Cell phone junkies are as bad as drunks!

Jym Dyer writes:

BTW, the California law could be a lot better - it technically
makes it illegal to make a call while stopped at a red light.
If there is a line of 10 cars in front of you, you'd have
enough time to make a quick phone call to tell someone you
are stuck in traffic and will be late, with the call completed
before traffic starts moving again.

=v= This seems very very impractical to make an exemption for.
What if the call takes longer than expected for any reason
whatsoever?

When it's about time to start moving, you just say you are
in the middle of traffic, can't talk, and will call later.
And how is "I'm stuck in traffic and going to be late" going
to take longer than expected?

Well, then we can expect motorists to be driving (or obliviously
holding up the line of traffic) "just this once," "just for a
second," etc. etc. _Jym_

Not really. Remember, I said "stopped at a red light" with
"10 cars in front of you". If the person you call hasn't
picked up the phone before the light changed, you just hang
up. Otherwise you probably have at least 20 seconds to
say, "Hi, I'm stuck in traffic and will be late," optionally
followed by "have to hang up - the light just changed."
Since everyone would know the rules, the person being called
would know that the caller could only make a very short call
and it would be rude to not end the convesation quickly.

Also, you can send a text message - phones can store
pre-canned messages, so you can have a "stuck in traffic
and will be late" message that you can send. That may
be illegal shortly as there is legislation to ban sending
text messages as well - it wasn't in the original legislation
because of the time it took to get it passed and a concern
that a change would stop the process.

With the current legislation, there is no incentive to
wait until you are stopped before calling if you are not
going to park the car first - the fine is the same whether
you are driving in heavy traffic at 40 mph or completely
stopped. The safety implications are obviously quite
different.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 07:47:12 -0700, KingOfTheApes wrote:


Drivers on Cell Phones Are as Bad as Drunks

And have you seen where the law abiding section of the phone toting
Sterling Mossi choose to pull up when answering their phones? They are
stop immediately without regard to where they may be. On bends on islands
on junctions on the pavement on double yellows.... It's as if they are
acting out some perverse retaliation for a law which rankles with them.

--
___ _______ ___ ___ ___ __ ____
/ _ \/ __/ _ | / _ \ / _ \/ _ |/ / / / /
/ // / _// __ |/ // / / ___/ __ / /_/ / /__
/____/___/_/ |_/____/ /_/ /_/ |_\____/____/

"KingOfTheApes" wrote in message
...
This is a study from 2006, but since the authorities and politicians
have not acted on it or even talked about it, we must assume TRAFFIC
SAFETY IS NOT IN THEIR LIST OF PRIORITIES. And since CYCLISTS HAVE THE
MOST TO LOSE from a collision with the cell phone junkies and drunks,
we must place them in the "most wanted" list of criminals. Oh, the
authorities and politicians could be their accomplices if this were a
court of justice.

Drivers on Cell Phones Are as Bad as Drunks

Utah Psychologists Warn Against Cell Phone Use While Driving

"A student talks on a hands-free cell phone while operating a high-
tech driving simulator. The simulator was used during a University of
Utah study that found motorists who talk on cell phones while driving
are as impaired as drunken drivers with blood-alcohol levels at the
legal limit of 0.08 percent."

http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=062206-1

NOTE: Some states are found to be totally innocent since they have
passed cell phone restrictions.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Riding a bike costs peanuts --which is why monkeys love biking"

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote88



And having an un-muzzled 2 year old screaming his/her head off in the
backseat is a distraction as well...probably in the 0.10 equivalent range!

Changing the radio station distracts you, so why not legislate and disable
that function if the car is in motion? Driving will always have
distractions. The world will never be a perfectly safe place to live. The
sooner people accept this and learn to live life anyway, the happier they'll
be.

Just be happy...

Mark C.

On Jul 31, 5:50*pm, "Mark C." wrote:
"KingOfTheApes" wrote in message

...





This is a study from 2006, but since the authorities and politicians
have not acted on it or even talked about it, we must assume TRAFFIC
SAFETY IS NOT IN THEIR LIST OF PRIORITIES. And since CYCLISTS HAVE THE
MOST TO LOSE from a collision with the cell phone junkies and drunks,
we must place them in the "most wanted" list of criminals. Oh, the
authorities and politicians could be their accomplices if this were a
court of justice.

Drivers on Cell Phones Are as Bad as Drunks

Utah Psychologists Warn Against Cell Phone Use While Driving

"A student talks on a hands-free cell phone while operating a high-
tech driving simulator. The simulator was used during a University of
Utah study that found motorists who talk on cell phones while driving
are as impaired as drunken drivers with blood-alcohol levels at the
legal limit of 0.08 percent."

http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=062206-1

NOTE: Some states are found to be totally innocent since they have
passed cell phone restrictions.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------*-----
"Riding a bike costs peanuts --which is why monkeys love biking"

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote88

And having an un-muzzled 2 year old screaming his/her head off in the
backseat is a distraction as well...probably in the 0.10 equivalent range!

