View Single Post
  #45  
Old July 14th 05, 07:20 AM
C.H.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 04:46:40 +0000, Dave Head wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 18:21:55 -0700, "C.H." > wrote:
>
>>No driver, who is even halfway sane, turns around to swat the kid in the
>>back seat.

>
> There's _lotsa_ lunatics behind the wheel, and they actually _do_ that.


And the fact that other people do stupid things relates to your 'right' of
doing something exquisitely stupid exactly how?

>>If you really are unable to discipline your kids so they don't
>>get in trouble in the car, you should not be allowed to drive at all.

>
> Not my kids - talking about other people.


Turning around is already illegal (careless driving).

>>Apparently most cellphohniac drivers think differently, or the number of
>>accidents would not be so excessively high.

>
> That's another thing - where is this skyrocketing death rate that we
> _should_ have with the proliferation of cell phones. Haven't noticed it.
> Rate is still about 40K per year, about the same as it was 10 years ago.
> Whazzup with that?


Cars have been getting much safer over the last few years. The death rate
OTOH has almost leveled out, because a certain risk factor offsets the
positive effect from the safety gains.

>>No, it's not. But even if it were I'd be all for it. Make revenue by
>>fining the (dangerous) cellphoniacs instead of people who go a few miles
>>over an arbitrary speed limit.

>
> Yeah, lets make driving a hell on earth for everyone. Legislators in NJ
> want to ban _smoking_ in the car.


I'm all for it. Nicotine increases reaction times, fiddling with
cigarettes distracts.

> Y'all want to ban cell phones.


Only at the wheel.

> Someone else is eventually going to want to ban radios and tape players
> and CD players 'cuz they're _all_ distractions.


OK with me, even though the safety gain would be minute in relation to the
gain when outlawing cellphones.

> Maybe we can make driving so damn boring that everyone will go to sleep
> at the wheel and the death rate will _still_ go up!


If you are unable to concentrate on driving you need to return your
driver's license because you are apparently an unfit driver.

>>Talking is not even close to as distracting as being on the phone.

>
> Prove it. My personal experience says they're about equal.


Remember the experiment they did on Mythbusters? They were talking in the
car on both the test run and the phone run. Test run: Good results, phone
run: Half the obstacles run over. IOW: Talking doesn't significantly
distract, yakking on the phone does.

>>Plus it can be easily stopped if the situation demands it, whereas
>>cellphoniacs usually don't want the person they are cellyakking to to
>>know that they are not giving them their full attention.

>
> Maybe some people are brain-dead enough to act this way, but I think
> most people will do what is necessary to keep from having their hair,
> teeth, and eyes ending up all over the highway.


Most people won't even let go of their freaking cellphone when they wreck.

>>If your kid is likely to choke on vomit or get in trouble, sit in the
>>back seat with him and let someone else drive.

>
> Not my kid. I don't have any. But you know that the average parent is
> going to be turning around every few minutes to have a look. Doing
> otherwise might even be chargeable as "neglect", esp. if the rug-rat
> were to do exactly that and die of asphyxiation.


The average parent is not. And even if they did, it is illegal and for
good reason, just as cellphoniakking at the wheel should be illegal. Btw,
since when is a bad act by someone else an excuse for a bad act committed
by you? "He smoked on the bus, so I am to cut his throat"...

>>No. You have to find a place

>
> No such place on most interstate highways... at least not in the
> time-frame it takes to choke to death (6 - 10 minutes to brain-death.)


It's called emergency lane and it is present almost everywhere on the
interstates.

>>> Didn't happen so much when the kids were in the front seat, before air
>>> bags.

>>
>> If someone is too stupid to remember their kid in the back seat they
>> need to be locked up anyway.

>
> That still doesn't help the par-boiled kid in the back seat...


How often does that happen? Once a year? Twice? Kids get killed in traffic
accidents every day because they were sitting where they are not supposed
to sit: In the front seat. The chance of accidentally being parboiled
because a braindead parent forgets them in the back seat is smaller by a
very large factor thant the chance of being squashed or smashed because
the braindead parent was too stupid to put the kid where it belongs: In
the back seat.

>>> And by that time, _they're_ in the car and moving, so you still can't
>>> talk to them...

>>
>> Tough luck. Safety of others on the road goes before your 'right' to
>> gossip with your buddies.

>
> But that's what I'm paying for. If I can't do that, I'm not going to
> pay for it.


Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.

>>> Not if you're the one that's bleeding to death at 2 in the morning on
>>> a lonely road that is only going to have 1 other person come by at
>>> that hour, and that person has ceased carrying a cell because it is
>>> now mostly useless to him. I was in that approximate situation in
>>> 1978, only I was the one that came up on a guy in the ditch, bleeding
>>> like hell. No cell, no 2-way radio either, the guy died.

>>
>>How often does a situation like this occur?

>
> Well, that's what we don't know. It may be such that the removal of,
> say, 10% of the cell phones from society will cause a net overall zero
> effect in the death rate - for each cell phone death driving that is
> prevented, a delay-of-report of a dangerous situation results in a death
> that offsets the one that was saved. We don't know, tho.


