U.S. News - US calls for ban on in-car phone use ... even with Bluetooth

I agree that cellphones being used bt many especially texting causes a
lot of near accidents and accidents but this goes too far.
They could ban talking between occupants or taking a drink of soft drink
when it is safe as in cruising. essentially the Nanny Staters want to
straight jacket everyone. using your own judgment is not allowed.
Regimentation for our own safety. We now have cars that are cheap,
overpriced and uncomfortable and anemic and more costly than ever thanks
to NHTSA and safety nazis.
I doubt we will ever by another new vehicle as they are essentially over
priced appliances with data recorders and monitors for the convenience
of the police state.
The biggest crime in America: not wearing a seat belt soon to be
replaced with having anything in your hand or talking.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...with-bluetooth

On 2011-12-13, Bob Crachet <> wrote:
> I agree that cellphones being used bt many especially texting causes a
> lot of near accidents and accidents but this goes too far.
> They could ban talking between occupants or taking a drink of soft drink
> when it is safe as in cruising. essentially the Nanny Staters want to
> straight jacket everyone. using your own judgment is not allowed.

Well duh. We are all children in a big government school.

The vast masses will never accept the real solution, to go after bad
driving. Why? Because most of them are bad drivers. So instead there
will be attacks on various things that sometimes cause bad driving. Bad
driving will remain acceptable so long as it is not due to one of
the socially stigmatized reasons. We will continue to be told to drive
absurdly slow and more to compensate for the bad driving.

On Dec 13, 8:25*pm, Brent > wrote:
>
> Well duh. We are all children in a big government school.

Well, you and your ilk are.

> The vast masses will never accept the real solution, to go after bad
> driving. Why? Because most of them are bad drivers.

To be fair, there is no definition of "bad driving", an error I would
not expect of an expert on driving and traffic code and the US
Constitution.

> So instead there
> will be attacks on various things that sometimes cause bad driving.

So... you're anti-bad driving, but pro-various things that sometimes
lead to bad driving...?

You can discombobulate a premise in fewer words than anybody I've ever
heard of that wasn't retarded.

> Bad
> driving will remain acceptable so long as it is not due to one of
> the socially stigmatized reasons.

Which are those...?

> We will continue to be told to drive
> absurdly slow and more to compensate for the bad driving.

We just had a couple threads about good driving, I guess you missed
those opportunities to type.
-----

- gpsman

On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 01:25:15 +0000 (UTC), Brent
> wrote:

>The vast masses will never accept the real solution, to go after bad
>driving. Why? Because most of them are bad drivers.

I'm all for letting bad drivers kill each other off...

--
"Turn that **** off! Blasting, '**** da police,'
While you're being pulled over by da police
Is just ignorant!
--Chris Rock

U.S. recommends ban on drivers using electronic devices

Built-in systems like OnStar would not be affected

U.S. regulators attributed 3,092 deaths to distracted driving in 2010.

WASHINGTON (Bloomberg) -- U.S. drivers couldn't send text messages or use
mobile phones -- even with headsets or portable speakers -- under U.S.
National Transportation Safety Board recommendations aimed at preventing
distracted-driving crashes.

"Too many people are texting, talking and driving at the same time," NTSB
Chairman Deborah Hersman said at a hearing in Washington today. "It's time
to put a stop to distraction. No call, no text, no update is worth a human
life."

Systems built into cars, like General Motors Co.'s OnStar, and global
positioning systems wouldn't be affected by the ban, said Kelly Nantel, an
NTSB spokeswoman.

The NTSB recommends safety improvements for U.S. agencies to act upon. It
can't implement them itself. Donald Karol, the NTSB's director of highway
safety, said the agency had been recommending collision warning systems
since the mid 1990s.

The board strengthened its anti-phone stance after completing its
investigation into an August 2010 crash in Gray Summit, Mo., in which a
19-year-old GMC Sierra pickup driver sent or received 11 text messages in 13
minutes before plowing into the back of a tractor-trailer.

Two school buses collided with the stopped trucks. The pickup driver and one
bus passenger perished in the crash. The truck driver and 37 other people
were injured.

Last year, 3,092 deaths, or 9.4 percent of 2010 U.S. road fatalities were
related to driver distraction, the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration said last week.

Comparable figures to previous years were not available because the agency
changed how it keeps the statistic. Overall traffic fatalities dropped 2.9
percent last year to 32,885, the lowest since 1949, NHTSA said.

LaHood's concerns

Safety regulators have been debating how much to regulate drivers'
cell-phone use for the past decade. U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood
says he believes motorists are distracted by any use of mobile phones while
driving, including hands-free calls.

"Other data confirms that driver distraction continues to be a significant
safety problem," LaHood wrote in his blog last week. "For example, in a
survey we're releasing today (Dec. 8), more than three-quarters of the
drivers told us they answer calls on all, some, or most trips when they're
behind the wheel.

"They also said there are very few driving situations when they would not
use the phone or text, and that they rarely consider traffic situations when
deciding to use their phone. That behavior poses a safety threat to everyone
on the road.

"And, because people are reluctant to admit distracted driving at a crash
site, NHTSA believes the number of crashes attributed to distraction could
be higher."

LaHood, whose campaign against texting and talking on the phone while
driving has led to restrictions in 30 states, says his concerns extend to
vehicle information and entertainment systems such as OnStar or Ford Motor
Co.'s Sync.

The NTSB's recommendation would have to be adopted separately by each U.S.
state, since states have authority to regulate driver behavior. States
should adopt electronic-device bans, then back up the laws with aggressive
enforcement in the same way they have with drunk driving and seat-belt use,
Hersman said.

Missouri law prohibits texting while driving by people under the age of 21.

Truck, bus drivers

Fatal accidents caused by distracted operators have increased in all modes
of transportation, Hersman said. That includes planes, trains, boats,
trucks, buses and private cars and trucks, she said.

The use of phones and e-mail by operators is so prevalent that securing call
records and the devices themselves is one of the first steps investigators
now take after accidents, she said.

The NTSB called for a total ban on mobile phones for truck and bus drivers
in September, when Hersman said distracted driving was "increasingly
prevalent, exacerbating the danger we encounter daily on our roadways."

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, which regulates trucking
and bus companies, banned hand-held cell phones for drivers operating
commercial vehicles last month. It banned texting for commercial drivers in
January 2010.

Read mo http://www.autonews.com/article/2011...EM11/111219954

On 12/14/2011 3:33 AM, necromancer wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 01:25:15 +0000 (UTC), Brent
> > wrote:
>
>> The vast masses will never accept the real solution, to go after bad
>> driving. Why? Because most of them are bad drivers.
>
> I'm all for letting bad drivers kill each other off...

Let them ride liter-bikes in shorts, flip-flops, and wife-beater shirts,
and the herd will soon be thinned.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W