|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 9:58 am Post subject: LaHood Weighs Urging Ban on All Driver Phone Use in Cars |
 |
|
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-08/lahood-weighs-urging-u-s-ban-on-all-driver-phone-use-in-cars.html
| Quote: |
| U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says he believes motorists are distracted by any use of mobile phones while driving, including hands-free calls, as his department begins research that may lead him to push for a ban. |
Totally sensible. Every day I see people driving 60mph and sending sms messages. It's dangerous and should discouraged. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Meh. Why not just ban leaving your house altogether?
Personally I could care less what people do while driving. I don't even care about drunk drivers. I just expect there to be some nuts on the road (half the taxi drivers where I live are drunk on a given night), but life's supposed to be a tad dangerous... Anyway if less regulation means less cops, I'm all for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rocktek
Joined: 17 Dec 2009
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 10:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A better solution would be to just install cellphone/dmb jammers along the freeways.
That is the the only way to actually stop people from doing something in their car on the freeway, most people with an iota of common sense would realize is not in their, or anyone else's, best interest.
I bought a cellphone jammer online, and it's been well worth the price, in the endless hours of entertainment it's brought me here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I oppose seat-belt laws because one's safety should ultimately be one's own choice. Talking on your phone while driving, however, is taking other people's safety into your own hands as well. The state is totally within its rights to illegalize it.
| Rocktek wrote: |
| A better solution would be to just install cellphone/dmb jammers along the freeways. |
There are legitimate reasons why one might need to use a cell phone in those areas though (e.g. your car breaks down). There's also no reason to restrict passengers from using phones. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 6:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
The following should be banned from driving- eating, smoking, drinking, listening to music, talking, yawning should get you pulled over, nhaving caffeine in your blood, having taurine, and children.
Unless you are going to ban all of those things as well, it might be time to just give it a rest and accept the fact that human beings in control of 3500 lb. metal boxes traveling at speeds of up to and including 70 mph. is just risky period. You can make it safer sure, but there is a point of diminishing returns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
The following should be banned from driving- eating, smoking, drinking, listening to music, talking, yawning should get you pulled over, nhaving caffeine in your blood, having taurine, and children.
Unless you are going to ban all of those things as well, it might be time to just give it a rest and accept the fact that human beings in control of 3500 lb. metal boxes traveling at speeds of up to and including 70 mph. is just risky period. You can make it safer sure, but there is a point of diminishing returns.
|
Typing on a phone is more dangerous than having caffeine in the system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
The following should be banned from driving- eating, smoking, drinking, listening to music, talking, yawning should get you pulled over, nhaving caffeine in your blood, having taurine, and children.
Unless you are going to ban all of those things as well, it might be time to just give it a rest and accept the fact that human beings in control of 3500 lb. metal boxes traveling at speeds of up to and including 70 mph. is just risky period. You can make it safer sure, but there is a point of diminishing returns. |
I agree, there's a point of diminishing returns. Cell phones, however, don't fall into the category of things beyond the point of said diminishing returns.
Using cell phones is one of the most dangerous things you can do while driving. They're inherently distracting, and using them puts others at risk. Like drunk driving, they clearly fall into the category of "beyond acceptable risk" from a social policy perspective. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
beck's
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Many years ago the government said the same thing about radios in cars. They would distract the drivers. Why should you need to license a car anyway? It is just another form of tax and govenment control over our lives. Let's for once and or all get the Nany State out of our lives. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| beck's wrote: |
| Why should you need to license a car anyway?. |
So we know who's driving them? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| beck's wrote: |
Why should you need to license a car anyway?
|
Because you're driving the car on public roads. If you want to drive your car around on some plot of land you bought, you can do it without a license. The idea that the government shouldn't have the right to regulate who drives on government created roads doesn't have much merit. If those roads were made by a private entity you'd still require licensing to use them, and the license would cost a whole lot more so as to ensure the road makers earned continuous profit.
Is there anything Libertarians won't cry about? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
The following should be banned from driving- eating, smoking, drinking, listening to music, talking, yawning should get you pulled over, nhaving caffeine in your blood, having taurine, and children.
