You stupid f***ing cell phone users, stay off the roads.

[Castlerock]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

This point of view may have already been represented, so please accept my apologies if I skimmed over it...

I don't believe the problem is cellphones. I think the problem is irresponsible people behaving recklessly. Each individual should have enough respect for everyone else to not talk on the cellphone if it impairs their ability to drive properly. If I can drive properly AND talk on a cellphone, I should not be punished because some other fools can't handle it.

I don't know if it is a parenting issue, but somewhere along the way they were not taught how to properly respect the vehicle they are driving and its ability to take away the life of others on or near the road. That's not my problem. It's their problem.

[sarcasm]
Amen! I feel the exact same way about drinking and driving. Each individual should have enough respect for everyone else to not drive drunk if it impairs their ability to drive properly. If I can drive properly AND be drunk, I should not be punished because some other fools can't handle it.
[/sarcasm]

[Desnudo]

And how do you guys propose to judge who can and who can't? Standardized testing of reactions after putting away a 12-pack?

Personally, I feel like I'm able to decide who needs killin' and who doesn't. It pisses me off when people who obviously can't make that decision, go out and kill some one.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

And how do you guys propose to judge who can and who can't? Standardized testing of reactions after putting away a 12-pack?

You observe them. If they are weaving into other lanes, not signalling when they turn or change lanes, following too closely, etc, then you have a problem that should require that they be stopped. I don't have a problem with a legal BAC limit being set, as long as it is scientifically based on a level that would indicate intoxication of an average person. If they consent to a field sobriety test and fail, that would be evidence against them as well. I don't necessarily believe that BAC by itself should be cause for arrest, if you are otherwise operating the vehicle properly and safely. In other words, there should not be roadblocks just to smell for alcohol. You should have some other cause to stop a vehicle.

The same goes for cellphones. Merely talking on a cellphone should not be cause for presumption that you are about to have an accident or hit a pedestrian. You should have to demonstrate an inability to properly drive the vehicle before a crime has been committed. It's not really that hard to figure out, is it?

[Masked]

Originally Posted by Castlerock

Amen! I feel the exact same way about drinking and driving. Each individual should have enough respect for everyone else to not drive drunk if it impairs their ability to drive properly. If I can drive properly AND be drunk, I should not be punished because some other fools can't handle it.

No one can drive properly and be drunk.

[Castlerock]

Originally Posted by Masked

No one can drive properly and be drunk.

That was my point (and why I labeled the post as sarcasm).
Everyone is convinced that they are not the problem because they can operate a car safely while drunk, on a cell, etc.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

You observe them. If they are weaving into other lanes, not signalling when they turn or change lanes, following too closely, etc, then you have a problem that should require that they be stopped. I don't have a problem with a legal BAC limit being set, as long as it is scientifically based on a level that would indicate intoxication of an average person. If they consent to a field sobriety test and fail, that would be evidence against them as well. I don't necessarily believe that BAC by itself should be cause for arrest, if you are otherwise operating the vehicle properly and safely. In other words, there should not be roadblocks just to smell for alcohol. You should have some other cause to stop a vehicle.

The same goes for cellphones. Merely talking on a cellphone should not be cause for presumption that you are about to have an accident or hit a pedestrian. You should have to demonstrate an inability to properly drive the vehicle before a crime has been committed. It's not really that hard to figure out, is it?

Alcohol reduces reaction times and leads to more aggressive driving. It's proven time and again. The laws are meant to be preventative as well as punitive. Meaning that they want you off the road before you do something stupid, not afterwards.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

You observe them. If they are weaving into other lanes, not signalling when they turn or change lanes, following too closely, etc, then you have a problem that should require that they be stopped.

you just described every driver in eastern massachusettes, please contact dipshit romney and have him enforce this...PLEASE!

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by Subby

Utterly and completely right.

I do it all the time.

If one person can do it, then it *is* possible.

See this is the real problem. Ignorant gits like this who THINK they can do something that cannot be done.

