Texting Whie Driving and the NTSB

[Kenstaroni]

Got an email from my office today that the NTSB has banned all hand held phone usage for DOT drivers. I've been hearing on the news that they want to ban all cell phone use, hands on or hands free in cars. Sounds great right? Save a few wrecks a year by inconveniencing the other 380 million of us...typical socialism.

So they ban all usage....people like me who practically work out of their vehicles will no longer be able to conduct business while traveling. I'm sure this will be really stimulating to the economy. I can't wait for our interstates to look like parking lots because people are pulling over to use their phones. I'm sure all that extra maneuvering of vehicles on and off the roads to use phones won't create any more accidents right?

The real problem is texting, which I don't mind not being able to do while driving, but talking on the phone hands free...now that's just going too far. Companies like mine will be spending a small fortune in extra man hours and fuel in order for their employees to comply with a crazy law like this. My work day would be several hours longer if I had to pull over for every phone call.

My rant is over...lol

[Guest mcgyver210]

I really don't like to text so Im OK there & come to think of it I really don't talk on Cell much while driving but when I do I use HandsFree.

So either way it wouldn't effect me much but I am so TIRED of GOVERNMENT KGB AGENCIES getting into my business in the name of Socialism & will always rebel against more intrusion in my life. That is how they have managed to make the USA go backwards towards what Adolf Hitler & dictators like him wanted. They hit us with little things to see what we will just let them do & before you know it we are in a Country without freedoms which is what we have now & is only going to get worse.

We are headed for a time when if you don't agree with the politicians they will just label you as a terrorist kid-nap you, strip you of any rights you were entitled to under our constitution & Imprison you indefinitely without proof or conviction. OH wait we aren't headed there we are there & it all started with little steps in the name of whatever the general majority would just accept.

Next they will tell us what to drive based on their idea of what we should drive.

Edited December 14, 2011 by mcgyver210

[G27]

The government's job is NOT to disallow any potentially dangerous behavior. If that's the mindset, however, here's zero reason to allow alcohol to be sold in the US. It is poisonous to the human body and is the cause of a great number of accidents and violence every year. I'm sure you recall what happened when the government tried banning that...

My point for asking for studies regarding whether or not 'anti texting' laws actually reduce accidents is because while it might seem logical, it might not reduce anything. In fact, in the small study I referenced earlier, they found an INCREASE in traffic accidents due to the new 'anti text' laws.

So yah, before we knee-jerk and make MORE things illegal, let's make sure that unintended consequences don't rear their ugly head.

[Timestepper]

Ok, I know I'll go down in flames for this so I'll point out in advance that the first few paragraphs are <largely> sarcasm.

First, I think texting while driving should be allowed, even encouraged in fact. I also think that folks should be allowed and encouraged to read newspapers, grade school work, shave, apply makeup and even have sex while driving and do it all without benefit of the seatbelts everyone seems to hate. (In the course of a twenty plus year career as a truck driver, averaging 110,000 miles a year, I've seen all of that and more.) Plus we should add more high-tech gadgets to each and every new car and insist that all drivers use each of these gadgets at least once per mile for every mile they spend on the road

Why do I say that? Well I'm glad you asked and I'm pleased to tell you!!!

It seems to be increasingly difficult to legislate against stupidity these days. In fact it's nearly impossible. And still no one wants stupid people to die. In the 21st century we have everything from warnings on electric hair dryers, *WARNING: DO NOT USE THIS DEVICE IN SHOWER OR BATHTUB!* to directions on a box of freakin' toothpicks! Technology has helped the human race live so much longer and so much better that natural selection can't keep up anymore. As a result we've become an over-crowded and disillusioned race of disenchanted arrogant brats.

So I say "Go ahead and text whilst piloting your 2,000 plus pound weapon down the roadways at 10 - 15 MPH above the posted speed limit! Screw using the turn signals - nobody else does! Watch an extra 5 minutes of the morning news or deliberately set your alarm to go off late so you feel the need to shave, apply makeup, etc... on your way to work!"

Then the rest of us can sit back and watch natural selection at work. And if one of these idiots takes out one of our loved ones, then we make an example out of what's left of them! By and large, besides being stupid, people are also incredibly arrogant and think that either they are above the rules or they're much too good to ever have a problem. Simple fact is that driving is like having sex: Everyone thinks they're great at it, while the fact remains that most simply don't what the hell they're doing and have just gotten lucky.

As to the problem of texting while driving... Education might help. Maybe graphic images of body parts pulled from wreckage caused by offenders. But the seemingly inborn arrogance of modern society will nullify this in short order; "Can't happen to me, I'm too good!" Stiffer penalties have also been mentioned. Well, I can't think of a much stiffer penalty than death and, unfortunately, even that doesn't seem to be much of a deterrent. I mean, good Lord! In England a few years ago, they were putting padding on light poles in London because people were getting injured from walking into them while texting!!!

There comes a point when you just can't legislate against stupidity anymore and the only alternative is to completely remove/disable the means to be stupid. In this case, phones with text capabilities. Make something simple enough even a fool can use it and only a fool will use it. And yes, it is my firm belief that anyone who texts while driving is not just a fool but a damned fool!

