I am writing a research paper for my composition class at Normandale and need a source that isn't in a book or on a data base, so I'm doing a poll. Thanks in advance!!!! Should all cell phone use while driving be banned? If yes, how steep of a consequence should there be to discourage people continuing to use their phones? If no, why should drivers be able to continue to use their phone behind the wheel?
No, hands free is hard to argue against. Folks who are caught driving with a handset or otherwise distracted should be cited with inattentive driving and all that entails should it occur in the context of a moving violation. I don't understand the question "why should drivers be able to continue to use their phone behind the wheel?". I am suspicious of anyone who asks me to justify existing freedoms/privileges as opposed to validating objections to a given freedom. Experience has taught me to not trust the motives of people who present issues in this way.
Yes. Confiscation of motor vehicle being driven. Or if there is an accident and it can be proven a phone is in use, insurance does not have to compensate the user of the phone. If said user is killed in the accident, their body is put on display in the public square as an example of what not to do. Texting behind the wheel is proof of nonexistant higher reasoning powers.
This is the only acceptable use of a cell phone while driving. Anything besides hands-free should be illegal.
No, it shouldn't. Seatbelts shouldn't be required either. What you do, inside your own car, as long as it doesn't affect anyone else shouldn't be regulated. If you are in your own house, getting ****ed up on meth, crack, whatever that YOU cooked, in your own house, as long as it never leaves or affects anyone else, should be just fine i think. Government is not in place to protect you from yourself, and once government starts to, it has gone too far.
But the reason for law is to protect us and our familys that are sharing the roads with these Fu** heads.
My cell phone is my new radio in my car (pandora or slacker) so would that be considered "using" my phone? It isn't calling or texting but can be just as distracting..... My answer, don't take away the phone.... and even if they do I will still use. Why focus on cell phones... what about eating in the car? Make-up or brushing your teeth? Talking with your hands? Looking at the passenger while telling a story? Reading a billboard? Flicking off the slow driver in the left lane? Smoking cigs? Watching porn on my CD/DVD player? holla-in' @ the chicken heads? racing (oh wait that is illegal).... you get my point. Why take something like cell phones away when we aren't going to address all of the other stupid things people do while driving? ..... and if we do start with cell phones... where does it end? where is the line?
Should all cell phone use while driving be banned? No. If you are using a hands free device, then you are good to go. Your hands are on the wheel, and eyes on the road. If yes, how steep a penalty? I said "no", but there should be penalties for driving distracted and endangering others. Moving violations work, as do penalties if an accident or death is involved. If No, why should drivers be allowed to continue using their phones? I'm going to give a big thumbs up to SurlyOldMan on his response to this. You don't ask a free society to justify legal actions and behaviors. Until a law is passed that bans it or defines prohibitive actions regarding it, you aren't on the hook to explain yourself. Why I personally think people should be allowed to continue using phones in their cars while driving? If my hands free device allows me to watch the road, keep both hands on the wheel, and doesn't take those sensory and control functions away from me while I drive, then I see no reason to take that away. And if some legislator or lawmaker does ban phone use while driving, even with a handsfree headset, I will hunt them down and stomp the life out of them. Why? Because I spend at minimum, 6 hours on the road per day for work. If I had to stop every single time I got a phone call from a customer or my dispatchers, I would most likely lose my head, snap, and hurt someone due to the stress. My phone keeps me connected to my work. And if I had to drive 6 hours to a customer site, which I do on occasion (yes, that's 12+ hours of travel in one day) and couldn't be updated about upcoming service events and customer phone call requests, the amount of work and angry customers would pile up to the point that I would get no sleep as I would have to spend every waking minute of my day NOT spent on the road fielding all the calls I missed the day before. The second they take away my ability to use the phone while driving, is the very second the medical electronics repair business falls on its face. And if they pass this law, I want whoever wrote it, to call every one of my customers and explain to them that the quality and promptness of service they've enjoyed over the years is now over, and to expect infrequent call backs and 3-5 day turn arounds on their service requests.
You may be surprised how many of those things fall under inattentive driving and ARE illegal. The line is attentive vs. inattentive. Rear end the car in front of you while flicking off the slow driver in the left lane or watching porn on your in-dash. See what happens.
Yeah, I was trying to be funny and make a point. People tend to look at these things with blinders.... instead of going out into the field/roads and opening their eyes, looking around, and seeing what people are really doing in their cars besides driving.
Hey everyone, thanks for the input! I'm looking for a couple more people to chime in on this so I can have some sort of statistic!
Studies have shown that using a hands-free device is not an improvement in attentiveness over holding the handset. In both situations, the drivers are averting their attention to the phone conversation and are just as likely to suffer from "inattention blindness," no matter what device they are using. People tend to place themselves in the conversation and struggle to focus on visual cues while in said conversation. I find it amusing that most people don't want the system to take away their freedoms until one of these freedoms affects them or a loved one. Once they are affected by a certain incident, they are fully against that freedom and will lobby against it. I'm not saying anything should be or not be done about any of this. Just pointing out the irony of it all. GarageAlchemist, your argument fails to look at how these actions still affect us indirectly. People who don't use seatbelts cost a lot of money when they fly through the windshield. Money that we pay in taxes that ends up fixing their broken asses through medical assistance. Same is said for meth. We end up paying for the treatment systems, etc, that these people go through. If they don't go through these systems, they end up doing something else that will cost up a lot more in the end. I'm not saying all drugs do that, since pot smokers' biggest enemy is that bag of chips in the pantry. Anyways, many of the things that are regulated, taxed heavily, or whatever, end up costing society large sums of money that we work hard for. I'd rather not pay to put someone's face back together since they too dumb to wear a seatbelt...
Studies have proven those studies false. That's the problem with studies. It was big news when it was first "proven" that there was no difference. Follow up studies completely debunking the notion didn't make for very good news, I guess. I don't find that amusing at all. Your are describing emotion trumping logic via legislation. I was going to go there but I'm about 95% sure they already know all that and find it more convenient to remain willfully ignorant.
Evening bump! Thanks for all the comments, but can you please keep it on the subject of the question(s) I posed!