If your attention is anywhere but the road, you're not driving properly OR safely.

please figure this fact out.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by RendeR

you just described every driver in eastern massachusettes, please contact dipshit romney and have him enforce this...PLEASE!

I do happen to think that a big problem with drivers is the fact that simple traffic violations are ignored. Drivers get accustomed to inching into intersections, making improper lane changes, improper turns, pulling into crosswalks, and so on, to the point that they actually believe those demonstrate proper driving techniques. Then, you add in a cellphone to a driver who is already pushing the envelope and neglecting all the details and you have a recipe for disaster. If they were already conscientious drivers, they would not suddenly kill someone by simply introducing a cellphone. As drivers who paid attention to the details, they wouldn't use the phone if they felt it impaired their ability to maintain that standard.

It doesn't help that I see police officers committing traffic violations everyday that I am out on the roads, either. Nobody is setting a good example for these drivers who probably learned from parents who were constantly breaking rules as well.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Alcohol reduces reaction times and leads to more aggressive driving. It's proven time and again. The laws are meant to be preventative as well as punitive. Meaning that they want you off the road before you do something stupid, not afterwards.

Why do you think parents did not bring up their kids with a sense of respect and responsibility that would prevent them from ever considering such activity? I would never drive drunk. I'm wondering where my parents succeeded and so many have failed.

[Loren]

(damn i forgot to quote, soo in regards to directv>>>)we never have ours hooked up with the phone either, we got an upgraded system recently and the installer guy didnt even connect it..id love to get rid of our phone line at home since we use the cell phone for every call we make, but we'd loose dsl if we did that and no one here lets you have dsl without charging for the phone line..wed have to get cable and thats just as expensive as what we pay for both house phone and dsl through sbc sucks...
we got cell phones when we had the kid, i dont relish the thought of something happening to one of us on the road with a kid in the car, plus the man's out on the road all week, gotta love the cell phone.. as usual it isnt the actual item, it's the morons who use them at the wrong times in the wrong stupid ways...

[rkmsuf]

I'm telling you, these things are a problem.

---------------------------------------------------

Cell Phone Users Interrupt Sex for Phone Calls


hxxp://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/cell_sex.html


April 11, 2005
Fourteen percent of the world's cell phone users report that they have stopped in the middle of a sex act to answer a ringing wireless device, Ad Age reported.


The highest incidence of cellular interruptus was found in Germany and Spain, where 22 percent of users interrupted sex to answer their cell phones; the lowest was in Italy, where only 7 percent reported doing so. In the U.S., the figure was 15 percent, the magazine said, citing a study conducted by BBDO Worldwide and Proximity Worldwide.

"People can't bear to miss a call," said Christine Hannis, head of communications for BBDO Europe. "Everybody thinks the next call can be something really exciting. And getting so many calls proves social success," she said. "It fulfills a fundamental insecurity."

More than half of the respondents, 52 percent, said they used a mobile phone to flirt.

[Ksyrup]

"And getting so many calls proves social success"


I thought having sex proved social success?

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I'm telling you, these things are a problem.

---------------------------------------------------

Cell Phone Users Interrupt Sex for Phone Calls


hxxp://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/cell_sex.html


April 11, 2005
Fourteen percent of the world's cell phone users report that they have stopped in the middle of a sex act to answer a ringing wireless device, Ad Age reported.


The highest incidence of cellular interruptus was found in Germany and Spain, where 22 percent of users interrupted sex to answer their cell phones; the lowest was in Italy, where only 7 percent reported doing so. In the U.S., the figure was 15 percent, the magazine said, citing a study conducted by BBDO Worldwide and Proximity Worldwide.

"People can't bear to miss a call," said Christine Hannis, head of communications for BBDO Europe. "Everybody thinks the next call can be something really exciting. And getting so many calls proves social success," she said. "It fulfills a fundamental insecurity."

More than half of the respondents, 52 percent, said they used a mobile phone to flirt.

If a girl ever did this to me I would get dressed and leave. Or, if it were my house, I'd turn on the tv and wait for her to leave.

