VanDy Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 If you got that from my response then I would question your powers of comprehension...What part of my post made you think "guilty until proven innocent"? This requires the misconception that an arrest is predicated on guilt. It is not - it is on probable cause or a warrant. I said the police officer should be able to arrest based upon probable cause. This is how it always is.There are many questions to answer - like GPS features, as phone become more multifunctional devices. In the UK you simply cannot touch your phone while driving for any reason. But if you mount it to your dash and use a handfree and dial by voice (or dial by hand when not in traffic) then you are good to go. You can answer the phhone too - you just have to use a handsfree.Yep, got me there, oops, but I'm standing by my point. I do see where people would approve the law, but I dont think it would change much other then one more thing the govt has control over.. Sent from my iPhone using SIRI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 there are plenty of emergencies that do not warrant a 911 call IMOLike? What emergency can someone need you for over a tow truck, police officer, medic, etc or that can't wait 30-60 seconds while you pull over to answer or call back? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 If you can rattle out a whole text medssage in the time it takes someone to pick up a bottle cap then you are some kind of teenager's texting hero.or you have a smart phone with voice-to-text Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Had your dad died would you feel differently about that $100 fine being all he deserved? Do you think that bottle cap was really worth him wrecking into your dad for?Had he been killed, I'm sure the penalty would have been different. But, he wasn't so he got a ticket.I understand what you guys are saying and DUI like penalties would maybe prevent more serious crashes with bad injuries or death. In theory I'm for that, but I live in reality and we all know just like the DUI law it may deter some but its still going to happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 You're not alone.Neither Tbut or I are saying its not a good law, we're saying DUI like penalties are excessive with a law that would have a SHIT TON of gray area. A DUI has no gray area, you are either over the limit or under the limit. End of storyAgain, no grey area. Don't answer phone while driving. Pull over. Takes 30-60 seconds to pull over. If there's an emergency that can't wait 30-60 seconds, they shouldn't be calling you to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 What about eating? Putting on make-up? Or reaching in the back seat to smack your kids? or lighting a smoke?These have been around longer then cell phones are possibly as dangerous as answering a call and aren't illegal (yet) should we add them to the list?Sent from my iPhone using SIRIPersonally, I think distracted driving is just that, distracted driving. Stupid should be penalized. Unfortunately, it's not in this country. Look where that model has gotten us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 or you have a smart phone with voice-to-text Which is handsfree, and irrelevant in this argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jst2fst Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 There isn't a statewide ban, is there? I thought it was just a few cities?My mistake only in a few cities but still I've yet to see a cop pull over someone for doing this. Also it would use up more resources if they had to monitor this more closely. I use a text to speech and a bluetooth and I've been guilty of the text here and there but manage to keep on the roadway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVTPilot Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 If you can rattle out a whole text medssage in the time it takes someone to pick up a bottle cap then you are some kind of teenager's texting hero. Takes me longer than that. I've watched people texting and they use a bottle-cap's amount of time for each letter.Sooo...if you're driving/riding the bike and watching someone text, who is watching where you are going? Just curious. I'd hate for you to be distracted by someone else distracted and then hit someone. That would be the vehicular equivalent of dividing by zero.But I digress. I agree there should be some sort of blanket line of punishment for someone who texts while driving and creates an unsafe situation, up to creating an accident. I'm not sure it carries the same weight at the basic level that a DUI does, though. Certainly, if someone is pounding out a text and causes an accident, there should be a greater level of punishment because that specific situation dictates it. Punishment should be proportionate to degree of disregard that created the situation. Then again, the next time our judicial system gets that right, it will be the first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 A DUI has no gray area, you are either over the limit or under the limit. End of storyOVI is not just as simple as over/under end of story.you can still get a blow under the limit and get charged if the cop thinks that you are too impaired to drive. OVI is not restricted to alcohol either it counts drugs also...so i could take 5 xanax, drink a beer and then get pulled over. i wont blow over .08, but im def gonna be crunk out on pills, and can still be charged with OVI if the cop thinks im too impaired to drive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Like? What