Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on January 28, 2003, 08:41:04 AM
-
Just curious as to the opinion of this community. New evidence suggests that even hands-free units contribute to "Tunnel vision" while driving.
Drivers who use a cellular telephone, even with
a "hands-free" device, suffer from a kind of tunnel vision that endangers
themselves and others, U.S. researchers said on Monday.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A51581-2003Jan27.html
-
I don't know... it sure seems that people are unable to carry on a phone conversation and drive skillfully at the same time.
I would say that.... no but.... when you are involved in a wreck that your phone logs be checked. If you were on the phone at the time then you are charged with reckless driving. Why is driving with a phone in your ear and a glazed look on your unseeing eyes while varying speed from 45 to 85 mph in the fast lane considered fine while spinning the rear tires a little considered reckless driving?
lazs
-
I say yes, ban them.
It's becoming mandantory in a lot of places and for good reason. Even if someone seems to be 'doing well' driving while speaking on the cell phone, doesn't mean they can handle an emergency or 'situation' sould one arise.
I really like the trend around here where people pull off the side of the road to have their cell phone conversations.
-
Personally I'm split...on one hand I think I've seen some crazy drivers not paying attention on the freeway only to pass them and see that they're on the phone. OTOH, eating a Big Mac while driving down the interstate, or putting make-up on ranks up there too.
I turn my cell phone off and put it in the glove box, but thats me...I'm not sure if its right to ban them while driving if we haven't banned eating while driving(or other "distractions")...(shrugs)
-
What I've noticed, is that when people are talking on the phone (handsfree or not), is that they stop looking around. They will see what it's front of them ok, but have no clue to whats going on around them.
So yeah..ban it
Daff
-
Originally posted by Daff
What I've noticed, is that when people are talking on the phone (handsfree or not), is that they stop looking around. They will see what it's front of them ok, but have no clue to whats going on around them.
Spot on. My observations too.
-
Listening to the radio is the same type of distraction, I think as long as you're making things safe they will need to go as well.
-
Originally posted by Fatty
Listening to the radio is the same type of distraction, I think as long as you're making things safe they will need to go as well.
Only if you're making a rational discussion with the radio. ;)
-
yep... but... I don't think that everyone is incapable of driving while on the phone. I don't think the average soccer mom would be willing to throw or drop the phone tho if she needed both hands to drive suddenly.
just check the phone logs for the time during an accident or even a ticket.. any ticket with a phone conversation at the time doubles the fine.
lazs
-
i drive fine while on the phone.
and i have a 5 speed
its those soccer moms and dads in their damn minivans which scare me. or even worse, ford - expedition class SUVs
-
How about talking to someone in the backseat? Or anyone at all in the car? Will those be allowed?
The very idea of you girls outlawing conversations is humorous, Santa should be linking this thread in his US Nanny state thread.
-
Another "arguement" would be that driving and speaking with a passenger is similiar to that of having a conversation on the phone...I don't know, but I think the two are totally different. One seems more engaged/focused on the phone whereas in person I seem more involved with my surroundings while having a conversation. It's easier to drop the conversation in order to respond to a distraction in person because the other party is also aware of what is going on. Again, I shrug...
-
there is a huge difference between talking on the phone and talking to a passenger even one in the backseat. your eyes don't glaze over when talking to passengers.
lazs
-
Here's some research from the University of Utah,
I'm just going to post the intro. Follow the link for the rest.
"The use of cellular phones has skyrocketed in recent years, with more than 117 million subscribers in the United States as of July 1, 2001. This increase has been accompanied by an increase in the number of individuals concurrently driving and talking on the cell phone. Recent estimates suggest that cell phone users spend 60% of their cell phone time while driving. The precise effects of cell phone use on public safety are unknown; however, because of the possible increase in risks associated with the use of cell phones while driving, several legislative efforts have been made to restrict cell phone use on the road. In most cases, the legislation regarding cell phones and driving makes the tacit assumption that the source of any interference from cell phone use is due to peripheral factors such as dialing and holding the phone while conversing. Among other things, our research evaluates the validity of this assumption.
