Unenforceable nonsense or slippery slope for probable cause?

Fash · Post by **Fash** » May 13, 2007, 7:25 pm

http://www.nbc10.com/news/13286707/deta ... i&psp=news

TRENTON, N.J. -- New Jersey legislators Thursday pushed forward a plan to make it illegal to text message while driving.

The Assembly Consumer Affairs Committee voted unanimously to release the proposal after several legislators admitted frequently firing off text messages while behind the wheel, even though they know doing so is dangerous.

Assemblyman Paul Moriarty acknowledges doing it himself, but he's not proud of it.

"It's very, very dangerous," he said.

Citing that risk, the Democratic assemblyman wants to stop motorists from sending text messages while driving.

"It's more dangerous than talking on a cell phone because I believe you can keep your eyes on the road when talking on a cell phone," Moriarty said.

That's not the case when typing and sending text messages, he said.

"I only assume they're using their knees to drive," Moriarty said.

State Police are looking into whether text messaging played a role in the April 12 Garden State Parkway accident that seriously injured Gov. Jon S. Corzine.

Investigators want to know if Corzine's driver was distracted before the accident by text messages from a Berkeley Heights police officer angry about the driver having an alleged affair with his wife, though state police union officials contend the driver wasn't distracted by any message.

Corzine suffered numerous broken bones in the crash, breathed with the help of a ventilator for more than a week and was unable to resume work as governor until Monday. He faces a long recovery.

The proposed bill would fine drivers up to $250 if caught using mobile devices to send text messages. Unlike the state's ban on using a hand-held cell phone while driving, police would be able to stop anyone they see sending text messages while driving.

Police can only give tickets for using a hand-held cell phone while driving if they pull over a driver for another reason.

Arizona, Connecticut and Washington are among the states considering similar laws to ban text messaging while driving.

Moriarty, of Gloucester County, cited a recent Nationwide Insurance survey that found one in five people text while driving. That number soars to about one in three among those aged 18 to 34. The survey predicted both those estimates would rise as more people get access to mobile devices that allow text messaging.

"I think we have to get out ahead of this and send a strict message that this is dangerous," Moriarty said.

Yet safety advocates said focus is needed on all driver distractions, not just texting.

"Removing driving distractions from the roads is a worthy undertaking," said David Weinstein, spokesman for AAA Mid-Atlantic. "When you name one distraction in law and leave others unnamed, what you're doing is implicitly Okaying the unnamed distractions."

He said careless driving prohibitions already ban acts like texting while driving.

"We already have a law to tackle this and every distraction on the road," Weinstein said.

Inattentive driving was the leading cause of fatal accidents in New Jersey in 2005, factoring into 172 of 767 fatalities. The state doesn't track what distractions caused the accidents.

A proposal by Assemblymen John Wisniewski and Joseph Vas would require police accident reports detail whether drivers were distracted and what type of distraction was involved.

"A quick glance at directions, a cell phone number, a text message or even the radio dial can mean the difference between a safe trip and a car accident," said Wisniewski, D-Middlesex. "With distracted driving becoming the rule rather than the exception, details concerning driver distractions should be required information on all police accident reports."

How are they going to SEE you sending a text message? Does anyone hold the fucking phone up in the air while doing it? This is beyond retarded.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » May 13, 2007, 7:54 pm

Driving is a privilege. You shouldn't be distracted with devices such as cellphones and Blackberrys.

I'd imagine if they see you holding it and punching buttons you're obviously not paying attention to what you should be: the road.

I say ban them all! Honestly I don't see how people ever got along 20 years ago without having a cellphone glued to their ear. Such hardships the human race has endured!

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » May 13, 2007, 8:22 pm

There are two primary reasons to be holding a cell phone: placing/receiving a call, and sending/reading a text message. Any ban on one of those two without reference to the other would render the law unenforcable.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » May 13, 2007, 8:34 pm

I think you're missing the point... one does not hold a cellphone to their EAR to send a text message.

I do it all the time, it's down by my LEGS where no one would be able to see it.

