solman98

The Air Forces here does it also. Alone with the Marines at Parris Island. Both have signs that say you must use a hands free device while on base/post. For us in GSA, if you are in any of our vehciles you must use a hands free device, period.

This needs to be a law.

fastsuv

Yes, people should not use the cell phone while driving. I have also had many close calls with others on the phone. Even hands-free is only marginally better, as you are still distracted while in a two-way conversation.

However, I also agree with captain howdy. Here in NY I have actually seen MORE cell phone use in a car after enactment of the law. It's probably due to more people getting a cell phone. A few friends have actually received a ticket for cell phone use while driving, but the general public doesn't seem to care much about the law. A cell-phone ban law probably is just another traffic law that is actually intended to generate some revenue while doing nothing to solve the original problem.

Insurance companies could have more impact on cell phone use than a law. If a cell phone ticket or phone use while in an accident resulted in insurance cancellation, it might be more of a deterrent. If you are in an accident and the other driver was on the phone, note the time and request their cell phone record to prove they were on the phone. A good lawyer can make that a big negative in a court case even if there was no cell phone ban law.

Steve

EasyRay

Its also against the law to rape,rob,vandalize,murder,etc.etc. so I guess we solved that problem. Its also against the law to have a gun in DC and other large city's so I guess there are no more murders by guns in those places. I could make a laundry list and go on forever. I know the things I mentioned are extreme examples, but there is something called personal responsibility.

As far as I'm concerned we don't live in a perfect world and I don't think that more laws that take our freedom away are the solution. Where does this stuff end? Pretty soon will it get to the point that you can't talk to the the person sitting next to you because its a distraction. Or I think we shouldn't be allowed to drive because its to dangerous. Multiple thousands of people are killed every year in auto accidents.


Every time I hear * I think they should pass a law * I think a little more freedom will be lost if they do.

Thats my Take on these things. * I think they should pass a law *

solman98

Very true. But if people won't use it.

It's like common sense, you have it. But look at what happens when you don't use it. I'm all for laws that protect you from becomming a "victim".

captain howdy

Yeah but sometimes laws just don't work. if someone wants to do something they'll do it whether or not there is a law in place to prevent them from doing so. Like I stated before, after living with an anti cell phone law now for five years it doesn't do one bit of good. I like fastsuv's idea of involving the insurance companies. That might work.

EasyRay

If you pass a law against almost anything. Will it protect you against almost anything? I think not. You can be killed or maimed by someone who ran a red light. Did the the law prevent you from being a victim?

solman98

Of course not. But without the law stating that you must stop for a red light. If you ran a red light and hit me. Who would be at fault? I guess no one. Then by that statement I could just pull my glock out and shoot you for hitting me. Is there a law against that?


Lets use some common sense here.

I do like the insurance statement. Hard to deny facts.

EasyRay

fastsuv has a good point. If its going to cost you some serious insurance premiums, it will probably work much better than government intervention. Although not a perfect solution and there is no perfect solution it would be a better deterrent against such behavior imo.

joesblackhhr

Some very good points brought up here on both sides. I still puzzle at why a person in a car or food joint or mall is on a phone chatting about basically nothing for 30 minutes or so !!! You can hear the conversations they are so loud so you know it isnt "important" but then what defines inportant... Is it because we have the technology and it is our freedom to do so ? You know before cell fones we were at home chatting about nothing in particular.. is it because people (women who are the 90 percent) are more mobile now?

EasyRay

The point I was trying to make was that the law didn't keep you from being a victim. And it was not intentional. If you are dead or seriously injured the weapon is of no use at all. If you are able to use the weapon, that would be intentional and against the law. I would therefore become a victim. Did the law prevent me from becoming a victim?