Unless you are going to ban all of those things as well, it might be time to just give it a rest and accept the fact that human beings in control of 3500 lb. metal boxes traveling at speeds of up to and including 70 mph. is just risky period. You can make it safer sure, but there is a point of diminishing returns.
|
Typing on a phone is more dangerous than having caffeine in the system. |
I dunno, caffeine can make you drive that extra 5 mph faster that you don't even realize. It can be the difference between aggressive driving and cruising.
That difference is the difference of accidents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| caniff wrote: |
| beck's wrote: |
| Why should you need to license a car anyway?. |
So we know who's driving them? |
All roads should be privatized, as well as new road construction/maintenance (many ways to work this), and licensing scrapped altogether. There is no justification for it other than government tracking and controlling our lives (most state licenses requiring biometric thumb scans to get one). The federal government is trying to standardize all state licenses all under the RealID Act, (under the Department of Homeland Security). It's all unnecessary and a danger to our liberty.
Also, there is no logic argument for why cell phones should be banned, but not driving while on caffeine or listening to the radio (or while simply stressed out for that matter). Maybe having 2 people in a car should be banned because it's inherently distracting to drive while talking to someone? There's no clear cut logic, it's all simply up to the government's "discretion" (ie. a bunch of control freaks get to run our lives as they see fit, because they know best). It's all a load of bull. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candyteacher
Joined: 08 Jan 2009
Location: where ever i want
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
I oppose seat-belt laws because one's safety should ultimately be one's own choice. Talking on your phone while driving, however, is taking other people's safety into your own hands as well. The state is totally within its rights to illegalize it.
| Rocktek wrote: |
| A better solution would be to just install cellphone/dmb jammers along the freeways. |
There are legitimate reasons why one might need to use a cell phone in those areas though (e.g. your car breaks down). There's also no reason to restrict passengers from using phones. |
I agree banning the use of mobile phones while driving is a good idea. However I cant agree with the seat belt being a choice, you are endangering the lives of the others in the car by not wearing a seat belf.
It always make me think of this advert from home about seatbelts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzvzqaicMz0&NR=1
Something similar actually happened in a car that crashed not far from my parents house, back passenger not wearing a seatbelt left a girl in a coma for weeks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
Also, there is no logic argument for why cell phones should be banned, but not driving while on caffeine or listening to the radio (or while simply stressed out for that matter). Maybe having 2 people in a car should be banned because it's inherently distracting to drive while talking to someone? There's no clear cut logic, it's all simply up to the government's "discretion" (ie. a bunch of control freaks get to run our lives as they see fit, because they know best). It's all a load of bull. |
As far as I know talking on the cell phone(even hands free) is more distracting than talking to a passenger.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=060815161706.0xbugxlr&show_article=1
This is first thing i saw with a google search but i remember a big discussion about it on a science show I listen to. There doesn't seem to be a consensus on why this is the case but the evidence does seem to back it up.
The idea that cell phones are dangerous when driving is the result of studies not created out of whole cloth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| candyteacher wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
I oppose seat-belt laws because one's safety should ultimately be one's own choice. Talking on your phone while driving, however, is taking other people's safety into your own hands as well. The state is totally within its rights to illegalize it.
| Rocktek wrote: |
| A better solution would be to just install cellphone/dmb jammers along the freeways. |
There are legitimate reasons why one might need to use a cell phone in those areas though (e.g. your car breaks down). There's also no reason to restrict passengers from using phones. |
I agree banning the use of mobile phones while driving is a good idea. However I cant agree with the seat belt being a choice, you are endangering the lives of the others in the car by not wearing a seat belf.
It always make me think of this advert from home about seatbelts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzvzqaicMz0&NR=1
Something similar actually happened in a car that crashed not far from my parents house, back passenger not wearing a seatbelt left a girl in a coma for weeks. |
That's a good point. I never considered the potential of one's own body doing damage to another person as it flew around the car during a collision. I'm not sure if it will change my stance on seatbelt laws (since it still seems to be primarily a threat to those who ride with you rather than those in other cars, meaning they can choose whether or not to share a car with you when they know you aren't wearing a belt), but it's definitely something to consider.
| JMO wrote: |
| The idea that cell phones are dangerous when driving is the result of studies not created out of whole cloth. |
Precisely. It's not a matter of applying principle, it's a matter of applying data. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