emergency can someone need you for over a tow truck, police officer, medic, etc or that can't wait 30-60 seconds while you pull over to answer or call back?Tyler's example was a good one. I can't think of anything fast enough to keep up or in prior experience other than when my grandma had a stroke. I live 20mins from her house and the nearest fire department was 7 mins. I was in my car a mile from my house when my grandpa called me after calling 911. I beat the ambulance to their house with 4 mins to spare. If I had any medical training, I bet I could've done something moreIf you can rattle out a whole text medssage in the time it takes someone to pick up a bottle cap then you are some kind of teenager's texting hero. Takes me longer than that. I've watched people texting and they use a bottle-cap's amount of time for each letter.well they suck at texting . On my old phone I could type almost a whole paragraph with glancing at my phone maybe 2-3 times. I'm awesome but thats not the point. Most people I know type a word, look up, type a word, look up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Pull over. Answer phone or call them back. There is no grey area here.there is a huge grey area, you just refuse to see it because youre set in your opinion.how to prove if the call was an emergency?who decides what constitutes as an "emergency"? (see my earlier example)what if a phone call comes in that you take on a handsfree head set and immediately after the call youre in an accident, the phone record would show you on the phone at the time of the accident.what is the difference between looking at your phone to see who is calling, and using the phone? you have to look at the callerID, same as you would look down to look at a txt, change the radio, etcwhat if a person claims to have been using talk-to-txt, or speaker phone which is also hands free...how would it be proven they are lying? lock them up anyways, right?i could go on and on about circumstances that are not cookie cutter perfect situations that fit your mold Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanDy Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Wasn't there a senate bill or something, not to long ago, where they wanted cars to be equipped with devices that would Jam cell phones while the car was in gear?If not seems like a step that directionSent from my iPhone using SIRI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 OVI is not just as simple as over/under end of story.you can still get a blow under the limit and get charged if the cop thinks that you are too impaired to drive. OVI is not restricted to alcohol either it counts drugs also...so i could take 5 xanax, drink a beer and then get pulled over. i wont blow over .08, but im def gonna be crunk out on pills, and can still be charged with OVI if the cop thinks im too impaired to drive.thats true I didn't consider it. I'd still call that a bit more black and white even though it can involve officer judgement. At some point for an OVI, do they take blood test for drugs? I don't know hence why I ask. I only have experience, not personally me, with DUI'sAgain, no grey area. Don't answer phone while driving. Pull over. Takes 30-60 seconds to pull over. If there's an emergency that can't wait 30-60 seconds, they shouldn't be calling you to begin with.there is a huge grey area, you just refuse to see it because youre set in your opinion.how to prove if the call was an emergency?who decides what constitutes as an "emergency"? (see my earlier example)what if a phone call comes in that you take on a handsfree head set and immediately after the call youre in an accident, the phone record would show you on the phone at the time of the accident.what is the difference between looking at your phone to see who is calling, and using the phone? you have to look at the callerID, same as you would look down to look at a txt, change the radio, etcwhat if a person claims to have been using talk-to-txt, or speaker phone which is also hands free...how would it be proven they are lying? lock them up anyways, right?i could go on and on about circumstances that are not cookie cutter perfect situations that fit your moldyup all what Tyler said again. There are about 50 things other than talking or texting on my phone that I could be doing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Wasn't there a senate bill or something, not to long ago, where they wanted cars to be equipped with devices that would Jam cell phones while the car was in gear?If not seems like a step that directionSent from my iPhone using SIRIso youre suggesting the ban of handsfree devices also? some of you people dont live in reality...im completely shockedand for the record - new cars have a lot of cell phone features built in where they have a mic and speakers and you can make and take calls through the car stereo without your hands leaving the wheel or your eyes leaving the road....if they were trying to jam cell signals, i doubt major auto companies would continue to waste resources on these features Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Wasn't there a senate bill or something, not to long ago, where they wanted cars to be equipped with devices that would Jam cell phones while the car was in gear?there is a glaring problem with that idea though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 there just needs to be a law that if youre a fucking idiot you get a ticket....seems legit to me, second or third offense you get sent to a "camp"...i think im onto something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 