Recent Topics
Hyundai Elantra manual trans fluid change help
by dja4260
23 minutes 7 seconds ago
My Review of the 1997 Camry
by Nick1994
24 minutes 13 seconds ago
M1 ESP 5W30
by e55amgbenz007
24 minutes 39 seconds ago
"2013" 5.0 Stang oil?
by Camprunner
43 minutes 23 seconds ago
7,000 miles on oil... change before trip?
by Klutch9
Today at 09:50 PM
Wiggling brake shim
by Klutch9
Today at 09:45 PM
Sensen Struts, talk me into or out of them
by Clubber_Lang
Today at 09:23 PM
Ticks when it needs an oil change!
by Realtech214
Today at 08:43 PM
Mounting transmission cooler
by ARB1977
Today at 08:38 PM
need a rec on oil extractor..
by dblshock
Today at 08:36 PM
Favorite cut of steak?
by Rand
Today at 08:11 PM
Maryland Fried Chicken.
by 123Saab
Today at 08:05 PM
Newest Members
Samial, TomHh, JPowell490, LubeMan52, Powermax
50782 Registered Users
Who's Online
90 registered (901Memphis, asiancivicmaniac, 123Saab, 1kickbuttranger, 2010_FX4, 05LGTLtd, 7 invisible), 1374 Guests and 216 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
50782 Members
64 Forums
216927 Topics
3414709 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG

Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 ... 12 13 >
Topic Options
#3244734 - 01/11/14 10:15 AM Cell phone/driving: an officer's view
dernp Offline


Registered: 10/18/12
Posts: 323
Loc: S/W Ontario
I thought I would start a thread about an incident I encountered last week.

Background: I am currently a patrol officer with 30 yrs experience. Cell phone use while driving is illegal and this includes texting/talking or holding any wireless communication device while driving. Driving is included to be stopped at a red light. In order to lawfully use your device, you must pull off to the side of the road, put your car in Park.

I feel that cell phone use while driving is an epidemic and clearly constitutes distracted driving.

Incident: I am driving a marked police cruiser and observe a driver stopped at a red light clearly talking on the cell phone. I pull the driver over and charge the driver with appropriate offence. The driver began to tell me that it wasn't fair because the driver's child had called for a ride home from school. We talked for a bit about blue tooth and hands free. But the point that struck me was that the driver felt that they were entitled to speak on the phone due to the nature of the call.

I did not start this thread for Bitoger's to tell me I should have warned the driver. I would like to hear views from other drivers about why they text/talk while driving. Is the call or text that important?

Thanks for taking the time to read this thread and I look forward to your responses.
_________________________
2014 Honda Civic 1.8 FF
2013 Honda CR-V 2.4 AWD 15k TGMO 0w20
2012 Elantra 27k QSGB 5w20
2010 Tundra 4.6L 2wd 80k PP 5w20


Top
#3244741 - 01/11/14 10:21 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
spasm3 Offline


Registered: 05/30/10
Posts: 3414
Loc: north carolina
That's not an emergency. Unless the driver was on the way to the hospital or reporting an accident/medical emergency, ticket them.


Edited by spasm3 (01/11/14 10:21 AM)
_________________________
Bryan
13 elantra 27k penplat5w30
03 chevy avalanche63k m1 0-30
02 saturnsc1 55k pennultra
01 saturnsc1 160k nextgenhm
93 olds ciera 63k 5w30 nexgenhm
gz250

Top
#3244744 - 01/11/14 10:22 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
loyd Offline


Registered: 08/30/12
Posts: 127
Loc: California
Well, you got it half right. It has been proven tht talking on a hands-free device is ALSO distracted driving. Think about it, if you're trying to listen closely to what somedone is telling you AND trying to formulate your reply, how much of your attention is really on the road and what's happening around you ?????????????

Top
#3244749 - 01/11/14 10:25 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
FowVay Offline


Registered: 06/02/02
Posts: 2154
Loc: Southeastern USA
As long as those in law enforcement continue to chat with their girlfriends/wives while operating their government provided motor vehicle I can only assume that it truly isnt' that grave of a danger.

I would absolutely love to see the phone records of the thousands of cops who chat for hours on end while on duty.

So to answer the question - my view is that you should conduct this survey in the locker room at your place of business.
_________________________
'79 Honda CBX
'97 Nissan pickup
'99 BMW 323i
'09 Volkswagen Jetta TDI
'12 Kawasaki ZX-14R

Top
#3244763 - 01/11/14 10:35 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Rand Online   content


Registered: 08/20/03
Posts: 7217
Loc: Akron,Ohio
Its certainly true.
I was driving yesterday and a 13' box truck in front of me was doing 24 in a 35 and weaving...

the guy driving was talking on phone.
He never even turned off(wasnt looking for an address)

I have handsfree. When I answer the phone I tell them what do you want I'm driving make it fast. 10s later I'm off the phone.

unless I'm sitting at a light, or driving an empty highway at night. I will let the call go on longer maybe 1-2m
_________________________
2011 Subaru Forester X Prem. 5MT

Top
#3244775 - 01/11/14 10:44 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
dparm Offline


Registered: 04/19/10
Posts: 12348
Loc: Chicago, IL
Glad to hear at least one officer thinks its serious. Illinois finally made it illegal to talk while driving but there is zero enforcement and it just comes off as an empty threat from our politicians.
_________________________
2011.5 BMW M3 saloon ZCP
der stärkste buchstabe der welt
Castrol Edge Professional TWS 10w60 + Mahle OX 254D3

Top
#3244788 - 01/11/14 10:54 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: FowVay]
JHZR2 Offline



Registered: 12/14/02
Posts: 33266
Loc: New Jersey
Originally Posted By: FowVay
As long as those in law enforcement continue to chat with their girlfriends/wives while operating their government provided motor vehicle I can only assume that it truly isnt' that grave of a danger.

I would absolutely love to see the phone records of the thousands of cops who chat for hours on end while on duty.

So to answer the question - my view is that you should conduct this survey in the locker room at your place of business.



This is so true. There is a do as I say, not as I do in policing. Even officers using their POVs off duty (I know quite a few) who drive excessively, relying upon the fact that they'll get a professional courtesy if stopped.

So the point made is a good one, but the OP is trying to do his job and is enforcing the law correctly.

I don't have an issue with hands free, because it's not necessarily different than having a conversation with someone in the car. But operating the vehicle outside of the rules due to a faulty interpretation is fair game. There probably is some reasonable flexibility for the situation, but the laws are what they are.

Top
#3244789 - 01/11/14 10:54 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: FowVay]
hemitom Offline


Registered: 03/12/07
Posts: 733
Loc: canada
Originally Posted By: FowVay
As long as those in law enforcement continue to chat with their girlfriends/wives while operating their government provided motor vehicle I can only assume that it truly isnt' that grave of a danger.

I would absolutely love to see the phone records of the thousands of cops who chat for hours on end while on duty.

So to answer the question - my view is that you should conduct this survey in the locker room at your place of business.

Hitting The Nail On The Head....

I have seen our local police constantly using their cell phones while driving, i'm willing to bet none of it is duty related.
I do believe its a dangerous thing to do, and offenders should be fined for doing so.


Edited by hemitom (01/11/14 10:56 AM)
_________________________
2006 kia spectra
2006 chrysler 300

Top
#3244791 - 01/11/14 10:56 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
beanoil Offline


Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 1961
Loc: Midwest, Illinois
I don't answer the phone, look at email or text while driving. It's against my state law, and a violation of my companies policies. Just too dangerous, and besides, with the electronic fingerprinting available, it's too easy to prove you were distracted. For example, nephew totals a Corvette. Black box on the Vette showed excess speed, and cell records showed he was on the phone. Insurance balked, the police had proof, and it was all over but the crying at that point.
_________________________
beanoil: Tough under heat, real dirty afterwards.

Top
#3244800 - 01/11/14 11:04 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: FowVay]
xxch4osxx Offline


Registered: 03/11/09
Posts: 1525
Loc: Cedarbrae, Ontario
Originally Posted By: FowVay
As long as those in law enforcement continue to chat with their girlfriends/wives while operating their government provided motor vehicle I can only assume that it truly isnt' that grave of a danger.

I would absolutely love to see the phone records of the thousands of cops who chat for hours on end while on duty.

So to answer the question - my view is that you should conduct this survey in the locker room at your place of business.
I agree 100% here. I live in the same province as the OP and see OPP and local police yapping on cell phones regularly while driving.
_________________________
2004 Chev Silverado 4x4 using all Amsoil lubricants.
2008 Mazda 3 GS Sport Hatchback 5sp MT (Girlfriend's car)


Top
#3244806 - 01/11/14 11:05 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: FowVay]
eljefino Offline


Registered: 06/15/03
Posts: 23535
Loc: ME
Originally Posted By: FowVay
As long as those in law enforcement continue to chat with their girlfriends/wives while operating their government provided motor vehicle I can only assume that it truly isnt' that grave of a danger.


I suspect they talk to other officers about subjects they don't want recorded on a tape for future use as evidence like would happen if they used their official radio channels.

Top
#3244809 - 01/11/14 11:07 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
eljefino Offline


Registered: 06/15/03
Posts: 23535
Loc: ME
Legitimate use of a cell phone is a 15-20 second call for the exchange of info. Eg where are you, get a gallon of milk on the way please.

But there should be a 25-50 cent a minute fee that goes into a kitty to cover underinsured motorist claims.

Watch a 5pm commute and everyone is on their phones complaining about their bosses or husbands or whatever... it's the only private time they get in their day. Thing is, face your problems, then you won't have to complain about them!

Top
#3244811 - 01/11/14 11:09 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
old1 Offline


Registered: 01/04/11
Posts: 127
Loc: Nebraska USA rural
Personally I never use a cell phone while driving, as I think it is dangerous as all****. But the one thing I don't understand is why it would be unlawful to use a hands free device? I can't see any difference between that and talking to another person in the car. Maybe even less dangerous, as many people tend to look at the person they are talking to.

Top
#3244816 - 01/11/14 11:11 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: loyd]
jeremiah2360 Offline


Registered: 10/06/03
Posts: 223
Loc: Massachusetts
Originally Posted By: loyd
Well, you got it half right. It has been proven tht talking on a hands-free device is ALSO distracted driving. Think about it, if you're trying to listen closely to what somedone is telling you AND trying to formulate your reply, how much of your attention is really on the road and what's happening around you ?????????????


So no talking to passengers. Gimme a break with that control freak logic.

Top
#3244818 - 01/11/14 11:14 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Stelth Offline


Registered: 02/24/11
Posts: 1323
Loc: California
Originally Posted By: dernp
I thought I would start a thread about an incident I encountered last week.

Background: I am currently a patrol officer with 30 yrs experience. Cell phone use while driving is illegal and this includes texting/talking or holding any wireless communication device while driving. Driving is included to be stopped at a red light. In order to lawfully use your device, you must pull off to the side of the road, put your car in Park.

I feel that cell phone use while driving is an epidemic and clearly constitutes distracted driving.

Incident: I am driving a marked police cruiser and observe a driver stopped at a red light clearly talking on the cell phone. I pull the driver over and charge the driver with appropriate offence. The driver began to tell me that it wasn't fair because the driver's child had called for a ride home from school. We talked for a bit about blue tooth and hands free. But the point that struck me was that the driver felt that they were entitled to speak on the phone due to the nature of the call.

I did not start this thread for Bitoger's to tell me I should have warned the driver. I would like to hear views from other drivers about why they text/talk while driving. Is the call or text that important?

Thanks for taking the time to read this thread and I look forward to your responses.


I am so glad you brought this up. There is so much baloney going around about cell phones, distracted driving, blah, blah, blah. What a bunch of hooey.

Now, as a patrol officer, it's your job to enforce the law, so this is not a direct criticism of you. Someone breaks the law, you are supposed to intervene. Fine.

However, it's not possible to legislate or regulate all danger out of existence. There are poor drivers who can be distracted by almost anything, or who drive poorly whether distracted or not. As long as they are given licenses, they will cause accidents. Sure, I've missed an exit because I was talking on the phone. I've also missed exits because I was listening to something on the radio, or simply deep in thought. Am I a distracted driver? Sometimes, so's everybody.

If you want to get rid of distracted driving, sure, ban phones, ban radios, ban kids in the car (talk about a distraction!), ban coffee, sodas, food, cigarettes, any sort of cargo (groceries) that can shift, ban discussion with others in the car (I've heard this one proposed), and so on. I bet if you did all of those things, the accident rate wouldn't dip very much.

Distracted driving is already illegal, regardless of the cause. If you're swerving around the freeway, or otherwise driving erratically, you should expect to attract the attention of the local gendarmes. Somewhere, there should be a line between force and personal responsibility.

Having said all that, one doesn't get to choose which laws one obeys. That's why I already have a couple of bluetooth devices, and I'm still looking for one that really works in the environments where I need one.

And yes, I see cops all the time talking on cell phones while driving patrol cars.
_________________________
Scofflaw

Top
#3244825 - 01/11/14 11:19 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
old1 Offline


Registered: 01/04/11
Posts: 127
Loc: Nebraska USA rural
RIGHT! and personally I know that with nobody else in the car and therefore just bored and daydreaming I was more distracted than talking to an actual person. But I guess until they can read our thought waves they won't be able to regulate that...... BUT I still think using a regular cell phone while driving should be a BIG fine.

Top
#3244831 - 01/11/14 11:24 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Brybo86 Offline


Registered: 10/08/11
Posts: 628
Loc: Chicago, IL
it is dangerous, especially texting but in Chicago cops are by far the biggest offenders. they are always on their phones. fine should be double because they should know better.


or how about when cops in my neighborhood park in either handicap spots or in front of fire hydrants while taking their 1 hr lunch break or one of their many other breaks? completely bogus double standard. the corruption runs deep

meanwhile you call to have them ticket the group of 8 rice burner punks in the alley whoare 3 min long burnouts at 3am? Ha, do you really think they are going to put down the coffee and donut?

I personally know a few CPD officers, they brag about how much downtime they have and I mentioned specific examples, they said unless someone was shot or you have called for the same issue 10 times in the last hour no one is going to come.


Edited by Brybo86 (01/11/14 11:30 AM)
_________________________
08 Honda Accord EX-L 2.4L Amsoil 0w20 ASM w/EA15K13 filter
01 Kymco People 50
95 Yamaha Jog
86 Kawasaki 454Ltd Amsoil Frankenbrew w/Wix 51334

Top
#3244833 - 01/11/14 11:25 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
ColdCanuk Offline


Registered: 11/21/09
Posts: 40
Loc: Calgary, Canada
The driver should thank you, next time he/she might kill an innocent person.

I hope you gave the driver the biggest ticket possible.

They should also ban blue tooth and hands free too, still causes distraction.

People are so important today that a second can't go by without them talking or texting, amazing. I wish I was that important.

Top
#3244835 - 01/11/14 11:29 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Roob Offline


Registered: 02/19/13
Posts: 318
Loc: Ontario,Canada
This is why I love accessories to wireless technology, like hands free devices!!!
Press a button to talk/end or use voice commands for everything, it's not hard to do and they are cheap to buy, cheaper than a ticket.... At least Ontario hasn't banned them yet!!!!!
_________________________
2007 Honda Accord Coupe EX 2.4 Vtec.
Bridgestone TS+V, N2 fill.
HGMO GF4 SM and A02.
Honda Dw1+Lubeguard red.

Top
#3244839 - 01/11/14 11:35 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Spazdog Offline


Registered: 09/06/10
Posts: 5492
Loc: Arlington
A few months ago, I almost got wiped out by a Fort Worth Police officer.

She whipped out in front of me like no one was there. Fortunately I was already slowing for the redlight at the next intersection.

I pulled alongside her and all I could see was the officer typing with one hand on the center mounted laptop and having a very animated conversation with a large (ie: Samsung Galaxy) smartphone pressed against her head. Looked like she was laughing.

I stayed a safe distance back. She drove about 20 over the speed limit weaving all over the lane. Anybody else doing that would have had to have perform a field sobriety test.

I should have reported her car number.
_________________________
2005 Mazda 6S hatchback - Mobil Super 5000 5W20
2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser GT - QSUD 5W30

Top
#3244852 - 01/11/14 11:44 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Spazdog]
Stelth Offline


Registered: 02/24/11
Posts: 1323
Loc: California


I actually like the police chief's attitude on this video. The mayor, however, just seems like a typical government-knows-best politician.
_________________________
Scofflaw

Top
#3244853 - 01/11/14 11:45 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Bebop367 Offline


Registered: 12/08/06
Posts: 217
Loc: Louisiana
I agree with you!
I see very near misses all the time...
I also wonder how many accidents with or with out fatalities are cell phone related.