Even if I had it up by the steering wheel, I cannot imagine how a cop could see you playing with a phone unless you're stopped at a traffic light and it's robocop.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » May 13, 2007, 8:51 pm

This is taking away my rights of freedom and I don't like it. Everyone is different. Some people are incapable of walking and chewing gum and most can. Should we ban chewing gum and walking? Just because a small minority of people are fucking idiots and cannot temper their uses of these devices all of us should not have to pay. This is really getting frustrating. I'm fucking tired of the majority being fucked over by such a small minority. A couple overly sensitive cock suckers banish Imus and other DJs all the time, when most of us are fine and can handle it.

I also find it hilarious how those who spoke in outrage over the Patriot Act taking away liberties have no problem taking away liberties from others all the time. Yes, you Assholla.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » May 13, 2007, 9:12 pm

Oh look, the retard Midnyte made a funny using my name. Welcome to 5 years ago. How's fourth grade treating you? Will this be the year you finally move to fifth? I hear that's when they teach you the difference between a right and a privilege.

Where does it say you have the RIGHT to endanger those around you while messing with mobile communication devices while driving? Here's a clue... You don't have that fucking right. You're supposed to be focused on the road not your latest incoming text message or chat with the local brothel while scheduling your next visit. I suppose next you're going to say stopping people for speeding and DUIs is violating your rights as well.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » May 13, 2007, 9:39 pm

asslana lol

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » May 13, 2007, 9:48 pm

Fash wrote:I think you're missing the point... one does not hold a cellphone to their EAR to send a text message.

I do it all the time, it's down by my LEGS where no one would be able to see it.

Even if I had it up by the steering wheel, I cannot imagine how a cop could see you playing with a phone unless you're stopped at a traffic light and it's robocop.

I didn't miss your point; I just don't agree with you.

If a cop sees you with a cellphone in your hand while driving on the freeway in WA, then they can pull you over and fine you. You will not dodge the ticket with the "oh, I was just TM'ing not placing a call" line. The legislation is comprehensive enough to make it enforceable.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » May 13, 2007, 9:50 pm

and i remember when you people called me gay for text messaging. i'm a fucking pioneer.

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » May 13, 2007, 9:55 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:This is taking away my rights of freedom and I don't like it. Everyone is different. Some people are incapable of walking and chewing gum and most can. Should we ban chewing gum and walking? Just because a small minority of people are fucking idiots and cannot temper their uses of these devices all of us should not have to pay. This is really getting frustrating. I'm fucking tired of the majority being fucked over by such a small minority. A couple overly sensitive cock suckers banish Imus and other DJs all the time, when most of us are fine and can handle it.

I also find it hilarious how those who spoke in outrage over the Patriot Act taking away liberties have no problem taking away liberties from others all the time. Yes, you Assholla.

You are confusing rights with privileges; your freedom of speech to complain about this issue is a right whereas permission to drive, and the restrictions placed upon you while driving are privileges.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » May 13, 2007, 10:12 pm

I often see people hold their cell phone up by the steering wheel while texting...Especially when they are stopped at a green light...

Fash · Post by **Fash** » May 13, 2007, 11:18 pm

archeiron wrote:If a cop sees you with a cellphone in your hand while driving on the freeway in WA, then they can pull you over and fine you. You will not dodge the ticket with the "oh, I was just TM'ing not placing a call" line. The legislation is comprehensive enough to make it enforceable.

lol, you did miss my point... I would never use that 'line', lol... i don't think its safe or OK to do either...

however, i do think it highly unlikely that a cop could visually focus and identify a cellphone in your hand if its not up to your ear. (and even then, hes not identifying a cellphone, it just looks like you have a phone to your head)

this is why I asked if it is a slippery slope for probable cause pullovers... who doesn't have a cellphone? can't the cop now just say i thought i saw a cellphone and pull anyone over hoping to find something else in plain sight or otherwise?

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » May 14, 2007, 12:06 am

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » May 14, 2007, 12:09 am

Fash wrote:lI do it all the time, it's down by my LEGS where no one would be able to see it.

Fash wrote: i don't think its safe or OK to do either...

So are you reckless or just stupid?

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » May 14, 2007, 12:10 am

Arborealus wrote:
Fash wrote:lI do it all the time, it's down by my LEGS where no one would be able to see it.

