by minimus 54 Replies latest jw friends
Thats a tough one, I hate to see more and more laws.
I would rather they allow you to not wear seat belts, but you cant talk on the cell phone.
When people are talking on the cell phone they are distracted and not focused.
I try not to talk on the cell phone when I'm driving, But if it rings I may answer it and get caught before I can pull over.
I understand where the law is coming from. It really irritates me watching people trying to navigate traffic while talking on the cell phone.
But ... I agree with Minimus. This type of law isn't the answer. Even the legal alcohol limits are wrong. If you drive while drunk and kill someone you should be charged with first degree murder, because you've knowingly endangered people's lives. But if you can drink a few glasses of wine with dinner and still drive safe, fine. The same with cell phone use, or putting on makeup, or fiddling with the radio, or myriads of other things that potentially makes someone an unsafe driver.
What we really, really need is for people to learn personal responsibility. And you'll never do it by treating people like small children. All that is accomplished is keeping the populace juvenile. If there isn't a law against it ... I can do it. It doesn't matter if it's wise or not.
Cellist
Good.
They need to enforce that law here in South Florida and throw the book at anyone talking on their cell phone while driving.
The people down here in South Florida drive like idiots.........in fact they cannot drive..........and even less when talking on their cell phones on I-95 for 30 minutes to two hours; non-stop.
Unbelievable the number of accidents, deaths, injuries, etc down here by these lackluster , stupid drivers. 85% of them cannot speak or read english and are allowed to get drivers' licenses and get on the road.
It is downright scary to drive here.
Ronin1
While it might seem a pain in the butt, these laws are there for good reason, its to reduce the amount of avoidable car accidents. Talking on a cell phone is a great way to get distracted while driving, most people agree with that. And with the exception of sneezing (been there, done that, beyond my control), I agree, there are alot of idiotic things you can do to endanger yourself and others on the road, at least the government is trying to eliminate one of them. If that saves even one persons life, its worth it right?
No, not right!!!
many people die while swimming, should the gov. try to prevent those deaths too by having everybody wear life jackets to swim in a pool? maybe they should outlaw skydiving as well, that kills lots of people, and what about rock climing, hunting, race car driving, hell people even die while having sex maybe that should be outlawed or regulated as well? Every time the government passes a law like this they take away a little more of the freedoms we are said to have, and I for one am tired of it. I am a better driver with my cell phone to my ear that most people in their 80's paying strict attention to the road, if the gov. is so concerned about saving lives they would get these dangers off of the road, but they won't. If they really want to stop auto accidents, outlaw cars that will do it.
When ever I see someone driving really badly, Ive discovered they are using a cell phone. Their speed suddenly goes down, then they start to weave, I start thinking what the hell are they doing then, I see them on the phone. I get so mad !!!!!!!!!
Im glad its treated as a crime, it should be.......................if anyone needs to use the phone whilst driving get a hands free.
I notice a big difference in attitude with the US, Canadian and UK posters.....................it was the same with the alcohol thread.
I understand where the law is coming from. It really irritates me watching people trying to navigate traffic while talking on the cell phone.
But ... I agree with Minimus. This type of law isn't the answer. Even the legal alcohol limits are wrong. If you drive while drunk and kill someone you should be charged with first degree murder, because you've knowingly endangered people's lives. But if you can drink a few glasses of wine with dinner and still drive safe, fine. The same with cell phone use, or putting on makeup, or fiddling with the radio, or myriads of other things that potentially makes someone an unsafe driver.
That is the most bazar statement ive ever heard.......................dont you know the more you drinkl the more you think you can drive safely
I live in a country now where you cannot drink and drive AT ALL. Wheres the hardship?????
yeah its a sort of talk on your cell and you can talk IN your cell type of deal
I wish we'd get a law in my state banning cell phone use while driving. I've had so many close calls from bad drivers in the past. And I'd say the number one thing most of them had in common was the driver was on the cell phone.
I've made it known to my wife that I won't answer the phone if I'm driving.
But yet, I'm a hypocrite when it comes to shaving (cordless electric, not shaving cream and straight blade, of course ) and eating while driving. But in my defense, I only do these things on the drive to work and only when there is no traffic. On the rural highway I use, that is most of the time. I'll put the elec razor down if a car approaches or if I approach an intersection with traffic there.