Prior research has established that the manual manipulation of equipment (e.g., dialing the phone, answering the phone, etc.) has a negative impact on driving. However, the effects of the phone conversation on driving are not as well understood, despite the fact that the duration of a typical phone conversation may be up to two orders of magnitude greater than the time required to dial or answer the phone. One study found that simple conversations did not adversely affect the ability to maintain road position. On the other hand, studies have found that working memory tasks, mental arithmetic tasks, and reasoning tasks disrupt simulated driving performance.
Our research focused on the cell phone conversation, because it comprises the bulk of the time engaged in this dual-task pairing. We sought to determine the extent to which cell phone conversations interfere with driving and, if so, the precise nature of the interference. In particular, the "peripheral interferences" hypothesis attributes interference from cell phones to peripheral factors such as holding the phone while conversing. By contrast, the "attentional hypothesis" attributes interference to the diversion of attention from driving to the phone conversation itself. The study described here is part of a larger research project that will be detailed in a forthcoming issue of Psychological Science."
http://www.nsc.org/library/shelf/inincell.htm
-
Originally posted by lazs2
there is a huge difference between talking on the phone and talking to a passenger even one in the backseat. your eyes don't glaze over when talking to passengers.
lazs
Some drivers are scary when they talk to passengers - they turn their head at the backseat passenger and talks for few seconds.
-
Here's some stuff that looks to be more conclusive.
"Carnegie Mellon study provides conclusive evidence that cell phones distract drivers
PITTSBURGH-By studying images of the brain at work, Carnegie Mellon University scientists have concluded that we cannot converse on cell phones without distracting our brains from the task of driving.
In findings reported in the journal NeuroImage, a team led by Carnegie Mellon Psychology Professor Marcel Just discovered that attending to a conversation significantly distracts the brain from processing complex visual information.
"This has direct implications for cell phone use during driving because it answers one of the classic questions about human thinking. We've demonstrated that the human brain has a limited ability to perform two cognitive tasks concurrently under demanding circumstances, such as simultaneously conversing and driving," said Just. "
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2001-07/cmu-cms072601.php
So no, it's not just soccer moms. It's everyone.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Some drivers are scary when they talk to passengers - they turn their head at the backseat passenger and talks for few seconds.
In rebuttal, those same type of drivers are usual plain scarey, with or without a passenger....
-
they can talk all they want in the car, just wire the ignition into the phone - when one is on the other is off...
seriously - pagers, cellphones, pdas - is anything that freakin important it can't wait until you are parked and/or out of the movies???
stop and smell the flowers, pet your dog, hug your kids - life is short - turn off the crap
-
So Thrawn, conversations are distracting (I'm very saddened that someone probably got their degree based on that profound discovery). So the danger has moved from being the phone to being the conversation itself, not suprising, when NY first started debating its hands free law there were a lot of calls to outlaw the phones themselves and even eating in the car.
Did they do a study on the distractions of having a child in the backseat? Should we outlaw those too? (I'm game).
-
Just one more civil liberty the Right Wing Reactionaries want to take away from us.
(how'd I do Cabby?)
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Just one more civil liberty the Right Wing Reactionaries want to take away from us.
(how'd I do Cabby?)
The New York ban came from a Democrat...you did lousy as usual.:)
-
Originally posted by Fatty
So Thrawn, conversations are distracting (I'm very saddened that someone probably got their degree based on that profound discovery). So the danger has moved from being the phone to being the conversation itself, not suprising, when NY first started debating its hands free law there were a lot of calls to outlaw the phones themselves and even eating in the car.
Did they do a study on the distractions of having a child in the backseat? Should we outlaw those too? (I'm game).
Lol...Fatty, you brought up the nanny issue..and I agree wholeheartedly. If you ban cell phones,you better ban talking and loud music too. Also, children can never fight in a car because that is possibly the most distracting thing for a driver etc etc.
For heaven's sake guys...you are Americans. How can you let someone tell you what to do in the land of the free and the home of the brave?
