NTSB recommends full ban on use of phones while driving

[zsdersw]

Would you all be as supportive of this recommendation if it were mandated at the federal level?

 

[zsdersw]

I don't understand these notions that driving should be as free of government encumbrances as possible. Taking classical liberalism a bit too far, aren't we? Why not get rid of all stop signs, traffic lights, speed limits, and licensing requirements in general? I mean after all, it's not possible to enforce that everyone stop at a stop sign, so why bother making the law, right?

The quest to cure or prevent stupidity with laws and government never ends because it never succeeds.

 

[fskimospy]

And then a sensor fails that is critical to the system, and the car veers into oncoming traffic. I write software for a living. Worked on prototype hardware...I would not trust my life to a car relying on hardware that would fail, or software that may have (fatal) bugs.

Same reason ANNs aren't allowed to be used when making medical equipment: a single error, however small, can lead to the loss of life. I trust myself more than I trust a machine. I know when I'm too tired.

Now, adding things like blind-spot sensors, and audible warnings that you're approaching the car in front of you too fast, those I can agree with having on all cars.

This is a natural inclination in people, but it's often quite wrong. You might think that people are more trustworthy than machines, but frequently when this is actually measured out the opposite is true.

 

[Craig234]

You can't ban hands-free devices IMO. To do this would require the banning of any switch, knob, button, and the like within the cockpit of the vehicle. Also, you would have to ban any conversation while driving. If pushing a button and talking to a windshield is too much to handle then you shouldn't be driving in the first place.

No, it doesn't. The danger from conversations on hands-free phones is not the same as the danger from other knobs such as heater or radio. Try science sometime.

 

[Craig234]

Only hands free systems installed by the manufacturer? Give me a fucking break. If you want to ban cell phones, you need to ban music. And in car conversations.

I'll agree with states requiring you to use hands free while the car is moving. But not a ban on hands free. There are tons of distractions as bad or worse than talking on a phone. Worse than talking on a phone are all the soccer moms who have to reach back and tend to their kids in the back seat.

As I said above, phone conversations impair the driver more than in-car or radio. Check the science.

 

[cybrsage]

Would you all be as supportive of this recommendation if it were mandated at the federal level?

I would not support it; it is a State issue. For example, Wyoming only have 564,000 people in the entire state. The Lancaster, PA metro area (think Amish country) has 508,000 people in it. The driving needs of the two are vastly different.

 

[fskimospy]

I would not support it; it is a State issue. For example, Wyoming only have 564,000 people in the entire state. The Lancaster, PA metro area (think Amish country) has 508,000 people in it. The driving needs of the two are vastly different.

Do you think it should be ok for Wyoming to legalize driving while intoxicated?

 

[xBiffx]

No, it doesn't. The danger from conversations on hands-free phones is not the same as the danger from other knobs such as heater or radio. Try science sometime.

If you ban hands-free then logically you have to ban all these other things. What would be the reason to ban a hands-free device? The same reasoning can be applied to the rest of the list. Get my point? Would be idiotic to say that hands-free conversations are most distracting that talking to someone in the seat next to you. Would be idiotic to say that pushing the answer button on the hands-free device is more distracting or requires more hand time away from the wheel than pushing a button on the radio or changing the A/C. See where this is going?

 

[xBiffx]

As I said above, phone conversations impair the driver more than in-car or radio. Check the science.

Please link. I would be interested in seeing this "science".

 

[Brovane]

How would even go about banning the use of hands free cell phones by a driver? How would LE even know a person was using a hands free device?

 

[bfdd]

Do you think it should be ok for Wyoming to legalize driving while intoxicated?

eskimospy, it actually was legal until recently. something about more likely to hit a cow than a person. also, the passengers can still drink in wyoming as far as i remember. open container isn't a big deal.

 

[RampantAndroid]

Do you think it should be ok for Wyoming to legalize driving while intoxicated?

It's a state right, so if they somehow did it, sure. The name of this country seems to have the word "States" in it.

 

[bfdd]

It's a state right, so if they somehow did it, sure. The name of this country seems to have the word "States" in it.

I hate the giant fed, lets idiots in other States dictate to much shit. As a Californian I do feel bad at times for the rest of the country having to try and keep up with our standards. It's rather bullshit.

 

[RampantAndroid]

How would even go about banning the use of hands free cell phones by a driver? How would LE even know a person was using a hands free device?

The better one is....people wanting to be legal, or safe, bought the hands free systems. Or cars with them installed. And now the NSTB wants to go an say "whoops, sorry, that's now illegal too" - I mean, fuck the people who followed the laws in their states. They just threw their money away.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

wow, it amazes me sometimes that we've survived as a country for so long but it won't take long now to ruin what we once had if we keep allowing FEDERAL control over our every action. I in no way support these sorts of bans - and yes OP they are talking about banning hands free as well.
Using my cell phone while driving down the interstate is no more distracting than the radio, taking a drink of pop, or having a smoke. I suppose though that if you nanny state morons got your way we'd ban those things as well.

F'n disgusting.

 

[Brovane]

The better one is....people wanting to be legal, or safe, bought the hands free systems. Or cars with them installed. And now the NSTB wants to go an say "whoops, sorry, that's now illegal too" - I mean, fuck the people who followed the laws in their states. They just threw their money away.

I am sure it isn't the first time the government did this and it will not be the last time either.