Top
#3244876 - 01/11/14 12:18 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
dave123 Offline


Registered: 01/13/09
Posts: 1095
Loc: wi
Do you ticket all the do-gooders Wyatt Earp's of the world out their calling dispatch to rat out others while they're on the cell phone "making the world a better place".

Top
#3244920 - 01/11/14 12:49 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
The_Eric Offline


Registered: 03/31/10
Posts: 3150
Loc: Iowa
Originally Posted By: Stelth

I am so glad you brought this up. There is so much baloney going around about cell phones, distracted driving, blah, blah, blah. What a bunch of hooey.

Now, as a patrol officer, it's your job to enforce the law, so this is not a direct criticism of you. Someone breaks the law, you are supposed to intervene. Fine.

However, it's not possible to legislate or regulate all danger out of existence. There are poor drivers who can be distracted by almost anything, or who drive poorly whether distracted or not. As long as they are given licenses, they will cause accidents. Sure, I've missed an exit because I was talking on the phone. I've also missed exits because I was listening to something on the radio, or simply deep in thought. Am I a distracted driver? Sometimes, so's everybody.

If you want to get rid of distracted driving, sure, ban phones, ban radios, ban kids in the car (talk about a distraction!), ban coffee, sodas, food, cigarettes, any sort of cargo (groceries) that can shift, ban discussion with others in the car (I've heard this one proposed), and so on. I bet if you did all of those things, the accident rate wouldn't dip very much.

Distracted driving is already illegal, regardless of the cause. If you're swerving around the freeway, or otherwise driving erratically, you should expect to attract the attention of the local gendarmes. Somewhere, there should be a line between force and personal responsibility.

Having said all that, one doesn't get to choose which laws one obeys. That's why I already have a couple of bluetooth devices, and I'm still looking for one that really works in the environments where I need one.

And yes, I see cops all the time talking on cell phones while driving patrol cars.


I agree. Bad drivers are just that. Doesn't matter what else they are doing while driving... If anything.
_________________________
2001 Hyundai Elantra 2.0
1998 Chevy Malibu 2.4
1995 Pontiac Grand Am 3.1
1979 Ford F-150 351M

Top
#3244928 - 01/11/14 12:56 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Stelth]
Spazdog Offline


Registered: 09/06/10
Posts: 5492
Loc: Arlington
Originally Posted By: Stelth


I actually like the police chief's attitude on this video. The mayor, however, just seems like a typical government-knows-best politician.


Yep! That's my hometown.

Mayor Dr Cluck can be a little offputting and arrogant. Arlington is a weird city. It has a bigger population than St Louis, MO or Cincinnati, OH but if you aren't an MLB or NFL fan, you have never heard of it. It's a suburb that is not a suburb.

The police are their own interesting bunch. The department requires a 4-year degree from applicants. There are very professional and dedicated cops and then there are a bunch that have a 4 year degree in "underwater basket weaving" that are just doing the job because there were no jobs in the "underwater basket weaving" field. There doesn't seem to be a middle ground there. I bet most of the distracted cop drivers were the latter.
_________________________
2005 Mazda 6S hatchback - Mobil Super 5000 5W20
2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser GT - QSUD 5W30

Top
#3244940 - 01/11/14 01:11 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
hattaresguy Offline


Registered: 06/01/11
Posts: 4859
Loc: CT
Some people can handle multi tasking, some cannot. Most drivers are quite bad at just driving, and all the technology manufactures keep jamming into cars is not going to help this.

OTOH this is the kind of nanny state nonsense that you don't see in other countries. In the islands you can do pretty much what you want when you drive and if you kill yourself your just a moron.

Top
#3244945 - 01/11/14 01:14 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
FowVay Offline


Registered: 06/02/02
Posts: 2154
Loc: Southeastern USA
haha,, this is classic. They require a 4 year degree yet the officer doesn't know the correct use of 'too' in his report. Amazing!
_________________________
'79 Honda CBX
'97 Nissan pickup
'99 BMW 323i
'09 Volkswagen Jetta TDI
'12 Kawasaki ZX-14R

Top
#3244955 - 01/11/14 01:19 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: dernp
I did not start this thread for Bitoger's to tell me I should have warned the driver. I would like to hear views from other drivers about why they text/talk while driving. Is the call or text that important?

I don't understand the allure, either. There's a reason I don't have a cell phone. I'd yank my home phone if I could get away with it, too wink
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3244967 - 01/11/14 01:28 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
hattaresguy Offline


Registered: 06/01/11
Posts: 4859
Loc: CT
My truck is my office so yes, I couldn't run my business without my cell phone. Or at least it would be extremely challenging.

Top
#3244972 - 01/11/14 01:32 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: FowVay]
spackard Offline


Registered: 03/24/11
Posts: 676
Loc: CA
Originally Posted By: FowVay
haha,, this is classic. They require a 4 year degree yet the officer doesn't know the correct use of 'too' in his report. Amazing!


I don't know about Arlington in particular, but in CA if a city cop is involved in a collision the CHP investigates and writes the report. It has to do with conflict of interest.


Yeah, I use the cellphone for a food to-go order, the conversation lasts about 20 seconds because I always order the same thing. If it's another type of call, either I don't answer or pull off to the side of the road. I can't concentrate enough on troubleshooting a problem over the phone if I'm driving. I tried once and realized within a few seconds that I couldn't do both.

As an aside, I'd like to be able to take a call on the train, but the inside noise level is frequently 85dB and every few minutes goes to 95dB for the autostop announcements. That isn't a good enough environment to hold a conversation.

Top
#3244979 - 01/11/14 01:39 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
andrewg Offline


Registered: 10/05/08
Posts: 2691
Loc: Covington, Wa.
I despise cell phone use while driving....for me personally, as well as seeing others do it.
I drive to work daily on an interstate. Five lanes....full of traffic...many days raining terribly (low visibility). And THIS is a fact.....I see at least three to four vehicles weaving left and right and/or not signaling when changing lanes. And what are they doing when I look into the vehicle? Texting or talking on a STUPID phone. And this is an even more concerning observation....MANY OF THOSE SWERVING left and right are using cells phones while driving SEMI- TRUCKS!! How can people be so brain dead?
GET OFF THE PHONE while driving BEFORE you kill an innocent person.
s far as officers of the law doing this while driving? I don't notice if they do....but pointing fingers at a few policeman is a distraction of the main issue.
_________________________
2012 Honda Ridgeline
2009 Ford Focus

Top
#3244982 - 01/11/14 01:42 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
dishdude Offline


Registered: 11/14/08
Posts: 3215
Loc: Phoenix
Every state already has distracted driving laws on the books, why do we need another for using the phone? Everything is a potential distraction; passengers, eating, drinking coffee, billboards, an accident in the oncoming lane, a nice looking woman walking down the street...

I lived near a DQ that had a drive through, and I would always get some bozo that would pull out in front of me and do half the speed limit while swerving all over the place because he was too occupied stuffing his face with an ice cream cone to worry about driving.

I text while stopped at red lights but not while moving, and have Bluetooth in both my cars so I am never holding the phone while moving.

Top
#3244992 - 01/11/14 01:51 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dishdude]
SAJEFFC Offline


Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 334
Loc: Texas
Ok this thread has gone four pages and no one has asked so I will....OP did you ask him what oil and OCI he was running while writing the ticket??? Inquiring minds want to know....just sayin... grin2 crackmeup

Top
#3245000 - 01/11/14 01:57 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Pop_Rivit Offline


Registered: 02/09/08
Posts: 3402
Loc: Midwest
Originally Posted By: dernp
Background: I am currently a patrol officer with 30 yrs experience.


Thank you for your service. Yours is often a thankless job and you usually see the worst of humanity. Most citizens have no idea what a difficult job it can be.

Originally Posted By: dernp
I feel that cell phone use while driving is an epidemic and clearly constitutes distracted driving.


I couldn't agree more. I've never used the phone while driving. While I do have a cell phone, it's often turned off while I'm in the car. If it is turned on and happens to ring, I simply ignore it until such time as I'm at my destination. I'll then listen to the voice mail, and return the call if needed. There's nothing so important that it can't wait until I'm safely parked.

As someone who operates a motor vehicle I've agreed to abide by the rules and regulations regarding their safe operation. I also have an obligation to operate that vehicle in the safest possible manner; not only for myself but for other motorists. It's what I agreed to do when I first received my license and I have always tried to uphold my end of the bargain.

While I may not always agree with every rule or regulation, the way to change them is from within, not by being a scofflaw.


Originally Posted By: FowVay
haha,, this is classic. They require a 4 year degree yet the officer doesn't know the correct use of 'too' in his report. Amazing!


Coming from one who failed to start his sentence with a capital letter, used two commas after the first incorrect word in the sentence, and somehow managed to start a sentence with "haha" (hint-it isn't a real word), your comment rings rather hollow.

Top
#3245002 - 01/11/14 01:58 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Gabe Offline


Registered: 02/22/11
Posts: 1401
Loc: Chicago, IL
First off, the driver was STOPPED at a red light - not exactly a safety hazard.

Second, the driver's reasoning is valid - most young children don't have their own phones. If the driver didn't take that call, the child would have been stranded.

I have seen some really bad drivers with a cell phones, but I have seen some really bad drivers without one too. And the reason people choose to break that law: it is a stupid law. If somebody is driving reckless due to texting, then ticket them for reckless driving; don't make the 90% of people who use their cell phone responsibly into criminals.

Top
#3245006 - 01/11/14 02:05 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: FowVay]
BISCUT Offline


Registered: 12/28/11
Posts: 1289
Loc: NewYorkistan
It's a huge bone of contention here in NY where I work (Westchester). Cops don't really wan't to give these tix out (for the most part) but it's crammed down our throats by Cuomo and his I wanna be president initiatives and the heavy backing from Ins. lobby (cell tix are points!!).

Cops are different in that most of us are veeery well accustomed to the wife on phone #1, girlfriend on line 2, running the rover to a call and hitting lights (and once in a great while, siren). AND like seat belt laws; often LE are exempt. Now, before the whole tirade about cops getting away with things; I'll have you know that for the most part the old blue wall of silence is GONE! We are whining babies who feel under appreciated and that the world owes us at minimum a deputy chief spot with a take home car. New erra of ME is in our ranks as well as everywhere else.

IMHO operating a cell and driving is most definitely a distraction but no where near what texting involves. That said these tasks are singled out and soooon enough nanny will strike again and you won't be able to eat and drive, put on make up (lets face it, lots of beauties out there need the makeup), heck lets take talk radio outa the car as well....makes my head think of the topic at hand not the road.

Guess I'm a little jaded here but the thrust behind most of these initiatives is revenue generation pure and simple. I'm an admin guy for over a decade and when dealing with town supervisor, city manager, various elected officials the first question is always: Do you wan't compliance or revenue? Think of speed zones when were the studies done to determine safe speeds? What vehicle technology was used? Has that maybe changed since then?
_________________________
2010 Nissan Armada/Mobil1 5-30 P1 (82k)
2008 BMW 328XI Mobil 1 0-40 (79k)
2004 F-150 Lariat/M1 EX 5-20 P1 (90k)
1995 Toyota Camry (112k)

Top
#3245008 - 01/11/14 02:07 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Kuato Online   sleepy


Registered: 10/23/05
Posts: 2840
Loc: Northeastern MT
I will answer an incoming call while driving, as all it requires is picking up the phone, same as any other object in the vehicle.

To make a call however, I pull over and stop. I have read a text once - ONCE - and the level of distraction clearly illustrated why it should be illegal to do so.

It is all directly related to how much attention is required. Most/many drivers cannot make this judgement for themselves so a law was passed making it safer for all.

Op did the right thing, it should be a black and white decision on the streets.
_________________________
04 Jeep Wrangler 2.4 MT 183k
13 F150 4x4, 5.0, 22k

both on Amsoil

Common sense isn't common any more. Is it.

Top
#3245010 - 01/11/14 02:09 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Gabe]
Kuato Online   sleepy


Registered: 10/23/05
Posts: 2840
Loc: Northeastern MT
Originally Posted By: Gabe
First off, the driver was STOPPED at a red light - not exactly a safety hazard.

Second, the driver's reasoning is valid - most young children don't have their own phones. If the driver didn't take that call, the child would have been stranded.

I have seen some really bad drivers with a cell phones, but I have seen some really bad drivers without one too. And the reason people choose to break that law: it is a stupid law. If somebody is driving reckless due to texting, then ticket them for reckless driving; don't make the 90% of people who use their cell phone responsibly into criminals.


Op clearly stated that the law says even stopped at a light, so the driver was in violation.

Taking 15 seconds to pull over and call the child back would not strand the child.
_________________________
04 Jeep Wrangler 2.4 MT 183k
13 F150 4x4, 5.0, 22k

both on Amsoil

Common sense isn't common any more. Is it.

Top
#3245011 - 01/11/14 02:09 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Gabe]
BISCUT Offline


Registered: 12/28/11
Posts: 1289
Loc: NewYorkistan
Originally Posted By: Gabe
First off, the driver was STOPPED at a red light - not exactly a safety hazard.

Second, the driver's reasoning is valid - most young children don't have their own phones. If the driver didn't take that call, the child would have been stranded.

I have seen some really bad drivers with a cell phones, but I have seen some really bad drivers without one too. And the reason people choose to break that law: it is a stupid law. If somebody is driving reckless due to texting, then ticket them for reckless driving; don't make the 90% of people who use their cell phone responsibly into criminals.


Gabe, You bring to light a VERY important fact most just don't get. We really do not need new laws; we have plenty of laws currently on the books covering just about every possible human action. What we need is consistent enforcement of the laws without the push toward revenue. If gov't really wanted compliance not revenue penalties would not be monetary but more in line with 10 over speed limit license suspended for 5 days, etc...
_________________________
2010 Nissan Armada/Mobil1 5-30 P1 (82k)
2008 BMW 328XI Mobil 1 0-40 (79k)
2004 F-150 Lariat/M1 EX 5-20 P1 (90k)
1995 Toyota Camry (112k)

Top
#3245012 - 01/11/14 02:11 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Kuato]
BISCUT Offline


Registered: 12/28/11
Posts: 1289
Loc: NewYorkistan
Originally Posted By: Kuato
Originally Posted By: Gabe
First off, the driver was STOPPED at a red light - not exactly a safety hazard.

Second, the driver's reasoning is valid - most young children don't have their own phones. If the driver didn't take that call, the child would have been stranded.

I have seen some really bad drivers with a cell phones, but I have seen some really bad drivers without one too. And the reason people choose to break that law: it is a stupid law. If somebody is driving reckless due to texting, then ticket them for reckless driving; don't make the 90% of people who use their cell phone responsibly into criminals.


Op clearly stated that the law says even stopped at a light, so the driver was in violation.

Taking 15 seconds to pull over and call the child back would not strand the child.



Pulling over is another whole issue with inherent dangers far eclipsing that of picking up the incoming call.
_________________________
2010 Nissan Armada/Mobil1 5-30 P1 (82k)
2008 BMW 328XI Mobil 1 0-40 (79k)
2004 F-150 Lariat/M1 EX 5-20 P1 (90k)
1995 Toyota Camry (112k)

Top
#3245020 - 01/11/14 02:24 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: BISCUT]
Kuato Online   sleepy


Registered: 10/23/05
Posts: 2840
Loc: Northeastern MT
Originally Posted By: BISCUT
Originally Posted By: Kuato
Originally Posted By: Gabe
First off, the driver was STOPPED at a red light - not exactly a safety hazard.

Second, the driver's reasoning is valid - most young children don't have their own phones. If the driver didn't take that call, the child would have been stranded.

I have seen some really bad drivers with a cell phones, but I have seen some really bad drivers without one too. And the reason people choose to break that law: it is a stupid law. If somebody is driving reckless due to texting, then ticket them for reckless driving; don't make the 90% of people who use their cell phone responsibly into criminals.


Op clearly stated that the law says even stopped at a light, so the driver was in violation.

Taking 15 seconds to pull over and call the child back would not strand the child.



Pulling over is another whole issue with inherent dangers far eclipsing that of picking up the incoming call.


How so? As the driver you don't have to swerve over immediately, you can take your time and pick where you pull off the road, making sure it is safe for both you and others.
_________________________
04 Jeep Wrangler 2.4 MT 183k
13 F150 4x4, 5.0, 22k

both on Amsoil

Common sense isn't common any more. Is it.

Top
#3245024 - 01/11/14 02:26 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: BISCUT]
Kuato Online   sleepy


Registered: 10/23/05
Posts: 2840
Loc: Northeastern MT
Originally Posted By: BISCUT
Originally Posted By: Gabe
First off, the driver was STOPPED at a red light - not exactly a safety hazard.

Second, the driver's reasoning is valid - most young children don't have their own phones. If the driver didn't take that call, the child would have been stranded.