-
Originally posted by Curval
For heaven's sake guys...you are Americans. How can you let someone tell you what to do in the land of the free and the home of the brave?
We don't, the People take up lobbying their state Rep or Senator for such legislation. So, in essense, the laws come from complaints of ordinary people calling their representives. State reps carry the torch for the people from there..
-
Hands free or not the whole point is are you mentally focused on driving and road conditions or on your conversation.
-
Here it's already forbidden, btw, some month ago, they permitted with a new law the use of the phone with headphones (auricular?), but not the handling to dial the number.
You must be hands free to drive.
Anyway, it's more a question of the driver, I mean, "priority of tasks"
Usually, when I answer at cell in car using the Headphone, I still mantain a good control of the driving activity, what suffer is the ability to mantain a good speed in conversation.
By driving I use this priority.
1) Watch out around and drive.
2) other tasks.
There is a lot of people that, With or without cell phones have the following:
1) Other tasks
2) Drive
3) Watch out (optional).
:)
-
Naso, the study suggests that your reaction time is still considerably less than without a phone conversation at all regardless how good "you" think your reaction time is...but its just another "study"...so I digress.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
We don't, the People take up lobbying their state Rep or Senator for such legislation. So, in essense, the laws come from complaints of ordinary people calling their representives. State reps carry the torch for the people from there..
Ahhh Rip, but aren't you forgetting those pesky little lobby groups that run around changing the minds of those representatives when it actually comes time to vote? They sort of get in the way of the perfect little political system you describe.
One such group springs to mind...the NRA.
-
Originally posted by Curval
Ahhh Rip, but aren't you forgetting those pesky little lobby groups that run around changing the minds of those representatives when it actually comes time to vote? They sort of get in the way of the perfect little political system you describe.
One such group springs to mind...the NRA.
And if one does not like it, they can get a counter-lobby group together, thats the beauty of a democracy, if you don't do anything, others vote for you. You must be pro-active if you want change.
Sure beats the hell out of being a Subject of the Queen. :p
-
I'm sure there are studies that say most firearm injuries come from firearms too Rip (it would be an equally groundbreaking study to undertake if not, someone should tackle it and get ahold of that grant money), but I'm in no hurry to ban those either.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
And if one does not like it, they can get a counter-lobby group together, thats the beauty of a democracy, if you don't do anything, others vote for you. You must be pro-active if you want change.
Pleeeaaaseee Rip.
An anti-NRA lobby group...hmmm...like this hasn't been tried before. The NRA has extremely deep pockets and far too much political clout for any "new" group to have a hope of changing the state Rep's mind. So he loses one or two votes by not listening to the new group...he GAINS a bunch of NRA card carrying voters and quite possibly a condo in Vail for siding with them.
A great big :rolleyes: for your democratic system.
-
Curval, the anti-gun lobbyists are winning in this country, do you not pay attention to the news?
And go start your own NRA thread if you want to discuss firearms, this is about cell phones. Thread Hijacker. :)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Only if you're making a rational discussion with the radio. ;)
some people can have conversations with anything. i've seen some of your posts. ;)
ban them, or at least mak'em use hands free of some sort.
-
Originally posted by mason22
some people can have conversations with anything. i've seen some of your posts. ;)
Noted! I'll refer to you as "anything" from here on out.
-
5-10-life
-
Originally posted by mason22
some people can have conversations with anything. i've seen some of your posts. ;)
ROTFL!!!
:D
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Naso, the study suggests that your reaction time is still considerably less than without a phone conversation at all regardless how good "you" think your reaction time is...but its just another "study"...so I digress.
And my reaction it's less quick when I am tired, or worried.
I mean that it's basically a driver's attitude, not the means that he use to distract himself.
There's alot of my friends or working partners that can understand when i am driving while talking, because I suddenly stop to talk or to listen, while my processor time it's tasked to the driving function.
It's an attitude, as the Safety Boards teach us when they talk about piloting an airplane, crew management, and all that stuff.