Fash wrote: i don't think its safe or OK to do either...
So are you reckless or just stupid?

but that wasn't his point! His point was: How will they be able to see him doing it!

I am guessing the phone would be shoved up his rectum when he went off the road and plowed into a tree.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » May 14, 2007, 12:29 am

I suppose it is a little bit of both... I don't wear my seatbelt either. I knee-drive while smoking pot, texting, and jerking off at the same time. What's it to you?

I'm not saying it's a conspiracy, but midnyte is right...

Did I just say that?

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » May 14, 2007, 12:38 am

Fash wrote:I suppose it is a little bit of both... I don't wear my seatbelt either. I knee-drive while smoking pot, texting, and jerking off at the same time. What's it to you?

If you get hurt or killed? Nothing.. It's your choice. Have at it. But hey guess what? You're not the only one on the fucking road. YOU'RE DRIVING! It's not call your friends time.

That's the point.

Fash wrote:I'm not saying it's a conspiracy, but midnyte is right...

Did I just say that?

Before you agree with him you may want to actually read what he wrote. He's calling you a 'fucking idiot' lolz

Just because a small minority of people are fucking idiots and cannot temper their uses of these devices all of us should not have to pay. This is really getting frustrating. I'm fucking tired of the majority being fucked over by such a small minority.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » May 14, 2007, 12:48 am

Zamtuk wrote:and i remember when you people called me gay for text messaging. i'm a fucking pioneer.

a gay pioneer

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » May 14, 2007, 1:29 am

im going to text you my disapproval of that statement.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » May 14, 2007, 2:27 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:This is taking away my rights of freedom and I don't like it. Everyone is different. Some people are incapable of walking and chewing gum and most can. Should we ban chewing gum and walking? Just because a small minority of people are fucking idiots and cannot temper their uses of these devices all of us should not have to pay. This is really getting frustrating. I'm fucking tired of the majority being fucked over by such a small minority. A couple overly sensitive cock suckers banish Imus and other DJs all the time, when most of us are fine and can handle it.

I also find it hilarious how those who spoke in outrage over the Patriot Act taking away liberties have no problem taking away liberties from others all the time. Yes, you Assholla.

are you seriously equating driving with walking? Is it honestly your contention that text messaging while driving is only distracting to stupid people and you are much too smart to be distracted?

As far as enforceability is concerned, the mere fact that the law is on the books will keep a pretty substantial number of people from doing it, whether or not it is enforceable.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » May 14, 2007, 2:40 am

laws like this exist mostly to determine liability. in BC it's illegal to touch your stereo in your car. you're never going to get a ticket for it, but if you make a statement about why you didnt see that baby carriage coming because you were putting in your honeymoon suite CD then you'll get a ticket for it and the police will determine the accident was caused by yourself.

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » May 14, 2007, 2:41 am

Here in denmark we just had a few tragic deaths because people (mainly teenagers though) managed to get themselves killed because they walked out into the street without checking if the traffic ligth was green to them.
Thats people on foot, now try to imagine same idiots behind the wheel of 1 ton of metal able of injuring lots of people fast.

Its already illegal to use a cell phone in cars here unless you got it in a hand-free device, so also illegal to use text messenging.
And were not just talking small fine illegal, get caught using a cell phone in one hand while driving, and you get one notch on your driving record. 3 notches within i think its 5 years, and you loose your drivers licence.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » May 14, 2007, 2:51 am

Looking forward to some fucking enforcement on cellphone use while driving. You fucking fucks are fucking with my commute. If you would pay the fuck attention to traffic signals and speed limits, you would not fucking get on my nerves so fucking much. Fuck off and hit a tree. DO YOU HEAR ME NOW MOTHERFUCKER???

I don't know what compels you fucking asspatsies. Why do you feel dialing a fucking number comes after putting your piece of shit car in reverse? Have you ever heard of 'Time off'? She is going to leave you anyways, so don't call her. Listen to the fucking radio or just quit the Prozac so you can afford a fucking iPod. Nobody gives a sideways fuck that you are leaving work or going through the drivethru at DEL TACO.