I have seen some really bad drivers with a cell phones, but I have seen some really bad drivers without one too. And the reason people choose to break that law: it is a stupid law. If somebody is driving reckless due to texting, then ticket them for reckless driving; don't make the 90% of people who use their cell phone responsibly into criminals.


Gabe, You bring to light a VERY important fact most just don't get. We really do not need new laws; we have plenty of laws currently on the books covering just about every possible human action. What we need is consistent enforcement of the laws without the push toward revenue. If gov't really wanted compliance not revenue penalties would not be monetary but more in line with 10 over speed limit license suspended for 5 days, etc...


I agree with you here; no need to add laws, simply amend distracted driving laws that are in place to include cellphone use. This has the added advantage of allowing for Officer Discretion, such as in the case of phone use while stopped, that the full ban does not.
_________________________
04 Jeep Wrangler 2.4 MT 183k
13 F150 4x4, 5.0, 22k

both on Amsoil

Common sense isn't common any more. Is it.

Top
#3245029 - 01/11/14 02:37 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
spasm3 Offline


Registered: 05/30/10
Posts: 3414
Loc: north carolina
I see few reasons to be on a handheld phone in a car. Medical emergency,calling a traffic accident. Otherwise pull off. Children were in school before cell phones existed what did we do before cell phones? Somehow we survived. Its funny the mentality of this. I can be in a waiting room or in a car with someone and my phone rings, I don't answer it. Invariably the person I'm with gets visibly nervous and finally asks do you need to take that? they are surprised when i say no, not really. Its a society conditioned response that phones MUST be answered right away.


Edited by spasm3 (01/11/14 02:37 PM)
_________________________
Bryan
13 elantra 27k penplat5w30
03 chevy avalanche63k m1 0-30
02 saturnsc1 55k pennultra
01 saturnsc1 160k nextgenhm
93 olds ciera 63k 5w30 nexgenhm
gz250

Top
#3245030 - 01/11/14 02:37 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: ColdCanuk]
Happy Birthday jeepman3071 Offline


Registered: 04/15/10
Posts: 1611
Loc: Storrs, Connecticut
Originally Posted By: ColdCanuk
The driver should thank you, next time he/she might kill an innocent person.

I hope you gave the driver the biggest ticket possible.

They should also ban blue tooth and hands free too, still causes distraction.

People are so important today that a second can't go by without them talking or texting, amazing. I wish I was that important.


This x100.

I salute you for pulling this person over, and I'm not surprised at all by their claim that the phone call was important. No phone call is more important than somebody's life. The person could have easily waited and pulled into a parking lot to call them back.


Phone use at a red light IS a safety hazard, especially when the light turns and the driver fails to notice.

I'm not sure why people are making comments about Police talking on the phone. That has nothing to do with this particular officer.
_________________________
2000 Jeep Cherokee Sport 4.0L (144k) - PYB 10w40, Wix 51085, Magnefine trans filter

Top
#3245056 - 01/11/14 02:59 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: jeepman3071]
Stelth Offline


Registered: 02/24/11
Posts: 1323
Loc: California
Quote:


I'm not sure why people are making comments about Police talking on the phone. That has nothing to do with this particular officer.


True, it's not about the OP, but it's about public perception of law enforcement, and hypocrisy.
_________________________
Scofflaw

Top
#3245087 - 01/11/14 03:52 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: BISCUT]
Duffman77 Offline


Registered: 12/21/06
Posts: 561
Loc: Alberta, Canada
Originally Posted By: BISCUT


IMHO operating a cell and driving is most definitely a distraction but no where near what texting involves. That said these tasks are singled out and soooon enough nanny will strike again and you won't be able to eat and drive, put on make up (lets face it, lots of beauties out there need the makeup), heck lets take talk radio outa the car as well....makes my head think of the topic at hand not the road.


Depends where you are from. My Province was the last in Canada to bring in distracted driving legislation and because of that it is also the most comprehensive. Reading, applying makeup, eating (but not snacking) and the full list below, are out.

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/distracteddriving.htm

Top
#3245093 - 01/11/14 03:58 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Vikas Offline


Registered: 07/22/05
Posts: 7845
Loc: NorthEast
OP, no offence but when you punch in the plates, are you stopped on the side of the road or still driving?

Top
#3245095 - 01/11/14 04:02 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Duffman77 Offline


Registered: 12/21/06
Posts: 561
Loc: Alberta, Canada
On Thursday while I was riding in a coworkers car there was a police cruiser following a van for quite a while with his lights on in the inside lane of oncoming traffic. The van was not pulling over, when we passed the van the driver was on her phone, everyone in the car all laughed.

I cant speak to the element of kids in the car as I don't have any but for me there is a different level of distraction when talking on the phone vs talking to other adults in the car. The other adults (usually) know when they can have your attention and when they don't and shouldn't talk, people on the phone have no feel for that whatsoever.

Top
#3245101 - 01/11/14 04:16 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Vikas]
Duffman77 Offline


Registered: 12/21/06
Posts: 561
Loc: Alberta, Canada
Originally Posted By: Vikas
OP, no offence but when you punch in the plates, are you stopped on the side of the road or still driving?


While I agree there is a high degree of hypocrisy, all emergency response elements seem to have a degree of entitlement in my area as well there is also a big difference that many here seem to miss. When police are punching in a plate while driving they are performing a protective service for the public, yes some of that is reduced by the increased risk they are creating. When Joe public texts or dials his phone there is no service to the public, just selfish behavior that puts others at risk. I am also sure the day you find yourself in front of a judge for calling 911 to report an emergency, discretion will also be applied in your favor.

Top
#3245108 - 01/11/14 04:31 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Stelth]
Wilhelm_D Offline


Registered: 01/28/09
Posts: 818
Loc: Tacoma, WA
Originally Posted By: Stelth
Now, as a patrol officer, it's your job to enforce the law, so this is not a direct criticism of you. Someone breaks the law, you are supposed to intervene.

Despite my personal intense hatred of distracted drivers, drunk drivers, and so on I have to agree with you here.

It burns me to get a lecture from an officer about "safety" when his or her job is to enforce laws as written, nothing more and nothing less. Let the legislatures make decisions on what the law should be and why.

I have my job, and he his, and let's just focus on doing them and cut the discussions.

Top
#3245114 - 01/11/14 04:38 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Wilhelm_D]
Spazdog Offline


Registered: 09/06/10
Posts: 5492
Loc: Arlington
Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D


It burns me to get a lecture from an officer about "safety" when his or her job is to enforce laws as written, nothing more and nothing less. Let the legislatures make decisions on what the law should be and why.


As long as the citation book is put away, I'll take the lecture. Bring out the citation book? "Pardon my interruption but I feel the citation is lecture enough."
_________________________
2005 Mazda 6S hatchback - Mobil Super 5000 5W20
2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser GT - QSUD 5W30

Top
#3245128 - 01/11/14 04:57 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Wilhelm_D]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
It burns me to get a lecture from an officer about "safety" when his or her job is to enforce laws as written, nothing more and nothing less.

There is far more to the job of a law enforcement officer than simply enforcing the law.

@Vikas: The legislation is generally written to exempt police and other emergency personnel from the cell phone rules. That's not hypocrisy. Would you consider it hypocrisy for a police officer to have to speed to pull over a speeder, or to run a red light to catch the guy who just ran the red light?

A police officer should have the moral fiber to not be texting his wife and kids while driving a patrol car. But, policing has evolved beyond call boxes for a good reason.
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3245138 - 01/11/14 05:20 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: jeremiah2360]
Shannow Offline


Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 26066
Loc: a prison island
Originally Posted By: jeremiah2360
Originally Posted By: loyd
Well, you got it half right. It has been proven tht talking on a hands-free device is ALSO distracted driving. Think about it, if you're trying to listen closely to what somedone is telling you AND trying to formulate your reply, how much of your attention is really on the road and what's happening around you ?????????????


So no talking to passengers. Gimme a break with that control freak logic.


There IS a difference that I've observed personally...
1) Your passenger is also in the car, and knows if you are in twisty terrain, takes a breath when someone pulls out on you etc.
2) Unless the other person is driving too, they'll be asking questions (e.g. work) that require much more processing than passenger chatter or listening to the radio.

Not saying I'd ban hands free, but I've had to ask people to let me ring them back because the conversation took too much.

As to the OP, it's illegal in my state for my partner to even handle her phone rummaging through her handbag for a toll...technically, and our Police chief idjit has made that point "lock it in the boot before you move"...

At the same time, they made the law read that police officers can use them hands on, hands free, all day...they must be better trained drunk drivers (if that's the official analogy for not using phones).

Top
#3245145 - 01/11/14 05:31 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: FowVay]
Jarlaxle Offline


Registered: 02/02/12
Posts: 3781
Loc: New England
Originally Posted By: FowVay
As long as those in law enforcement continue to chat with their girlfriends/wives while operating their government provided motor vehicle I can only assume that it truly isnt' that grave of a danger.


THAT! They talk on phones, they text, they poke at data terminals, and they do it while whizzing down the left lane at 90MPH with no seat belt on! It's quite simple: cops are above the law!

Quote:
I would absolutely love to see the phone records of the thousands of cops who chat for hours on end while on duty.

So to answer the question - my view is that you should conduct this survey in the locker room at your place of business.


Yes! But of course, that will NEVER happen!
_________________________
1979 Coupe de Ville, 542 stroker, Super Tech 15W40, Purolator
1995 Dakota, 5.2, VWB 10W-30, Motorcraft
2012 Suzuki AN400A, unknown

Top
#3245149 - 01/11/14 05:37 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Spazdog]
Jarlaxle Offline


Registered: 02/02/12
Posts: 3781
Loc: New England
Originally Posted By: Spazdog
Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D


It burns me to get a lecture from an officer about "safety" when his or her job is to enforce laws as written, nothing more and nothing less. Let the legislatures make decisions on what the law should be and why.


As long as the citation book is put away, I'll take the lecture. Bring out the citation book? "Pardon my interruption but I feel the citation is lecture enough."


That's a good way to get your teeth smashed in and/or meth planted in your car! Contempt of cop is a VERY serious matter!
_________________________
1979 Coupe de Ville, 542 stroker, Super Tech 15W40, Purolator
1995 Dakota, 5.2, VWB 10W-30, Motorcraft
2012 Suzuki AN400A, unknown

Top
#3245195 - 01/11/14 06:33 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
wtd Offline


Registered: 06/25/02
Posts: 1152
Loc: southwest Mo.
I personally have no problem with people talking on cell phones while driving, especially with all of the voice activated answering and hand free options on most phones these days. I've seen plenty of people just as distracted by talking to their passengers, dealing with kids in the car, changing stations on the radio, messing with the heating/AC controls. I've personally been distracted while driving just by having something on my mind that is bothering me and not really paying attention to my surroundings.

The cell phone ban while driving is just IMO, another governmental control to try and restrict people. It's another case of a few people doing something stupid while talking on a phone while driving, that effects everyone else and causes these laws to be made in the first place. That goes for pretty much every law out there. The mistakes of a few effect the majority. There are plenty of people that can talk and drive at the same time with no issues.
_________________________
2014 Mustang GT
1998 Chevy K3500
1998 Chevy K1500
(2) 1992 Cavaliers
1970 Monte Carlo

Top
#3245295 - 01/11/14 08:30 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: wtd]
Shannow Offline


Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 26066
Loc: a prison island
Originally Posted By: wtd
The cell phone ban while driving is just IMO, another governmental control to try and restrict people.


The conspiracy theorist in me is heading down the line that smart phones, and photo/video capture are the real targets in the bans, particularly if merely touching the phone is an offence, as it's been brought into my state.

We've had fake roadworks set up on the highway, and a week long blockade with every vehicle and driver checked for a week, while the traffic report states "free flowing"...photos and uploading to social media in real time is not what they would want...

Top
#3245378 - 01/11/14 10:06 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: hattaresguy]
JHZR2 Offline



Registered: 12/14/02
Posts: 33266
Loc: New Jersey
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Some people can handle multi tasking, some cannot. Most drivers are quite bad at just driving, and all the technology manufactures keep jamming into cars is not going to help this.

OTOH this is the kind of nanny state nonsense that you don't see in other countries. In the islands you can do pretty much what you want when you drive and if you kill yourself your just a moron.


Depends on the island. In the VI, you're sure to get a cellphone or seatbelt ticket, but driving drunk or drinking from alcohol containers (all illegal) isn't nearly as enforced.

Top
#3245464 - 01/12/14 12:09 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Well, in commercial trucking, the fine against the driver for texting or not being hands free is $2750.00 per offense. For the company that driver works for, it is $11,000.00. that is getting pretty serious.

But, the OP story is interesting. The vehicle was stopped at a red light when the operator was talking on the phone. No indication that this was a threat to the general public's welfare. How is that different than if they were stopped along side the road talking on the cell phone. Oh, they might not be paying attention that the light turns green, but that still would not put people in danger, except maybe from high blood pressure because they let it get the best of them.

Then there is the clear abuse of the laws they seem bent on enforcing by themselves. It is a common occurrence to see laptops open and an LEO keying something, a LEO talking -- non hands free -- on their cell phone. I am a commercial driver and see scores of LEO's each day roaming around. I have yet to ever see one with a Blue Parrot headset or some other device to talk hands free. Yet I have seen a lot of them with the phone up against their head. Ah, but they're professionals! Well, I will cut them some slack when they get over 5 million miles of accident free driving under their belt like I have, and they go thru the series of exams I have to, to get the endorsements for my CDL, and they go thru all 3 levels of Arctic Driving Certification, again like me. Then I will consider them merely equals, not better.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3245647 - 01/12/14 09:31 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Lapham3 Offline


Registered: 12/23/13
Posts: 43
Loc: Minnesota
Most all of my friends don't cell/text as we realize it's not good. I am in a law enforcement family and feel that cops are just people=some good-some not so much-too many do not set a good example. If I were king, many folks would not be driving-probably about a third-but we know many would still drive without a license/insurance, ect. Maybe the newer technology that can identify the driver can help deal with that

Top
#3245676 - 01/12/14 10:05 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
DAC17 Offline


Registered: 02/12/04
Posts: 134
Loc: CT, USA
This whole thread is proof that we have lost the battle against distracted driving. First, many people immediately upbraid the police for using phones during their work (which was not the original topic, and just indicates that they can do anything that certain police officers do). Second, the excuses flow like water about what calls are important to be taken (little Johnny will be left at someone's house if Mommy doesn't take the critically important call).

Another series of signs that 85% of drivers consider themselves better than average, and that the individual's rights continue to trump the good for the masses.

Ugh.
_________________________
2014 C7 Corvette
2014 Ford Escape
2013 Chevrolet Volt

Top
#3245679 - 01/12/14 10:06 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: spasm3]
DAC17 Offline


Registered: 02/12/04
Posts: 134
Loc: CT, USA
Originally Posted By: spasm3
I see few reasons to be on a handheld phone in a car. Medical emergency,calling a traffic accident. Otherwise pull off. Children were in school before cell phones existed what did we do before cell phones? Somehow we survived. Its funny the mentality of this. I can be in a waiting room or in a car with someone and my phone rings, I don't answer it. Invariably the person I'm with gets visibly nervous and finally asks do you need to take that? they are surprised when i say no, not really. Its a society conditioned response that phones MUST be answered right away.


Amen, brother!
_________________________
2014 C7 Corvette
2014 Ford Escape
2013 Chevrolet Volt

Top
#3245687 - 01/12/14 10:12 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: DAC17]
Jarlaxle Offline


Registered: 02/02/12
Posts: 3781
Loc: New England
Originally Posted By: DAC17
This whole thread is proof that we have lost the battle against distracted driving. First, many people immediately upbraid the police for using phones during their work (which was not the original topic, and just indicates that they can do anything that certain police officers do). Second, the excuses flow like water about what calls are important to be taken (little Johnny will be left at someone's house if Mommy doesn't take the critically important call).

Another series of signs that 85% of drivers consider themselves better than average, and that the individual's rights continue to trump the good for the masses.

Ugh.


It's not complicated at all: I have a problem with blatant hypocrisy!
_________________________
1979 Coupe de Ville, 542 stroker, Super Tech 15W40, Purolator
1995 Dakota, 5.2, VWB 10W-30, Motorcraft
2012 Suzuki AN400A, unknown

Top
#3245733 - 01/12/14 10:48 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: DAC17]
Wilhelm_D Offline


Registered: 01/28/09
Posts: 818
Loc: Tacoma, WA
Originally Posted By: DAC17
First, many people immediately upbraid the police for using phones during their work (which was not the original topic, and just indicates that they can do anything that certain police officers do).

I think the comment reflects other issues.

If a LEO's office is to enforce laws as written, he ought to obey them.

If a LEO's office is to do what is good for safety, he ought to refrain from driving and speaking on a cellphone.