[Cringer]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

If a girl ever did this to me I would get dressed and leave. Or, if it were my house, I'd turn on the tv and wait for her to leave.

I just wouldn't stop. Make her scream....

[Subby]

blah blah blah cell phones are evil blah blah blah

[Subby]

Originally Posted by RendeR

99% of Americans have no talent for driving a motor vehicle, let alone driving it SAFELY.

Add in the inherint IDIOCY of doing ANYTHING beyond driving the vehicle and you have simply made life for everyone that much more dangerous.

Motor vehicles are lethal weapons when no operated in a safe and secure manner, and some are even then.

Do everyone a favor, stop talking shit with your buddy, stop putting on makeup, stop talking on your phones, stop playing with the fucking radio, and stop making excuses for why you all want to feel special and not have to be responsible while driving a 2 ton killing machine.

fucking cell phones....

You used to be such a tender young pea. Now you are an angry old dried up rutabaga. Wha happa!!!???

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by RendeR

99% of Americans have no talent for driving a motor vehicle, let alone driving it SAFELY.

Add in the inherint IDIOCY of doing ANYTHING beyond driving the vehicle and you have simply made life for everyone that much more dangerous.

Motor vehicles are lethal weapons when no operated in a safe and secure manner, and some are even then.

Do everyone a favor, stop talking shit with your buddy, stop putting on makeup, stop talking on your phones, stop playing with the fucking radio, and stop making excuses for why you all want to feel special and not have to be responsible while driving a 2 ton killing machine.

fucking cell phones....

I have a feeling that this guy wouldn't approve of me driving while playing my guitar, either.

[Cringer]

RendeR, you left off "Stop masterbating in rush hour traffic."

Unless it's a woman, I usually enjoy that a bunch.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by RendeR

See this is the real problem. Ignorant gits like this who THINK they can do something that cannot be done.

If your attention is anywhere but the road, you're not driving properly OR safely.

please figure this fact out.

Thanks for the lecture Mr. Perfect. I'm sure you've never done anything while driving that distracts you from the road - fiddling with the radio, inserting/removing CD's from the CD player, talking with your friends in the passenger seats, reaching over to the passenger seat to grab something, etc. We should probably write specific laws forbidding all of these activities as well, right?

I have no doubts that talking on a phone while driving limits your reaction time - that's not in question. I do question the contention that talking on a phone is worse than talking with a passenger - neither of the linked studies explained the research that purportedly comes to this conclusion. I also question the methodology of many of the studies, as I think the way they conducted their experiments are poor cyphers for the real thing and as such are severely flawed in the relevancy of their conclusions.

Here's the thing though - while we are all impaired a certain amount by any task that distracts us while driving, we are not all starting from the same level of driving skill. A good driver who's driving and talking on a cell phone may still be better than a horrible driving paying full attention to the road.

Don't mistake this defense of driving while talking on cell phones to mean I think it should be done willy-nilly - there are times where it's much more dangerous than others.

I would also concur with others that as a society, we haven't yet developed good manners with how to integrate cell-phone usage into the public arena. I get just as pissed as anyone when I see obnoxious cell-phone behavior. In time though, I think we as a society will adjust and adapt such that typically rude behavior with cell-phones becomes less common.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

This point of view may have already been represented, so please accept my apologies if I skimmed over it...

I don't believe the problem is cellphones. I think the problem is irresponsible people behaving recklessly. Each individual should have enough respect for everyone else to not talk on the cellphone if it impairs their ability to drive properly. If I can drive properly AND talk on a cellphone, I should not be punished because some other fools can't handle it.

I don't know if it is a parenting issue, but somewhere along the way they were not taught how to properly respect the vehicle they are driving and its ability to take away the life of others on or near the road. That's not my problem. It's their problem.

You realize that EVERYONE thinks they can drive and talk on the cell phone at the same time, yes?

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by RendeR

See this is the real problem. Ignorant gits like this who THINK they can do something that cannot be done.

If your attention is anywhere but the road, you're not driving properly OR safely.

please figure this fact out.

