Recent Topics
Bosch/Exide AGM Batteries
by The Critic
11/25/17 04:32 AM
Friction Reduction Tested, low viscosity lubs
by wemay
11/25/17 01:54 AM
ASTM test / determining miscibility of motor oils
by wemay
11/25/17 12:42 AM
Mobile 1 0W40 19.98 @ amazon & Walmart
by Pajero
11/24/17 10:12 PM
German Scrabble Anyone?
by StevieC
11/24/17 09:40 PM
Remington?
by bigj_16
11/24/17 09:26 PM
Oil Filter Effect on Pressure
by bunnspecial
11/24/17 09:19 PM
Rotela T4 -> now without API SM ?
by Yannick
11/24/17 09:12 PM
Uh yeah, Pizza!
by StevieC
11/24/17 08:59 PM
MotorGuard M100 install on Triton V10
by A310
11/24/17 08:58 PM
Using cheaper filters at shorter intervals
by izz
11/24/17 08:56 PM
3" vs 4" casters
by JHZR2
11/24/17 07:26 PM
2001 4.6 misfire on one cylinder
by terry274
11/24/17 07:01 PM
Buying a house! Hard to find a non hoa area.
by motor_oil_madman
11/24/17 07:00 PM
Best Dextron Vl brand for overheating conditions
by 911Hunter
11/24/17 06:33 PM
Engine Damage from Starting Fluid?
by StevieC
11/24/17 05:50 PM
Opinions on bubble balancers.
by ram_man
11/24/17 05:41 PM
FYI: EPA on "Waste Oil"
by bunnspecial
11/24/17 05:39 PM
Small Hobby project :)
by maverickfhs
11/24/17 04:40 PM
Castrol (3 varieties) $2/qt, O'Reilly Auto
by D60
11/24/17 04:36 PM
Newest Members
BobStirratt, CajunLariat, knead2no, izz, Heema
63494 Registered Users
Who's Online
19 registered (DS9, kennyv1, Farmer, Loi, billt460, gathermewool, 4 invisible), 790 Guests and 14 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
63494 Members
66 Forums
274273 Topics
4559189 Posts

Max Online: 3590 @ 01/24/17 08:07 PM
Donate to BITOG
Page 5 of 13 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 12 13 >
Topic Options
#3245676 - 01/12/14 10:05 AM Re: Cell phone/driving: an officer's view [Re: dernp]
DAC17 Offline


Registered: 02/12/04
Posts: 151
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.
_________________________
2017 Corvette Z51
2016 Ford Escape Titanium
2017 Chevy Volt Premier

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: 151
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!
_________________________
2017 Corvette Z51
2016 Ford Escape Titanium
2017 Chevy Volt Premier

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: 7944
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, Delco
2011 Crown Vic P71, 5W-20 NextGen, Motorcraft
2012 Suzuki Burgman 400, Valvoline 10W40, K&N

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: 1878
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.
_________________________
2015 F150 Lariat M1 0-20 FRAM U(24k)
2017 Sub OB M1 5-30 FRAM U(19k)



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: 1878
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.
_________________________
2015 F150 Lariat M1 0-20 FRAM U(24k)
2017 Sub OB M1 5-30 FRAM U(19k)



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: 4939
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.
_________________________
'11 Hyundai Sonata GLS
'11 Scion XB

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: 2299
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?
_________________________
On the internet, people can be anything they want. Why do so many choose to be stupid?

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: 8516
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
_________________________
2012 Toyota Camry 68k-PUP 5w20,OEM filter, RT43s.
2005 Toyota Matrix 122k miles - VWB 5w30 conv, Valvoline oil filter. Nokian eNTYRES.

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: 22611
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, Wix 57356
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: 17064
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: 7944
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, Delco
2011 Crown Vic P71, 5W-20 NextGen, Motorcraft
2012 Suzuki Burgman 400, Valvoline 10W40, K&N

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: 31708
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: 9200
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: 7817
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!!
_________________________
13 elantra 63k 5w30 QSUD
03 chevy avalanche74k synpwr 5w30
02 saturnsc1 70k 5w30 synpwr
01 saturnsc1 185k synpwr rebuilt
93 ciera 83k 10w30 synpwr

Top
Page 5 of 13 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 12 13 >