Americans have a very low tolerance for blatant hypocrisy.

Top
#3245813 - 01/12/14 12:13 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Jarlaxle]
BISCUT Offline


Registered: 12/28/11
Posts: 1289
Loc: NewYorkistan
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: DAC17
This whole thread is proof that we have lost the battle against distracted driving. First, many people immediately upbraid the police for using phones during their work (which was not the original topic, and just indicates that they can do anything that certain police officers do). Second, the excuses flow like water about what calls are important to be taken (little Johnny will be left at someone's house if Mommy doesn't take the critically important call).

Another series of signs that 85% of drivers consider themselves better than average, and that the individual's rights continue to trump the good for the masses.

Ugh.


It's not complicated at all: I have a problem with blatant hypocrisy!


Oh Stop. You have much more burning inside you than a mere moral high point.
_________________________
2010 Nissan Armada/Mobil1 5-30 P1 (82k)
2008 BMW 328XI Mobil 1 0-40 (79k)
2004 F-150 Lariat/M1 EX 5-20 P1 (90k)
1995 Toyota Camry (112k)

Top
#3245819 - 01/12/14 12:17 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Wilhelm_D]
BISCUT Offline


Registered: 12/28/11
Posts: 1289
Loc: NewYorkistan
Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
Originally Posted By: DAC17
First, many people immediately upbraid the police for using phones during their work (which was not the original topic, and just indicates that they can do anything that certain police officers do).

I think the comment reflects other issues.

If a LEO's office is to enforce laws as written, he ought to obey them.

If a LEO's office is to do what is good for safety, he ought to refrain from driving and speaking on a cellphone.

Americans have a very low tolerance for blatant hypocrisy.







I'm not here to change anyones mind on love or hate or indifference for LE. BUT you do need to realize that there is a lot, and I mean a lot of business that is taken care of over the the cell phone in a cops car that isn't possible over the rover. Now, I'm not stating this is the case in all the calls or even insinuating same just pointing out that it is another facet not spoken of as most assume the cop is on the phone with some broad.
_________________________
2010 Nissan Armada/Mobil1 5-30 P1 (82k)
2008 BMW 328XI Mobil 1 0-40 (79k)
2004 F-150 Lariat/M1 EX 5-20 P1 (90k)
1995 Toyota Camry (112k)

Top
#3245829 - 01/12/14 12:23 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
JustinH Offline


Registered: 04/17/04
Posts: 3142
Loc: Texas
Another reason why I love living in texas.

The government does not get in the way.

Cell phone use while driving is legal, texting is legal.

It may not be smart to do, but the civilian is left to his own judgement to use it or not.

I have noticed that texting or calling in a SCHOOL zone is illegal, which makes perfect sense to me.
_________________________
'14 Toyota Rav4
'08 Toyota Matrix

Top
#3245846 - 01/12/14 12:48 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
To those that are trying to crucify those that use hands free calling, have you ever ate while driving? Ever adjusted the radio or climate control? Looked at an accident, or sung along to a song? There are thousands of ways to be distracted. When you are 100% distraction free, I'll listen to your arguments. I agree that texting is a problem, and not using hands free could be a problem for some.

Is it too much to ask that those that are paid to enforce the laws, also abide by those laws?

Top
#3245873 - 01/12/14 01:23 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
satinsilver Offline


Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 2897
Loc: Ohio
I hope you guys didn't scare off the OP with your remarks. I thought we would hear something back from him by now. Only 5 pages later. smile

Top
#3245918 - 01/12/14 02:11 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Wilhelm_D]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
If a LEO's office is to enforce laws as written, he ought to obey them.

No one answered this before, so I'll ask it again. Why no complaints about speeding to catch a speeder, or running a red light to catch someone who ran a red light.

Additionally, if someone in a difficult to find location needs emergency services and the responder (be it the ambulance driver or police officer) has to speak to the complainant directly, using his cell, to clarify directions, you want them pulling over?

The police officers (and other emergency personnel) ARE following the laws as written. Every example I have seen explicitly exempts such personnel while in the execution of their duties. So, how are they violating the law? Are you arguing that they aren't police officers? That they aren't in execution of their duties? That the exemption is unconstitutional? The state governor didn't sign the law? What?
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3245922 - 01/12/14 02:15 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Merkava_4 Offline


Registered: 01/30/07
Posts: 8866
Loc: Clovis, CA
Originally Posted By: dernp
We talked for a bit about blue tooth and hands free.


I don't see how that's any better. The driver is still very distracted because her mind is on the conversation.

Top
#3246036 - 01/12/14 04:19 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: BISCUT]
Jarlaxle Offline


Registered: 02/02/12
Posts: 3781
Loc: New England
Originally Posted By: BISCUT
Originally Posted By: Wilhelm_D
Originally Posted By: DAC17
First, many people immediately upbraid the police for using phones during their work (which was not the original topic, and just indicates that they can do anything that certain police officers do).

I think the comment reflects other issues.

If a LEO's office is to enforce laws as written, he ought to obey them.

If a LEO's office is to do what is good for safety, he ought to refrain from driving and speaking on a cellphone.

Americans have a very low tolerance for blatant hypocrisy.







I'm not here to change anyones mind on love or hate or indifference for LE. BUT you do need to realize that there is a lot, and I mean a lot of business that is taken care of over the the cell phone in a cops car that isn't possible over the rover. Now, I'm not stating this is the case in all the calls or even insinuating same just pointing out that it is another facet not spoken of as most assume the cop is on the phone with some broad.


My last Bluetooth earpiece cost me about $25!
_________________________
1979 Coupe de Ville, 542 stroker, Super Tech 15W40, Purolator
1995 Dakota, 5.2, VWB 10W-30, Motorcraft
2012 Suzuki AN400A, unknown

Top
#3246092 - 01/12/14 05:06 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Garak]
eljefino Offline


Registered: 06/15/03
Posts: 23535
Loc: ME
Originally Posted By: Garak


The police officers (and other emergency personnel) ARE following the laws as written. Every example I have seen explicitly exempts such personnel while in the execution of their duties. So, how are they violating the law? Are you arguing that they aren't police officers? That they aren't in execution of their duties? That the exemption is unconstitutional? The state governor didn't sign the law? What?


Yup. This is mostly so criminal defense lawyers can't point fingers in court and say, neenner neener neener the cop was breaking the law.

So seat belts etc are used "per departmental policy" so any problems with personnel have to go through channels and aren't handled by outsiders. Some jurisdictions don't even require cops to have driver's licenses!

And yeah cops have it dangerous. Numerous cruisers have been clobbered so far this winter in icy conditions while they've responded to other accidents. That doesn't mean I'd like the 99% of drivers who aren't police to be compromised and distracted. When I see a marked cruiser I give it more leeway anyway in case it has to suddenly turn around etc.

Top
#3246162 - 01/12/14 06:21 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: spasm3]
97tbird Offline


Registered: 05/09/03
Posts: 8226
Loc: Fayetteville, NC
Originally Posted By: spasm3
That's not an emergency. Unless the driver was on the way to the hospital or reporting an accident/medical emergency, ticket them.

But he didn't know it wasn't an emergency until he answered the call.
If people can know what their children/significant others are calling them for without answering the phone, there would be no use for them at all.
_________________________
Sufficiently Caffeinated...
Cars: 1997 Thunderbird v8 sports(sold), 2003 Elantra GLS, 2005 BMW 330Ci ZHP, 2014 Mazda 6 Touring

Top
#3246202 - 01/12/14 06:54 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: 97tbird]
spasm3 Offline


Registered: 05/30/10
Posts: 3414
Loc: north carolina
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
Originally Posted By: spasm3
That's not an emergency. Unless the driver was on the way to the hospital or reporting an accident/medical emergency, ticket them.

But he didn't know it wasn't an emergency until he answered the call.
If people can know what their children/significant others are calling them for without answering the phone, there would be no use for them at all.


If he is receiving the call, and feels he must answer it , pull over then call them back. Again its society conditioning that people think phones MUST be answered. People are slaves to phones and thinking they must be instantly available to anyone and everyone at a moments notice. When I'm call for the hospital I still don't answer when driving , I pull to the side and call the party back. takes about 1 minute. If I can do that so can others. When I'm not on call , I rarely even carry a phone!!
_________________________
Bryan
13 elantra 27k penplat5w30
03 chevy avalanche63k m1 0-30
02 saturnsc1 55k pennultra
01 saturnsc1 160k nextgenhm
93 olds ciera 63k 5w30 nexgenhm
gz250

Top
#3246219 - 01/12/14 07:09 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
97tbird Offline


Registered: 05/09/03
Posts: 8226
Loc: Fayetteville, NC
Well, not carrying a phone at all is not an option for most people these days I think smile
Pulling over and answering the call is a very good idea.

Anyway, I only use hand free answering if I am driving - and there are only 2 numbers (caller ID and such) to which I will answer at all.
All other calls I just let go to voice mail.
I don't do any texting at all.
_________________________
Sufficiently Caffeinated...
Cars: 1997 Thunderbird v8 sports(sold), 2003 Elantra GLS, 2005 BMW 330Ci ZHP, 2014 Mazda 6 Touring

Top
#3246231 - 01/12/14 07:17 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Merkava_4]
nepadriver Offline


Registered: 07/20/11
Posts: 215
Loc: Northeast PA
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: dernp
We talked for a bit about blue tooth and hands free.


I don't see how that's any better. The driver is still very distracted because her mind is on the conversation.


How is that different than talking to a passenger?

Top
#3246235 - 01/12/14 07:19 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: 97tbird]
spasm3 Offline


Registered: 05/30/10
Posts: 3414
Loc: north carolina
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
Well, not carrying a phone at all is not an option for most people these days I think smile


They just think its not an option. For some it is necessary. For most is simply a notion that they can't leave the house with out it.

The hands free stuff, i have no problem with.

Voice mail he he, not only do i not text, I don't have a voicemail box either! happy


Edited by spasm3 (01/12/14 07:23 PM)
_________________________
Bryan
13 elantra 27k penplat5w30
03 chevy avalanche63k m1 0-30
02 saturnsc1 55k pennultra
01 saturnsc1 160k nextgenhm
93 olds ciera 63k 5w30 nexgenhm
gz250

Top
#3246281 - 01/12/14 08:04 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
97tbird Offline


Registered: 05/09/03
Posts: 8226
Loc: Fayetteville, NC
Again, Need a phone/don't need a phone at all stuff depends on a lot of things; and those things are so individually specific,I am not even going there.
It's also not some kind of 'victory' to not need a phone, or to need one. Depending on perception, either (esp. someone who never needs/uses a phone and is unreachable by family or work places, and has no way for others to leave a message in an emergency) can be looked at as a negative these days.

But all that is clearly for a different topic.
Let's stay on topic for now.
_________________________
Sufficiently Caffeinated...
Cars: 1997 Thunderbird v8 sports(sold), 2003 Elantra GLS, 2005 BMW 330Ci ZHP, 2014 Mazda 6 Touring

Top
#3246359 - 01/12/14 09:35 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
friendly_jacek Offline


Registered: 05/04/03
Posts: 5100
Loc: southeast US
Ticketing someone talking while stopped at a red light?
Ridiculous. I don't care what the law says.

Top
#3246599 - 01/13/14 07:23 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Benzadmiral Offline


Registered: 10/12/05
Posts: 3520
Loc: Da Swamp
Hey, I get distracted talking on the phone at home when I try to do something more complex than feeding the cats. If I had a cell phone, I certainly wouldn't talk on it while driving. And I'm not sure hands-free is any better.

Officers who are breaking those rules should certainly be fined or worse.
_________________________
* *
-- Paul W. (The Benzadmiral)
('11 Buick Regal CXL, charcoal/cream, 2.4L NA)
My Man from U.N.C.L.E. Blog: http://benzadmiral-uncle.blogspot.com/

Top
#3246633 - 01/13/14 08:11 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
meep Offline


Registered: 02/20/07
Posts: 2457
Loc: Southeast
Going to try to stay on topic.

I do find that often if a car is going too slow, seems unaware of surroundings, is weaving, the driver is holding a phone to their head. I have fussed at my wife, seeing how her driving degrades when she's on the phone.

When they made phone use while rolling illegal in certain parts where I drive, I installed a hands-free bluetooth radio, and it really does make a big difference for me. Even if I'm in a location where phone-in-hand is still legal, I hate it, as I can tell that it puts a blanket over my awareness, compared to the BT.

It took a friend of hers fussing at her for my wife to wonder if there was some legitimacy to my concerns about her rolling phone use. After her friend got on to her, she agreed to an aftermarket stereo for hands-free.

Hands-free sort of "separates" me from the phone. I can swivel my head, crane my neck, keep two hands on the wheel. the car gets priority instead of the chorus of movements required to spin head, phone, arm-holding phone, shoulder holding arm, twisting at the back while therefore leaning forward to twist. It becomes no different than talking with a passenger. the only difference there is, if I'm about to have to do a complex merge or something, I have to say "hold on", whereas a live passenger would see it and just be quiet.

As for officers that also break the rules. We can't say, "i'm not going to do it because they don't do it either." It's not about that. It's about public safety. Do what is RIGHT for you, and don't base your own bad habits on other people around you. I've experienced good officers and unprofessional ones alike, just like you have good students and bad, good [insert religion here] and bad. They have little bearing on how I try to conduct myself.

Be safe.
_________________________
2006 Tundra 2wd
2002 MDX (wifey!)
2003 town and country, in various state of repair

Top
#3246685 - 01/13/14 08:53 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Doog Offline


Registered: 10/24/11
Posts: 3364
Loc: Ohio
I don't talk or text while driving....what? and spill my beer? shrug
_________________________
The difference between a beer and your opinion is that I asked for a beer...

Top
#3246786 - 01/13/14 10:29 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
accent2012 Offline


Registered: 02/08/12
Posts: 440
Loc: Orlando, FL
From the words of a woman:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLuaPZWkvZ0

Good luck everybody else.
_________________________
Hyundai Accent 2012

Top
#3246850 - 01/13/14 11:43 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
doitmyself Offline


Registered: 06/03/02
Posts: 4661
Loc: MI
It doesn't seem that pulling off the road to use the cell phone is a viable option in the city and suburbs. Could you imagine the traffic snarls and probably increased accidents if everyone did that?

I don't know how we can move backwards regarding the masses thinking they need to be constantly connected to everyone 24/7.

I dislike increased gov't. regulations, but at the same time our nation is unable to act responsibly. I don't see how the problem can be resolved without initiating laws.

Top
#3247414 - 01/13/14 07:32 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Doog]
Spazdog Offline


Registered: 09/06/10
Posts: 5492
Loc: Arlington
Originally Posted By: Doog
I don't talk or text while driving....what? and spill my beer? shrug


Oh [heck] no! When you see someone texting while they drive, you slam your 40oz and throw it at their windshield. wink
_________________________
2005 Mazda 6S hatchback - Mobil Super 5000 5W20
2005 Chrysler PT Cruiser GT - QSUD 5W30

Top
#3249628 - 01/15/14 08:06 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: satinsilver]
dernp Offline


Registered: 10/18/12
Posts: 323
Loc: S/W Ontario
Originally Posted By: satinsilver
I hope you guys didn't scare off the OP with your remarks. I thought we would hear something back from him by now. Only 5 pages later. smile


Thanks for all the replies. I have thick skin so not to worry about some negativity.

I just wanted to reiterate that the incident that I relayed to you involves a cell phone law that is enforced in my jurisdiction. This law may not apply to all.

Currently, in Ontario, police are allowed to talk on cell phones while driving as long as they are in lawful execution of their duty.

My patrol car is equipped with a mobile data terminal and GPS and yes at times my job requires me to read the screen while driving. However, if in doing so, I cause a wreck then I am inherently responsible. Everything I do is tracked.

AS one poster mentioned if I asked the driver what oil they had in their vehicle, I'm sorry to say no. But being that it was a Ford Escape, I'm hoping it was Motorcraft.
_________________________
2014 Honda Civic 1.8 FF
2013 Honda CR-V 2.4 AWD 15k TGMO 0w20
2012 Elantra 27k QSGB 5w20
2010 Tundra 4.6L 2wd 80k PP 5w20


Top
#3250121 - 01/16/14 10:30 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
ddrumman2004 Offline


Registered: 11/16/04
Posts: 942
Loc: Mississippi
If I get a call while driving, I can see who it is easily enough and if I need to return the call right away, I will pull off the road. Otherwise, the call can wait until I reach my destination.

Got by without talking on the phone all the time 30 years ago so why not now? On a side note....I don't like yakking on the phone anyway.

We need better law enforcement on cell use while driving around here where I dwell.


