| Author |
Message |
    
Xl1200r
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 - 10:21 pm: | 
|
...ban phones or make destracted driving while using a phone a fellony
That makes about as much sense as arresting someone for vehicular manslaughter of they speed in an urban area because they *might* have killed someone.
Again, not defending people using phones while driving, but you can't assign a harsh punishment based on an outcome that hasn't occured yet.
+1 on the folks who have said they use phones or CBs to actually stay alert on long trips. I've done the same thing a few times. |
Ferris_von_bueller
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 - 10:26 pm: |
|
I see too many distracted folks driving these days,
I agree but they are doing all kinds of things in addition to talking on a phone. I would like to see some statistics, if they are any, breaking down the causes of accidents. I bet 25% or more are caused by drinking and driving and I dont see any of you all calling for the prohibition of alcohol seeing as the DUI laws haven't done much to deter drinking and driving. I've never seen such vitriol against an inanimate object as has been displayed in this thread towards the lowly cell phone. |
Oldog
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 - 10:48 pm: |
|
That makes about as much sense as arresting someone for vehicular manslaughter if they speed in an urban area because they *might* have killed someone.
If you speed you can be stopped and ticketed.
If you speed the likely hood of an accident increases.
If I am ripping up 132 here at home and whipping in and out of traffic, In my truck or on my bike I can be sited for wreckless driving, IIRC in NC that IS a Fellony charge.
If I screw up in the truck I am more likely to KILL someone, than on my bike.
I should restate that I would like to see a law created and enforced that IF you are in an accident,
you must give the officer at the scene your phone #
they call that in and see if you were on the phone in that time frame,
if so you could be charged.
911 call not with standing and calls after that non issue, as you are likely summoning help.
Like all things if common cense were used the draconian suggestion I made would not be needed.
Drunk driving / and driving distracted or sleepy were sited #1 & 2 in the article I excerpted, for causes of accidents.
What supprises me is that the insurance carriers have not pushed for this citation as this allows them to charge more after a citation and its a means to raise revinues.
Using the radio / phone to stay awake on the slab +2
its safer on the slab, in town not so. |
Corporatemonkey
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 05:09 am: |
|
 someone with a Bluetooth helmet
I do take calls on my headset, but they are usually very short, or involve "Hold on let me pull over"
I do have to say I have used it on a few occasions to call 911. I was following an obvious drunk driver. So I voice dialed 911. After spending a few minutes explaining to the operator that I was on a motorcycle at the time, she thought it was a prank call.
But in the end the fuzz got the info they needed to nab the drunk SOB.
Something that hasn't been mentioned here. I don't think it is the act of using a phone that causes accidents. It is usually the conversation itself.
When you have passenger in the car, usually that person knows when to shut up. A caller can't see what you are up to so the conversation continues.
Either way Sarodude is absolutely right we need stricter licensing requirements. Look what the Europeans go through (maybe the grumpster will fill us in on the details) |
Irideabuell
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 06:14 am: |
|
Use of a cell phone is so difficult to prove. There was a case here in Orlando a few years ago where a girl plowed into two little girls while they and their mother crossed a heavily traveled road at a crosswalk with a stop light.
The first report said the girl driving the car was distracted as she was on her cell phone. Witnesses claimed she was on the phone. Once an attorney became involved she was said to have not been on the phone and records would prove this.
I'm not sure how this panned out, but how else would you end up going through a stop light while all other traffic is stopped and hit two children at speed?
If American's would only take responsibility for their actions...... |
Xl1200r
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 08:31 am: |
|
I'm not sure how this panned out, but how else would you end up going through a stop light while all other traffic is stopped and hit two children at speed?
I don't know about you, but I'm not perfect and have run a red light or two before, and not been on the phone at the time.
It's really tough not to get the impression that a lot folks here seem to think their driving skills and habbits are perfect. As a former certified driving instructor for New York State, I can assure you that in the course of a day or two, I could probably find at least one thing that likely fail you if you taking the licensing test for this state.
