A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The official view on distracted driving



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old March 5th 14, 03:15 AM posted to rec.autos.driving
nospam[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 149
Default The official view on distracted driving

In article >,
Harry K > wrote:

> > 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.


nonsense. looking at a phone's display is no different than looking at
a car's gauge. some of the apps are just that, more gauges (from obd).

> Perhaps you can explain how looking at an app instead of the
> road "increases driver safety".


it's additional information for the driver about many things, including
traffic, road hazards, road conditions, vehicle status (e.g., engine
temp is climbing rapidly) and much more.

now how about you can explain how looking at a dashboard gauge is
different than looking at a phone's display. or looking at a passenger.

> > > > 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?


in other words, you have no answer.

hint: it's not possible.

> > > 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"


but looking at a radio or reaching for a cup of coffee is? or even a
dashboard gauge?

your hypocrisy knows no bounds.

> > 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 only want to ban or disable electronic 'toys'. your bias is clear.

you have not said anything about banning radios, food, passengers and
other potential distractions.

> > 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.


i don't care who says it and it will not happen. nobody is going to
tolerate having their devices disabled.

if distraction is an issue, ban all potential distractions.

you don't get to pick a subset.

> > > > 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,


then no need to ban them.

> anyone using WHILE DRIVING is unsafe. By now you
> should have gotten that simple point.


using a lot of things while driving is unsafe. ban everything or ban
nothing.

> > 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.


ban drivers.

> > > > > > 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.


you said:
> > > > > Passengers can request the driver do
> > > > > so.



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


it is when the passenger is using the device with *no* effect on the
driver whatsoever.

>
> > > > 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.


you've obviously not used a gps.

no wonder you spew such nonsense.

> > 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.


gauges on some cars *are* a screen.

> 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.


no.

electronic 'gizmos' make the trip safer, more enjoyable and they are
100% legal.

> > > > 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,


this is about a gps not phone calls. try to stay on topic.

> the gps gives you a wrong turn (yes
> it happens) you blindly follow it, etc.


and if that happens, there is still no fiddling. you just end up taking
a less than ideal route.

or the driver can decide to not follow what it says. i've done that
many times.
Ads
  #22  
Old March 15th 14, 06:32 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
T0m $herman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 348
Default The official view on distracted driving

On 3/4/2014 10:44 AM, Harry K wrote:
> As has said many times in this thread "you can't fix stupid" and no law will force anyone to keep their mind and eyes on the road while driving. All that can be done is ban or disable some of he play toys.


We could put distracted drivers in prison for a few years to keep them
off the road.

--
T0m $herm@n
  #23  
Old March 15th 14, 06:33 PM posted to rec.autos.driving
T0m $herman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 348
Default The official view on distracted driving

On 3/2/2014 12:43 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article >, T0m $herman
> > wrote:
>
>>> Disabling the phones and other electronic media in motion is in the wind
>>> and it will come since drivers will not curb their use while driving.

>>
>> We can only hope that this glorious day soon arrives.

>
> absolutely not. disabling anything is a denial of service.
>
> the first person who can't use their phone in an emergency because it
> was disabled is going to have a field day in court and be awarded huge
> sums of money.
>
>> And instead of concentrating on speeding tickets for revenue generation,
>> the police could use scanners and ticket for mobile device usage in
>> older vehicles without the blocking technology.

>
> you must be kidding.
>
> and even if such a thing were to happen, it will be *quickly* disabled
> by customers.
>

10 years in state prison for disabling the devices would be a good start
to discouraging this behavior.

--
T0m $herm@n
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Distracted driving: money and power talked, science walked? Ad absurdum per aspera[_2_] Driving 11 July 25th 09 12:23 AM
Ford Researcher Says Teen Drivers are Easily Distracted From Driving James C. Reeves Driving 9 May 11th 05 08:31 PM
GT4 Driving view Driver Simulators 40 March 17th 05 06:01 AM
Audi A4 TV module - view whilst driving? Russell Fray Audi 7 May 14th 04 08:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.