Hang up and Drive! (Austin, San Diego: transplants, insurance, living in)

[TexasBlonde]

Originally Posted by AustinTexan

The sooner the Texas legislature passes a law against Californians moving here and trying to make it just like California (i.e. a worthless state), the better!!

LOL!

[hank0604]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Well, since it's evidently been established that hands free is no less distracting than hands on, and that it's the conversation itself that's the distraction, clearly we must also ban passengers in automobiles, as well, right, lest we be tempted to talk to them? In order to be consistent and believable?

Took the words right out of my mouth. Holding a phone to your head isn't the problem, it's talking to it. So a law that bans cell phones but allows hands free devices wouldn't make any sense.

I guess I just don't get Texas. No, we can't have helmet laws for motorcyclists because that's infringing on their rights, but we can make a law against cell phones...

[Jezer]

I get my passengers to not talk to me when the situation requires full concentration.

The main aim of a journey is to get from A to B without a mishap inbetween.

I don't go in for multi tasking and it's helped me out of some potentially nasty situations.

It has also helped other drivers around me out of nasty situations but they were too busy doing something else to realise it.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by hank0604

Took the words right out of my mouth. Holding a phone to your head isn't the problem, it's talking to it. So a law that bans cell phones but allows hands free devices wouldn't make any sense.

Actually, I can see a law that allows hands free devices, because those are no more distracting than the passenger in the seat next to you. As I said, in order to be consistent, one would have to ban passengers (and, if you get right down to it, the driver, because there are many things that a driver alone, without a cell phone, can do that are equally distracting).

The fact is, we've gotten so used to treating our citizens as children who are to be protected against any possible danger that way too many of our citizens have learned, from that, to behave like children, taking no responsibility for their own actions and at the same time insisting that someone else must be held responsible whenever something bad happens to them, no matter what.

That's where the term "Nanny State" come from, a populace that insists that its government behave towards its citizenry as if they were children to be protected from each other and life in general, rather than adults with the ability to take responsibility for themselves and their own behavior. Our founding fathers surely did not have this in mind when they fought to create this country.

[mego65]

Since I live in California I can say I do not like the law at all. Hand frees are still legal so they have replaced phones. People walk through their lives with this thing in their ear and are just talking away.

And of course it has not stopped anyone you see people talking on the phone all the time.

I don't think it should ever become a state wide ban. In LA it is probably dangerous to talk on the phone and drive, but in my very small town, it is not a problem.

[orngkat]

I think it is funny how people often get on their cell phones right when they start up their cars. It is as if driving and talking on the phone go together. I have had too many near misses to know that they don't.

[datacity]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Actually, I can see a law that allows hands free devices, because those are no more distracting than the passenger in the seat next to you. As I said, in order to be consistent, one would have to ban passengers (and, if you get right down to it, the driver, because there are many things that a driver alone, without a cell phone, can do that are equally distracting).

The fact is, we've gotten so used to treating our citizens as children who are to be protected against any possible danger that way too many of our citizens have learned, from that, to behave like children, taking no responsibility for their own actions and at the same time insisting that someone else must be held responsible whenever something bad happens to them, no matter what.

That's where the term "Nanny State" come from, a populace that insists that its government behave towards its citizenry as if they were children to be protected from each other and life in general, rather than adults with the ability to take responsibility for themselves and their own behavior. Our founding fathers surely did not have this in mind when they fought to create this country.

How about we just ban people who cannot drive from driving. It is a privilege, not a right. That way, you take care of this issue and traffic too since most of population would lose their license... except for me of course!

[b. frank]

Libertarian sensibilities aside, I would totally welcome a ban on cell phone use in cars. I'm not usually the type to complain about other peoples' driving but, from what I've seen on Austin roads (esp. headed out west and back) there is a distinct correlation between people driving at erratic speeds and inching in-and-out of their lane while holding a phone to their ear. It happens - and SW Parkway and 71 are already dangerous enough without the cell phone factor.

[Driftwood1]

If I had time I'd send 4000 reps on that one.. very well put.
Cheers HorseLady.

""That's where the term "Nanny State" come from, a populace that insists that its government behave towards its citizenry as if they were children to be protected from each other and life in general, rather than adults with the ability to take responsibility for themselves and their own behavior. Our founding fathers surely did not have this in mind when they fought to create this country""

[nomore07]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

The fact is, we've gotten so used to treating our citizens as children who are to be protected against any possible danger that way too many of our citizens have learned, from that, to behave like children, taking no responsibility for their own actions and at the same time insisting that someone else must be held responsible whenever something bad happens to them, no matter what.

That's where the term "Nanny State" come from, a populace that insists that its government behave towards its citizenry as if they were children to be protected from each other and life in general, rather than adults with the ability to take responsibility for themselves and their own behavior. Our founding fathers surely did not have this in mind when they fought to create this country.

Certainly there are some situations where an alert person can use a phone in their car without problems... long trip on I-10 with few cars, an isolated back road, etc. But city traffic is another matter. What happens when someone hits a pedestrian or child in a residential neighborhood?

There's a reason why governments are putting "Nanny State" laws into effect. Too many adults are behaving like brats nowadays. If that weren't the case, there would be little support (or excuse) for such laws.