I think the real problem is people who use British English slang in American style writing.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Thanks for the lecture Mr. Perfect. I'm sure you've never done anything while driving that distracts you from the road - fiddling with the radio, inserting/removing CD's from the CD player, talking with your friends in the passenger seats, reaching over to the passenger seat to grab something, etc. We should probably write specific laws forbidding all of these activities as well, right?

I have no doubts that talking on a phone while driving limits your reaction time - that's not in question. I do question the contention that talking on a phone is worse than talking with a passenger - neither of the linked studies explained the research that purportedly comes to this conclusion. I also question the methodology of many of the studies, as I think the way they conducted their experiments are poor cyphers for the real thing and as such are severely flawed in the relevancy of their conclusions.

Here's the thing though - while we are all impaired a certain amount by any task that distracts us while driving, we are not all starting from the same level of driving skill. A good driver who's driving and talking on a cell phone may still be better than a horrible driving paying full attention to the road.

Don't mistake this defense of driving while talking on cell phones to mean I think it should be done willy-nilly - there are times where it's much more dangerous than others.

I would also concur with others that as a society, we haven't yet developed good manners with how to integrate cell-phone usage into the public arena. I get just as pissed as anyone when I see obnoxious cell-phone behavior. In time though, I think we as a society will adjust and adapt such that typically rude behavior with cell-phones becomes less common.

I won't insult anyone's intelligence by trying to say so. I've done stupid things just like anyone else. I will not however defend bringing another distraction, especially one that is TOTALLY UNNECESSARY IN A CAR.

People say they have to deal with work, bullshit, deal with it from the side of the road. if you think YOUR job is more important that someone else's LIFE then you're a bigger fucking loser than I would have assumed from seeing you use your self indulgent toy while trying to drive your car along the freeway.

Get a god damned clue people, You do NOT have to be in contact with anyone ALL the time. Grow the fuck up and show some fucking responsibility.

Subby: Eat shit, I've always been an angry old fart. I'm sick to death of people trying to defend human stupidity. You more than most it would seem.

Skydog, Don't be an Ass, its really not your forte

Desnudo: I picked up the slang IN the UK, so I figure I qualify. Don't like it, fucking ignore me then and my language won't bother you any longer.


Somtimes you people seriously piss me the fuck off.

God DAMNIT...stop making me sound like a parent.

[Subby]

You should turn that rage into something productive.

Like Ice Dancing!

[Desnudo]

You don't sound like a parent. Maybe someone with anger management problems. And great, I've been to the UK too, but I don't walk around calling everything bloody. And I could never ignore you, baby.

[dawgfan]

I will reiterate - just because some people are awful drivers to begin with and can't afford any distractions while driving shouldn't force others that have a clue while driving from being able to use their cell-phones when it's not a bad time to do so.

If you're going to create specific legislation outlawing talking on a cell-phone while driving then I want to see specific legislation outlawing reading the newspaper while driving, shaving while driving, applying makeup while driving, eating while driving, having an animated conversation with passengers while driving, etc.

Or, we could simply use the existing laws that allow police to ticket drivers for reckless or inattentive driving and go after the people that are hazards without forcing those of us that can manage both tasks competently from being able to do so.

[ISiddiqui]

I will not however defend bringing another distraction, especially one that is TOTALLY UNNECESSARY IN A CAR.

Music isn't necessary in a car. So stop fiddling with your radio or CDs while driving, you unsafe driver .

[daedalus]

Originally Posted by Loren

id love to get rid of our phone line at home since we use the cell phone for every call we make, but we'd loose dsl if we did that and no one here lets you have dsl without charging for the phone line..wed have to get cable and thats just as expensive as what we pay for both house phone and dsl through sbc sucks...

Don't know if they're in your area but Speakeasy is one DSL that will let you do DSL without phone line. Of course, their price is fairly expensive (at least in my opinion).

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I have a feeling that this guy wouldn't approve of me driving while playing my guitar, either.

First, I can't believe that nobody else has praised this joke!