Edited by ddrumman2004 (01/16/14 10:32 AM)
_________________________
2012 F 150 XLT 5.0 4x4
2012 Mustang convertible V6 auto.
2011 Harley Davidson Softail Heritage Classic

Top
#3250363 - 01/16/14 02:50 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
qwerty1234 Offline


Registered: 01/14/14
Posts: 65
Loc: Chicago, IL
The city of Chicago is so crime ridden that you will never get pulled over for talking on a cell. Expect for Lake Shore Drive and the Skyway to IN, I don't think officers even make traffic stops anymore.

Top
#3250391 - 01/16/14 03:21 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: DAC17]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: DAC17
This whole thread is proof that we have lost the battle against distracted driving. First, many people immediately upbraid the police for using phones during their work (which was not the original topic, and just indicates that they can do anything that certain police officers do). Second, the excuses flow like water about what calls are important to be taken (little Johnny will be left at someone's house if Mommy doesn't take the critically important call).

Another series of signs that 85% of drivers consider themselves better than average, and that the individual's rights continue to trump the good for the masses.

Ugh.


I won't say anything about the police violating cell phone laws (though I have seen it myself) as that isn't what this thread is about, but you are right in saying we've lost the battle of distracted driving. This thread is full of excuses and weak arguments in favor of doing nothing about the use of cell phones while driving, or simply lumping it in with all other types of distracted driving. They try to justify it by saying things like adjusting the radio, eating, talking to other people in the vehicle, etc., are just as distracting...well, studies have shown that cell phone use while driving is more dangerous than drunk driving...I doubt the same can be said for the other distractions...

Top
#3250400 - 01/16/14 03:35 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: doitmyself]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
It doesn't seem that pulling off the road to use the cell phone is a viable option in the city and suburbs. Could you imagine the traffic snarls and probably increased accidents if everyone did that?

I don't know how we can move backwards regarding the masses thinking they need to be constantly connected to everyone 24/7.

I dislike increased gov't. regulations, but at the same time our nation is unable to act responsibly. I don't see how the problem can be resolved without initiating laws.


Bingo! People complain about there being too much big brothering, but they continue doing stupid and dangerous things (like doing anything with cell phones while driving), then wonder why there's laws made against it...like I keep saying, as long as people continue to be too stupid to do the right things on their own, there will continue to be laws against those stupid things...

Top
#3251332 - 01/17/14 03:17 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
But my contention has always been, there have been laws on the books for decades against distracted driving. Piling on texting and cell phone bans will do nothing to curb the activity. It is only after the fact that anything can be charged. What piling on law after law does is allow the powers that be to stack charges against someone in the hopes that one will stick. And the prime interest is revenue collection. After all, even if any fine was assessed and collected, the victim, if there is one, would not get a penny of it. The almighty state or local government would pocket it. It isn't like the fines collected for these types of things are directed to improving driver education on the dangers. Nor is it earmarked for victim assistance. It is just dumped into the coffers of government to be spent on any number of little pet projects. Or better yet, to enhance LE ability to collect even more revenue.

Cynical? You bet. I question, anymore, all of these feel all warm and fuzzy things that agencies will promote. I see little evidence that government actually cares like they promote. And a lot of what is fostered in the name of public safety, has nothing to do with public safety. After all, they do not even apply laws equally. What is the fine for texting by the common motorist? Surely nothing near the fine a commercial trucker gets... $2750.00 per occurrence. Yet the government's own statistics shows that at least 80% of all accidents between auto drivers and commercial truck drivers are the direct fault of the auto driver. There is more than ample evidence of things like traffic citation cameras being used soley to fund things that have nothing to do with public safety. Cell phone laws, texting laws, seat belt laws, almost always are instituted with the same outcome in mind. A classic example is LE's DARE programs. There is reams of evidence that it does nothing to curb drug use, and the DARE letters themselves are a common joke among many young people. The like to call it Drug Availability and Resource Education.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3251352 - 01/17/14 03:39 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
daze Offline


Registered: 03/02/03
Posts: 10
Loc: texas
It should be against the law and $500 min. fine. I live in DFW metroplex and do not use phone while driving except for GPS. In the past 3 yrs, I've had to avoid idiots driving and texting more than a dozen times. Thinking about getting a tank with huge guards front/back and not swerving to avoid them anymore! Throw their butts in jail along with fine and they'll change their habits.

Top
#3251698 - 01/17/14 10:23 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
First, there isn't enough LEO's to effectively enforce such a law, and it can only be charged after the fact like an accident. No need for such a law. Distracted driving is already on the books in almost every jurisdiction in the U.S. Maybe up the fine. Passing a new law about texting or phone use just allows LE to stack the charges. Hit the person with distracted driving charge, cell phone use while operating charge, and anything else they can dream up. let's just keep those laws coming, boys and girls, to make us safe from ourselves, which they will never do. But it makes some politician brownie points come election time that he is doing something to address the problem. Yet, after all the laws that have been passed regarding seat belts, texting, cell phone use, and even tacking on $2750 fines for commercial drivers..... it still goes on every day. I rack up an average of 2500 miles a week and see it all around me like there are no laws at all. I can see right down into those cars that pass me and see them texting away like there is no tomorrow.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3251891 - 01/18/14 07:57 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
First, there isn't enough LEO's to effectively enforce such a law, and it can only be charged after the fact like an accident. No need for such a law. Distracted driving is already on the books in almost every jurisdiction in the U.S. Maybe up the fine. Passing a new law about texting or phone use just allows LE to stack the charges. Hit the person with distracted driving charge, cell phone use while operating charge, and anything else they can dream up. let's just keep those laws coming, boys and girls, to make us safe from ourselves, which they will never do. But it makes some politician brownie points come election time that he is doing something to address the problem. Yet, after all the laws that have been passed regarding seat belts, texting, cell phone use, and even tacking on $2750 fines for commercial drivers..... it still goes on every day. I rack up an average of 2500 miles a week and see it all around me like there are no laws at all. I can see right down into those cars that pass me and see them texting away like there is no tomorrow.


You make some very good points, and I agree, most laws today in reality are not made with public safety in mind, they are simply there to generate revenue...so I have come up with a new idea to combat the cell phone use while driving that's taken over the country...pass a law that mandates factory installing a device on all cell phones that renders them as inoperable while in a vehicle with the ignition on...


Edited by grampi (01/18/14 07:57 AM)

Top
#3251951 - 01/18/14 09:15 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
When reading threads like this, it always amazes me to see the things people want outlawed. Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that some people want pot legalized, but cell phones outlawed?

Top
#3252152 - 01/18/14 02:23 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
When reading threads like this, it always amazes me to see the things people want outlawed. Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that some people want pot legalized, but cell phones outlawed?


Did you ever think that's because people using cell phones while driving is like a million times more dangerous than smoking pot is?

Top
#3252165 - 01/18/14 02:47 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
silverrat Offline


Registered: 01/09/09
Posts: 1174
Loc: Ontario
Pretty sure you can't smoke pot while driving either?
_________________________
03 Civic Si - Assembled in Swindon, England
Pennzoil Platinum 5W20 - OEM Honda

Top
#3252352 - 01/18/14 06:42 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: silverrat]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Pretty sure you can't smoke pot while driving either?


Who said anything about smoking pot WHILE DRIVING? You ASSUMED that...you know what they say about assuming...


Edited by grampi (01/18/14 06:43 PM)

Top
#3252369 - 01/18/14 06:53 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Johnny2Bad Offline


Registered: 05/20/13
Posts: 46
Loc: Canada
In my jurisdiction there is a system where they track cellphone use via Teleco records when there is an accident. They have about three years of data.

For the accidents where they have confirmed data (time of call / text and time of accident vs. BAC which is tested either at the time of the accident or post-mortem) in fatal accidents, the accident rate is higher for cell use than for Impaired Driving. The stats also are consistent with ordinary accidents not involving injury (cell use more likely to be a contributing factor than impairment).

There is also a caveat that not all cell data can be cross-referenced in every case while all BAC data is confirmed, so the incidents are technically higher than the data suggests.

Texting is particularly implicated, but talking has a significant minority occurrence. There is little difference between hands-free and hand-held calls.
_________________________
57 FL Straight 50 wt
1990 Miata 1.8L w/Rotrex Supercharger Mobil1 0W-40
1996 Ram 1500 3.7L Mobil1 0W-20 / 1L 15W-50
2001 PT Cruiser Mobil1 0W-40

Top
#3252446 - 01/18/14 08:25 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
But my contention has always been, there have been laws on the books for decades against distracted driving.

That's quite true, but one also has to look at the ease in obtaining convictions (and in being able to make a defence). Does using a cell phone while driving automatically mean someone is driving "without due care and attention" as per this jurisdiction's wording for distracted driving? On the other hand, using a cell phone while driving is contrary to the law against using a cell phone while driving - end of discussion.

I don't like to see a bunch of "extra" laws, either, but if one is really picky, one could wipe out 95% of every jurisdiction's traffic code and charge just about everything as driving without due care and attention. If you run a red light, you're either driving intentionally dangerously (dangerous driving) or you weren't paying attention. Same goes for failing to signal, tailgaiting, unsafe loads, failure to yield. So, tear up the traffic code and have four offences: Dangerous driving, driving without due care and attention, impaired driving, and speeding. All else is really fluff, isn't it? But, those who would wish to simplify things to such a point should be relegated to prosecuting offences. wink
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3252481 - 01/18/14 08:49 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Blkstanger Offline


Registered: 08/13/11
Posts: 604
Loc: San Diego CA
I live in Southern California. People constantly cut me off and slow traffic because they are talking on the phone. I hate it. If I need to talk I pullover and do it. IMHO they need to up the fine by about 10Xs. That might slow them down a little.
_________________________
99 Ranger Supercab 4x4 4.0 145,000
Maxlife 10w30 Motorcraft FL-1A

Top
#3252529 - 01/18/14 09:26 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
wrcsixeight Offline


Registered: 10/15/10
Posts: 1012
Loc: california
I was visiting with my sister a few weeks back and one day she comes in complaining how every single driver between A and B was texting and weaving all over the road.

Then we go out to the store together, and her phone rings and she is weaving and distracted and I keep having to point out when the lights turn green, watch out for this person entering the road, ect. If that Phone beeped, rang, alit, it was instantly in hand in front of face no matter the situation.

It infuriated me, and I let her know it. She tried to restrain herself from that point, but she could not possible wait to read or respond to a text at the first opportunity. Her attempted restraint was probably more distracting than if she had just got it out of her system

I also live in S. California. It seems to be mandatory that every woman has her sparkly accessorized smart phone in jewel encrusted paw when driving anywhere. AT no time at any redlight is moment wasted by actually looking out the windows at one's surroundings.

Humans by and large are so contemptible. Texting drivers are like the house cat which insists on putting its anus in your face.
_________________________
LA 318 Roller Cam
M1 0w-30 AFE
M1-301 filter

Top
#3252601 - 01/18/14 11:06 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
silverrat Offline


Registered: 01/09/09
Posts: 1174
Loc: Ontario
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Pretty sure you can't smoke pot while driving either?


Who said anything about smoking pot WHILE DRIVING? You ASSUMED that...you know what they say about assuming...


It was in response to the wording of this post

Quote:
Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that some people want pot legalized, but cell phones outlawed?


I guess you assumed wrong
_________________________
03 Civic Si - Assembled in Swindon, England
Pennzoil Platinum 5W20 - OEM Honda

Top
#3252698 - 01/19/14 06:57 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
When reading threads like this, it always amazes me to see the things people want outlawed. Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that some people want pot legalized, but cell phones outlawed?


Did you ever think that's because people using cell phones while driving is like a million times more dangerous than smoking pot is?

Sure.

I'm fascinated by your logic. It seems if something inconveniences or impacts you in a negative way, you want more regulations to control it. Things like cell phones and semi trucks. For things you enjoy, you want less regulation. I'm curious how far this logic goes.

Top
#3252700 - 01/19/14 07:04 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: silverrat]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Pretty sure you can't smoke pot while driving either?


Who said anything about smoking pot WHILE DRIVING? You ASSUMED that...you know what they say about assuming...


It was in response to the wording of this post

Quote:
Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that some people want pot legalized, but cell phones outlawed?


I guess you assumed wrong


Wrong. Even his wording did not mention, or even imply smoking pot while driving...

Top
#3252703 - 01/19/14 07:06 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
When reading threads like this, it always amazes me to see the things people want outlawed. Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that some people want pot legalized, but cell phones outlawed?


Did you ever think that's because people using cell phones while driving is like a million times more dangerous than smoking pot is?

Sure.

I'm fascinated by your logic. It seems if something inconveniences or impacts you in a negative way, you want more regulations to control it. Things like cell phones and semi trucks. For things you enjoy, you want less regulation. I'm curious how far this logic goes.


Isn't that the way it is for pretty much everyone? If something impacts you in a negative way, are you going to be for or against it?

Top
#3252815 - 01/19/14 09:28 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
silverrat Offline


Registered: 01/09/09
Posts: 1174
Loc: Ontario
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Pretty sure you can't smoke pot while driving either?


Who said anything about smoking pot WHILE DRIVING? You ASSUMED that...you know what they say about assuming...


It was in response to the wording of this post

Quote:
Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that some people want pot legalized, but cell phones outlawed?


I guess you assumed wrong


Wrong. Even his wording did not mention, or even imply smoking pot while driving...


My point was over your head apparently


Edited by silverrat (01/19/14 09:31 AM)
_________________________
03 Civic Si - Assembled in Swindon, England
Pennzoil Platinum 5W20 - OEM Honda

Top
#3252896 - 01/19/14 10:21 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
When reading threads like this, it always amazes me to see the things people want outlawed. Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that some people want pot legalized, but cell phones outlawed?


Did you ever think that's because people using cell phones while driving is like a million times more dangerous than smoking pot is?

Sure.

I'm fascinated by your logic. It seems if something inconveniences or impacts you in a negative way, you want more regulations to control it. Things like cell phones and semi trucks. For things you enjoy, you want less regulation. I'm curious how far this logic goes.


Isn't that the way it is for pretty much everyone? If something impacts you in a negative way, are you going to be for or against it?

A few nights ago, I burnt the roof of my mouth on hot pizza. I don't want regulations on the temperature that pizza can be served.
There are lots of other things I don't approve of, but I don't want them regulated. Conversely, there are things I do, that a lot of people don't approve of. Where does it stop? If you regulate everything you disapprove, and the next guy does the same, what's left?

Top
#3252933 - 01/19/14 10:49 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
A few nights ago, I burnt the roof of my mouth on hot pizza. I don't want regulations on the temperature that pizza can be served.
There are lots of other things I don't approve of, but I don't want them regulated. Conversely, there are things I do, that a lot of people don't approve of. Where does it stop? If you regulate everything you disapprove, and the next guy does the same, what's left?


I see your point, but let's take it the other direction for a moment. Let's say nothing is done about the problem because we don't like big brother over-regulating things. The problem just continues getting worse and worse until pretty soon it isn't safe to be on the roads at all anymore...that's no good either...

Top
#3252934 - 01/19/14 10:50 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: silverrat]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: silverrat
Originally Posted By: grampi
[quote=silverrat]Pretty sure you can't smoke pot while driving either?


Who said anything about smoking pot WHILE DRIVING? You ASSUMED that...you know what they say about assuming...


It was in response to the wording of this post

Quote:
Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that some people want pot legalized, but cell phones outlawed?


I guess you assumed wrong


Wrong. Even his wording did not mention, or even imply smoking pot while driving...


My point was over your head apparently [/quote]

Apparently...


Edited by grampi (01/19/14 10:50 AM)

Top
#3252986 - 01/19/14 11:45 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Originally Posted By: grampi

I see your point, but let's take it the other direction for a moment. Let's say nothing is done about the problem because we don't like big brother over-regulating things. The problem just continues getting worse and worse until pretty soon it isn't safe to be on the roads at all anymore...that's no good either...


You fail to realize, though, that many things have a way of self regulating themselves. We don't need any more laws, we have lawyers. People getting nailed in civil lawsuits, insurance carriers getting walloped between the eyes in civil lawsuits, do far more to regulate bad behavior than government and it "feel good" "we are here to help" mindset and those that buy into it.

Even speed limits, in many instances, were established on non urban roads based on the average speed the public runs at on those roads. That is fact. Check with any state Dept of Transportation. Now it is true, that political events have a play, but the way speed limits were established for decades was based on how fast the general public operated on a stretch of road. The average speed was shown to be the balance the public was willing to do to maintain safety and speed. Read up the history on this. The public determined the best speed limit for a stretch of road. Not some dweeb in a DOT cubicle.

It was not more laws restricting smoking that caused the greatest decrease in smoking. Nor was it the almost insane taxing on the products. More than anything, it was public opinion that has had the largest effect on reduction in number of active smokers. It just ain't "cool' anymore in the general public eyes. Sure, there will always be a subculture.