there is a huge grey area, you just refuse to see it because youre set in your opinion.how to prove if the call was an emergency?who decides what constitutes as an "emergency"? (see my earlier example)what if a phone call comes in that you take on a handsfree head set and immediately after the call youre in an accident, the phone record would show you on the phone at the time of the accident.what is the difference between looking at your phone to see who is calling, and using the phone? you have to look at the callerID, same as you would look down to look at a txt, change the radio, etcwhat if a person claims to have been using talk-to-txt, or speaker phone which is also hands free...how would it be proven they are lying? lock them up anyways, right?i could go on and on about circumstances that are not cookie cutter perfect situations that fit your moldSeems you're the one stuck with an idea and refusing any other possibilities. Phone rings. You're driving. You don't have a handsfree device. Pull over. Answer or call back. Nothing you could possibly be doing is more important than someone else's life. I'm not even sure how you can possibly argue otherwise. Sure, you could get into an accident while on the phone. You have a bluetooth headset but weren't using it. You can lie and say you were, and if the courts can't prove you weren't then that's that according to the letter of the law. You can lie about that just the same as you can lie about anything else that might get you in trouble the with the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMMW Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 DUI laws? Yeah, right. Those work well.Maybe we should refrain from selling alcohol at gas stations. That would certainly cut down on the bums begging for gas money. Who knows if we would drink/drive less.As for laws against texting/phone use ... it's going to be irreverent. People will still get hurt badly.I'm just going to start riding on the sidewalk. F' the pedestrians and the law. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Tyler's example was a good one. I can't think of anything fast enough to keep up or in prior experience other than when my grandma had a stroke. I live 20mins from her house and the nearest fire department was 7 mins. I was in my car a mile from my house when my grandpa called me after calling 911. I beat the ambulance to their house with 4 mins to spare. If I had any medical training, I bet I could've done something more You don't think a stroke is an emergency? Pretty sure there isn't a police officer in the world that would consider that a non-emergency. I'm not sure how I feel about Tyler's example. I don't see how the call to him was an emergency that couldn't have waited until he pulled over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) double post dumbass Edited December 13, 2011 by Bad324 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 Seems you're the one stuck with an idea and refusing any other possibilities. Phone rings. You're driving. You don't have a handsfree device. Pull over. Answer or call backI'm definitely stuck on severity of penalty, not the actual law itself and I'm ok admitting that. I hate being penalized because of morons that can't do 2 things at once. This goes back to my feelings of why I feel that more than 50% of people on the road shouldn't even be issued a license, but thats a whole other argument Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 thats true I didn't consider it. I'd still call that a bit more black and white even though it can involve officer judgement. At some point for an OVI, do they take blood test for drugs? I don't know hence why I ask. I only have experience, not personally me, with DUI'sall OVI involves officer judgement. its the officers opinion that you are drunk, until you take the breathalyzer and it shows you are over the limit.im not sure about the blood test for drugs either... but that can bring up its own issues, mainly that drugs can stay in your system for days or even weeks depending on what it is, so it doesnt mean that you are under the influence of them at the moment you are being tested. if i took whatever on saturday, then get pulled over the next wednesday, there may be evidence of them in my system still, but clearly im not still under the influence of them 4 days later.There are about 50 things other than talking or texting on my phone that I could be doingso what are we saying here? that there shouldn't be a penalty because there are many other ways you can kill someone driving? im not clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 You don't think a stroke is an emergency? Pretty sure there isn't a police officer in the world that would consider that a non-emergency. I'm not sure how I feel about Tyler's example. I don't see how the call to him was an emergency that couldn't have waited until he pulled over. duh I'm an idiot, I used an actualy emergency. I'm selfish, I shouldn't have to pull over to answer my phone and disrupt my travels as I'm also impatient. Like chevy said, its akin to me not being able to have my CHL because some other licensed idiot shot themselves in the foot. Don't take away my liberties because everyone else is blubbering fucking idiot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted December 13, 2011 Report Share Posted December 13, 2011 yeah, i drive fine when im drunk... just because some dumbass drank too much and ran over a kid, why shouldnt i be able to tie one on and drive around? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.