Dialing the number it's another matter, because you need to dirtract your motorious function to dial, your attention to see (or feel) what buttons you are pushing, and so on.
Uh, maybe this have something to do with the fact that I am left hand? (different distribution of brain use?) :)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
And go start your own NRA thread if you want to discuss firearms, this is about cell phones. Thread Hijacker. :)
:p
-
I don't have any problems with cellular phones but those things you've calling "soccer moms" are really scary; especially if they are having a small childs with them.
Stupid squeakes start to play with their childs and don't understand it might be the last trip they're ever doing together.
Well maybe they can share same meat-wagon otw to cemetary.
-
I think we should all go back to using CB radios. It was a lot more entertaining listening to group conversations. With cellphones, I have a hard time eavesdropping on the motorist next to me.
-
btw with modern phones all you have to do is put a voice-commands on and Vóila; you can make a call without dialing a number first.
-
Originally posted by Staga
btw with modern phones all you have to do is put a voice-commands on and Vóila; you can make a call without dialing a number first.
So you're saying that I should trade in my soup cans with the string? :D J/K...I have mine programmed for voice dialing, but I still carry it in the glovebox. Thats because I'm too damned busy having fun driving to monkey around with a phone. :D
-
I say ban 'em. For everyone except me that is.
-
Once saw two "baseball" moms with their Suburbans full of kids race 30 miles on a twisty, two-lane highway. Don't know if they were headed to a ball game or not, but it scared the life out of me. They were driving in excess of 80 mph on that narrow, bumpy road. When they finally got to the next town, they drove side-by-side down a two-lane, one-way street and talked to each other. I wanted to bludgeon them to death with a blunt excrement.
Shuckins
-
Originally posted by H. Godwineson
I wanted to bludgeon them to death with a blunt excrement.
Shuckins
I've had that problem, alittle prune juice will help you out.
-
the mind can only truly concentrate on one thing at a time
if your talkin on the phone, you aren't driving 100%
if you are female and doing it, you aren't driving at 25%
if everyone drove with 100% concentration, accidents would be nil.. but ..
most dumb arses think they can truly multi task :)
-
Stay outta my life and leave me alone!!!!
-
Originally posted by Rude
Stay outta my life and leave me alone!!!!
{Devils Advocate Mode On}
But if you are yapping on the phone, and rear end someone, you've just invaded someone elses life with your decision to yap. Its no longer "your life" thats affected.
-
you people are so stupid arguing about cellphones. cellphones don't kill people.
BAN ALL CARS!!
and if that doesn't stop people from being injured...
BAN ALL PEOPLE!!
...ah that'll work nicely. once we get rid of all the people there will be a drastic reduction in the number of injurys caused by cell phones.
F.
-
come on guys... face it... whenever you see someone driving like a dufus for mo apparent reason.... you get close and see the stupid cell phone stuck in his/her ear... they drive like crap. There is a huge difference between converstaion with passengers and with a cell phone... the person on the cell is concentrating on every word because he can't see the other persons reaction and he knows that they can't see his... he is very careful to not give or get the wrong impression.
I don't like to "ban" anything.. why not simply check the guys phone logs when he is in an accident or gets a ticket and double the penalty if he was on a cell phone? We have a precedent... fines are doubled in construction zones.
personally.... I think people who can't drive or watch a movie without pretending to be so important that they need a cell phone are a holes. NOw.... if for instance... you are on a long stretch of interstate 5 with light traffic... that's another thing.... might even help you by keeping you awake.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Should Cellular phone conversations be banned while driving?
No.
That's like banning radios in airplanes.
-
I'm not runnin into anything while I talk on my phone....why? Because I can walk and chew gum at the same time....just because some accidents have been found to be caused by cellphone comatosis, should not mean no one can use them while driving.
Lazs has the correct approach to this problem...what's that called??? Oh yeah....ACCOUNTABILITY!!!
