Preserved Topic: Question on driving laws: (Page 1 of 1)

Would you support a law that tickets those who are eating, putting on makeup, talking on the phone, or otherwise distracted while driving? - Taken from a website in the Site Reivew forum

Jestah

Yep, becuase distracted drivers are dangerous...they can't fully concentrate on what's going on around them. Driving requires you to concentrate in order to keep your (at least) 1 ton vehicle from colliding with other vehicles, motorcyclists and pedestrians. I have personally witnessed 4 car pile-up accidents where several people have died, all becuase hte person driving was eating, or putting on makeup, or talking on the phone.

Yes - we already have them here.

___________________
Emps

FAQs: Emperor

Yes...we already have some of them here, in Germany...

What bothers me about living in the United States is everyone is so concerned with laws that 'limit' their rights, they sacrafice saftey just to prove a point. When New York State passed a ban on talking on cell phones while driving many of these people came out of the woodwork claiming that having coversations on there cell phones didn't distract them and these laws were unconstitutional. I don't think anyone can legitimately tell me that they aren't distracted while talking on a cell phone & driving, its more or less they just don't want to give up this 'freedom'. Somehow over the course of 200 years, everything thats not specifically banned in the Constitution is a freedom of living in the United States. :sigh:

I doubt a law like this could ever be passed nationwide in the United States. As much of a common sense thing as it is, people here just generally believe that they have the specific rights to apply make up & eat while driving.

Jestah

There are sollutions for driving with celphones. Keeping both hands free in the case of an emergency is one of my personal little rules while driving, should I ever get a cel phone and need to use it, I'll pick myself up a hands-free headset. If I need to eat when I drive, I'll either opt to wait a bit until I get to wherever I'm going or stop somewhere.

Morbid or not, I find amusement in vanity taking one's life by them putting on makeup while driving. Just seems silly to get pissy about not being able to apply mascara while flinging yourself and a ton of steel at 70 miles an hour down pavement with others doing the same thing. Normally I'd say, 'Hey, it's their choice, let them do it.' But in this case, I'd really hate to be the victim of a massive car accident by someone putting on rouge, so I'm quite in favor of these kinds of laws.

The problem, me thinks, is that people are too comfortable with themselves and their ability to drive vehicles. I know I'm far from the best driver out there, and I can't even begin to imagine what kind of numbskulls are out there doing stupid crap on the freeways. As such, I've taken it upon myself to ensure I get where I need to go without killing someone else, or putting their life in jeopardy. It's called pride, and when the government steps in to make things a bit safer out there, most people are too anal to realize that it isn't an attack on their pride, it's being done for a reason. They defend it as though it's some vital part of driving. Dangit Jestah, you're absolutely correct. They feel it's their right to eat/drink/apply makup/talk on the phone while driving, and it's really not... it's taking just that much attention away from what's going on outside, and this leads to mistakes that can kill.

Good topic!

njuice42 Cell # 551
icq 957255

Will making it illegal for drivers to drive badly stop it from happening?

no.

Laws that can't be enforced are just print on paper.

Accidents are accidents, and someone is always at fault for whatever reason. Banning a few of the reasons won't help when cops aren't watching every single person every single second.

The best solution is cars that drive themselves, free from human error.
Think of it... no human error... no need for speed limits.
Or better yet, flying cars that fly themselves.
No speed limit... no road construction... no accidents.

I wish technology would hurry up.

Genis, I've been noting several of your posts have hinted at some type of evil plan to take over the world and treat people like sheep. Are you sure you're not some internet AI bent on taking over the system?

As for the topic, I agree that cellphones and makeup should be banned while driving becuase one involves the brain in a complex process (talking) and the other involves looking in a mirror and/or extraneous movement while driving.

However, I don't think they should ban eating while driving. First of all, it's a simple motor function that you have used since the age of 3 (age of five for some of us). You move the food to your mouth. Simple, and no need for the brain to activate any more than a few neurons. Second of all, the chewing and swallowing action involves very very little conscious thought. Again, something you've been doing since the age of 3.

I would think that these actions would not interfere with your driving concentration.

But, no matter what laws they pass, the best way to reduce accidents is for people to actually use their brain when driving, for them to realize that they're sitting on a couple of tons of steel powered by an extrememly flammable liquid at high speed. If you're in a situation when you need to concentrate, put the cigarette out, turn the bloody phone off, put the burger down, make sure your tray tables are up and your seatbelts fastened and fucking pay attention to the road.

me?

no. I think you're thinking of Lacuna.

silence - I think it has less to do with the actual process of eating than it does with the distraction that food *can* be. A juicy burger drips on your pants, you look down for a split second to assess damage to the Dockers and smack, car stopped in front of you.

njuice42 Cell # 551
icq 957255

But Genis, they can and are being enforced. Laws banning cell phone use while driving anyway. Studies show that by talking on a cell phone your chances of getting in to an accident is four times as great. While stupidity can't be banned, distractions that greatly increase the odds of getting into an accident can! They should be enforced and heavily. There should be strict fines on being caught on the phone, eating, applying make-up, etc. I think if the average person was slapped with a $500+ fine nationwide everytime they were caught on the phone people would pull over before making calls.

Theres no reason to be on the phone while driving anyway. I can't think of a particular phone service that doesn't come with voice mail. If your phone rings, pull over to the side of the road and then answer it. Why cause an accident because your friends want to find out which movie theater you guys are going to that night?

Jestah

speeding also kills.

i bet if we set speed limits and fine anyone who goes over those speed limits.. that'll put a stop to speeding for sure!