Fuck you you lazy piece of shit. I hope someone stabs you with an old Palm Pilot.

Fuck

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » May 14, 2007, 3:34 am

Bojangels · Post by **Bojangels** » May 14, 2007, 6:02 am

If you have your phone down by your legs while you're texting how can you see the road? I think TMing while driving is way more dangerous than talking on a cell phone. If I was trying to text and drive I think I'd hold it up by the wheel so I could at least see in front of me.

In Japan, you see people riding bicycles down the street and texting, it's scary shit.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » May 14, 2007, 7:49 am

can you text someone and shoot a handgun at the same time?

Drolgin Steingrinder · Post by **Drolgin Steingrinder** » May 14, 2007, 9:10 am

Canelek wrote:Looking forward to some fucking enforcement on cellphone use while driving. You fucking fucks are fucking with my commute. If you would pay the fuck attention to traffic signals and speed limits, you would not fucking get on my nerves so fucking much. Fuck off and hit a tree. DO YOU HEAR ME NOW MOTHERFUCKER???

I don't know what compels you fucking asspatsies. Why do you feel dialing a fucking number comes after putting your piece of shit car in reverse? Have you ever heard of 'Time off'? She is going to leave you anyways, so don't call her. Listen to the fucking radio or just quit the Prozac so you can afford a fucking iPod. Nobody gives a sideways fuck that you are leaving work or going through the drivethru at DEL TACO.

Fuck you you lazy piece of shit. I hope someone stabs you with an old Palm Pilot.

Fuck

SYSTEM NOTICE: REMAINING WORD QUOTA FOR USER "CANELEK" (WORD: "FUCK") UNTIL YEAR 2011 IS NOW 2 (TWO).

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » May 14, 2007, 9:31 am

I really think it is fucking sad how you don't see this as a horrible precedent. I don't text and drive, nor do I even like to text at all. I prefer speaking with people. But, it is a freedom issue. Slowly, they are taking away the individuality of people by mandating which priviledges we should be allowed to have. It is some fucked up shit what is going on.

Funny too how when a so-called republican" says these things it is a conspiracy. When the leftists say it, it is just and right thinking and the evil republican are trying to take away our freedoms, for reals!

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » May 14, 2007, 9:44 am

I agree with Mid. They are taking away our right to drive recklessly. How dare they try to protect people on the road.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » May 14, 2007, 10:31 am

What exactly is the 'precedent' here? I seem to be missing it. They're not takign away anything. They're simply refining existing laws on road safety as things like this weren't a problem 20 years ago. If you find it as such a egregious removal of your personal freedoms perhaps you should stop driving in protest.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » May 14, 2007, 10:33 am

Lynks wrote:I agree with Mid. They are taking away our right to drive recklessly. How dare they try to protect people on the road.

No dude. They are saying that you cannot handle doing two things at the same time. Many people can though. Only a very small, tiny percentage of retards cannot do two things at the same time. They are doing this because it is something they think they can get through and it will make them look like they have accomplished something. If they truly cared about driving safety they would ban all drive through windows, smoking while driving, and talking to passengers while driving.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » May 14, 2007, 10:46 am

I quote a page of the Book of Midnyte, if you are not doing it, you have nothing to worry about.

BTW, NO ONE can text message and drive safely at the same time. To drive safely, you have to look AT the road. When you are texting, you ARE LOOKING AT the phone and NOT the road. Smoking isn't the same thing because you don't have to look at it. Same with talking. I'm not sure what you are talking about when you say drive through windows since you aren't actually driving at the time.

But like what Kyou said, this law was created mostly to determine liability.

miir · Post by **miir** » May 14, 2007, 10:50 am

It's not a freedom issue.... it's a safety issue.
That's all.

There have been a number of studies showing that people are unable to operate an automobile safely when using a cel phone or PDA.

To argue that people should have the right to text message or use a cel phone while driving is the same as arguing a person's right to drive while under the influence of alcohol.

Kwonryu DragonFist · Post by **Kwonryu DragonFist** » May 14, 2007, 10:52 am

LOL @ the Asshola/Asslana name-calling!

We (teh veeshanites of the veeshanvault crew) are better than this!

