Personal Freedoms vs. Texting While Driving

RedRocker

New Member
Founding Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2010
Messages
25
Location
N. Texas
Texting & driving could be stopped tomorrow, phone companies could program phones not to text over 5 mph, done.
 

RIDEMYST

So many roads......
Joined
Jan 4, 2015
Messages
604
Location
South Florida
Public awareness is part of the problem. Texting while driving needs to become socially unacceptable.
MADD made a big impact on drinking and driving, so laws changed.
If I make a decision to drink a fifth of whiskey and then drive and hurt or kill someone there are severe consequences.
If I decide to text while driving and hurt or kill someone because of my decision, the consequences are not nearly as severe, yet the end result is the same.
That is what needs changed to change drivers attitudes! IMHO. -JEP-
 

Checkswrecks

Ungenear to broked stuff
Staff member
Global Moderator
2011 Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
9,182
Location
Damascus, MD
RedRocker said:
Texting & driving could be stopped tomorrow, phone companies could program phones not to text over 5 mph, done.
From my post of April 18 a year ago:


Checkswrecks said:
I actually tried lobbying to make it happen and you will be floored by the response. I was told that restrictions may be placed on drivers, but blocking signals would affect the rights of the PASSENGERS. Give me a break!And remember that this could be done with a software change. All it would take is for the cell towers to not talk to phones moving at more than a pre-set speed, unless on a list of phones not to block (fire/EMS/police/etc).
 

Andylaser

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Messages
514
Location
Southampton UK
Theres nothing wrong with passengers using phones. When on work trips, I often answer the drivers phone for them.

Luckily over here, there has been some big crackdowns on phone use while driving and the instant £100 ($170) fine makes people take note. The other thing that is happening, is if you are involved in an accident, the Police will check phone records and if they can confirm phone use at the time, you will also get charged with "Driving without due care and attention". This generally puts the liability 100% to you and insurance companies then rape you come renewal time.
 

Dogdaze

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
3,040
Location
Solothurn, Switzerland
Isn't it funny how people will get all jittery when on a plane and either put the phone on 'plane mode' or switch it off, yet those same people will have a complete disregard of safety to others and text while driving? I don't say all plane passengers text while driving, but I'm sure a good percentage.
 

dietDrThunder

Why so serious, son?
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
283
Location
Nashvegas, TN
IMO there is no reason for there to be a law making it illegal to text and drive, because it's already illegal. Where I'm from in MA it's called "driving to endanger" and is a serious offense. I've read the code, and texting while driving squarely applies. I live in TN now, and I'm not sure what it's called here but I'm sure there is an equivalent law.
 

shrekonwheels

New Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2014
Messages
773
Location
Montana
dietDrThunder said:
IMO there is no reason for there to be a law making it illegal to text and drive, because it's already illegal. Where I'm from in MA it's called "driving to endanger" and is a serious offense. I've read the code, and texting while driving squarely applies. I live in TN now, and I'm not sure what it's called here but I'm sure there is an equivalent law.
This, reckless driving is Illegal in every single state, we do not need more redundant laws. What we do need perhaps are some serious progressive penalties based on income. For instance a 300 dollar fine is near ruin for someone struggling on low wages, a white collar worker a mere annoyance, level that playing field so in cases of reckless driving it could lead to serious penalties for all.

The stopping testing all together is annoying and not realistic by any stretch of the imagination.
 

Dogdaze

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
3,040
Location
Solothurn, Switzerland
shrekonwheels said:
This, reckless driving is Illegal in every single state, we do not need more redundant laws. What we do need perhaps are some serious progressive penalties based on income. For instance a 300 dollar fine is near ruin for someone struggling on low wages, a white collar worker a mere annoyance, level that playing field so in cases of reckless driving it could lead to serious penalties for all.

The stopping testing all together is annoying and not realistic by any stretch of the imagination.
I read this and felt I should let you know that in Switzerland they will fine 2% of your gross income, for instance 20kph is the 'magic' threshold, anything over 20kph will illicit the 2% rule and so if you make 100k per year the fine is an automatic 2K fine plus costs and 1 month ban for first offence, 2nd offence will get you same and 1 year ban, last year I just scraped under that. And even if you don't work, they will take 'family' income as a figure, so no getting out of it.
 

Checkswrecks

Ungenear to broked stuff
Staff member
Global Moderator
2011 Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
9,182
Location
Damascus, MD
Not going to argue income-basing could be effective.


The arguments against it in the US would be really strong. Start with proof of income having always been the problem with those concepts, partly because of selecting whose "proof" you want to base it on. For example, if it's income tax it's full price for us wage slaves and could be nearly nothing for a lot of small cash-based business owners. And then, traffic records are open, so you'd be posting your income.
 

shrekonwheels

New Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2014
Messages
773
Location
Montana
Dogdaze said:
I read this and felt I should let you know that in Switzerland they will fine 2% of your gross income, for instance 20kph is the 'magic' threshold, anything over 20kph will illicit the 2% rule and so if you make 100k per year the fine is an automatic 2K fine plus costs and 1 month ban for first offence, 2nd offence will get you same and 1 year ban, last year I just scraped under that. And even if you don't work, they will take 'family' income as a figure, so no getting out of it.
::012::
 

DTOM Gadsden

New Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2018
Messages
4
Location
Texas
I was active in a number of forums in the 2000s, until my interests outside the house and away from electronic devices extracted me from the quagmire of virtual "reality" and those so hamstrung by it. What really rubbed me the wrong way was the lack of objectivity or ANY critical thinking ability among the moderators. Musical instrument forums were the worst, by far!
The original poster here deserves a hearty handshake and a tip of the hat for instigating such a Libertarian discussion.
(Our Founding Fathers are smiling down on ya!)
That being said, I'm jumping back into the ring after a decade in remission!