It was not seat belt laws that have increased the percentage of seat belt use by motorists, it has primarily been due to a relentless campaign of public awareness and suggestion. Any LEO should be able to figure that out. The OEM's stress the safety features, air bags, seat belts in their vehicles complete with warning lights and buzzers. It is more in the forefront of people's thinking and as a result, there is a higher percentage than ever of seat belt usage.

It is just too narrow minded, short sighted, and myopic to think that the best solution is new laws. Already, among commercial truck drivers, it is not the risk of $2750 fines that is causing a greater awareness and reduction of hand operated cell phone and texting abuse, it is the brow beating by other drivers that goes on over the CB that has a greater effect. Truckers, by nature, tend to have a roque streak in them. But they do have an awareness of being considered a low life in the eyes of other truckers. There is not a day goes by, that while operating my semi truck, I hear many instances of a group of drivers brow beating on another driver for not paying attention and talking on a cell phone or looking at some message.

Public awareness, negative stereotypes portrayed on television, active promotion by OEM's of the hand's free blue tooth features in the new vehicles, etc, etc, has more of an effect of curbing negative behavior than some threat from government. It is easier and more effective to attract flies with honey than vinegar. Cold, rigid laws do nothing but make criminals of honest citizens. And they rarely take into account the gray areas.... like the motorist using their cell phone while driving to call in a dangerous driver that may be putting others at risk. A nearby LEO may not have seen the bad driver, only the driver on the cell phone and so they go after that individual, wasting valuable time that could have been used going after the idiot.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3253028 - 01/19/14 12:34 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
satinsilver Offline


Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 2897
Loc: Ohio
You sure seem very alert to me TiredTrucker. Maybe change your username to AlertTrucker, SmartTrucker etc. smile

Top
#3253741 - 01/20/14 08:18 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Sorry TiredTrucker, I just don't see this whole cell phone use while driving thing getting any better unless 1) laws are passed with stiff enough penalties (and they are enforced) to deter such use or 2) laws are passed that force cell phone manufacturers to install a device in every cell phone that makes them unusable while in a vehicle with the ignition turned on. Today's society has become so self-centered and instilled with a sense of entitlement that people believe they can do whatever they feel like doing, everyone else be darned. I see it every time I drive...people swerving all over the road, not using their turn signals, speeding up, slowing down for no apparent reason, all because they're doing something with their cell phone...people speeding and tailgating because they think they're entitled to drive as fast as they want...slow drivers parked in the far left lane on the highways and refusing to move right even though they're driving slower than everyone else, holding up faster moving traffic and acting like they are totally unaware of the situation, or they're fully aware and are just being a jerk...in spite of all the drivers around these people who despise this type of behavior, these problems continue to get worse, not better...I just don't see your theory curing these problems...

Top
#3253937 - 01/20/14 12:06 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Garak]
javacontour Offline


Registered: 06/26/03
Posts: 7379
Loc: Illinois
The "problem" is your approach relies on subjective judgement. Not saying I disagree with your notion. I understand why we get more specific laws that leave out such judgements. Speed can be measured, so we see traffic enforcement focused far more on speeding than lane usage and so forth. Why? Because the officer can testify that he observed the vehicle operating at 75 mph. Likewise, instead of testifying inattentive driving, he can testify he observed the motorist using her cell phone. No subjective call needed.


Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
But my contention has always been, there have been laws on the books for decades against distracted driving.

That's quite true, but one also has to look at the ease in obtaining convictions (and in being able to make a defence). Does using a cell phone while driving automatically mean someone is driving "without due care and attention" as per this jurisdiction's wording for distracted driving? On the other hand, using a cell phone while driving is contrary to the law against using a cell phone while driving - end of discussion.

I don't like to see a bunch of "extra" laws, either, but if one is really picky, one could wipe out 95% of every jurisdiction's traffic code and charge just about everything as driving without due care and attention. If you run a red light, you're either driving intentionally dangerously (dangerous driving) or you weren't paying attention. Same goes for failing to signal, tailgaiting, unsafe loads, failure to yield. So, tear up the traffic code and have four offences: Dangerous driving, driving without due care and attention, impaired driving, and speeding. All else is really fluff, isn't it? But, those who would wish to simplify things to such a point should be relegated to prosecuting offences. wink
_________________________
network down, IP packets delivered via UPS -BOFH

Top
#3253955 - 01/20/14 12:21 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
Sorry TiredTrucker, I just don't see this whole cell phone use while driving thing getting any better unless 1) laws are passed with stiff enough penalties (and they are enforced) to deter such use or 2) laws are passed that force cell phone manufacturers to install a device in every cell phone that makes them unusable while in a vehicle with the ignition turned on. Today's society has become so self-centered and instilled with a sense of entitlement that people believe they can do whatever they feel like doing, everyone else be darned. I see it every time I drive...people swerving all over the road, not using their turn signals, speeding up, slowing down for no apparent reason, all because they're doing something with their cell phone...people speeding and tailgating because they think they're entitled to drive as fast as they want...slow drivers parked in the far left lane on the highways and refusing to move right even though they're driving slower than everyone else, holding up faster moving traffic and acting like they are totally unaware of the situation, or they're fully aware and are just being a jerk...in spite of all the drivers around these people who despise this type of behavior, these problems continue to get worse, not better...I just don't see your theory curing these problems...

If you see people speeding, not signaling, and tailgating, which is against the law, why would more laws stop these people from driving poorly? If a person feels entitled, no law will change that behavior.
Your second point about disabling cell phones while the ignition is on will never work. If I'm driving with my wife, is there any reason she can't make a call?

Top
#3254213 - 01/20/14 04:08 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
If you see people speeding, not signaling, and tailgating, which is against the law, why would more laws stop these people from driving poorly? If a person feels entitled, no law will change that behavior.
Your second point about disabling cell phones while the ignition is on will never work. If I'm driving with my wife, is there any reason she can't make a call?


In the cases where laws already prohibit a certain type of driving, I'm not advocating more laws, but simply enforcement of existing ones. In the case of disabling phones while in the vehicle with the ignition on, what's more important, making roads safer by ensuring that people can't use the phones while they're driving, or passengers in the vehicle being able to use them? It's called prioritizing...

Top
#3254628 - 01/21/14 12:29 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: javacontour]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: javacontour
The "problem" is your approach relies on subjective judgement.

That was my whole point - we can't have everything too subjective. Hence, a cell phone law does have a point.

The law should just require cell phone jammers as standard equipment in all new vehicles. Then I'd be happy. wink
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3254635 - 01/21/14 12:47 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
crazyoildude Offline


Registered: 07/23/08
Posts: 5182
Loc: new jersey
Here in NJ Police officers and other emergency personel can talk on their cell while driving..
Personally driving while on a cell is or can be distracting i don't usually do it but i have done it a few times.

Top
#3254746 - 01/21/14 07:38 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Garak]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: javacontour
The "problem" is your approach relies on subjective judgement.

That was my whole point - we can't have everything too subjective. Hence, a cell phone law does have a point.

The law should just require cell phone jammers as standard equipment in all new vehicles. Then I'd be happy. wink


I'd rather see the jammers installed on the phones...it would take way too long to get rid of all of the older vehicles that don't have them....cell phones on the other hand are constantly being replaced so the conversion would take a lot less time...

Top
#3255567 - 01/21/14 07:24 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Agreed. All cell phones should have jammers installed and turned on permanently. I dislike cell phones intensely, so I think that would be great!
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3255847 - 01/22/14 01:56 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
daves87rs Online   content


Registered: 02/23/09
Posts: 13275
Loc: Michigan
Issues I see:

Patrol cars are on the road on day. Besides lunch and doing their duties, it's not like they just take a break on get out of the car. The fun part of being on call 12 hours a day...

Their job is to enforce the rules, not your opinion of them...

There has to be rules on these not for us normal people, but the stupid ones....a growing population as it is. Sure you should text your life story, as the cars will just get out of your way. Can't tell you what I see every day....it's that part of the population we have to worry about!

Just the way I see it, as I have some police buddies. They work hard for their money. But I know that this does not work with every officer in every city....just how we do things here.


Might need to become a firefighter and grab a flame suit.. wink
_________________________
“The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing.”

Top
#3256014 - 01/22/14 08:57 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
BMWTurboDzl Offline


Registered: 04/15/10
Posts: 1184
Loc: Atlanta,GA
Originally Posted By: dernp
I thought I would start a thread about an incident I encountered last week.

Background: I am currently a patrol officer with 30 yrs experience. Cell phone use while driving is illegal and this includes texting/talking or holding any wireless communication device while driving. Driving is included to be stopped at a red light. In order to lawfully use your device, you must pull off to the side of the road, put your car in Park.

I feel that cell phone use while driving is an epidemic and clearly constitutes distracted driving.

Incident: I am driving a marked police cruiser and observe a driver stopped at a red light clearly talking on the cell phone. I pull the driver over and charge the driver with appropriate offence. The driver began to tell me that it wasn't fair because the driver's child had called for a ride home from school. We talked for a bit about blue tooth and hands free. But the point that struck me was that the driver felt that they were entitled to speak on the phone due to the nature of the call.

I did not start this thread for Bitoger's to tell me I should have warned the driver. I would like to hear views from other drivers about why they text/talk while driving. Is the call or text that important?

Thanks for taking the time to read this thread and I look forward to your responses.


I see people texting/talking while driving all the time. Only texting while driving is illegal in my state.

The companies like Google, Apple, and the telecommunications companies will win this fight via driverless cars (Google talks safety but under the premise that it should be safe to drive while using their services).

Frankly I'm surprised you pulled them. In my state it's usually an 'add-on' offense. Kudos to you for enforcing the law.
_________________________
'10 335d (Castrol Edge 5w-30, LL04)

Top
#3257185 - 01/23/14 08:52 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Garak]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: Garak
Agreed. All cell phones should have jammers installed and turned on permanently. I dislike cell phones intensely, so I think that would be great!

lets say your wife or child is driving home at night, and they think they are being followed. They have a passenger with them. Do you think it would be great for them to pull over and turn the car off to call for help?

Top
#3257998 - 01/23/14 09:11 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Under the law in most jurisdictions, that could probably be considered an emergency. So, the driver could probably get away with it. But, in your scenario, you said the wife or child had a passenger. Is this hypothetical passenger incapable of using the cell phone?

If there was a jammer, of course there would be a problem. Like I said, though, if I were king of the world, cell phones would be equipped with jammers from the factory and would be expensive bricks. wink
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3258727 - 01/24/14 02:39 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Garak]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: Garak
If there was a jammer, of course there would be a problem. Like I said, though, if I were king of the world, cell phones would be equipped with jammers from the factory and would be expensive bricks. wink

Thankfully, narrow minded people like you and Grampi aren't in charge.

Top
#3259421 - 01/25/14 09:23 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: Garak
Agreed. All cell phones should have jammers installed and turned on permanently. I dislike cell phones intensely, so I think that would be great!

lets say your wife or child is driving home at night, and they think they are being followed. They have a passenger with them. Do you think it would be great for them to pull over and turn the car off to call for help?


No, I think it would be a good idea for them to drive to the police station...

Top
#3259423 - 01/25/14 09:25 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: Garak
If there was a jammer, of course there would be a problem. Like I said, though, if I were king of the world, cell phones would be equipped with jammers from the factory and would be expensive bricks. wink

Thankfully, narrow minded people like you and Grampi aren't in charge.


Unfortunately, there are too many people like you who want everything to be a free-for-all...

Top
#3259606 - 01/25/14 12:14 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Well, I use a hands free headset and talk on the cell phone while driving. Not always practical to pull 70 ft of truck off and find a nice convenient place to park. I got into hands free headsets long before this whole distracted driving with cellphones really became a major blip on the radar. I probably text 3 times a month and that is not while driving. I like email if things are written. If someone has something to say, call.

Going to extremes like jammers and such is overkill if there every was one. As was mentioned, what of passengers using a cell? How does the phone know if it is the being used by a person behind the wheel or the back seat? And then, what of CB use in moving vehicles? We cannot legislate good sense, so let's just carpet bomb the populace with regulations, laws, and jammers. But that doesn't seem surprising. The common ideology now is to have the government protect us from ourselves.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3259669 - 01/25/14 01:25 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Well, I use a hands free headset and talk on the cell phone while driving. Not always practical to pull 70 ft of truck off and find a nice convenient place to park. I got into hands free headsets long before this whole distracted driving with cellphones really became a major blip on the radar. I probably text 3 times a month and that is not while driving. I like email if things are written. If someone has something to say, call.

Going to extremes like jammers and such is overkill if there every was one. As was mentioned, what of passengers using a cell? How does the phone know if it is the being used by a person behind the wheel or the back seat? And then, what of CB use in moving vehicles? We cannot legislate good sense, so let's just carpet bomb the populace with regulations, laws, and jammers. But that doesn't seem surprising. The common ideology now is to have the government protect us from ourselves.


Again I ask, why is it necessary for even a passenger to use a cell phone in a moving vehicle?...though I'm no proponent of big brothering, I'd rather have the gov step in on this issue than just continuing to do nothing while the problem continues to get worse...

Top
#3259834 - 01/25/14 04:55 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi

Again I ask, why is it necessary for even a passenger to use a cell phone in a moving vehicle?...

If it's not necessary it needs to be regulated? Are sports cars necessary? What about motorcycles? Smoking and drinking? Where does your desire to regulate unnecessary thing stops?

Top
#3259836 - 01/25/14 04:57 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: Garak
If there was a jammer, of course there would be a problem. Like I said, though, if I were king of the world, cell phones would be equipped with jammers from the factory and would be expensive bricks. wink

Thankfully, narrow minded people like you and Grampi aren't in charge.


Unfortunately, there are too many people like you who want everything to be a free-for-all...

Imagine that, a person living in a free country wanting people to have free will.

Top
#3260272 - 01/26/14 05:44 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: whip
Thankfully, narrow minded people like you and Grampi aren't in charge.

I don't like land lines, either. I have no cell phone, and I'm still alive.
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3260935 - 01/26/14 08:01 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Stelth]
troberts Offline


Registered: 12/07/06
Posts: 94
Loc: Baytown, TX
.....choose which laws one obeys.... PRECISELY! I used to go sailing through the traffic as what is called an "aggressive" driver. Having done a 180 degree turn and bought a Prius several years ago, I find that obeying the speed limit has a wonderful byproduct in adding miles to my gallons....

Besides, when the populace as a whole decides it only needs obey the laws each individual thinks applies to him or her, we are going downhill rapidly as a society. Violence rises, accidents profliferate, arrogance is the norm. Of course, I do remember tales of a little incident at the beginning of our country called the American Revolution wherein our forefathers did just that!

As I work at not being bunted off a bridge by overpowered pickup trucks, anyone needing to contact me by phone can wait until the end of my 25 minute commute.
_________________________
Enjoying life outside the car business....

Top
#3261043 - 01/26/14 09:51 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
But, one thing that causes people to pick and choose.... not seeing the sense in some of the laws as to how they are applied. It is asinine to blanket legislate things and expect the world to just shuffle along like it is a good thing.

Case in pont. I could be operating my pickup down the gravel road I live on, or I may have just turned onto the 2 lane highway, and the wife may call me that cattle have gotten out. Now, by the strict interpretation of the law as some would like it here, I would be in clear violation by taking that call, or I might not even be able to if the phone was made inoperable if the vehicle is moving. But, if I didn't, someone's life could be jeopardized if cattle got on the roadway and a motorist hit one. So, how do you apply your jammer type of mindset to that scenario, which is very common in rural areas. That's ok. The motorist ended up with 800 lb of beef in their lap, but the cell phone law was obeyed. Explain how great the cell phone ban thing is to a grieving family member seeing their loved one in ICU or a coffin.

And what if I am operating my pickup out on cropland or pasture? it's moving, so the phone would be jammed, as per some folk's mindset here. That is ridiculous. See, many do not stand back and take a broad view of what goes on in the world. They seem to think that everyone else's life and driving routines are just like theirs. Not everyone runs their vehicles up and down freeways and metro areas. My pickup, maybe, might see a 4 lane road or a metro area twice a month at best.

You see, these blanket laws have no basis in reality for many folks. That is why folks, including me, tend to ignore and ridicule them many times. If phones are made so that they don't function if the vehicle is moving, people will find a way around it, and we will be right back where we started. So laws like that make no sense, and just make criminals out of honest citizens. Ah, but it is a revenue stream for the cop shop!
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3261087 - 01/26/14 10:37 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
rw19 Offline


Registered: 12/30/13
Posts: 135
Loc: British Columbia
I use my phone all the time while i am driving for work reasons. I get phone calls I use the bluetooth in my car but sometimes you get a email you have to answer it 99% of the time I pull over and reply, or on a red light.