Post by **Sylvus** » May 14, 2007, 11:14 am

I think it's kind of funny that someone who can rarely even type and form a cogent argument at the same time thinks that they can safely operate a vehicle and read/write on a device inside the car at the same time. Should people be allowed to read the paper while driving? How about type their memoirs on a laptop while driving?

Sure, people can and do send text messages while driving without causing accidents. I've personally done it quite a few times, as bad an idea as it is. But the fact remains that while you're looking down at your phone, you are not looking at the road, and in that instant any number of bad things can happen, from animals or people stepping out in front of your car to cars in front of you hitting the breaks or pulling out in front of you. This law is being enacted to try and limit the damage you can do to yourself and to others, and is totally in line with you having to wear your seatbelt in your car or not being allowed to drive 120mph or drink and drive.

For someone who has so often chastised others for not seeing the big picture, you sure are nearsighted when it comes to it. Every time we have a discussion about a change that will end up being positive in the long run, however minor, you immediately discount it if it won't fix all the world's problems.

Banning texting while driving is not going eliminate all potential for people to be accidentally hurt or killed while driving a car, but I will conservatively estimate that it is going to save at least one life. How many lives is preserving people's "right" to text while driving going to save?

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » May 14, 2007, 11:16 am

Lynks wrote:I quote a page of the Book of Midnyte, if you are not doing it, you have nothing to worry about.

BTW, NO ONE can text message and drive safely at the same time. To drive safely, you have to look AT the road. When you are texting, you ARE LOOKING AT the phone and NOT the road. Smoking isn't the same thing because you don't have to look at it. Same with talking. I'm not sure what you are talking about when you say drive through windows since you aren't actually driving at the time.

But like what Kyou said, this law was created mostly to determine liability.

OHHHH, Okay so it's only looking away that they are truly concerned about. Okay then, so they will be removing all billboards then? They will be removing all of those flashy signs with scrolling marquee messages along the side of the road in fromt of bank and car lots? They will be removing in dash stereo systems that require you to look away to change the station or volume, etc? They will immediately require all stereo system to have a smooth face with no buttons at all on them and all controls must now be placed upon the steering wheel? Not like they have it now, but "all" controls. So they are really going after the real issues affecting those distracted drivers? Very cool. I stand corrected.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » May 14, 2007, 11:23 am

Sylvus wrote:I think it's kind of funny that someone who can rarely even type and form a cogent argument at the same time thinks that they can safely operate a vehicle and read/write on a device inside the car at the same time. Should people be allowed to read the paper while driving? How about type their memoirs on a laptop while driving?

Sure, people can and do send text messages while driving without causing accidents. I've personally done it quite a few times, as bad an idea as it is. But the fact remains that while you're looking down at your phone, you are not looking at the road, and in that instant any number of bad things can happen, from animals or people stepping out in front of your car to cars in front of you hitting the breaks or pulling out in front of you. This law is being enacted to try and limit the damage you can do to yourself and to others, and is totally in line with you having to wear your seatbelt in your car or not being allowed to drive 120mph or drink and drive.

For someone who has so often chastised others for not seeing the big picture, you sure are nearsighted when it comes to it. Every time we have a discussion about a change that will end up being positive in the long run, however minor, you immediately discount it if it won't fix all the world's problems.

Banning texting while driving is not going eliminate all potential for people to be accidentally hurt or killed while driving a car, but I will conservatively estimate that it is going to save at least one life. How many lives is preserving people's "right" to text while driving going to save?

I am talking about the big picture Sylus. I can't believe how fucking narrow minded and short sighted you can be for some one who I find to be quite intelligent. You don't see this as yet another bullshit symbolic gesture? There are actual real distractions out there, but talking them away would actually make a big difference, but hurt businesses. So, running around pretending like this actually does anything but put a little bandaid on the big festering wound is nothing more than a symbolic gesture. So some assholes can put it on their resume and get in fromt of cameras and proclaim they have made some hard decisions and saved some lives. You have to be trolls, all of you. There just is no way you don't see this shit. It is right in front of you.

miir · Post by **miir** » May 14, 2007, 11:26 am

So mid, does that mean you support a person's right to drink and drive?

