated a law penalizing those who are not hands free while driving, I have seen less people holding a phone, but haven't seen much enforcement either. I can't believe that CHP has to become babysitters of such, but then the law was passed.

I am sooooo tired of seeing people texting with total disregard for the safety of others. I followed an suv the other day who at first i thought was drunk due to their erratic driving into the bike lane, but as I caught them, I saw that they were texting. I wanted to yell at them, but hell, what's the use. Stupid is just that. This moron was texting on a city street in a bike lane that led into a school zone, like that isn't an accident waiting to happen.

I just wish that people would make better decisions while driving and realize that they control a 1/2 ton killing machine. I've seen it all, chatting, texting, eating, drinking, yelling at kids, putting on makeup, shaving and all while trying to pilot a vehicle. It's a freakin' jungle out there.

Ya, i'd like to see something installed into a phone that just made it inoperable while moving, all but 911 disabled. It might be a safer world.

[demenshea]

Originally Posted by B650E

That would be good for drivers, but what about passengers with phones? They are travelling at the same speed.

Good point, but what did we do without cell phones. We called from a land line. It would be safer all around if they were all disabled, and I use my cell gps frequently. Better lost and safe.

I don't know...there are no easy answers here. Cell phones make our lives easier and both more and less safe. go figure...

[Law Dawg (ret)]

Originally Posted by B650E

That would be good for drivers, but what about passengers with phones? They are travelling at the same speed.

Really just how "important" do you think most cell phone calls are anyway? How many calls could not wait for a bit, even for a passenger? A shut off system while moving would mean some inconvenience but the safety rewards would outweigh the merits of a steady stream of "OMG...LOL...DAMHIK...BFF...blablabla".

In a perfect world Donna, in a perfect world. For now we must dwell in this one. A blue tooth exemption might also be enabled along with the 911 though.

[B650E]

I should have first stated that I absolutely agree that driver distraction continues to be a killer ( I lost my mother to one ).

So, it's not that I don't agree with the size and scope of the problem, just how to address it. I think that there are legitimate, and some safety reasons, for passengers to be able to use their cell phones in cars, but definately not drivers. But, being my own devil's advocate, I guess if a passenger cell phone worked, it kind of defeats the purpose as the drivers would still find a way to use them.

Distracted driving is a huge issue that goes well beyond just cell phones, as Donna pointed out. Since the distractions come from so many sources, it's hard to get one's hands around the whole thing at once to try to solve it. Maybe it gets solved one piece at a time.

[Law Dawg (ret)]

Reality is (from a career LEO) that we don't have enough enforcement assets to even scratch the surface of the cell phone/distracted driver issues. Folks will continue to be dull and self centered as long as human nature is what it is. The problem is that citations bring revenue into the general fund so State legislators are keen to bring more bandaids in the form of infraction type penalties than they are to address the problem directly. With Blu Tooth only enabling the only thing a passenger would miss out on is TXTing (OMG! ). The positive trade off would be hands free only no matter what (excluding 911 of course). At least one distraction reduced and a complicated ineffective law becomes extinct.

[FD929]

Disagree. I've found myself to be becoming more of a libertarian these days as our Constitution becomes less and less important as a result of people giving up their freedoms and privacy in search of safety which continues to elude them. This sounds great in theory but what would actually happen is Sacramento would require software that tracks users locations, time, speed, etc which essentially constitutes a warrantless search. Nanny state turns into police state and reaches even further into our personal lives.

The knee jerk reaction after a tragedy is the same thing that brought us the patriot act, the ineffective invasive procedures of the TSA, Obamas shocking recent EO outlining government control of private businesses in event of "national emergency" whatever vague meaning they could construe that to mean, and the O Admin and Leon Panetta telling the Senate Arms Committee that they don't need congressional approval to declare war under the authority of the UN and the "international community" whatever that means.

I am all for justice but not at the expense of liberty and privacy. If the State doesn't have room for her, impose a different punishment. Require her to pay 30% of her income to a fund promoting knowledge of the dangers of distracted driving for the next 20 years and dont let her live on welfare to avoid having to pay. Make her go to high schools and tell kids her story and how it affected her life and how it feels to have killed someone who's grand kids can never see him again and FLED because she was driving illegally. Locking her up does nothing to fix her and society gains very little from it anyway.

[Law Dawg (ret)]

As an IT guy you know better than most that privacy is an illusion anyway.

Me? I'd say go to the Old Testament system of cities of refuge. You kill a member of my family in any way and I get to hunt you down and return the favor. If you get to a city of refuge first then you get a trial. If found guilty, I get to return the favor.

[shaklee909]

Besides talking on the phone and texting, there are many things that distract drivers.

Eating
Smoking
Changing the radio station
Pretty girl on the sidewalk
Alcohol
Being overly tired

I think we can all agree that the driver must be alert and unimpaired while on the road. The passengers, not so much….

I for one have been able to take off of work and make it a travel day to family events, because I was able to talk on the phone, and even use the Internet on my laptop as my wife drove down the highway. Had I not been able to do this, I would not have been able to take the days off. I would hate to see blanket rules for every one in the car/van/motorhome (think of the carpool vans) that would disable the technology.

I think there needs to be more educational campaigns, with enforcement of distracted drivers laws.

I would like to say that we should make adult decisions about our diving behavior, but I am well aware that even those whose age would make them adults, there mental abilities are less than adult.
So anyway, those than can think must. And be alert for those who can’t.