Hand held Cell Phone ban in Nova Scotia

[RadioHowie]

What will they think of next? Someday I am sure they are going to actually put a man on the moon!!

How come they did that all those years ago but only recently thought of putting wheels on suitcases?

That's an easy one:

"cause "The Greatest Generation" proved they could accomplish something. The current generation is primarily a bunch of lazy *****.

 

[Toecutter]

Yeah, it's all a distraction, just like talking with a passenger, but I have to listen to music to keep the voices at bay.

The voices are more distracting than the music.

 

[sonicspeed]

I thought playboy magazine was the manual for rubbing one off? Nowadays it's hustler.....er swank er sumptin.

it's legal to read playboy and masturbate while riding now???

:yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo:

 

[odot]

...............according to texas state law it is.

 

[sonicspeed]

...............according to texas state law it is.

i'm moving to texas

 

[Bearly Flying]

but I have to listen to music to keep the voices at bay.

Toe, I thought that Your new medication and the Electro Shock Therapy was helping with those voices.........

 

[odot]

His voices are telling him to rub one off right now. Listen to the voices, dude......LISTEN.

and here in texas you can do it while yer drivin.

 

[juniorfjr]

The biggest issue is the collective abilities of drivers. Some professional drivers, cops, truck drivers, etc. from miles of driving, have honed their skills. My 19 yo daughter has the driving skills of......

I think we need to train people to drive better. In most states, if you are over 18 yo, 20 dollars and a written test followed by a 15 minute driving test is the extent of a driving skills necessary.

More education of drivers is a better idea. Then we can all drive talking on the phone.

 

[uctofeej]

I don't see the big deal about cell phones. Causing a wreck generally results in punishment and/or consequences of some sort. If the offender wants to do something stupid, it's their prerogative (and their consequences), and there's no law that's ever going to stop them.

That's why we learn defensive driving, not aggressive driving. Rule of thumb, watch out for the idiots, who cares what causes them to be idiots, it's the same result whether it's a cheeseburger, cell phone, or kiddies in the backseat that's distracting them.

 

[Bearly Flying]

AGREED!!!!!!!

 

[madmike2]

That's why we learn defensive driving, not aggressive driving. Rule of thumb, watch out for the idiots, who cares what causes them to be idiots, it's the same result whether it's a cheeseburger, cell phone, or kiddies in the backseat that's distracting them.

I agree with your assessment, however, for those of us who live in metropolitan areas, the sheer volume of inattentive drivers becomes the issue.

If nothing else, it will give us one more tool to use when they are cited and we have the basis to prove driving while distracted.

 

[RadioHowie]

I don't see the big deal about cell phones. Causing a wreck generally results in punishment and/or consequences of some sort. If the offender wants to do something stupid, it's their prerogative (and their consequences), and there's no law that's ever going to stop them.

I don't like the trade-off....Janie gets a ticket for "failure to yield" while I'm spending the next 6 months in traction and my bike now lives in a box. :angry2:

That's why we learn defensive driving, not aggressive driving. Rule of thumb, watch out for the idiots, who cares what causes them to be idiots, it's the same result whether it's a cheeseburger, cell phone, or kiddies in the backseat that's distracting them.

Nope. Ain't buyin' that one, either.

You're essentially saying "it's MY responsibility to run like a ************ 'cause it's okay to give the 3 year old in the next aisle over a loaded M-16."

 

[uctofeej]

I don't see the big deal about cell phones. Causing a wreck generally results in punishment and/or consequences of some sort. If the offender wants to do something stupid, it's their prerogative (and their consequences), and there's no law that's ever going to stop them.

I don't like the trade-off....Janie gets a ticket for "failure to yield" while I'm spending the next 6 months in traction and my bike now lives in a box. :angry2:

I'm not saying it's fair, in fact that trade-off totally sucks. But it beats the option you are pushing.

That's why we learn defensive driving, not aggressive driving. Rule of thumb, watch out for the idiots, who cares what causes them to be idiots, it's the same result whether it's a cheeseburger, cell phone, or kiddies in the backseat that's distracting them.

Nope. Ain't buyin' that one, either.

It is YOUR responsibility to drive defensively. Dude, if you expect others to watch out for you, then, well...

You're essentially saying "it's MY responsibility to run like a ************ 'cause it's okay to give the 3 year old in the next aisle over a loaded M-16."

You have armed 3 year olds in Florida? :gun:

 

[madmike2]

That's why we learn defensive driving, not aggressive driving. Rule of thumb, watch out for the idiots, who cares what causes them to be idiots, it's the same result whether it's a cheeseburger, cell phone, or kiddies in the backseat that's distracting them.

Nope. Ain't buyin' that one, either.

It is YOUR responsibility to drive defensively. Dude, if you expect others to watch out for you, then, well...

But, at some point, it is THEY who should drive responsibly. I don't expect them to watch out for me (For God's sake, some don't even SEE my work vehicle that is over 70' long), but I do expect them to stay in their lane, be alert so they can apply brakes in time, actually look in their mirrors (if not over their shoulder) before changing lanes or while attempting to merge, be aware and prepared to change lanes for their upcoming off-ramp rather than suddenly realizing they are late, then, crossing 3 moving lanes of traffic while talking on their phone for their very important call...and the examples I've witnessed go on and on and on and on.........

I AM a professional driver and I have taken the defensive driving courses and watch the monthly videos my company provides in our monthly safety updates. It is ONLY my experience and the perception I have honed over the years that has saved others from their own stupidity and/or lack of responsibility (And that includes grabbing the minor passengers or eating while driving). God forbid I should actually witness a crash (incident...anything but labeling it an "accident", as I will give a statement to the authorities performing the incident investigation).

Driving "distracted" makes traveling the public roadways even more dangerous for the rest of us. Perhaps someone should begin an advertising campaign of Public Service Announcements, but those who choose to drive like we are discussing are too busy talking on their phones or eating to actually read a billboard or take notice of a road sign. THAT distraction is the problem.

 

[uctofeej]

Mike, I agree with you entirely, they should have some level of responsibility. I'm just saying when they lose sight of that responsibility and cause an accident, there are consequences (mostly financial) already in place, so we don't need new laws regulating an activity that people are going to do anyway. It's a waste of time and money to ban conversations while driving.

 

[madmike2]

........so we don't need new laws regulating an activity that people are going to do anyway. It's a waste of time and money to ban conversations while driving.

IMO. the financial penalties aren't enough since the insurance pays the liability (if they have insurance). The point I am trying to make is that, with this law, they can be cited and fined under the vehicle code. THAT will prove their irresponsibility, be on their driving record, and hopefully extend the penalties (per their raised insurance rates) and a violation that will be on their driving record.

The same law will take effect in CA on June 1st. No, it won't make much of a change in the driving habits of most of the cagers out there, but it will help prove blame on their part and hopefully some of them will be ticketed for their behavior.

 

[uctofeej]

Ah, now I see where you're coming from. That's the first legit argument I've seen for banning cell phones. All the others seem to fit under the aforementioned affiliation in post #7. I can agree with building the irresponsibility case.