Changing the radio station distracts you, so why not legislate and disable
that function if the car is in motion? Driving will always have
distractions. The world will never be a perfectly safe place to live. The
sooner people accept this and learn to live life anyway, the happier they'll
be.

Just be happy...

Mark C.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Just be happy... Hey, that calls for a few drinks while driving! Party
like it's 1999 until you get stopped by the police or kill someone.
Cheers!

In rec.bicycles.misc Leo Lichtman wrote:

The study was based on driving with a hands-free phone. So California
passed a law making it illegal to drive while holding a phone to your ear,
while hands free is still legal. If anything, that will make matters
worse, because you won't be able to look at a driver and know whether he is
drunk-equivalent.

Talking on a phone, hands free or not, is a channel which sucks your
attention away from driving.

This is pretty much my opinion also. In a couple years (decades) we'll
end up just banning talking on the phone while driving. Just like we
did with drinking and driving.

--
Dane Buson -
Take your work seriously but never take yourself seriously; and do not
take what happens either to yourself or your work seriously.
-- Booth Tarkington

In rec.bicycles.misc Mark C. wrote:

And having an un-muzzled 2 year old screaming his/her head off in the
backseat is a distraction as well...probably in the 0.10 equivalent range!

Changing the radio station distracts you, so why not legislate and disable
that function if the car is in motion? Driving will always have
distractions. The world will never be a perfectly safe place to live. The
sooner people accept this and learn to live life anyway, the happier they'll
be.

Most of these are momentary distractions (with the exception of the
spaztastic child possibly). And even though they are momentary, you
hear all the time about people crashing their car while doing precisely
these things. People are on the cell phone for hours at a time (in many
cases). That's not a momentary distraction, that's a completely
avoidable long-term disability to your driving.

--
Dane Buson -
Performance:
A statement of the speed at which a computer system works. Or
rather, might work under certain circumstances. Or was rumored
to be working over in Jersey about a month ago.

Dane Buson writes:

Talking on a phone, hands free or not, is a channel which sucks your
attention away from driving.

This is pretty much my opinion also. In a couple years (decades) we'll
end up just banning talking on the phone while driving. Just like we
did with drinking and driving.

In a couple of decades, we'll probably have deployed collision-
avoidance electronics in cars that will compensate for the level
of driver distraction related to cell-phone use.

Just something like cruise control systems that use low-powered
radar to keep a safe distance from a car ahead would make a
difference.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:49:13 -0700, Dane Buson
wrote:

In rec.bicycles.misc Mark C. wrote:

And having an un-muzzled 2 year old screaming his/her head off in the
backseat is a distraction as well...probably in the 0.10 equivalent range!

Changing the radio station distracts you, so why not legislate and disable
that function if the car is in motion? Driving will always have
distractions. The world will never be a perfectly safe place to live. The
sooner people accept this and learn to live life anyway, the happier they'll
be.

Most of these are momentary distractions (with the exception of the
spaztastic child possibly). And even though they are momentary, you
hear all the time about people crashing their car while doing precisely
these things. People are on the cell phone for hours at a time (in many
cases). That's not a momentary distraction, that's a completely
avoidable long-term disability to your driving.


spaztastic?

Good to see that the school holidays have started - or are you a
merkin?




--
you can either promote cycling or promote helmets,
the two are incompatible.

In rec.bicycles.misc judith wrote:
Dane Buson wrote:

Most of these are momentary distractions (with the exception of the
spaztastic child possibly). And even though they are momentary, you
hear all the time about people crashing their car while doing precisely
these things. People are on the cell phone for hours at a time (in many
cases). That's not a momentary distraction, that's a completely
avoidable long-term disability to your driving.

spaztastic?

Good to see that the school holidays have started - or are you a
merkin?

Well, it's been almost a decade since I last interacted with academia
personally. I'd also like to point out that at no point have I ever
been a beard for anyone's progenitive organs.

But if you mean, am I doomed by my geographic location to butcher the
English language in the American fashion? Then the answer would be yes.

--
Dane Buson -
The wind doth taste so bitter sweet,
Like Jaspar wine and sugar,
It must have blown through someone's feet,
Like those of Caspar Weinberger.
-- P. Opus

Mark C. wrote:
...
And having an un-muzzled 2 year old screaming his/her head off in the
backseat is a distraction as well...probably in the 0.10 equivalent range!...

I am all for banning carrying children in motor vehicles.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken /
She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.”