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » May 14, 2007, 11:28 am

Stereo buttons dont change. You dont need to look at them to operate them. Signs are on the road. What you should be looking at. Phone calls and texts are not always the same. You need to divert your attention when it comes to those things.

miir · Post by **miir** » May 14, 2007, 11:35 am

Sionistic wrote:Stereo buttons dont change. You dont need to look at them to operate them. Signs are on the road. What you should be looking at. Phone calls and texts are not always the same. You need to divert your attention when it comes to those things.

Yea, it's not just the action of 'looking at' something that causes the distraction.
Billboards, traffic signs, rear/side view mirrors and stereo controls can all be viewed in a split-second... even in your peripheral vision. A quick glance in the direction of the object is often more than enough.
Traffic signs are colour coded.
Billboards use gigantic text and logos for instant recognition.

To text message requires hand-eye coordination. You need to actually focus your vision and attention on the device. I have yet to meet anyone who can touch type on a phone or blackberry.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » May 14, 2007, 11:39 am

Once again we are all trolls and only Midntye sees the big picture.

Typical.

Billboards aren't even in the same category of distractions. Most people only glance at them for a second. Texting requires a bit more time and attention to accomplish.

However I'd be perfectly fine with those eyesores being removed!

Post by **Sylvus** » May 14, 2007, 11:51 am

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:I am talking about the big picture Sylus. I can't believe how fucking narrow minded and short sighted you can be for some one who I find to be quite intelligent. You don't see this as yet another bullshit symbolic gesture? There are actual real distractions out there, but talking them away would actually make a big difference, but hurt businesses. So, running around pretending like this actually does anything but put a little bandaid on the big festering wound is nothing more than a symbolic gesture. So some assholes can put it on their resume and get in fromt of cameras and proclaim they have made some hard decisions and saved some lives. You have to be trolls, all of you. There just is no way you don't see this shit. It is right in front of you.

Everything you mention is already covered by a comprehensive ban that is mentioned in the original article. Everything that you mentioned that distracts a driver in New Jersey can already be a reason for ticketing someone who is stopped, though it is unclear whether those distractions can be used to pull someone over, which is part of the language of the proposed text message ban.

He said careless driving prohibitions already ban acts like texting while driving.

"We already have a law to tackle this and every distraction on the road," Weinstein said.

I'm assuming a ban on Texting specifically is coming about because texting is pretty new in popularity (at least in this country) and it's easier to nip something in the bud before people begin taking it for granted than it is after. See: handgun thread.

Billboards and radio dials have existed since before anyone had ever heard Ralph Nader's name, banning them would be more difficult, not to mention less easy to convince people that it will do that much good. I'm not sure about how the radio in your car works, but not only does mine have pre-set stations on it, it also has controls built into my steering wheel. I never have to look at it to change stations, be it via the thumb controls on the wheel or the actual buttons on the console. Billboards are essentially part of the road that you're driving on, the same as speed limit signs or construction notifications, and you don't have to take your full attention off of the road to see them. For the most part you do when reading a text message, and you absolutely do in order to write a text message.

But again, you use exactly the argument I expect you to make after having seen you make it countless times. If something does not fix all problems, it has no value or is a symbolic gesture. Asbestos isn't the only cause of cancer in the world, do you support it being singled out when cigarettes are still legal, or are you cool with your kids' school having asbestos it in its walls?

The little steps are not going to make the world 100% idiot proof, nothing ever will, but in my opinion it's worth it to sacrifice something meaningless like text messaging while driving (which no one in this country could even do a few years ago) that will move us even a fraction of an inch in that direction.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » May 14, 2007, 12:29 pm

Billboards are already illegal in most provinces and some states, and you only see them on highways that go through indian reserves where those types of laws don't apply.

There are probably only a handful of states and provinces that don't have laws in their motor vehicle act against playing with your stereo while your car is on the road.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » May 14, 2007, 12:48 pm

I was under the impression that Vermont is the only U.S. state that bans billboards.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » May 14, 2007, 12:59 pm

I agree it has a lot to do with multi tasking ability. I know some people that could absolutely not talk on their cell and focus on driving, and I know more that can. I text on my phone all the time while I am driving, and will continue to do so indefinitely, but then again using T9 word on my cell I can text without looking at my phone (unless I have to type a super long text, which I wouldn't do while driving.)

