Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 49 of 49

Thread: U.S. withheld data on risks of distracted driving

  1. #41
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: U.S. withheld data on risks of distracted driving

    Quote Originally Posted by americanwoman View Post
    I agree. I got a careless/reckless driving ticket the other day. I was speeding about 10 miles over the limit, yes I admit it, and the car in the fast lane where I was driving was going about 40 (speed limit 60) so I changed lanes quickly and then went back in my lane. A cop saw and gave my a careless driving ticket instead of speeding because of the lane change. I was in control the whole time, just speeding a little. I would hate to think of myself in the same category as some jerk off who swerved into traffic and wasn't even paying attention to the road because they were texting.

    Umm... what kinda douchebag wrote CnR for that?

    I ignore people speeding unless they are going 15 over, or around that area. I'll stop for about 13 over depending on how calls are going.

    In my state, this wouldn't fall under Careless/Reckless.

    EDIT (again): This wouldn't fall under Careless/Reckless unless you got 1/2 car length off of the bumper of the slow car, changed lanes quickly without using a turn signal right in front of another car who had to brake to avoid a rear end collision, and then swerved back over in front of the slow car, missing its hood with your rear bumper by about 10 feet.

    Add in honking a horn, throwing a cigarette at them and flippin' them the middle finger just for comic relief.
    Last edited by Caine; 07-22-09 at 05:58 PM.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  2. #42
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: U.S. withheld data on risks of distracted driving

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    Texting while driving does not fall under reckless driving.

    Reckless driving requires specific driving behavior, as has been determined by the courts.
    Exactly. Things of that nature are made specifically for making money. Texting bans are a great example of this. If you're not reckless driving, then I don't really care what you're doing. Stay in control and do whatever you want. You can be in control and texting, I've seen people do it. My buddy is permanently attached to his blackberry. But he'd get a fine, even if he's driving fine. The idea is to give yet another law by which cops can pull people over and ticket. The real world effect is reckless driving. Texting can be distracting, and that distraction causes people to drive recklessly, not slowing down, swerving, speeding, etc. That's what has the real effect, it's that reckless driving. The other specifics are made to give something else to pull people over for and ticket for. If it wasn't about the money, there wouldn't be the plethora of other laws associated with things which increase the probability of reckless driving; there would only be reckless driving.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #43
    dangerously addictive
    americanwoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    17,419

    Re: U.S. withheld data on risks of distracted driving

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    Umm... what kinda douchebag wrote CnR for that?

    I ignore people speeding unless they are going 15 over, or around that area. I'll stop for about 13 over depending on how calls are going.

    In my state, this wouldn't fall under Careless/Reckless.

    I think he was new or something, cause he's like I'm going easy on you and putting it just as careless driving. Um yeah, a $200 careless driving class as opposed to the $85 speeding driving class is certainly going easy on me.
    I call my own shots, largely based on an accumulation of data, and everyone knows it.
    _____________________________________________

  4. #44
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: U.S. withheld data on risks of distracted driving

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Exactly. Things of that nature are made specifically for making money. Texting bans are a great example of this. If you're not reckless driving, then I don't really care what you're doing. Stay in control and do whatever you want. You can be in control and texting, I've seen people do it. My buddy is permanently attached to his blackberry. But he'd get a fine, even if he's driving fine. The idea is to give yet another law by which cops can pull people over and ticket. The real world effect is reckless driving. Texting can be distracting, and that distraction causes people to drive recklessly, not slowing down, swerving, speeding, etc. That's what has the real effect, it's that reckless driving. The other specifics are made to give something else to pull people over for and ticket for. If it wasn't about the money, there wouldn't be the plethora of other laws associated with things which increase the probability of reckless driving; there would only be reckless driving.
    You can be in control and text while drive. I won't deny this, ive done it myself while transporting one to jail and trying to communicate with another officer when we are going to eat lunch

    The real world effect isn't reckless driving. Most distraction crashes happen because someone is distracted and fails to reduce speed as necessary to avoid colliding with another vehicle. If you are driving straight and not swerving but distracted by a blackberry device, you can still fail to slow down because your too busy looking at your blackberry. There are no outward indicators of this until after the crash occurrs.

    This sort of thing will only be effectively enforced when investigating crashes.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  5. #45
    Sage
    bhkad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    08-13-10 @ 01:01 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,745

    Re: U.S. withheld data on risks of distracted driving

    The law should not be to allow for the exceptional situation or driver, it should be to accommodate most of the situations and most drivers most of the time to protect the greatest numbers of innocents.

    Under this criterion no calling or texting should be allowed while driving.

    OBL 11/24/02

  6. #46
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: U.S. withheld data on risks of distracted driving

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    You can be in control and text while drive. I won't deny this, ive done it myself while transporting one to jail and trying to communicate with another officer when we are going to eat lunch

    The real world effect isn't reckless driving. Most distraction crashes happen because someone is distracted and fails to reduce speed as necessary to avoid colliding with another vehicle. If you are driving straight and not swerving but distracted by a blackberry device, you can still fail to slow down because your too busy looking at your blackberry. There are no outward indicators of this until after the crash occurrs.

    This sort of thing will only be effectively enforced when investigating crashes.
    Yes, which IMO makes the laws even more suspect. I would think stopping short, speeding, tailgating, etc. could be some form of reckless driving. I've had plenty of people nearly rear end me because they were doing something stupid in their car and not paying attention, you can usually tell because these people will stomp on their brakes and end up somewhat sideways in the lane. So instead, we make laws that outlaw certain activities in the car when first off it's not automatic that you'll get into trouble (in the driving sense) from that activity, or that accidents will ultimately be avoided. In the end, some of the things are hard to test for (like texting say), and you're just going to get some small percentage of people and not affect the accident rate because of it. Instead, you're just setting up some form of fundraising by being allowed to issue more tickets for crap. I put helmet and seatbelt laws into the same category.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #47
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: U.S. withheld data on risks of distracted driving

    Quote Originally Posted by bhkad View Post
    The law should not be to allow for the exceptional situation or driver, it should be to accommodate most of the situations and most drivers most of the time to protect the greatest numbers of innocents.

    Under this criterion no calling or texting should be allowed while driving.
    Laws should deal with realities, not maybes and ifs.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  8. #48
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: U.S. withheld data on risks of distracted driving

    The best idea I can think of is to pass a bill through congress funding free limo/taxi rides for people who want to use a cell or text/eat/sleep/read/watch TV/whatever while driving.


    ...





    Yes, I'm joking.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  9. #49
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: U.S. withheld data on risks of distracted driving

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Yes, which IMO makes the laws even more suspect. I would think stopping short, speeding, tailgating, etc. could be some form of reckless driving. I've had plenty of people nearly rear end me because they were doing something stupid in their car and not paying attention, you can usually tell because these people will stomp on their brakes and end up somewhat sideways in the lane. So instead, we make laws that outlaw certain activities in the car when first off it's not automatic that you'll get into trouble (in the driving sense) from that activity, or that accidents will ultimately be avoided. In the end, some of the things are hard to test for (like texting say), and you're just going to get some small percentage of people and not affect the accident rate because of it. Instead, you're just setting up some form of fundraising by being allowed to issue more tickets for crap. I put helmet and seatbelt laws into the same category.
    If you could convince the legislature to change the elements of the offense of reckless driving, then you'd have a point.

    Until legislators change the law, police can't make **** up and charge people with it. As the courts have demonstrated it takes certain actions to amount to reckless driving.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •