Federal Ban on All Cell Phone Use While Driving Proposed For US

Discussion in 'Android News' started by cereal killer, Apr 27, 2012.

  1. hAHAha Halo
    Offline

    hAHAha Halo New Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2010
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Disagree for only one reason: in Colorado, it's illegal to use your cell phone at all while driving if you're under the age of 18, and for anybody above the age of 18 its only legal to use your phone for calling people. You'll get ticketed for texting and driving here, I think that should be the law instead of taking a big leap like that.
    3 people like this.
  2. BenLand150
    Offline

    BenLand150 Premium Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,786
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Lincoln, NE
    I want texting while driving gone for sure. Even I hate being tempted to do it because when I type on an all touch-screen device it's nearly impossible to completely control the car. Typing on my D3 however is very easy as I can put that on my steering-wheel and text without looking. But even that poses more risk than not doing that at all. However, I do not want to eliminate use of GPS as I seriously need this.
  3. NeXtras
    Offline

    NeXtras New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Saugus, MA
    So your driving, you see an accident happen and you want to call 911 so they get imediate help.. a tropper sees you dialing and talking, and pulls you over... what happens then? You get fined for being a good samaritan?

    Also, what if you are using an ipod to change the song? The law needs to well defined and leave out no holes..

    I know here in MA you cannot text and drive.. talking is ok (although MANY shouldnt) but, you CAN use an ipod because it is not "Digital Conversation" or however they word it
  4. anewton
    Offline

    anewton New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2011
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In our current entitlement society, the ideas of personal responsibility no longer exist for the current generation of people from teenagers up to people at least in their 30's. I usually oppose laws like this, but when traffic accidents (with some percentage of deaths) due to this one cause (cell phone use while driving, whether talking non-hands-free or texting, which by definition is non-hands-free) reaches epidemic proportions (as it has), government exists specifically to serve the common good, so I support such a law -- with stiff penalties. Causing an accident while texting should cost the perpetrator at least 10 times the amount of the penalty resulting from no accident, and even that should be high enough to discourage it. Better, yet, would be passing a law for providers to not allow texting from a phone which is moving, say, greater than 5 mph. If they can't text while driving, they'll quit trying. And I realize such a block would inhibit non-drivers in a car from being able to text, which arguably is a consideration, but really -- as you say, they can wait for that text message. The benefit to society is greater than the inconvenience! Saying that there shouldn't be such a law "because aren't we all adults?" is like saying we shouldn't have laws against DWI because, "aren't we all adults? Don't we all know better than to get behind the wheel drunk?" Um, evidently not!
    1 person likes this.
  5. NeXtras
    Offline

    NeXtras New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Saugus, MA
    [h=1]Mythbusters - Cell Phones Vs. Drunk Driving - 1 of 3 [/h]


    [h=1]Mythbusters - Cell Phones Vs. Drunk Driving - 2 of 3 [/h]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGN1pLI4ZaM

    [h=1]Mythbusters - Cell Phones Vs. Drunk Driving - 3 of 3 [/h]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8LuM92Twm8
    1 person likes this.
  6. bazar6
    Offline

    bazar6 Premium Member Theme Developer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2009
    Messages:
    676
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    MD
    Hands free should be the exception, specially talking, which I don't see the article saying. This isn't going to stop everyone from doing it, it's just going to give the gov't a way to punish you. In my state (MD) I believe the law is that being on the phone is a secondary offense; they can't just pull you over because they saw you on the phone, they have to first pull you over for speeding, or reckless, etc, first, then they can add the cell phone charge on top of that (I believe this is correct, last time I heard it was). Unlike NJ, where the cop sees you on the phone and pulls you over even if you're doing 45 in a 45.

    I think car manufacturers and cell providers may be against this, because they're all up about Bluetooth and hands-free and sometimes even make it a selling point. They've all adapted to be safer, but if this law happens, and you're not a loud to talk in the car, whats the point in having BT in the car radio?

    *Show this in school and no one will text and drive anymore
  7. anewton
    Offline

    anewton New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2011
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I wasn't comparing drunk driving to driving while texting. I was comparing the statement about "aren't we all adults" being used to argue against passing a law addressing behavior. When you think about it, most of the laws on the books wouldn't be necessary if we all ACTED "like adults" (and showed concern for others as well as ourselves -- living the "Golden Rule"). The very fact that we have laws regulating our behavior is evidence that "we all" are NOT acting "like adults"...
  8. Jungle King 76
    Offline

    Jungle King 76 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2010
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Back and forth between AZ and PA
    I am on the fence. On one hand I know some people should not have any distractions but to completely ban all use is too much. I personally will not use my phone if I am in a congested or high traffic area but if I am driving down an empty road, you better believe I have no issues texting or messing with my phone. If no-one else is around, it is my own safety I am "jeopardizing".

    This is in line with seat belts. I disagree with seat belt laws whole heartedly. I don't need the government to tell me how to protect myself. I can jump out of a plane or go bungee jumping or any number of life threatening activities but I can't drive down the road without my seat belt?

    Of course, my kids must wear one and any other passengers because I am responsible for them as the driver but if I don't want to wear a seatbelt myself x that should be my choice.