While I disagree with the law, it wouldn't make a difference in MN. They passed laws here to allow the cops to pull you over for no reason other than a hunch that something (ie: anything in the world) could be wrong - so this would just fall under that anyhow.

And Fash, I got you beat. I drive 20 mph over the speed limit while texting, smoking, listening to my music loud enough to rattle the windows in the car in front of and behind me, and honking my horn at the person in front of me that's going 5mph under the speed limit in the left lane

Spang · Post by **Spang** » May 14, 2007, 1:00 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:I am talking about the big picture Sylus. I can't believe how fucking narrow minded and short sighted you can be for some one who I find to be quite intelligent. You don't see this as yet another bullshit symbolic gesture? There are actual real distractions out there, but talking them away would actually make a big difference, but hurt businesses. So, running around pretending like this actually does anything but put a little bandaid on the big festering wound is nothing more than a symbolic gesture. So some assholes can put it on their resume and get in fromt of cameras and proclaim they have made some hard decisions and saved some lives. You have to be trolls, all of you. There just is no way you don't see this shit. It is right in front of you.

There will always be distractions while driving. They're like drugs and roaches. They aren't going anywhere, but you can limit the amount of distractions that exist. One way is by outlawing text messaging. This is a great idea. The only way you'll get rid of all distractions while driving is by outlawing driving.

Rarely, if at all, do 2 people that are paying attention to the road get into the same car accident. If there is a car accident, someone wasn't paying enough attention to the road. Paying attention to the road would lower traffic accidents considerably. I have no links to back this up.

Ironically, two of the more dangerous things to do while driving are the two biggest sponsors in NASCAR!

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » May 14, 2007, 1:21 pm

Sueven wrote:I was under the impression that Vermont is the only U.S. state that bans billboards.

You're probably more correct than Kyo, who just makes statement as if they are fact, but hasn't the slightest clue wtf she is talking about.

I've driven through at least 9 different states in the past year on business and I've seen billboards in all of them and never saw a sign mentioning I may not use my stereo. /boggle

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » May 14, 2007, 1:22 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:And Fash, I got you beat. I drive 20 mph over the speed limit while texting, smoking, listening to my music loud enough to rattle the windows in the car in front of and behind me, and honking my horn at the person in front of me that's going 5mph under the speed limit in the left lane

It's people like you who dodn't desrve the privilege of driving. One can only hope you'll crash into a tree or careen off a high cliff and take yourself out before you end up hurting someone else with your carelessness.

Post by **Sylvus** » May 14, 2007, 1:37 pm

Sueven wrote:I was under the impression that Vermont is the only U.S. state that bans billboards.

There are four states (Alaska, Hawaii, Maine and Vermont) that prohibit billboards, as well as federal law limiting billboards on some stretches of road/highway. I'd say four states falls under the heading of "most provinces (ed. referring to Canada) and some states". This clarification is less for you than for others, Sueven, I know your reading comprehension is better than that. Midnyte's isn't always.

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:I've driven through at least 9 different states in the past year on business and I've seen billboards in all of them and never saw a sign mentioning I may not use my stereo. /boggle

Many laws limiting billboards also specifically disregard billboards that existed when the laws were enacted, so their grandfather status allows them to remain. I have no idea why you boggle at not seeing a sign that says you cannot use your stereo, no one suggested that you should see one. If it's distracting, it's illegal and is covered by bans such as the one mentioned in the opening post of this thread and later quoted by me. I bet each of those 9 states you drove through had countless laws that you could have violated or were, in fact, violating with nary a sign to warn you.

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:You're probably more correct than Kyo, who just makes statement as if they are fact, but hasn't the slightest clue wtf she is talking about.

Not only were her statements fact, you're doing exactly what you accuse her of doing. Stop it.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » May 14, 2007, 3:38 pm

Syl wrote:Alaska, Hawaii, Maine and Vermont

Good to know. Those are four pretty sweet states!