 

[fskimospy]

wow, it amazes me sometimes that we've survived as a country for so long but it won't take long now to ruin what we once had if we keep allowing FEDERAL control over our every action. I in no way support these sorts of bans - and yes OP they are talking about banning hands free as well.
Using my cell phone while driving down the interstate is no more distracting than the radio, taking a drink of pop, or having a smoke. I suppose though that if you nanny state morons got your way we'd ban those things as well.

F'n disgusting.

Studies of course disagree with you. Who's cares about that though?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Studies of course disagree with you. Who's cares about that though?

studies aren't me you moron. I am talking about ME driving on the Interstate. There is no way I'm more distracted on the phone than doing the items I listed or even having a converstion with another passenger in the vehicle. Try as you might to "disagree" - it just doesn't matter.

So I want to know what makes a conversation through a digital device makes it so dangerous vs a conversation through air. If I had to line them up - it's about a wash with the in-person through the air would be more dangerous since you normally look at the person you are talking to - which in this case would take your eyes off the road. But yeah, who cares about the reality of the situation... lets just let the gov't decide what's best for us all so we're happy little drones... F'n hell you people make me sick.

 

[bfdd]

cad actually that's wrong. passengers generally care about the driver watching the road. so they will make sure to be less distracting. just watch yourself as a pasenger and you will see it.

 

[IGBT]

expect insurance co.to reformulate policies and install contract language that will void coverage if phones are involved.

 

[fskimospy]

studies aren't me you moron. I am talking about ME driving on the Interstate. There is no way I'm more distracted on the phone than doing the items I listed or even having a converstion with another passenger in the vehicle. Try as you might to "disagree" - it just doesn't matter.

So I want to know what makes a conversation through a digital device makes it so dangerous vs a conversation through air. If I had to line them up - it's about a wash with the in-person through the air would be more dangerous since you normally look at the person you are talking to - which in this case would take your eyes off the road. But yeah, who cares about the reality of the situation... lets just let the gov't decide what's best for us all so we're happy little drones... F'n hell you people make me sick.

Why do we care about you specifically if not for how it relates to the rest of the population? Were you just meaninglessly babbling like someone's crazy grandpa then?

Studies have checked this relationship between cell phone conversations and personal conversations in fact, but have not reached super solid conclusions. It may in fact be that in person conversations are less dangerous as both people adjust to things around them. (they tend not to chat so breezily when conditions are dangerous) It's still a bit grey at this time though.

Oh, and you look at the person you're talking to while driving? Jesus.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

cad actually that's wrong. passengers generally care about the driver watching the road. so they will make sure to be less distracting. just watch yourself as a pasenger and you will see it.

You don't make eye contact when you talk to someone? Oh wait... I forgot this is AT Human to human communication is a rare event and then it's done with no eye contact - just staring at one's shoes...

I kid I kid...

Sure, a passenger MAY be courteous but it's still on the driver to keep their eyes on the road. I've put on a lot of Interstate miles the last few years and while I do see cell TEXTING drifting, I see just as much conversation drifting. But meh - it still doesn't make the gov't ban right or correct no matter what the ratio is.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Why do we care about you specifically if not for how it relates to the rest of the population? Were you just meaninglessly babbling like someone's crazy grandpa then?

Studies have checked this relationship between cell phone conversations and personal conversations in fact, but have not reached super solid conclusions. It may in fact be that in person conversations are less dangerous as both people adjust to things around them. (they tend not to chat so breezily when conditions are dangerous) It's still a bit grey at this time though.

Oh, and you look at the person you're talking to while driving? Jesus.

lol, I didn't expect any less from you. Clearly it's ok to ban something just because some have issues with it. Nevermind there are other things equally as distracting... It's just not a hot topic so it needs to be ignored. It's obviously for your own good... the gov't says so...

So maybe more studies should be done before banning something? Nah, just let your knee go off and beg the gov't to ban something because you feel it'll make it safer... :roll; idiots.

No, but I do glance at them once in a while depending on the conversation. Look in the kiid mirror to check on the kids if something is going on... etc. Oh, that reminds me - kids are the biggest distraction in a vehicle - why doesn't the gov't ban them? PLEASE!!! I'd support that one

 

[CADsortaGUY]

expect insurance co.to reformulate policies and install contract language that will void coverage if phones are involved.

THIS is how it should be handled - NOT with a gov't ban.

 

[fskimospy]

lol, I didn't expect any less from you. Clearly it's ok to ban something just because some have issues with it. Nevermind there are other things equally as distracting... It's just not a hot topic so it needs to be ignored. It's obviously for your own good... the gov't says so...

So maybe more studies should be done before banning something? Nah, just let your knee go off and beg the gov't to ban something because you feel it'll make it safer... :roll; idiots.

No, but I do glance at them once in a while depending on the conversation. Look in the kiid mirror to check on the kids if something is going on... etc. Oh, that reminds me - kids are the biggest distraction in a vehicle - why doesn't the gov't ban them? PLEASE!!! I'd support that one

'Some have issues with it' = studies show people on average talking on cell phones display similar impairment to driving drunk.

Hey, just because some people drive drunk doesn't mean that we should tie federal funding to BAC limits! Also, if something else that's dangerous isn't being addressed, that means we shouldn't address anything that's dangerous. What needs more study is the relationship between passenger conversation and cell conversation. The item under scrutiny for banning already has research done on it.

Thanks for shitting your pants in yet another thread, CAD. I'm sorry but I just don't have it in me today to deal with you. I'm sure you are fully prepared to another fight to the death that will inevitably devolve into minutiae and those have just gotten too boring.