-
It already is isn't it?... called distracted driving... and it can pertain to eating... smoking... trying to quite the kids in the back seat... anything that is affecting your ability to drive. I don't think we need another law. It think *some* people have a problem with talking on the phone and driving... but they also have trouble talking to the person in the passenger seat and driving. We have waaaay too many laws already... and I think this one is already coverered.
-
i think cell phones in cars out weight the bad driving,,,say someone seen a accident,,or some one in trouble,,robberies,,rapes,,burglaries,,bad drunk drivers,,,i think the cell phone's save more lives than it gives up
-
cell phones are the hands down winner for distracting.... maybe a tie with kids chokeing to death in the back seat... Not even close for eating or conversing.
For causing accidents and impaired driving... tied with drunk/drugged driving... hard to tell (from a distance) if the driver is on drugs or a cell phone.
No problem.... I also don't see a problem with an open container of booze in the car (and I don't drink) but.... if you were on the phone when you caused the problem.... you should be more liable. same for being intoxicated... Anyone who believes that they are just as aware of their surroundins and drive just as well while conversing on the phone is living in the same sort of self servoing denial as drunk drivers.
lazs
-
I must admit...lazs definately has the right approach to this problem with cellies.
-
When we outlaw cellphones
Only outlaws will have cellphones!
-
Saw a bumpersticker once that sum's up my feelings on the matter.....
"DO YOU THINK YOU COULD DRIVE ANY BETTER IF I STUCK THAT PHONE UP YOUR ASS?"
Of course the reaction I had would probably lead to someone banning bumper-stickers too. :D
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
When we outlaw cellphones
Only outlaws will have cellphones!
Heeeeey! Thats got a snappy tune to it! I like it! :)
-
cell phones are the hands down winner for distracting
according to national deaths,,,only 57 death last year happen because of cell phones,,compared to how many drunk drivers?,,i would say allcohall is way more of a killerAnyone who believes that they are just as aware of their surroundins and drive just as well while conversing on the phone is living in the same sort of self servoing denial as drunk drivers
maybe,,but does the death toll ring the same?,,there are more people dieing of drunk driving than anything else in this world,,More than 500,000 Americans are injured annually in crashes involving alcohol, and the annual economic cost of alcohol-related crashes exceeds $114 billion.Last year, 17,448 were killed in alcohol-related crashes -- representing 41 percent of all traffic deaths. <~~now that is a good reason to make allcohall illegal while driving,,,,i dont know if 57 deaths is anuff to make a law over,,heck,,i bet 57 deaths happen a year while driving because of site seeing,,lol<~~going to make us stop lookin out of the windows next?,,lol,,i beleve phone use is a distraction,,but i dont know if its anuff to warant a law over it
-
Originally posted by lazs2
There is a huge difference between converstaion with passengers and with a cell phone... the person on the cell is concentrating on every word because he can't see the other persons reaction and he knows that they can't see his
So you're saying it would be better if he were looking at the passenger while driving?
-
17,448 were killed in alcohol-related crashes -- representing 41 percent of all traffic deaths. <~~now that is a good reason to make allcohall illegal,,,,i
alcohol kills, but you want to outlaw allcohall?
make up your mind.
-
while driving!! ,,lol<~~not illegal for drinking,,just while driving!!,,does 57 death toll anuff for it?,lol,,i would say over 10,000 deaths a year makes allcohall much more deadly than 57 cell phone deaths,,,,if i ran into a freeway that said,,,drunk drivers this way,,and cell phones this way,,,i would go the cell phone route anyday,,lol<~~seen anuff drunk drivers and cell phone drivers,,but atleast cell phone people keep there cars on the road and in the right lane most of the time,,lol
-
fatty... yes I am saying exactly that. Just as I can "look" at the rearview mirror or the guages.... I can "look" at the passenger and talk and drive at the same time. It does not require the amount of concentration that is required to tulips or to convey expression over the phone.
mt... exactly... I don't want to outlaw anything... I just want people to be accountable. shoot someone who doesn't deserve it... pay the price.. crash your car cause you were drunk or/and on a cell phone... pay the price.