We don't need a law for everything that is dumb to do.
People who are dumb are going to do dumb things laws or no laws and our police have enough to deal with already.

Yeah, police are too busy already to start outlawing anything else.



Unusual Texas travel. (A little Google bombing doesn't hurt.)

Well all ineffectual laws like this go unchecked by police unless it is glaring them in the face.

I'd put this law on the same level as jaywalking in a suburb.

I doubt they would think of it as a top priority on their beat.

I think everything should be legal but when a problem occurs (i.e. an accident) everyinfringement on reasonable safety is a $5000 fine. Talking on the phone, not wearing your seat belt, traveling at unsafe speeds, etc. basically anything that is illegal or "frowned upon" now will get your wallet reamed later. personally I don't talk on my phone in the car. I know I drive worse when i'm on my phone. I do ,however, speed regularly. Drink pop in the car and the like. I want the choice. to do those things and pay for them if they cause an issue later on. I'm responsible. I can learn from my mistakes. I don't need someone to force me into it.


GrythusDraconis
I admire a man who can budget his life around his pint of Guinness and I envy a man who's wife will let him. ME, inspired by Suho1004 here.

Openly admitting to driving recklace doesn't sound like something an overly responsible driver would say. As I said before, the biggest problem in this country is people assume anything not specifically made illegal in the Constitution is there right to do. You want the ability to drive recklace if you want, because its your life, correct? Well we aren't talking about your life here. We're talking about the lives of other motorists on the street. I shouldn't have to stay locked inside because you want to make your own choices.

Jestah

outlawing phones is like outlawing playing with your Gamboy Advance while driving, of course you shouldn't do it.

But all that law is saying is "Don't do stupid distracting crap, watch the road jackass."

It's common sense, labeling each and every thing that distracts a person while driving, cellphones, eating, gameboys, road head , is not the answer.

If you want to pass a law that says "All persons while driving should pay attention to the road and not act like jackasses when driving", well then I'd support you...

except for the fact that granting a person with a driver's license already says "We the government accept your driving abilities as good enough to be licensed to drive, and we now believe you are capable of not being an idiot when driving. Love, Your Local Government."

You want safe drivers?
Tell your local government to stop handing licenses to idiots and geriatrics.

Love,
Your Friendly Neighborhood Genis

To the best of my knowledge a significant portion of motorists aren't playing GameBoy Advanced and driving at the same time. I'm very curious about one thing though Genis. How do you feel about laws prohibiting the driving while intoxicated or under influence? If you choose to get smashed before getting in to your car is that your own business or should it be made illegal?

Jestah

Specifically illegal?
No.

As cause for more severe punishment as the perpetrator's own intoxicated state was responsible for the main crime(s), reckless endangerment, etc. ?
Absolutely.

Of course you shouldn't drink before driving, or be under the influence of drugs or alcohol while driving.
Why?
Because it will make you drive like a jackass.
This is common knowledge.

But let's face it.
Do police have extrasensory perception?
Do they just happen to know when someone is stoned or drunk while driving?
No.
They arrest them after the offense, after they have seen ample display of reckless driving.

Let's be clear. Laws are already established that clearly state you can not drive recklessly.
More laws won't prevent people who already drive like jackasses from doing so.
All laws can do is lay out the correct punishment for the crime.

If it is established that the reckless driving was as a result of the drivers intoxication, that person should get possible jailtime, and have license revoked for a number of years, depending on how bad the reckless driving was.
If someone else was hurt, absolute jailtime and restitution.
If someone died as a result of this idiot's concious decision to drive after being intoxicated.
He/She should get life. No question.

But there's the crux.
The concious decision by the perpetrator to drive even after becoming intoxicated.
There's no excuse after that.

So it is the same with cell phones, gameboys, fiddling with the radio, eating french fries, etc.
A concious decision to do something while driving, all with a little variation on the impact of the person's ability to drive.
Maybe you can drive fine with those things, maybe not.
Whatever the case, you need to gauge it yourself before you partake in any reckless behaviour.

But after the reckless driving has occurred, and the perp's problem was the cell phone, then again the court can make a ruling as to the severity of the recklessness, and the idiot's decision to talk on the phone.

What I'm trying to get across is everyone wants to put new laws instead of enforcing the old.
What happens when you keep banning this and that?
A huge endeavor into micromanagement.

That's what we see with DUI laws. Every year they have a new Blood/Alcohol Content level that is the new low, and everyone who is at that level must be unfit to drive.
With such laws, you have to set levels, and mandatory fees and jailtimes for this and that, etc, on and on and on.

We just need one law. "Reckless Driving Bad" and let that be it.
The severity of the crime fluctuates and the labeling of this that or the other that caused it can be put into evidence afterward as cause for more jailtime, fines, or whatever.

This whole micromanagement lawmaking is a bunch of bullshit out of the Socialist Manifesto and will never work succesfully.
It puts tiny laws out there that the cops have to look for and all it does is lead to more tickets, more fines, and pretty soon is just a money making raquet for your local government.

Doesn't sound like justice to me.

NC has already made driving while talking on the cellophone a ticketable offense. But I've never heard of anyone getting a ticket for it yet. I see people on cellophones all the time around here, but never see them pulled over. I'm pretty sure they made the law so that when an accident occurs that was clearly caused by a cellophone conversation, they can fine the hell out of the person responsible.

As for all other driving laws, I have long been a firm believer that a Common Sense Exam should be a mandatory part of the Driver's License renewal process. The first time a person fails the Common Sense Exam, they get their license jerked until they can pass it at least twice! And they should have several different exams so that people can't cheat and memorize the test beforehand!

Bodhi - Cell 617