    This goes for cell phone use, if I am driving down an empty road and am texting, I am responsible for my own safety.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Xparent Purple Tapatalk
  9. CJM
    Offline

    CJM Developer Relations Staff Member Rescue Squad Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    9,371
    Likes Received:
    555
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Mississippi Gulf Coast
    I'm all for laws like this. Anything to make driving safer is a good thing. Too many people get complacent when driving & that's when accidents happen. I don't think it should apply to hands-free talk & mp3's though. Talking and/or listening to music is "normal" in a vehicle.

    Tapped from a Galaxy Nexus using Xparent ICS
  10. anewton
    Offline

    anewton New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2011
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The "empty road" doesn't always STAY empty. I remember driving down a country road one night many years ago, late at night when you wouldn't expect anyone else around, and for a long time, there wasn't. At one point, I passed a junction and, just as I crossed it, some hooligans ran their stop sign and almost nailed me! Fortunately, because I wasn't distracted, I was able to react in a way which allowed me to avoid the collision, but just barely. If I'd been distracted WITH ANYTHING at that point, I'd have gotten nailed (and probably killed). I don't think your assumption is a safe one. Just something to think about...
  11. UrbanBounca
    Online

    UrbanBounca Rescue Squad Staff Member Rescue Squad Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2010
    Messages:
    2,311
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Virginia
    Actually, the statistics show that when you actually have a passenger, you are less likely to end up in a wreck. However, simply talking to someone on the phone, you are more likely to end up in a wreck.

    There is really no way to make rules and regulations based on how long or in-depth your phone conversation can be.
  12. Jungle King 76
    Offline

    Jungle King 76 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2010
    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Back and forth between AZ and PA
    This goes along with knowing your surroundings and being smart. If I was on a country road that I am familiar with, I know every drive way, intersection, road that comes so obviously I would be prepared for anything. Trust me, my assumption is very safe. Again, it goes to me being responsible for myself. In your example, they ran a stop sign so I would not feel guilty about what happens to them, if I get hurt, again it goes back to my life, my responsibility, my choice.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Xparent Purple Tapatalk
  13. colorfulbliss
    Offline

    colorfulbliss New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I cannot believe the number of posters here that are ok with a "Federal" law concerning a driving issue. Although I am not opposed to laws regulating cell phone usage while driving, they should be State/Local laws and not Federal laws. This is nothing more than an attempt at further loss of state's rights. It saddens me that most of the debate in this thread is over the law itself rather than who is legislating away state's rights (as guaranteed by the Constitution). Folks, please don't take your eyes off the ball here.
    2 people like this.
  14. aaf709
    Offline

    aaf709 Nice Guy Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    4,189
    Likes Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    So Cal
    I was handsfree long before it was mandatory in California. I'm amazed at all the drivers I see with one hand stuck to their ear.

    When it became the law in California The Reader (a free paper in San Diego) did an editorial about the law. It had two pictures, showing what was Illegal and what was Legal. The "Illegal" picture had a driver with a cell phone to his ear, eyes straight ahead and talking. The "Legal" picture had a driver (with a BT device on his ear) with the cell phone next to him. He's looking down and trying to dial a number. Not really accurate as how did the driver in the "Illegal" picture dial?
  15. Narsil
    Offline

    Narsil Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    577
    Likes Received:
    132
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Location:
    Central Florida
    The Federal Government has absolutely no Constitutional Jurisdiction to dictate driving laws. None.

    It is not "commerce" so they cannot even use the massively over-abused "Interstate Commerce Act" to justify it.

    The 10th Amendment, however, precludes Congress from making this law. Sadly, the 10th Amendment might as well not exist as few states seem to even remember it through the flood of "shut up and suckle" money flowing from the Fed. :mad:
    1 person likes this.
  16. bsmith0731
    Offline

    bsmith0731 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2011
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Virginia
    What about all the women who change clothes put on makeup and whatever else they do while they drive. I don't see a band on this.
    1 person likes this.
  17. bsmith0731
    Offline

    bsmith0731 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2011
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Virginia
    I can understand a band on having a cell phone in your hand but that's what bluetooth devices are for
  18. floyddrose1
    Offline

    floyddrose1 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    are we going to ban law enforcement and truck drivers

    Give me a break, if you cant use a cell phone, you cant use a cb. you cant read a map, you cant look in the mirror to see if you have something on your face. you must drink coffee so your not sleepy,you cant roll your windows down the air might distract you. You have to drive alone,conversation may distract you, you definately cant drive with kids,all bus drivers must give up their jobs now. kids will have to walk to school. Taxi drivers are not allowed, a person in the back making them constantly look in the rear view mirror has to be distracting especially if there hot . Cops cant call in back up,like I said what's the difference between a cb ,thats been around for years,and a cell phone,oh wait its mounted on the dash, you actually have to look down and take your eyes off the road to use it. Thanks government for taking care of me even though Im sure that every politician that votes for this law will be exempt from it. As they are from forced health care.
    1 person likes this.
  19. UrbanBounca
    Online

    UrbanBounca Rescue Squad Staff Member Rescue Squad Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2010
    Messages:
    2,311
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Virginia
    Oranges to apples, friend.

    Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk 2
  20. Ziggie
    Offline

    Ziggie New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2010
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Whoever said that the posters are missing the point when they are discussing the merits of the law itself instead of whether the feds should allowed to do it versus the states is themselves missing the point. The point is that someone should pass the law.

    I honestly don't think anyone here can make the claim that they are more focused and less distracted while driving and talking on their cellphone than when they are driving and not talking on their cellphone.

    Driving while talking on a cellphone is more dangerous than driving without talking on a cellphone.

    Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Droid Forums