Want another way to put this idiocy to an end? Make the penalties stiff enough that no one can afford to do it: 1st offense, your car is impounded for a week and you spend that week in jail! 2nd offense, your car is confiscated, you spend a year in jail and you lose your license for LIFE!!! And then encourage the motoring public to report violators by offering a reward! And give LEO's the technology to detect when someone is texting while driving. Then.... ENFORCE THE FREAKING LAW UNTIL NO ONE DOES IT ANY MORE!

And if anyone thinks those penalties are too stiff... Well, they're welcome to do pallbearer duty for the families of those killed by the offenders.

Anyway, that's the not so humble rant of someone who has traveled more than 2 1/2 million miles on the highways and byways of the good ol' USofA and it's worth exactly what you paid to read it.

...TS...

[Lumber_Jack]

Ok texting while driving is dangerous. But how is talking in the phone more distracting than talking to a passenger?

Just for the record the NTSB can lick my nuts!

[Timestepper]

Ok texting while driving is dangerous. But how is talking in the phone more distracting than talking to a passenger?

It's not. Especially if you use a hands free device. I'm guessing they're thinking that the only way to completely get rid of texting is to disallow phone use by the driver altogether.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I like your sarcasm. I remember years ago at the TN State Fair there was a booth about the accidents in TN. Troopers were there and had information about traffic safety and what caused the accidents. The pictures alone was enough for me to grow up and drive more safely. Another law on the books won't do a damned thing to help with these nuts texting while driving, unless all those warning labels actually saved someone's life after all, and unless you want to continue the discussion we had on another thread. The one about felonies. Just so you know, the FRA banned the use on trains. I can't be at the controls of a locomotive while operating a phone. It was a knee jerk reaction by the NTSB and the fine is $7,500.00. Did it stop railroad employees from using their phones? I doubt it did any good except for the ones who value their jobs. Only if I'm stopped and away from the controls, or it's company business will I use mine. It's usually the ones in society that don't have the value system or whatever you want to call it that cause the rest to be punished by some over-reaching law. There's something to be said about "defensive driving", also. We talk about situational awareness on here all the time. Well doesn't that apply to the highway, too?

Edited December 15, 2011 by 6.8 AR

[TMF]

Ok, I know I'll go down in flames for this so I'll point out in advance that the first few paragraphs are <largely> sarcasm.

...TS...

Wow. That outlook on our current population makes me want to drink a bottle of draino. I don't disagree at all though. I do think the issue is lack of enforcement.

As to my initial question, can the NTSB have any say on anti-texting laws for regular drivers or just commercial?

[daddyo]

Hmmmm. Looks like the problem is actually tailgating, not texting:

Why the Proposed Car Cellphone Ban Is Wrong - Popular Mechanics

[Timestepper]

Wow. That outlook on our current population makes me want to drink a bottle of draino. I don't disagree at all though. I do think the issue is lack of enforcement.

As to my initial question, can the NTSB have any say on anti-texting laws for regular drivers or just commercial?

I don't really think that the issue is lack of enforcement so much as a need for the law in the first place. No one wants to be responsible for their own actions anymore and so Big Brother feels the need to legislate against their stupidity. Used to be, we had to look both ways before crossing the street. Now motorists have to stop for pedestrians.

As to the NTSB and their jurisdiction, think of what the acronym stands for: National Transportation Safety Board. (Note that it's not: National Commercial Transportation Safety Board.) Point in fact - Even though not all commercial drivers are as safety conscious as we should be at all times, a very large portion accidents involving commercial vehicles were caused by the initial actions of a non-commercial vehicle. Simply put, I think that EVERYBODY should be held to a higher standard, not just professional drivers.

[Lumber_Jack]

I've heard a statistic that after cell phones became main stream ie '95ish, that traffic accidents have declined continually.

But you know what they say about statistics....87.32% are made up on the spot.

[lowbud]

I'm so sick of passing the left lane slow pokes only to see them yapping on the phone as i'm passing. Why the left lane???? What the hell is wrong with people?

[TMF]

I'm so sick of passing the left lane slow pokes only to see them yapping on the phone as i'm passing. Why the left lane???? What the hell is wrong with people?

Because everyone knows the world revolves around them, and most think they're living in an MTV reality show.

[Timestepper]

Because everyone knows the world revolves around them, and most think they're living in an MTV reality show.

BINGO!

[RobertNashville]

I'm so sick of passing the left lane slow pokes only to see them yapping on the phone as i'm passing. Why the left lane???? What the hell is wrong with people?

I would say that there are three basic types of people who just "hang out" in the passing lane...

1. The stupid (who probably shouldn't even be behind the wheel

2. The distracted (cell phone users, etc.) who may have needed to be in the passing lane FIVE MILES AGO!, and

3. The self-appointed who believe that they have a civil duty to curtail "speeding" (usually any speed above what THEY feel comfortable driving).

On the other side of the coin, there are more than enough jerks out there who think that the guy doing 75/80 in a 70 zone AND is actually passing slower vehicles should find a way to move over (even if it endangers others) just so the jerk who wants to do 90 doesn't have to wait 20 seconds for them to complete their pass!

[mikegideon]

I gotta admit. When I was driving a lot of interstate miles, I was pretty aggressive about pressuring the left lane coma cases. I never drove 80, but would lock my cruise on 77 or 78. My favorite is the folks that are scared of semi's, so they get next to them, and just drive the same speed. My solution... the crazy man behind you is much scarier than that semi.

[Timestepper]