I have gotten a ticket for emailing and driving and since then I have learned my lesson, I know the cops doing there job but they should let others do there job as well.
_________________________
2004 Lincoln Navigator 5.4L M1 AFE 0w 20 M-210 80,000km
2014 Lexus IS 350 AWD Dealer Fill 2000km
2012 CTS-V 6.2L V8 M1 0w 40 K&N PS-1017 13,200km


Top
#3262326 - 01/28/14 07:33 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
You see, these blanket laws have no basis in reality for many folks.

Very true. When confronted with realistic issues to their fantastical theories, all they seem to do is redirect and change the subject. Many questions have been asked, but very few answers have been given.

Great post. I wonder how they will respond?


Edited by whip (01/28/14 07:34 AM)

Top
#3262337 - 01/28/14 07:49 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi

Again I ask, why is it necessary for even a passenger to use a cell phone in a moving vehicle?...

If it's not necessary it needs to be regulated? Are sports cars necessary? What about motorcycles? Smoking and drinking? Where does your desire to regulate unnecessary thing stops?


It needs to be regulated when unnecessary things that are done are dangerous to themselves and others...

Top
#3262339 - 01/28/14 07:51 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: Garak
If there was a jammer, of course there would be a problem. Like I said, though, if I were king of the world, cell phones would be equipped with jammers from the factory and would be expensive bricks. wink

Thankfully, narrow minded people like you and Grampi aren't in charge.


Unfortunately, there are too many people like you who want everything to be a free-for-all...

Imagine that, a person living in a free country wanting people to have free will.


One person's free will ends when it becomes a danger to others...

Top
#3262352 - 01/28/14 08:03 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi

Again I ask, why is it necessary for even a passenger to use a cell phone in a moving vehicle?...

If it's not necessary it needs to be regulated? Are sports cars necessary? What about motorcycles? Smoking and drinking? Where does your desire to regulate unnecessary thing stops?


It needs to be regulated when unnecessary things that are done are dangerous to themselves and others...

I'd be willing to bet that more people die from motorcycles, smoking, and drinking than passengers making phone calls. So are you calling for regulations to ban motorcycles? What about people driving to the mall in bad weather? Unhealthy food? I broke my ankle once running. Wheres the outrage against exercise?

Top
#3262355 - 01/28/14 08:06 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip

Imagine that, a person living in a free country wanting people to have free will.


One person's free will ends when it becomes a danger to others...

But you only apply this logic selectively. There are things you do that many would say are dangerous to others, and you still do them. Why do you hold others to a higher standard than you hold yourself?

Top
#3262356 - 01/28/14 08:06 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Garak]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: whip
Thankfully, narrow minded people like you and Grampi aren't in charge.

I don't like land lines, either. I have no cell phone, and I'm still alive.

Does this somehow make you a better person?

Top
#3262362 - 01/28/14 08:11 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Originally Posted By: grampi


It needs to be regulated when unnecessary things that are done are dangerous to themselves and others...


But it is like the tree falling in the forest. If one is on a remote stretch of road, there is no other motorists around, how is using the cell phone dangerous? Not any more so than sucking down a hamburger while driving. So, do we have provisional things about the regs? I am also reminded of an intersection on a gravel road that has a stop sign. You can see over a 1/4 mile in either direction on the adjacent road before you ever arrive at the intersection. Many just slow and look and don't fully stop. Of course, Barney has noticed this, even though there is very little traffic on these roads, He will sit to the side in hiding and wait for someone to "run" the stop sign. He is going to see that justice is done and the law is obeyed!

And some wonder why a lot of folks start to have disdain for all the regulations that get thrown out there like a shotgun blast. Because in the end, it is just piling on the laws with no real change in things. We have laws against murder, but murder goes on like there are no laws against it. We can pile on the cell phone laws and regulate the snot out the practice, but it will go on like not one law has been written. When it comes down to it, it is only yet another fine or penalty we can throw onto someone after any accident. You are not going to stop the practice with another regulation.

It will just allow some politician to come back to the district and spout out about how he is doing something about the problem, now vote for me.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3262494 - 01/28/14 10:17 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
Jarlaxle Offline


Registered: 02/02/12
Posts: 3781
Loc: New England
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi

Again I ask, why is it necessary for even a passenger to use a cell phone in a moving vehicle?...

If it's not necessary it needs to be regulated? Are sports cars necessary? What about motorcycles? Smoking and drinking? Where does your desire to regulate unnecessary thing stops?


It needs to be regulated when unnecessary things that are done are dangerous to themselves and others...


You are in favor of banning motorcycles, then?
_________________________
1979 Coupe de Ville, 542 stroker, Super Tech 15W40, Purolator
1995 Dakota, 5.2, VWB 10W-30, Motorcraft
2012 Suzuki AN400A, unknown

Top
#3262521 - 01/28/14 10:42 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: whip
Does this somehow make you a better person?

No, that means we have to be a little more clear as to what's a luxury and what's a necessity.

Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
But it is like the tree falling in the forest. If one is on a remote stretch of road, there is no other motorists around, how is using the cell phone dangerous?

If there's no other motorist around, the odds of getting a ticket are nil, since a ticketing officer would have to be a motorist as well.
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3263471 - 01/29/14 07:54 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip

Imagine that, a person living in a free country wanting people to have free will.


One person's free will ends when it becomes a danger to others...

But you only apply this logic selectively. There are things you do that many would say are dangerous to others, and you still do them. Why do you hold others to a higher standard than you hold yourself?


You're just being ridiculous now...I'm guessing your probably one of many drivers who thinks it's time to get on the phone when your driving...

Top
#3263476 - 01/29/14 07:57 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: grampi


It needs to be regulated when unnecessary things that are done are dangerous to themselves and others...


But it is like the tree falling in the forest. If one is on a remote stretch of road, there is no other motorists around, how is using the cell phone dangerous? Not any more so than sucking down a hamburger while driving. So, do we have provisional things about the regs? I am also reminded of an intersection on a gravel road that has a stop sign. You can see over a 1/4 mile in either direction on the adjacent road before you ever arrive at the intersection. Many just slow and look and don't fully stop. Of course, Barney has noticed this, even though there is very little traffic on these roads, He will sit to the side in hiding and wait for someone to "run" the stop sign. He is going to see that justice is done and the law is obeyed!

And some wonder why a lot of folks start to have disdain for all the regulations that get thrown out there like a shotgun blast. Because in the end, it is just piling on the laws with no real change in things. We have laws against murder, but murder goes on like there are no laws against it. We can pile on the cell phone laws and regulate the snot out the practice, but it will go on like not one law has been written. When it comes down to it, it is only yet another fine or penalty we can throw onto someone after any accident. You are not going to stop the practice with another regulation.

It will just allow some politician to come back to the district and spout out about how he is doing something about the problem, now vote for me.


Fine, don't make any more laws against cell phone use while driving, just make phones so they won't work in a vehicle with the ignition on then...problem solved...unless you've got another idea...

Top
#3263479 - 01/29/14 07:59 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Jarlaxle]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi

Again I ask, why is it necessary for even a passenger to use a cell phone in a moving vehicle?...

If it's not necessary it needs to be regulated? Are sports cars necessary? What about motorcycles? Smoking and drinking? Where does your desire to regulate unnecessary thing stops?


It needs to be regulated when unnecessary things that are done are dangerous to themselves and others...


You are in favor of banning motorcycles, then?


More ridiculousness...how many people die on motorcycles each year and how many people die due to cell phone use while driving each year...enough said on that...

Top
#3263484 - 01/29/14 08:05 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: grampi


It needs to be regulated when unnecessary things that are done are dangerous to themselves and others...


But it is like the tree falling in the forest. If one is on a remote stretch of road, there is no other motorists around, how is using the cell phone dangerous? Not any more so than sucking down a hamburger while driving. So, do we have provisional things about the regs? I am also reminded of an intersection on a gravel road that has a stop sign. You can see over a 1/4 mile in either direction on the adjacent road before you ever arrive at the intersection. Many just slow and look and don't fully stop. Of course, Barney has noticed this, even though there is very little traffic on these roads, He will sit to the side in hiding and wait for someone to "run" the stop sign. He is going to see that justice is done and the law is obeyed!

And some wonder why a lot of folks start to have disdain for all the regulations that get thrown out there like a shotgun blast. Because in the end, it is just piling on the laws with no real change in things. We have laws against murder, but murder goes on like there are no laws against it. We can pile on the cell phone laws and regulate the snot out the practice, but it will go on like not one law has been written. When it comes down to it, it is only yet another fine or penalty we can throw onto someone after any accident. You are not going to stop the practice with another regulation.

It will just allow some politician to come back to the district and spout out about how he is doing something about the problem, now vote for me.


Fine, don't make any more laws against cell phone use while driving, just make phones so they won't work in a vehicle with the ignition on then...problem solved...unless you've got another idea...


And I addressed that idea a few posts back. It is asinine to require cell phones be shut off or not work when the ignition starts. That puts people's lives in jeopardy just as much as any perceived threat by using cell phones. Go back and read it. I take it a step further here. Anyone that would even suggest your idea should give up their citizenship right away, for they are not worthy of being American and espousing the ideals of Americanism. Because what you suggest, falls under Facist or Communist ideology. One of the reasons, some days, that I think my 7 years in the military was a total waste of time.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3264242 - 01/29/14 07:35 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: grampi


It needs to be regulated when unnecessary things that are done are dangerous to themselves and others...


But it is like the tree falling in the forest. If one is on a remote stretch of road, there is no other motorists around, how is using the cell phone dangerous? Not any more so than sucking down a hamburger while driving. So, do we have provisional things about the regs? I am also reminded of an intersection on a gravel road that has a stop sign. You can see over a 1/4 mile in either direction on the adjacent road before you ever arrive at the intersection. Many just slow and look and don't fully stop. Of course, Barney has noticed this, even though there is very little traffic on these roads, He will sit to the side in hiding and wait for someone to "run" the stop sign. He is going to see that justice is done and the law is obeyed!

And some wonder why a lot of folks start to have disdain for all the regulations that get thrown out there like a shotgun blast. Because in the end, it is just piling on the laws with no real change in things. We have laws against murder, but murder goes on like there are no laws against it. We can pile on the cell phone laws and regulate the snot out the practice, but it will go on like not one law has been written. When it comes down to it, it is only yet another fine or penalty we can throw onto someone after any accident. You are not going to stop the practice with another regulation.

It will just allow some politician to come back to the district and spout out about how he is doing something about the problem, now vote for me.


Fine, don't make any more laws against cell phone use while driving, just make phones so they won't work in a vehicle with the ignition on then...problem solved...unless you've got another idea...


And I addressed that idea a few posts back. It is asinine to require cell phones be shut off or not work when the ignition starts. That puts people's lives in jeopardy just as much as any perceived threat by using cell phones. Go back and read it. I take it a step further here. Anyone that would even suggest your idea should give up their citizenship right away, for they are not worthy of being American and espousing the ideals of Americanism. Because what you suggest, falls under Facist or Communist ideology. One of the reasons, some days, that I think my 7 years in the military was a total waste of time.


Doing absolutely nothing is not the answer either, which is what you seem to be suggesting...and how does not having a cell phone that can be used when the ignition is on put lives in jeopardy? You mean all those years before cell phones were around were risky ones because there were no cell phones? Lol!

Top
#3264363 - 01/29/14 09:46 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Ok. The pass a law to jam cell phones when the car is started. I will contact one of the hackers over at the University to put a patch in the cell phone so that it doesn't jam when the car starts. This should be an easy work around. Oh, and that would be against the law? So is deleting EGR, SCR, DPF stuff from diesel engines, but it gets done all the time.

Also, I can just use a CB or FM carrier 2 way radio like in the past. So much for hands free like I could do with a cell phone. So, the law will do nothing. Absolutely nothing. When you place a restriction, folks will find a way to circumvent it. Only those that have no tech background can't see that it is a exercise in futility to mandate that some jammer type of feature be used on cell phones.

Ok, Mr. LOL. All those years before cell phones, those years weren't riskier? For whom? How about the patient that died because someone could not contact the doctor who was driving on his way home? How about, in my previous example, I couldn't get a call from the wife that cattle got out, and since there was no way for me to know that cattle had gotten onto the road, a motorist caps the hill and puts an 800 lb steer thru their windshield. Sure there were beepers and such for someone like the doctor, but he still had to locate a pay phone (remember those) and call in. And minutes count when it comes to life or death. If he was on a rural road, it might be some time before he could get to a phone.

So, thing weren't riskier? Maybe in your sanitized tight nit world. There are myriads of examples where cell phones have saved lives that would have been lost in the years we didn't have them. Just being able to call, while driving, about the drunk driver weaving in the lane in front of you, putting people in danger. How about seeing someone across the road go into the ditch, but it is unsafe, due to traffic for you to stop right then and call, so you call on the cell phone while you are still moving. I have done that one frequently during the winter months while driving my semi. Kinda hard to just stop 80,000 lb of truck on ice without endangering others, but I can at least put a call in to the local cop shop and let them know.

I realize that folks under 30 have a hard time grasping what things were like before cell phones, laptop computers, and other tech marvels. But those that are not suffering from Mad Cow and can still remember the "good 'ol days", if they put things in perspective, they would realize that we are much better off, in general, having this technology available. And with anything, there comes personal responsibility. But this mindset that we must have the government protect us from ourselves, I have a real hard time understanding it.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3264641 - 01/30/14 09:02 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
So, the law will do nothing. Absolutely nothing. When you place a restriction, folks will find a way to circumvent it.

Just ask all of the illegal pot smokers. Right, Grampi!

This is the point where Grampi calls you ridiculous and refuses to address the legitimate points you've brought up because he has no answer for them.

Top
#3265647 - 01/31/14 08:11 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Ok. The pass a law to jam cell phones when the car is started. I will contact one of the hackers over at the University to put a patch in the cell phone so that it doesn't jam when the car starts. This should be an easy work around. Oh, and that would be against the law? So is deleting EGR, SCR, DPF stuff from diesel engines, but it gets done all the time.

Also, I can just use a CB or FM carrier 2 way radio like in the past. So much for hands free like I could do with a cell phone. So, the law will do nothing. Absolutely nothing. When you place a restriction, folks will find a way to circumvent it. Only those that have no tech background can't see that it is a exercise in futility to mandate that some jammer type of feature be used on cell phones.

Ok, Mr. LOL. All those years before cell phones, those years weren't riskier? For whom? How about the patient that died because someone could not contact the doctor who was driving on his way home? How about, in my previous example, I couldn't get a call from the wife that cattle got out, and since there was no way for me to know that cattle had gotten onto the road, a motorist caps the hill and puts an 800 lb steer thru their windshield. Sure there were beepers and such for someone like the doctor, but he still had to locate a pay phone (remember those) and call in. And minutes count when it comes to life or death. If he was on a rural road, it might be some time before he could get to a phone.

So, thing weren't riskier? Maybe in your sanitized tight nit world. There are myriads of examples where cell phones have saved lives that would have been lost in the years we didn't have them. Just being able to call, while driving, about the drunk driver weaving in the lane in front of you, putting people in danger. How about seeing someone across the road go into the ditch, but it is unsafe, due to traffic for you to stop right then and call, so you call on the cell phone while you are still moving. I have done that one frequently during the winter months while driving my semi. Kinda hard to just stop 80,000 lb of truck on ice without endangering others, but I can at least put a call in to the local cop shop and let them know.

I realize that folks under 30 have a hard time grasping what things were like before cell phones, laptop computers, and other tech marvels. But those that are not suffering from Mad Cow and can still remember the "good 'ol days", if they put things in perspective, they would realize that we are much better off, in general, having this technology available. And with anything, there comes personal responsibility. But this mindset that we must have the government protect us from ourselves, I have a real hard time understanding it.


In all of your examples, a cell phone with a jammer could've been used by simply stopping the vehicle and turning off the ignition...there would never be a circumstance where this couldn't be done, so again I will ask, why is it necessary to use a cell phone WHILE YOU'RE DRIVING?

Top
#3265648 - 01/31/14 08:13 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
So, the law will do nothing. Absolutely nothing. When you place a restriction, folks will find a way to circumvent it.

Just ask all of the illegal pot smokers. Right, Grampi!

This is the point where Grampi calls you ridiculous and refuses to address the legitimate points you've brought up because he has no answer for them.


Why don't you just go back under your bridge?...you never have anything constructive to say anyway...

Top
#3265751 - 01/31/14 10:07 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
So, the law will do nothing. Absolutely nothing. When you place a restriction, folks will find a way to circumvent it.

Just ask all of the illegal pot smokers. Right, Grampi!

This is the point where Grampi calls you ridiculous and refuses to address the legitimate points you've brought up because he has no answer for them.


Why don't you just go back under your bridge?...you never have anything constructive to say anyway...