That isn't meant as a dig at anyone, but rather to point out that everyone is an imperfect driver at least some of the time, and state that I don't think the process to get a license is the issue. The tests are easy because driving itself is rather easy.
How many accidents are actually caused by people just plain lacking the skills needed to operate a vehicle? My guess very little - they're all caused by some sort of distraction, be it phone, radio, someone else in the car, the sun bliding you, the hot chick on the side of the road, checking your rear view mirror because that guy is following a little close...
My point is that the daily distractions, phones or otherwise, are the issues here. You can preach all day about them to students, and they can go take their test and not distract themselves with anything. But after that it's all over. |
Irideabuell
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 06:58 pm: |
|
I've run red lights too, but none where there are pedestrians crossing directly in front of me.
I know well and good there are days when I don't have my wits about me and I'm not the best driver on the road (not to imply that I am when I do have my wits about me). But, to mow down two young children and then claim you weren't on your cell phone after witnesses openly state that you were is the issue I point out.
In 9 out of 10 cases where I'm nearly hit by a cager, guess what? They're talking on their cell phone and aren't giving their driving a single thought.
Nobody is perfect and I certainly don't intend to come across that way. But, if you hurt someone, own up to it. It's rarely malicious and most often unintentional. However, it's your responsibility none-the-less. |
Ferris_von_bueller
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 07:08 pm: |
|
Some of you folks act as if the roads were a paradise to travel before the advent of the cell phone. Blame the gun !! Blame the phone !! I say, Blame the water head !!
I have a co-worker that I refuse to drive with because he's an a-hole driver. He's rides people's bumper's doing 80, switches lanes erratically. He doesn't need a cell phone to be a bad driver. He just is !! |
Oldog
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 18, 2008 - 10:21 pm: |
|
On the Phone & proof, if the time of day can be established for the accident
911 call records can help, cell phone traffic is documented thats how they keep up with air time all leo needs is the air times for that number that day.
say +/- 2 minutes of accident report time and you may have been at fault its likely that you were on the phome.
perfect driver me NO BUT I dont talk on the phone while driving, and I try to drive carefully, the bike a lunitic, the truck a little old man.
I see way to many asshats with the detroit lean on, phone jammed in the ear,
Dilligaf for any one but them selves. speeding / weaving and or changing lanes no signal / no look
What will kill me is the day I miss that one. |
Irideabuell
| | Posted on Thursday, June 19, 2008 - 06:41 am: |
|
I guess what irritates me is the punishment never seems to be commensurate with the "crime". I know in most cases it wasn't intentional, but if you've killed someone, there has to be a penalty if you were at fault.
Yes, it sucks and makes an honest, upstanding citizen realize an immediate life change, or it should.
I constantly think about that case from the upper midwest I read about in the AMA monthly mag (I don't recall what state) where a couple riding were killed by a cager and it dragged on for years which clearly was upsetting to their family and bikers in general.
It is horrible that these things drag on causing undue pain for those left behind. Why is that? |
Xl1200r
| | Posted on Thursday, June 19, 2008 - 09:16 am: |
|
In 9 out of 10 cases where I'm nearly hit by a cager, guess what? They're talking on their cell phone and aren't giving their driving a single thought.
Maybe things are just different where I am, but whether I'm on the bike or in the car, I only notice a cell phone in the hands of an offending driver I'd say less than a third of the time. |
Froggy
| | Posted on Thursday, June 19, 2008 - 09:21 am: |
|
XL1200r, you need to remember that NY is a no holding the phone state, so most people have switched to headsets. |
Xl1200r
| | Posted on Thursday, June 19, 2008 - 09:51 am: |
|
Froggy - yes, you're right. I forgot about that.
Kind of like when I travel out of state and go out to eat. When the hostess asks me, "Smoking or non?", all i can give is a blank stare because I have no idea what she's talking about for a couple seconds. |
Froggy
| | Posted on Thursday, June 19, 2008 - 11:02 am: |
|
That confused the hell out of me too when i saw the movie Airplane for the first time 
"Would you like smoking or non smoking?"
Smoking please.
*Receives ticket thats on fire* |
|
