+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving (/showthread.php?tid=128663)
Re: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving - mrbigstuff - 12-13-2011
how about really stringent driver education at 16 years of age, followed with a probationary period of 3 years, with 10 year re-certifications and every 5 years after that over 65 years of age?
nahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Re: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving - Grace62 - 12-13-2011
mrbigstuff wrote:
how about really stringent driver education at 16 years of age, followed with a probationary period of 3 years, with 10 year re-certifications and every 5 years after that over 65 years of age?
I hear ya! I like intermediate licensing laws and many states such as mine have them.
You can get that stringent driver education at my house. One on the road 2 1/2 years with no accidents and no tickets, another learning at the moment. (Offer not valid in all states.)
Re: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving - Zoidberg - 12-13-2011
silvarios wrote:
Overly complex electronic climate controls?
I've had the same Honda Odyssey van for about 5 years and I still have to look at the climate controls. The previous model -- with dials instead of the same-sized buttons -- I could work w/o looking at it within a day.
Re: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving - Carnos Jax - 12-13-2011
Ditto Zoid, at least in regards to my dad. The thing's like a 747! I don't think he'll ever figure it out.
Re: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving - SDGuy - 12-14-2011
Grateful11 wrote:
...the dashes on we new vehicles are way too to cluttered with electronic gadgetry...
:agree:
I'm partial to the instrument cluster on my latest vehicle...
Re: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving - mrlynn - 12-14-2011
My recollection is that there have been insurance-company studies that showed that any kind of phone use was not just a 'distraction' (like the radio, or even talking to someone in the car), but led to the driver's mind just leaving the road and heading to another space. So handheld vs. hands-free didn't matter; it was the conversation with someone in a different place.
If true, that's an argument for specific rules against cell-phone use.
Texting, of course, is a no-brainer, as it's virtually impossible to perform and still keep eyes and attention on the road.
SDGuy, where are the heater controls on the Model A? There is a heater, right?
/Mr Lynn
Re: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving - Mike Johnson - 12-14-2011
It seems like every time I'm at the supermarket, somebody is chatting on a phone and just wandering around distracted, totally oblivious to their surroundings. They'll walk right in front of people, walk right in front of people pushing carts. They shuffle along in a straight line until they hit an obstacle, and then they turn either 90 or 180 degrees and shuffle off. They're like zombies, or Roombas, so I call them Zombas. The woman with three kids in the cart and another one hanging off the front and yet another child running ahead and pulling a box of twinkies off the shelf? She's distracted, but she's still present. She's navigating the store. She's not wandering in some dreamy mental landscape of distant ghosts.
Talking on a cell phone is a distraction, and it should be illegal while driving. Here in CA, it's a ticket, but no points on your record. That's absurd. Anybody saying "X is also distracting" is missing the point. We don't legalize heroin because alcohol is legal.
Remember when terrorists killed 3,000 people ten years ago? 400,000 Americans have died in car crashes since then.
Re: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving - Carnos Jax - 12-14-2011
Mike Johnson wrote: Anybody saying "X is also distracting" is missing the point. We don't legalize heroin because alcohol is legal.
Mike, in regard to this part of your arguement, I would suggest the reason we don't legalize heroin even though we do alcohol, is because the two aren't comparable. Heroin is much more disastrous in its effects.
Re: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving - SDGuy - 12-14-2011
mrlynn wrote:
...SDGuy, where are the heater controls on the Model A? There is a heater, right?
Well, I don't have one installed, but if I did, the control is the epitome of simplicity - open to let hot air in, close to block hot air from entering - and would look like this (and not be very accessible to the driver while driving):
Re: F/U texting and driving, that Missouri crash, NTSB recommends ban on cell phone use while driving - davester - 12-14-2011
First off, let me just say that any texting while driving is moronic and in most cases cell phone use while driving is moronic. In most places this behavior is also illegal.
That said, there appear to be some misconceptions here. First of all, my understanding is that in the particular crash in question this guy died while performing epic darwin award behavior (11 texts!?). However, the two school buses that rammed the back of the stopped vehicles did so as a result of driver error (following way too close). It's not at all clear that the accident could have been averted if only the driver hadn't been texting. We don't even know if the errant texter might have survived if the school buses hadn't rammed him. We're talking TWO school buses ramming into a stopped vehicle. The school bus drivers were totally responsible for maintaining a safe following distance and didn't do so. For all we know the pickup could possibly have stopped behind the truck and the two school buses rammed him whether or not he was texting. The NTSB is making a big political to do about this, probably because of all the political hay that can be made of headlines with "DEAD KID - TWO SCHOOL BUSES - 11 TEXTS", but I don't see a solid connection in the presented facts.
Second of all, how is making new laws going to help the situation? What the driver was doing was already illegal. There's already a law against what he was doing. It didn't work, just as prohibition didn't work to prevent a destructive but common behavior. Laws that try to change common behaviors are generally destined for the dustbin of history. Why not focus on other methods, like requiring cars and cell phones to have interlocks that disallow all but emergency calls while a car is in drive. Oh no!! The carmakers and cell phone makers will fight that tooth and nail because it makes their products very slightly more expensive and worse yet, less appealing to their customers.