Not true. I've brought up numerous valid points to discuss, and you've ignored most of them. Just because we see things differently, doesn't mean it's not constructive.

Top
#3265753 - 01/31/14 10:10 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
In all of your examples, a cell phone with a jammer could've been used by simply stopping the vehicle and turning off the ignition...there would never be a circumstance where this couldn't be done, so again I will ask, why is it necessary to use a cell phone WHILE YOU'RE DRIVING?

What are people supposed to do for incoming calls? The cattle situation that was brought up, how would people get a hold of him if he doesn't pull over and check his phone?

What about people riding in a bus? They wouldn't be able to make calls with your jammer theory.

Top
#3265759 - 01/31/14 10:16 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

You are in favor of banning motorcycles, then?


More ridiculousness...how many people die on motorcycles each year and how many people die due to cell phone use while driving each year...enough said on that...

Motorcycle deaths for 2011 were 4612.

Cell phone related auto accident deaths. 3285

Alcohol related deaths are over 75,000.

Who's being ridiculous?


Edited by whip (01/31/14 10:20 AM)

Top
#3265883 - 01/31/14 12:40 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
SteveSRT8 Offline


Registered: 10/10/08
Posts: 14253
Loc: Sunny Florida
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
So, the law will do nothing. Absolutely nothing. When you place a restriction, folks will find a way to circumvent it.

Just ask all of the illegal pot smokers. Right, Grampi!

This is the point where Grampi calls you ridiculous and refuses to address the legitimate points you've brought up because he has no answer for them.


Even Grampi would have to admit he responded EXACTLY as you said! Hilarious...
_________________________
"In a democracy, dissent is an act of faith."
J. William Fulbright
Best ET-12.79 @ 111 mph
4340 pounds, Street tires
Just like we go to Publix

Top
#3265954 - 01/31/14 02:00 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Smoky14 Offline


Registered: 04/23/03
Posts: 957
Loc: Nowhere NM
Since you are both buckeyes, get together and duke it out.
_________________________
99 Acura 2.3CL 5speed MT
12 Ford Fusion 2.5S 6speed MT

Top
#3266110 - 01/31/14 04:55 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
97f150 Offline


Registered: 02/24/05
Posts: 1727
Loc: Southeast Louisiana
Yup, once again Grampi proves that he is Grumpy as well
_________________________
2012 Ford F-150 XLT Super Crew 5.0
2012 Ford Fusion SE 3.0

Top
#3266575 - 02/01/14 07:59 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
[quote=grampi]What are people supposed to do for incoming calls? The cattle situation that was brought up, how would people get a hold of him if he doesn't pull over and check his phone?

What about people riding in a bus? They wouldn't be able to make calls with your jammer theory.


Again, I think we need to go back to priorities. What's more important, making the roads safer by trying to deal with a problem that's now more dangerous than drunk driving, or making sure that Mary Ann can discuss her latest recipe while riding on the bus? There would obviously be exceptions for those who actually have a need to use a phone in a moving vehicle, like emergency responders...


Edited by grampi (02/01/14 08:02 AM)

Top
#3266579 - 02/01/14 08:05 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

You are in favor of banning motorcycles, then?


More ridiculousness...how many people die on motorcycles each year and how many people die due to cell phone use while driving each year...enough said on that...

Motorcycle deaths for 2011 were 4612.

Cell phone related auto accident deaths. 3285

Alcohol related deaths are over 75,000.

Who's being ridiculous?


I don't know where you came up with those figures, but they aren't even close to being accurate...

Top
#3266584 - 02/01/14 08:08 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: 97f150]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: 97f150
Yup, once again Grampi proves that he is Grumpy as well


Here's another vital contributor...and probably a habitual cell phone while driving user as well...

Top
#3266703 - 02/01/14 10:21 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: SteveSRT8]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
So, the law will do nothing. Absolutely nothing. When you place a restriction, folks will find a way to circumvent it.

Just ask all of the illegal pot smokers. Right, Grampi!

This is the point where Grampi calls you ridiculous and refuses to address the legitimate points you've brought up because he has no answer for them.


Even Grampi would have to admit he responded EXACTLY as you said! Hilarious...

What makes it even better is that it appears Grampi doesn't even see it. He's certainly one of the most entertaining posters.

Top
#3266707 - 02/01/14 10:23 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

You are in favor of banning motorcycles, then?


More ridiculousness...how many people die on motorcycles each year and how many people die due to cell phone use while driving each year...enough said on that...

Motorcycle deaths for 2011 were 4612.

Cell phone related auto accident deaths. 3285

Alcohol related deaths are over 75,000.

Who's being ridiculous?


I don't know where you came up with those figures, but they aren't even close to being accurate...

I'd ask you to prove me wrong with your own figures, but I know you won't.

Top
#3266864 - 02/01/14 01:34 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Here are a few links that took me a whole 2 minutes to find:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/Drivingissues/20060830105036.html#.Uu1I96SA0dU

http://unews.utah.edu/old/p/062206-1.html

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/12/science/la-sci-sn-hands-free-phone-driving-aaa-20130612

I think we all get that Whip and TiredTrucker are against any rules, regulations, or laws that infringe upon their freedoms, even when those freedoms are dangerous to others...


Edited by grampi (02/01/14 01:36 PM)

Top
#3267018 - 02/01/14 04:27 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
Jarlaxle Offline


Registered: 02/02/12
Posts: 3781
Loc: New England
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle


You are in favor of banning motorcycles, then?


More ridiculousness...how many people die on motorcycles each year and how many people die due to cell phone use while driving each year...enough said on that...


Riding a motorcycle is "unnecessary", it is unquestionably dangerous. Backpedaling now, I see?
_________________________
1979 Coupe de Ville, 542 stroker, Super Tech 15W40, Purolator
1995 Dakota, 5.2, VWB 10W-30, Motorcraft
2012 Suzuki AN400A, unknown

Top
#3267022 - 02/01/14 04:30 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
Jarlaxle Offline


Registered: 02/02/12
Posts: 3781
Loc: New England
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
So, the law will do nothing. Absolutely nothing. When you place a restriction, folks will find a way to circumvent it.

Just ask all of the illegal pot smokers. Right, Grampi!

This is the point where Grampi calls you ridiculous and refuses to address the legitimate points you've brought up because he has no answer for them.


Even Grampi would have to admit he responded EXACTLY as you said! Hilarious...

What makes it even better is that it appears Grampi doesn't even see it. He's certainly one of the most entertaining posters.


"Entertaining"...you mean a bit like a Youtube clip of someone trying to play tether-ball while drunk, right?
_________________________
1979 Coupe de Ville, 542 stroker, Super Tech 15W40, Purolator
1995 Dakota, 5.2, VWB 10W-30, Motorcraft
2012 Suzuki AN400A, unknown

Top
#3267288 - 02/01/14 08:47 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Jarlaxle]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle


You are in favor of banning motorcycles, then?


More ridiculousness...how many people die on motorcycles each year and how many people die due to cell phone use while driving each year...enough said on that...


Riding a motorcycle is "unnecessary", it is unquestionably dangerous. Backpedaling now, I see?


Motorcycling only endangers the rider, unlike cell phoning and driving...

Top
#3267584 - 02/02/14 07:31 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Jarlaxle]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
"Entertaining"...you mean a bit like a Youtube clip of someone trying to play tether-ball while drunk, right?


This is the type of comment I expect from those who have nothing to back their view...

Top
#3267675 - 02/02/14 08:53 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
Here are a few links that took me a whole 2 minutes to find:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/Drivingissues/20060830105036.html#.Uu1I96SA0dU

http://unews.utah.edu/old/p/062206-1.html

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/12/science/la-sci-sn-hands-free-phone-driving-aaa-20130612

I think we all get that Whip and TiredTrucker are against any rules, regulations, or laws that infringe upon their freedoms, even when those freedoms are dangerous to others...

according to the wiki link you provided, only 995 deaths were directly contributed distracted driving by cell phone. that's almost 70% lower than the numbers I posted. Thank you for correcting me.

I'll try to explain my point to you again. There are already laws in place for distracted driving. New laws will do nothing. I agree that texting is plain ignorant, but I don't think hands free is that big of a deal. It's no more distracting than eating, talking or the hundreds of other things people do while driving.
You're a self admitted pot smoker. Do laws stop you from doing that? Since they don't, why do you think more laws are the answer?

Top
#3267727 - 02/02/14 09:31 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Originally Posted By: grampi


Motorcycling only endangers the rider, unlike cell phoning and driving...


Guess you have never seen a motorcycle go thru an auto windshield.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3267999 - 02/02/14 01:34 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi
Here are a few links that took me a whole 2 minutes to find:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/Drivingissues/20060830105036.html#.Uu1I96SA0dU

http://unews.utah.edu/old/p/062206-1.html

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/12/science/la-sci-sn-hands-free-phone-driving-aaa-20130612

I think we all get that Whip and TiredTrucker are against any rules, regulations, or laws that infringe upon their freedoms, even when those freedoms are dangerous to others...

according to the wiki link you provided, only 995 deaths were directly contributed distracted driving by cell phone. that's almost 70% lower than the numbers I posted. Thank you for correcting me.

I'll try to explain my point to you again. There are already laws in place for distracted driving. New laws will do nothing. I agree that texting is plain ignorant, but I don't think hands free is that big of a deal. It's no more distracting than eating, talking or the hundreds of other things people do while driving.
You're a self admitted pot smoker. Do laws stop you from doing that? Since they don't, why do you think more laws are the answer?


I don't, that's why I'm saying instead of making new laws specifically against cell phone use while driving, I say the focus should be on cell phone manufacturers to install devices in the phones that renders them useless while in a vehicle with the ignition on...and I admitted that I USED to smoke pot...I don't anymore...

Top
#3268005 - 02/02/14 01:35 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: grampi


Motorcycling only endangers the rider, unlike cell phoning and driving...


Guess you have never seen a motorcycle go thru an auto windshield.


You guys are really reaching for things to support your views...and looking quite foolish in the process...I don't think motorcyclists going through people's windshields is quite the epidemic that distracted driving is...


Edited by grampi (02/02/14 01:37 PM)

Top
#3268024 - 02/02/14 01:48 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
97f150 Offline


Registered: 02/24/05
Posts: 1727
Loc: Southeast Louisiana
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: grampi


Motorcycling only endangers the rider, unlike cell phoning and driving...


Guess you have never seen a motorcycle go thru an auto windshield.


You guys are really reaching for things to support your views...and looking quite foolish in the process...I don't think motorcyclists going through people's windshields is quite the epidemic that distracted driving is...


Key phrase is "distracted driving", not specifically cell phone use. Do you even know what a cell phone is?
_________________________
2012 Ford F-150 XLT Super Crew 5.0
2012 Ford Fusion SE 3.0

Top
#3268162 - 02/02/14 03:27 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
What is really "reaching' is trying to get every cell phone disabled once the ignition starts. Would be everyone in the vehicle, even in the back seat? If not, then the driver could just use their phone while driving! Does it apply to every phone in the vehicle? What is the range of that disabling? Imagine driving down the street and pedestrians that walk a little close to the vehicle and their calls drop. These are not "reaching" situations. I have watched regulatory stuff for a lot of years, both as a 13 year government employee, and as a small business owner in commercial trucking.

And just look at the Obamacare fiasco. One can only imagine the mess of having every cell phone disabled when the ignition switch is turned on. The big problem is that very few who advocate just about any regulation, also do not look beyond the end of their nose and see the potential unintended consequences of those regulations.

But it still boggles the mind how so many people that claim to be Americans want to regulate everyone like we are in Stalinist Russia.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3268256 - 02/02/14 04:29 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
I don't, that's why I'm saying instead of making new laws specifically against cell phone use while driving, I say the focus should be on cell phone manufacturers to install devices in the phones that renders them useless while in a vehicle with the ignition on...and I admitted that I USED to smoke pot...I don't anymore...

Myself and others have pointed out the many flaws to your jammer idea. Other than you and about 3 other people, nobody thinks it's a good idea to prevent passengers and bus riders from making calls. Since your only solution to those problems is ignoring them, it will never happen.

Top
#3268260 - 02/02/14 04:31 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi

Motorcycling only endangers the rider, unlike cell phoning and driving...

The family that was attacked by the group of motorcyclist in NYC might disagree.

Top
#3268399 - 02/02/14 07:31 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
So Whip and TiredTrucker, since you don't like my ideas, what do you suggest?

Top
#3268438 - 02/02/14 08:19 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
Panzerman Offline


Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 2470
Loc: Daytona, Florida
Intrusion in the name of safety, Intrusion in name of the children. Regardless its all Intrusion. I think I will keep my rights as many and as long as possible.

Top
#3268760 - 02/03/14 05:50 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: Panzerman]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: Panzerman
Intrusion in the name of safety, Intrusion in name of the children. Regardless its all Intrusion. I think I will keep my rights as many and as long as possible.


So basically, you're part of the do nothing crowd? Nothing should be done at all if it inconveniences anyone, even if it would make the roads safer?

Top
#3268763 - 02/03/14 05:53 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: 97f150]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: 97f150
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: grampi


Motorcycling only endangers the rider, unlike cell phoning and driving...


Guess you have never seen a motorcycle go thru an auto windshield.


You guys are really reaching for things to support your views...and looking quite foolish in the process...I don't think motorcyclists going through people's windshields is quite the epidemic that distracted driving is...


Key phrase is "distracted driving", not specifically cell phone use. Do you even know what a cell phone is?


Cell phone use is by far the most distracting, and the most widely common distraction there is...do YOU know what a cell phone is?

Top
#3268768 - 02/03/14 06:01 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: grampi
So Whip and TiredTrucker, since you don't like my ideas, what do you suggest?

We might not be able to get cell phone jammers into vehicles, but I have a proxy policy. I see a cell phone in the hands of an employee during work hours, I fire him on the spot.

They aren't facing an emergency or doing anything useful towards their duties. They're playing on Facebook or texting friends or playing a game. Obviously, they don't have enough free time to get that stuff done, so I oblige them and provide them with an extra 30 or 40 hours per week of free time.
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3268806 - 02/03/14 07:05 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 892
Loc: Kellogg, IA
And that is realistic and proper. You can make the regulations on how people do things in the work place. Some trucking companies have similar policies in place. People can abide or not, and deal with it. A trucking company that I do business with has a policy that, if the truck is moving, no calls to or from the carrier by any of it's trucks. And they have qualcomm units in all the trucks, so they can tell if the truck is moving or stationary. They pay the bills, they get to decide.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3268863 - 02/03/14 08:32 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: TiredTrucker]
Garak Offline


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 10993
Loc: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
The real problem I have with cell phone use in vehicles is that the emergency "excuse" is just that. A suspect that 99.9% of cell phone use in vehicles has nothing to do with emergencies.

If I had fifteen cents for every text sent out from a moving vehicle in North America, I'd be as rich as, well, a telecom.
_________________________
Plain, simple Garak.

2008 Infiniti G37 coupe - Mobil Delvac 1 ESP 5w-40, Hastings LF113
1984 F-150 4.9L six - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515

Top
#3268911 - 02/03/14 09:31 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: grampi]
whip Offline


Registered: 03/03/05
Posts: 1447
Loc: ohio
Originally Posted By: grampi
So Whip and TiredTrucker, since you don't like my ideas, what do you suggest?

It's pretty simple. There are already laws in place to address this. Enforce them, and hold people responsible for their actions. We don't need new laws or devices.

Top
#3269498 - 02/03/14 07:05 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
cjcride Offline


Registered: 11/06/09
Posts: 552
Loc: Ontario Canada
Cell use while driving is distracted driving, agreed. Kids in the vehicle is 12 times more so, according to a recent Australian study.
_________________________
2004 Corolla



Top
#3269552 - 02/03/14 07:47 PM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
wrcsixeight Offline


Registered: 10/15/10
Posts: 1012
Loc: california
For Teens and many other like minded individuals, it would require being made fun of by their peers by using a cell phone while driving before they would ever deign to modify their behavior.

Unfortunately breaking the law is "cool" and nobody can tell a teenager anything, because they already know everything and being seen as being "cool" is paramount in such a world.

These people then get older and become politicians, perhaps socialites, if they have a real high opinion of themselves.

That is if they can make it that far. Many will walk like a cell phone Zombie directly into traffic.

Top
#3269883 - 02/04/14 07:15 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: whip]
grampi Offline


Registered: 10/08/06
Posts: 3293
Loc: OH
Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: grampi
So Whip and TiredTrucker, since you don't like my ideas, what do you suggest?

It's pretty simple. There are already laws in place to address this. Enforce them, and hold people responsible for their actions. We don't need new laws or devices.


Enforce the laws? What a joke! That's not gonna happen...the highways today have become a free-for-all because law enforcement is basically non-existent...

Top
Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 ... 12 13 >