Double nonsense. One, only a tiny fraction of a percent of cellphoniacs
will give up their chatterbox just because they can't use it for 10% of
their day. I am almost sure that even though you are whining so loudly you
would not give up yours either, you are much too addicted to it. And even
if 10% would give up their chatterbox the death rate would nosedive. The
number of people bleeding to death on the freeway because no one can call
help is very close to zero nowadays and will not be noticeably higher if a
few people give up their gossip machine.

>>The number of deaths caused by cellphones is a few thousand times
>>greater than the number of lives potentially saved by a cellphone
>>carrying person.

>
> You don't know that - you're guessing.


Yes, I am making an educated guess. A lot more educated than your whining
'oh no, I can't babble for an hour, how horrible!'

>>And as only very few people will be stupid enough to give up their
>>cellphones just because they can't yack in the car any more the point is
>>moot anyway.

>
> Oh, getting personal now - I think you're preparing to lose this
> arguement, then.


Not really, because I am quite certain that you are not going to give up
your chatterbox either, even though you threaten to do so in here, because
aside from your 'i might be able to save a guy bleeding to death' you have
shown zero positive aspects of cellphones for safety.

> As I said, if I couldn't talk in the car, I wouldn't have it.


And I say you are just saying that, because you are much too addicted to
actually do it.

> I _bought_ it for talking in the car.


Good riddance then, when you have to get rid of it.

> Most anywhere else I am, I have access to another phone, and don't
> _need_ the cell. Yeah, it might be a little more convenient in some
> situations, but not $50 a month more convenient. I'd give it up in a
> heartbeat.


My cellphone plan is cheaper than my landline plan was. I am certainly not
stupid enough to go back to a landline.

>>Btw, in Germany it is illegal to use the phone in the car and by now the
>>fines are quite stiff plus they check your cellphone records in case of
>>an accident. The number of cellphone carriers has not decreased at all
>>but continues climbing.

>
> There's lots of nanny-state stuff going on in all parts of the world.
> Just 'cuz they do it doesn't mean we have to.


Germany shows that a cellphone ban for drivers has no negative impact on
the number of cellphones in the general population and a decidedly
positive impact on safety.

>>Not at all. No one stops you from whipping out your cell once you have
>>parked properly, which was not possible in 1978.

>
> Except I'm not going to have one - I don't relish the idea of stopping
> to make a casual call. I'd just keep driving - the call isn't _that_
> important that I need to stop for it.


You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either you get rid of your
cellphone, then don't whine about being in communication limbo (as you
don't need your cellphone outside your car anyway according to your own
words) or you don't.

>>What a nonsense. Banning cell phones in cars will drastically decrease
>>deaths. Pitting a lone soul saved somewhere in a ditch against thousands
>>killed by cellphoniacs is a joke.

>
> I don't see thousands in the yearly death rate. Its still about 40K a
> year, like its been for quite a while.


And it would be much lower with the recent improvements in car safety if
not a bunch of cellphone addicted morons would increase the risk.

>>I don't believe you. And even if it were, you are in a tiny minorty as
>>the example Germany clearly shows.

>
> Believe it. I only got the dang thing about 3 years ago.


Who cares whether you have a cellphone or not? The world will continue
spinning if you drop dead or get rid of your cellphone. Your threat
impresses exactly nobody.

>>> Ooohhhh yes they are - at least any reasonable usability of it.

>>
>>In Germany

>
> We are not in Germany...


But almost every American wishes that German safety, traffic education and
discipline were here.

>>being on the cell while driving is illegal. And people still
>>have/buy/use cellphones and get very reasonable usability out of it.

>
> Maybe everything isn't a 1 hr round-trip like it is here.


You really have no idea what you are talking about. Munich to Hamburg is a
5-10 hour drive depending on traffic.

> About the only thing I do that doesn't involve a 1 hr round trip is go
> to the grocery or the post office, and I don't go to the post office
> that often.


If you really can't live with the large distances, move somewhere, where
the distances are shorter.

> Work is slightly less than a 1 hr round trip, maybe 45 minutes or so.
> Health club (just got back) is at least 1 hr. Movie is across the
> street from the health club, so can you guess how long that round trip
> is? Work, movie, health club are my 3 main destinations. The next most
> often is my friend's house in Maryland, but that is a 1 1/2 hr round
> trip.


Boo-hoo!

You apparently are living in the wrong place, but that doesn't impress
anyone either. Face it, the world will not even notice if you make true on
your terrible threat.

>>So how is an innocent driver 'shooting at you' when you t-bone him
>>because you missed the red light because of your oh so important call to
>>the movie theater?

>
> I can't actually remember the last time I missed a red light, but I'm
> sure its not because I was talking on a cell phone.


Quite likely you merely didn't notice the last time you missed a red light
because you were too busy with the phone.

>>> Then I, and I suspect a whale of a lot of other people, are going to
>>> lose interest in cell phone ownership.