People allready pay the price for not being competent drivers... they are ticketed, pay more insurance etc... I am saying that there should be additional penalties for dileberatly driving impaired. Driving drunk or on a cell phone is driving deliberately impaired. If it can be proven that you were in a heated conversation with your passenger or spending half a minute looking at the radio while finding a station.... the same should apply.
lazs
-
life-saving operations involving cellphones:
Well, most can and should be done by a passenger or on the side of a road. Still, do you expect to get ticketed for calling 911 to report a grisly accident?
"I'm sorry sir, I'm going to have to write that up."
"well, back there a bigrig jacknifed and rolled over a schoolbus! I was calling for help."
"That's no excuse. They can get help themselves"
Yeah, right. That's it.
I say ban them. Enforcement will end up being something like seatbelts: Only if you're driving dangerously or otherwise pissing off a cop are you gonna get in trouble. If you're driving well enough to spot a police car and stop moving your mouth, you won't get ticketed, and you shouldn't.
Better yet, ban driver use of cellphones and raise the interstate speed limit to 95mph.
-
it's not the talking on the cell thats a problem (not a whole lot different than talking to your passenger, IMO)
it's the talking on the cell while, reading the file clutched in your hand (that's also trying to hold the wheel), with the biefcase open beside you, as you reach in and enter crap on your laptop.
btw- for any ladys reading, don't put on you make-up while riving either.
-
Hand-held phone use in a motor vehicle has been banned in the UK. The use of hands-free phones are advised against in the UK 'Highway Code' and therefore the Police will still pull you up if they suspect you of using a hands free device. If an accident occurs then it will be considered as a contributory factor to the accident and yuu maybe prosecuted.
-
Lazs, I don't know what the hell you're doing, but you must be doing it wrong if your phone conversations involve asses.
SOB
-
Cell phone use of any kind should be banned while driving. So should the following things:
Smoking
Being Female
Being Oriental
Being 16-25 years old
Being older than 55 years old
There's alot that could be done to make the roads safer... it seems that cell phones are a minor drop in the bucket.
MiniD
-
It's banned here.
One doesn't have a right to use a car on the road system of a nation. It's a priviledge. As such, perhaps some restrictions are in order to ensure the safety of others.
Lazs suggestion is sensible enough - only it won't save the person who was killed in the cell phone induced accident. Perhaps it'll work as a deterrant - then again, most drivers think they're above average, so probably not.
My philosophy is that you either drive or talk on the phone - not both at the same time.
I'm actually more worried when I am on the freeway in a car than when I am scuba diving or rock climbing. In the latter, YOU are in control - death or injury is a result of your own mistakes. On the freeway, your safety is partly in the hands of some half blind speed maniac who likes to talk on the cell phone - i.e the worst possible driver imaginable.
Since people can't drive, perhaps it's ok to ensure that their abilities aren't further reduced.
Haven't seen many woman putting up makeup in the car here in DK. Once or twice. Seen it plenty of times in normal video shoots of American women though. VERY odd to see a woman looking in the rear mirrow outting lipstick on. So irresponsible it's unbelievable - should be punishable by jail.
-
oh... I have a lot of views on driving... I don't think that a person should be allowed to drive till they get him out on a skidpad or that he should be able to drive on the freeway until he can prove he can panic stop from 70 mph in the wet. Bet there would be a lot less women tailgating each other at 80 mph in a pouring rain...
if you are distracted or impaired in any way and it can be proven then you should have increased penalties up to neglegent manslaughter.
I believe cell phones are extremely distracting for the majority of folks.. I believe most folks are impaired at a blood alc level of about .12 there are exceptions.
ok sob... since I was in the dictionary anyway....
"sob (sob) v., sobbed, sob•bing, n.— v.i.1. to weep with a convulsive catching of the breath. 2. to make a sound resembling this. — v.t.3. to utter with sobs. 4. to put, send, etc., by sobbing or with sobs: to sob oneself to sleep. — n.5. the act of sobbing. 6. any sound suggesting this. "
lazs
-
Talking on a mobile phone while driving is more dangerous than being over the legal alcohol limit, according to research.
