Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Should cell phone drivers be singled out?
3688 messages, Last post on Oct 27, 2009 at 11:39 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: steve_ (Dec 27, 2008 1:07 pm) "Here is you ticket for parking in a no parking zone Mr. Smith. Here is another ticket for falsely agreeing not to park in a no parking zone when you applied for a license, and here is one for perjury when you said you didn't realize you couldn't park in a red zone, it was on your test."
|
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Dec 27, 2008 1:20 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Dec 27, 2008 1:37 pm) Lets say your answer is to enforce the anti cell phone law and educate people on how that works. Good idea but if it worked wouldn't that mean it would have worked if you would have enforced the driving while distracted law in the first place? And if you can educate people on one law why not the origional law? One of the very groups you mentioned that was pushing for a study on cell phones and accidents AAA posted a study they did on driving distractions a few years ago. Cell phones were not at the top of the AAA list. But have any of the other distractions been addressed? Was the number one distraction even addressed? If the answer is no then why not? It can't happen both ways. If education and enforcement work then they work just as well for the origional law as they will for the amended law. If the origional doesn't work then repeal it. If it works enforce it. It is just that simple. If it isn't enforced it is a waste and it will be ignored, as is seen every day on our highways. A waste of ink. There is a process that tends to work in business and government, KISS. Amended laws adnausium doesn't.
|
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Dec 27, 2008 2:07 pm) Textecution kills texting functions while driving
|
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Dec 27, 2008 2:07 pm) No because you can be one of the minority of people who can hold the phone to your ear and still manage to keep the car in a straight line, even though your mind is at the other end of conversation. IMO, this is why a separate set of laws are needed. We already know laws don't work, that doesn't mean all civil and criminal laws should be scrapped. I do agree laws that clearly serve no legimate purpose should be struck from the books, e.g. it is illegal to shoot a buffalo in Times Square. |
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Dec 27, 2008 2:27 pm) The comment or the excuse on why they didn't enforce one law and why they would enforce another doesn't even require a response. We know the answer. |
|
| You'll love these. Even if you believe cell phone laws serve a useful purpose, these are still great examples of really useless laws. | |
|
Or should I say the foot's in the door? "A statewide poll by Pemco Insurance in June, just before the new law took effect, showed 60 percent of Washington drivers wanted to make a handheld cellphone ban a primary offense. But Douglass knows state lawmakers took seven years to move the current law from initial proposal to passage. And it took 16 years for the state's seat-belt law, implemented as a secondary offense in 1986, to become a primary offense in 2002." After 6 months, drivers ignoring cellphone ban (Seattle Times)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 02, 2009 11:05 pm) Look at their numbers: Statewide, troopers handed out 746 tickets for illegal driving-and-talking through November. They've socked it to teenagers and septuagenarians; but mostly men and drivers in their 20s and 30s have paid the price. Troopers also issued 1,345 written and verbal warnings. Seattle police have written another 247 tickets, according to the Seattle Municipal Court. And the number of driving-and-phoning citations is tiny compared to the 127,185 speeding tickets state troopers wrote between July and December. The numbers say it all about where enforcement is being targeted, and it ISN'T cell phone users. |
|
|
Can you hear me now? No, your cell is breaking up. Oh sorry, interference from my microwave..... Wheel good: The microwave that lets you enjoy hot meals on the move (Daily Mail) |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Should cell phone drivers be singled out?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