>>
>> Experience from countries (not only Germany) where cellphoniakking
>> while driving is illegal, shows the opposite.

>
> Again, maybe its not a 1 hr round trip to just about everywhere...


Again, no one cares whether you live in the wrong place. Germany shows
that people have cell phones and use them, although they are not allowed
to do so in the car. Which shows that your oh so horrible 'negative safety
impact' because one Dave Head doesn't have a cellphone any more in reality
does not exist nor will.

>>Who cares? Given 8 hours of sleep you will still have 14 hours and 30
>>minutes of non-driving potential cellphone time.

>
> Nope. Any time I have a landline phone available, that is _not_
> potential cell phone time.


Why not? I don't use up my cellphone minutes anyway, so why not use the
cellphone when I have to make a call? Whether at the office (no recording,
no billing problems, no dispute with the boss), at the store (should I
pick up this or that while I am at it?) or at home (free long distance
and free unlimited night and weekend minutes), the cellphone usually is
the better deal. When I dont want it at my ear I use a headset, which
makes the whole thing even comfortable. Sitting on my balcony in my
comfortable chair making a phone call beats yanking wires and dialing
dial-around numbers by a mile.

> This cuts potential cell phone time down to the few minutes it takes me
> to get to and from the car from the movie or health club, and work,
> unless you include driving. Not worth $50 a month to me.


Then you apparently don't have a legitimate need for one, so get rid of
it. No one is going to have to go to bed hungry just because you decide to
get rid of a service.

>>And if you really have to
>>be on the phone so urgently while in the car, hire a driver.

>
> Get real...


I am serious. Dead serious. If you can't afford a driver, concentrate on
driving instead of yakking.

>>> I have a phone on my desk - don't need a cell.

>>
>>I prefer being available on my private phone.

>
> I can do that by forwarding my home phone to my work phone.


Sure. Every day. And in the evening you switch off the forwarding. Sure.

>>I don't have a landline any more because of its utter lack of
>>flexibility.

>
> I do.


I pity you.

>>You might want to try walking sometimes (you know, moving these two
>>things that you use to press the pedals in your car). It is good for
>>you, good for the environment and utterly cheap to boot.

>
> Hello - what have I been telling you? Its about an hour of _driving_
> anywhere I normally go. That would be like 10 hrs of walking. I don't
> have that much time.


Guess what? I don't care. You live in the wrong place, that's not my
problem. And certainly no reason for endangering others. You made the
decision to live there, now suffer the consequences.

>>> _Could_ use the pay phone if its really, really that important.

>>
>>How are your friends, who you claim are calling you in your car, reach
>>you at the pay phone?

>
> They don't. But then its not really all that important that they reach
> me.


Then you don't need a cellphone.

> Its mostly important that I reach them when I need to.


Use a pay phone.

> If there looks like there's going to be a situation where its going to
> be important, I'll give them the number of my health club.


Wow, that clown has a cellphone and goes to any lengths to not use it.
You are either one of the stupidest people who ever lived or you have a
very vivid imagination.

> If its important enough to interrupt a movie, then I just won't go to
> the movie until the potential crisis is over. I'm 58 yrs old, and for
> 55 years I didn't _need_ a cell phone. If I can't use it _most_ of the
> time when it is the only alternative to communications, then I won't
> _need_ it in the future, either.


Congratulations, you don't need it so do us all a favor and get rid of it.

>>But you are seriously stupid enough to have a landline, that you can't
>>use most of the day...

>
> I use it just fine. I forward it to my cell phone.


You can't be serious! No one can be that stupid and still remember to
breathe. Your imagination is indeed priceless, you should try your hand on
a novel.

> Its in the phone book (unlike my cell phone) so I get calls from people
> I know and maybe people I do business with, like plumbers and HVAC
> people, and other repairmen. If i didn't have a cell, I'd forward it to
> my work phone.


Why in all the world would you have a land line so you have to forward
your number all the time when you have a perfectly serviceable cellphone?

>>Studies show that clearly.

>
> What studies? We have one that says cell phones are distracting. I'm
> not familar with any that take into account the consequences of a
> complete ban on cell phone in cars IN THIS COUNTRY with all its expanse
> of highways to be driven, which might figure into people leaving the
> cell phone at home a lot more because they know they're not going to be
> able to use it for 99% of the trip anyway.


The consequences are not going to be noticeably different than they are in
Germany. People know that a cellphone is a comparatively inexpensive
convenience and have it for that reason. Granted, almost no one is stupid
enough to worry about forwarding his landline all day when he has a cell.
If a handful of people don't need their cellphones any more the world will
continue spinning, the cellphone companies will continue to make money and
the road safety is not going to be compromised.

>>> Anyway, I gotta get outa hear right now, 'cuz the health club closes
>>> at 10, its 7:13, and the place is 20 miles / 1/2 hr away.

>>
>>I think it would be very healthy for you if you started walking to your
>>health club *eg*

>
> If I walked, I prolly wouldn't _need_ any more exercise... <G>


All the better, then you can save health club fees.

Chris
Ads