On Monday, March 3, 2014 1:05:12 AM UTC-8, nospam wrote:
> In article >,
> Harry K > wrote:

<snip>

> > Perhaps you could try rereading what you just replid to and dthis time try to
> > understand it. Nothing there says anything about removing ALL distractiosn,
>
> > just the the ones involving playing iwht your toys.

> a radio is not vital to travel, nor is a cd player, therefore they too
> are toys. if you want to ban toys, then you must also want to ban
> radios and cd players.

And of course you are ready to point out where I said I didn't??


> you also need to get over this playing with toys nonsense. smartphones
> are not toys and drivers do not fiddle with them as if they were.

Suurreee they don't! (more sarcasm)

> in fact, it's quite the opposite. many of the driving related apps will
> increase driver safety.

Not if they take attention away from the road...which they do every time you look at one. Perhaps you can explain how looking at an app instead of the road "increases driver safety".

> > > a ****ty driver is going to be distracted no matter what anyone does.
> > > if you disable their phone, they'll do something *else*, like use an
> > > ipod, fiddle with cds and the cd player, drink coffee, eat a sandwich,

> > Odd, I thought that an Ipod is included in 'electronic play toys' '

> how do you propose to disable an ipod remotely? or maybe the person has
> a portable cd player.


> this ought to be good.

Only in your imagination. Who said _I_ was going to do it? Perhaps if you would stick to what is written instaed of what you wish had been?

> > And most of
> > the other things you mention take only a few seconds.

> a few seconds is enough to travel almost the length of a football field
> at 60 mph. a lot can happen in that distance.

Well, you finally seem to have gotten the point of why looking at an electronic gizmo is not "increasing driver safety"

> if you are ok with a few seconds to fiddle with the cd player or drink
> coffee, but not ok with a gps which needs no time at all because it has
> voice prompts, then your entire rant falls flat.

Again (and this is getting old) Point out anywhere I said I was okay with those things.


> you don't get to pick and choose to ban only certain devices.
> distractions are distractions.

Perhaps if you read the OP and see that it is ROCKERFELLER, you know, that guy running the big gun that rules what safety equipment must be in a car and also what cannot be, who has put it out there OFFICIALLY now. Kick and scream all you want, it will probably come.

> > > read paper maps or a newspaper or many other things.
>
> >
>
> > > the problem is ****ty drivers. fix *that* (which is not simple).
>
> >
>
> > And who said anything different.

> you did by saying the devices are unsafe.

The devices are not unsafe, anyone using WHILE DRIVING is unsafe. By now you should have gotten that simple point.

> it's the drivers that are the problem.
> using the devices when inappropriate is a symptom.

Yep, a symptom that can be cured by banning or disabling them.


> > > > > having a phone render itself inactive means *passengers* will be
> > > > > affected because *their* phones won't work.

> > > > Tough ****. Anyone who _really needs_ to use the phone, gps play toy,
> > > > etc. can pull over and stop. Passengers can request the driver do so.

> > > that's absolute bull****.

> > Oh? Care to explain why the driver can't pull over?

> once you explain how a passenger using a device is going to affect the
> driver.

WTF? where did anyone say anything like that? You are getting desperate pulling something like that out of the nether regions.

Waiting for you to show how a driver pulling over is BS.

> this ought to be good too.

If you think that is a "good one", you are in poor mental shape.

> > > > > rendering a phone inactive because the vehicle is in motion is stupid,

> > > > Says a guy who sees nothing wrong with playing with electronic
> > > > he's supposed to be paying attention to the road.

> > > nowhere did i say any such thing.

> > Your post clearly lead to that conclusion.

> nonsense.

> > > > > especially since there are a lot of very useful apps that help make for
> > > > > safer driving, including gps navigation apps and many more.

> > > > I refer you to PAYING ATTENTION TO DRIVING and stopping if you want to
> > > > use your toys.

> > > what you don't get and likely never will is the devices (not toys) do
> > > not require the user to fiddle with them.

> > Odd, tell me how you can text, talk on a phone, look at a gps or other
> > mapping device, etc. WITHOUT fooling with them.

> looking at a gps requires no fiddling.

Of course it does. You have to set it up, makes changes, etc. as you go (or pull over to do it.

> it announces in a clear voice "take the next exit" or "upcoming right
> turn, 1/2 mile". you don't even have to look at it, let alone fiddle.
> it's as if you had a person sitting next to you who knows where to go.
> having a gps is much safer than trying to figure out where to go based
> on street signs, which in some places may not be behind trees or
> otherwise obscured and in some places, not there at all.

> > Just looking at a dashboard
> > screen takes you attention and eyes off the driving.

> then let's ban dashboards too.

Notice the little "screen" in there? quite difference from a simple guage. Some things are necessary, some are not needed WHILE IN MOTION. If you can't get where you are going without and electronic gizmo, quite driving.

> after all, we can't have anything take one's eyes off the driving.

> > > the driver can pay attention to driving while the device does its thing
> > > on its own.

> > So who just who told it to 'do its thing' to begin with?

> it's done *before* embarking on a trip. not during.

Uhuh. And your phone rings you ignore it, the gps gives you a wrong turn (yes it happens) you blindly follow it, etc.

> > And after it "does its thing" you just ignore it, sure you do.

> obviously you've never used a gps or you wouldn't say such stupid
> things.

> > > another thing you don't get and likely never will is that a lot of cars

> > > already have distracting devices built into them, including radio/cd
>
> > > player, gps navigation system and more.
> > > are you going to require that *those* be disabled too?

> > Perhaps you should reread Rockerfeller's comment about manufacturers reducing
> > the number of such items?
>
> > You might also note that the suggestion or disabling the play toys is
> > ROCKERFELLER'S.

> they aren't play toys and it's a colossally stupid and totally
> impractical suggestion.

Sp te;; Rockerfeller that.

> > Bottom line you are the poster child for people who think playing with things
> > not associated with the driving task is not a problem.

> nonsense.

> i'm interested in solutions based on facts, not let's ban everything
> because someone doesn't like it.

> > 'I'm a good driver and can text, talk, adjust a gps, etc. just fine, it is the other divers
> > who can't' seems to be the group you are in.

> i never said anything about texting or adjusting a gps while driving.
> as for talking, that can happen without a phone. it's called passengers.

Harry K