The cost of freedom is never cheap. I personally would prefer people using hands free devices, but their right should be to choose as they wish.
John Doe and others with a similar argument, I'm gonna pick on you here. Nothing personal but I felt like I should give this counter agrument.
Suppose an accident occurs due to the driver's use of a cell phone and you are seriously injured or lose a family member. Are you seriously going to think that tragic as it is, at least that driver was exercising his freedom? Freedom is good as long as you do no harm or take away another person's freedom. So when it comes down to the use of a machine that can take lives if misused, wouldn't it be wise to have rules governing the usage and safe operation of such a thing?
Another quesion...if using a cell phone while driving should be a matter of individual choice, should also being intoxicated while driving be a matter of choice? Both seem to have the same ultimate consequence.
Oddly enough, I bought a book yesterday called "You Can't Marry Your Mother-In-Law and Other Common Legal Misconceptions"...
This was in it :
Here is the story about the man killed by a lorry driver who was sending a text-message :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,438344,00.html
Driver on phone who killed gets 5 years
Thursday February 15, 2001Guardian
A lorry driver who hit and killed a pedestrian in a layby while sending a text message on his mobile phone to his girlfriend was jailed for five years yesterday.Sentencing Paul Browning, Judge Daniel Worsley at Southend crown court told him it was hard to imagine a more blatant act of cold-blooded disregard for safety on the road.
Paul Hammond, 24, from Hockley, Essex, died when the heavy goods vehicle hit him while he was talking to his mother who was in her car in a layby.
Browning, of Kenley, Surrey, had admitted causing death by dangerous driving. He had claimed the accident happened because he was distracted by paperwork fluttering around in the cab of his lorry.
Browning, 36, had told the court that he composed the message to his girlfriend, now his wife, while he was in stationary traffic and had sent it by mistake after the accident when he returned to the lorry to collect his mobile phone.
But Judge Worsley said this was "wholly unbelievable."
He said: "I am convinced that he was composing the material part of it as he was approaching the layby."
The judge also rejected Browning's claim that he had been distracted by the paperwork.
The text message read: "Oh yes! A real scorcher! Well, just leaving Benfleet 4 West Thurrock job no 7 of 11. Shit! call you back."
The judge agreed with the prosecution that the final sentence of the message was composed by Browning after the crash. Judge Worsley said he then "deliberately" sent the message.
Paul Hammond had parked his BMW car behind his mother's in the layby on the A13, near Pitsea, Essex, last June. They had arranged to meet up because he had forgotten his glasses.
Judge Worsley said: "In the seconds before the collision, I find that he was keying in a text message with his eyes on that and his concentration on that and off the road."
The judge said composing a text message to his girlfriend was "wicked."
Browning, whose wife is expecting the couple's baby in April was a "decent family man", who was a good and reliable driver, said the judge.
The court heard that Browning did not know he had hit a person until he saw Mr Hammond's body on the road.
His lorry had veered toward the layby scraping the side of Mr Hammond's BMW and his mother's car.
Judge Worsley said: "Text messages are now very cheap and in use by huge numbers and ... a stern deterrent sentence is necessary."
Speaking outside the court after the sentencing, Mr Hammond's father, Alan, said: "A lesson has been learnt that mobile phones can be lethal weapons. People who use mobile phones should not in anyway use them while driving."
Roger Vincent, spokesman for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (Rospa), said this was the 16th road death linked with mobile phones in recent years and he called for a blanket ban on using them while driving.
"We fear this case could just be the tip of the iceberg and that many more accidents could be being caused by people sending or trying to read text messages on the move.
"This tragic case underlines the need for the introduction of a specific offence to ban the use of mobile phones while driving."
Mr Hammond's death is believed to the first involving a driver sending a mobile phone text message while behind the wheel, said Mr Vincent.
Policeman Darren Riley, 25, from Somerset, died in May last year when he lost control of his car - the inquest into his death was told that he might have been trying to read a text message while driving.
Mr Vincent said: "We believe that there have been at least 15 road deaths in recent years where mobile phones have been implicated.
"This reinforces Rospa's argument for a specific offence to ban the use of mobile phones while driving."
Press Association