Tests by scientists at the Transport Research Laboratory said drivers on mobiles had slower reaction times and stopping times than those under the influence of alcohol.
And it said hands-free kits were almost as dangerous as hand-held phones.
Reaction times are nearly 50% slower when talking on a mobile
Using a hand-held mobile while driving is illegal in more than 30 countries, but in the UK drivers are usually prosecuted for dangerous or careless driving.
Research was done at the TRL driving simulator. So not unequivocal by any means, but very suggestive.
-
http://www.callertimes.com/ccct/local_news/article/0,1641,CCCT_811_1706921,00.html (http://www.callertimes.com/ccct/local_news/article/0,1641,CCCT_811_1706921,00.html)
Dont know if it went through, but heres an article for you.
-
I say ban them. Even the handsfree ones.
Anyone I know that has a cellphone cant drive worth crap when they are on them.
Where i live you can get a ticket for eating, cellphoning it up, or doing the other stupid things that lazs mentioned called "driving without due care and attention."
Hell most people i know with cellphones cant even walk without crashing into stuff while yapping away on those stupid phones.
Oh and laz i got one better.
All drivers should have to take a course and ride a motorcycle for at least a year before driving a car or truck. I know for me the instant i started riding I became a much better and "defensive" driver.
-
Florida Highway Patrol released figures that cellphones saved more lives than were lost. I will try find it.
-
Of course the cellular brings way more benefit than danger.. It's a must if you travel anywhere.
However simultanious speaking and driving is a TOTALLY individual issue. Some people can't drive while talking some can. Some people shouldn't be let to drive at all let alone talk while doing it!
There are so many different types of people on the road.. There are certain females that would never pass the roadtest if I was the instructor.. So maybe what's needed is to include a test in the driving school. Cell talking while driving.. If you fail you're not allowed to talk on cell while driving. However if your driving is not affected, you get the permit.
-
I carry a cell phone when I drive but it is in my luggage. If I need it I can get to it... you couldn't talk on a cell phone in one of my cars if it was running anyhow.
loser... I got my motorcyle licence at 15 1/2 ... I think too many people would get killed or crippled tho if you made people ride bikes.
People will allways find a way to injure others or themselves but banning dangerous behavior is not the way.... simply make people pay for their actions. The deterent value will be enough and ultimately, be better for everyone. The more laws and bans you make, especialy against popular activities, the more lawlessness you encourage.
lazs
-
i dont think 57 deaths last year because of cell phone driving merits ban,,lol<~~more kids die a year from choking on toys,,going to ban them too?,,lol
but double the fine sounds good for people caught talking while getting into a accident,,all they have to do is look at some ones cell phone log in dates
-
I called in a VERY VERY serious car crash while on the beltway in Atlanta at night. HAd I gone to where you fella thik was a safe place to call would have probably taken another 10 minutes.
-
that's why a ban is never a good thing. A person should be able to use his own judgement. If you would have smashed into another car tho because you used your cell maxtor then you should also be willing to accept the consequences of your action. Another wreck wouldn't have been of any benifiet.
lazs
-
oh... I have a lot of views on driving... I don't think that a person should be allowed to drive till they get him out on a skidpad or that he should be able to drive on the freeway until he can prove he can panic stop from 70 mph in the wet. Bet there would be a lot less women tailgating each other at 80 mph in a pouring rain...
You mean that skid pad testing isn't MANDATORY?!?
I knew it was extremely easy to get a license in the US. A girl I used to date lived there for a year and said she had a few hours of theory, an easy test and then 20 minutes of driving - dinnae even have to parallell park. Then she came back and paid €20 to get it converted to a Danish driver's license, which usually will cost you around $1200 and upwards.
Hm. Wonder if I have to be a resident to get a drivers license in the US? Iøm going there this summer probably anyhow, and it'd be cheaper to get a US drivers license even with the cost of travelling.
Anyway, I suspect the relatively high accident rate in the US is a direct result of poor drivers education.