Good point, we focus on cell phones, but the truth is there is too many things in a car to distract us these days, touch screen controls is a good example
I could not agree more.
Spend a few decades on earth and you will notice a phenomenon I call the Cause du Jour.
(Cause of the Day)
With social media being such a powerful force for unquestioned stupidity, this concept has been magnified exponentially. Remember when people got SO UPSET about things we don't even hear about anymore? The public consciousness moves on the next viral cause that offends their sensibilities so.... and tomorrow everyone will have their panties in a wad about something most of us have been aware of already but just weren't overly concerned about.
TV screen in a car?
Can't even adjust the air conditioning without a degree from MIT?
I'm the guy who hates auto-dimming mirrors, automatic headlights, and anything that supposedly LIGHTENS our cognitive load while we drive, yet I'm supposed to applaud all the "improvements" I can have in a new car?


I see people texting all the time on my rides. Typically I used to honk my horn to see if I could get them to pay attention/stop txting.

This typically earns me a finger (I'm number one!!) or in two cases road rage issues (one older guy in a Mercedes followed me to my office and wanted to fight, I shit you not).
When cell phones first began distracting drivers in the nineties, I developed a strategy for jacking with them on the freeways of Houston.
(I know, it's a douchebag move, but it worked!)
1. I would pace them in the next lane - ESPECIALLY if they were squatting in the left lane.
2. I would do my best to appear to look straight ahead while I purposely drifted into their lane a bit.
After a bit of speeding up and slowing down (which I matched) they would finally get pissed off and return to driving. Yes, they would cease writing, sorting papers, and all the other distracted activities to get away from me - as I was clearly an idiot and endangering THEM!

And the saying "Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose" certainly applies in this situation. I'd love to see the no txting laws get enforced in Georgia.

FWIW I'm a conservative leaning Libertarian.
I still disagree.
This is where the two of us could have a great discussion - which I am getting to in this post.


What if you could train people to text and drive? Really TRAIN them to crosscheck their phone, car, and surroundings in such a way that texting is no big deal?
It CAN be done.
YES!
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes!!!!!


From what I've seen, its near impossible to teach most people to just drive.
THIS.

Here's my opinion, worth every penny you paid for it:
Drivers have a DUTY, a social contract, a humanitarian responsibility, and a legal requirement to NOT RUN INTO/OVER OTHER PEOPLE or their property.
Doesn't matter why or how.
If you do, regardless of the reason (or excuse), you are culpable, liable, responsible, and obligated to make amends. If irreparable harm is done, beyond the reach of a financial remedy (like bodily harm or death) then it's YOUR ASS.

I don't care if you are on your cell phone, applying mascara, drunk, asleep, or installing 3rd-degree coffee burns on your nads, it is YOUR ASS.

We already have thousands and thousands of redundant laws, mostly ill-conceived and rarely applied.
We don't need more.

In my little world I subscribe to an American Constitution and a King James Bible, NOT all the watered-down, half-baked, knee-jerk "improvements" politicians and social media are selling as a remedy.

I do my best to keep my head outta my ass when driving (or flying) and I understand how dire my future may become in the blink of an eye if I fail.

Grain of salt not included.
 

Sierra1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
3,701
Location
DFW-TEXAS
"COMMON" sense, and "COMMON" courtesy....that's the only two things needed to set everything else right. But, as we know....
 

Talltourer

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
96
Location
Ottawa, Ontario
Interesting topic...

I'll sum up my opinion on this.

Cellphones, mascara, drinking coffee, eating a Bigmac, all the same bullshit and should all be under the same offence IMHO.

Distracted driving - lots of money, lots of demerit points(you got those in the US?). Lump it all in there. You are NOT paying attention to driving, regardless of the WHY.

The penalty is not big enough currently. People dont realize they are hauling down 3000lbs+ of metal down a road at 60+MPH. Enforce it more, 1000$ fine with license suspensions is where it should be.

I've seen common sense mentioned a few times. This common sense thing is getting so rare nowadays, it's about to be labeled a freaking super power.
 

Sierra1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
3,701
Location
DFW-TEXAS
I don't think it's a punishment/fine thing. It's a state of mind thing. All I ever hear anymore is "I didn't do anything wrong". If a person doesn't think that THEY are doing anything wrong, THEY are not going to change what THEY are doing.
 

Talltourer

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
96
Location
Ottawa, Ontario
I don't think it's a punishment/fine thing. It's a state of mind thing. All I ever hear anymore is "I didn't do anything wrong". If a person doesn't think that THEY are doing anything wrong, THEY are not going to change what THEY are doing.
One could argue they dont see it like a negative/wrong thing because the punishment/consequence is not harsh enough?
 

Sierra1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
3,701
Location
DFW-TEXAS
If they accepted that what they did was wrong, and accepted the punishment/consequence, you could be right. But the issue I'm seeing is that they are not accepting responsibility, or even admitting that they committed and error. I don't know what the answer is, or where the line will be drawn.
 

Dogdaze

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
3,040
Location
Solothurn, Switzerland
They don't see it as a crime because the punishment is not severe if they are caught. The only time the punishment fits the crime is when it all goes wrong and by then many lives have been torn apart in the worst cases. I always think of it as if my actions were to kill a small child, that for me is the worst and usually prevent me from even looking at my phone when it rings if I don't have bluetooth activated, even then I sometimes just ignore it, I'm hardly saving the world or curing cancer!!
 
Top