I think that behind the excess anger, RendeR makes some good points. Very few cell phone calls that are made while driving can be considered even remotely "necessary". In isolated circumstances, such as if you are reporting an accident or a drunk driver or some other emergency, using the cell phone while driving can be considered a reasonable thing to do (although pulling over before using the phone would be preferable).

As a rule, I think that talking on the phone is more distracting than talking to someone else who is in the car with you. Fiddling with buttons, trying to hear and be heard, yada yada yada - it can't help your driving. I also think that people enter a semi-hypnotic state when talking on the phone that they don't get into in a conversation with a person sitting next to them. They're trying to picture the person they're talking to, picture what the person is talking about, etc. At the very least, a passenger provides another set of eyes to watch the road, while the person you are talking to on a cell phone doesn't -- unless they happen to be in the car with you, in which case you are probably a simpering moron who should never drive a car anyway...

In the end, I see cell phone use while driving as just another example of people simply choosing to follow their own selfish motives and do whatever they feel like, regardless of any compelling evidence that might be presented that their course of action is not the wisest choice for them personally nor the safest option for everyone that they encounter on the road. I personally never talk on the phone while driving, and would favor any law that restricted other drivers from doing so. Drunk driving was once acceptable, but is now viewed as unlawful. I'm hoping that society will soon begin to realize that talking on the cell phone is just as bad and create laws to deal with the problem.

In the meantime, while I wait for the cell phone laws to materialize, I will just have content myself by listening to my beloved SUV drivers bitching about the skyrocketing costs of gasoline.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by RendeR

Skydog, Don't be an Ass, its really not your forte

Hmmmmm....you and Kodos seem to think that I was kidding. Interesting.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Kodos

As a rule, I think that talking on the phone is more distracting than talking to someone else who is in the car with you. Fiddling with buttons, trying to hear and be heard, yada yada yada - it can't help your driving. I also think that people enter a semi-hypnotic state when talking on the phone that they don't get into in a conversation with a person sitting next to them. They're trying to picture the person they're talking to, picture what the person is talking about, etc. At the very least, a passenger provides another set of eyes to watch the road, while the person you are talking to on a cell phone doesn't -- unless they happen to be in the car with you, in which case you are probably a simpering moron who should never drive a car anyway...

The point about a passenger being an extra set of eyes is a good one, but otherwise I'm yet to be convinced that a conversation on a cell-phone is any more distracting than one in a car. With a hands-free device for your phone, a person talking on the phone while driving can keep his eyes on the road (and checking the speedometer and rear-view mirror). There's a tendency when talking to passengers to occasionally make eye contact. And unlike a phone conversation, where if things get heated and emotional you can hang up, you're stuck with your passenger.

Originally Posted by Kodos

Drunk driving was once acceptable, but is now viewed as unlawful. I'm hoping that society will soon begin to realize that talking on the cell phone is just as bad and create laws to deal with the problem.

Let's be clear here - we haven't outlawed driving by people that have been drinking - we've set a certain level of sobriety as the benchmark. Depending on your body chemistry, you can have a drink or two or three depending on the situation (and the length of time over which you consume) and still drive legally.

My point remains that not all drivers start off on equal footing. Some can better afford to handle distractions while driving or to have had a drink or two and still drive - others can't. A former girlfriend of mine fully admitted her poor driving skills and because of that wouldn't ever drive after having a drink, as she couldn't afford any loss of dexterity. Unfortunately, many bad drivers are oblivious to their poor driving.

For my part, if I'm driving after having had something to drink, or if I'm driving while talking on the phone, I'm conscious of the fact that I need to pay as much attention to the task of driving as I can as well as being cautious and safe - not speeding at all, keeping a very safe following distance, etc. I have no doubt that compared to being fully sober and not talking on the phone, my reaction time is diminished, but I also don't think I'm a major safety hazard either.

Let's face it - driving carries safety risks. There is no perfectly safe solution to several thousand pound objects travelling at high speeds with full freedom of movement. We allow for some compromises of safety in the interests of personal liberty.

[Marmel]

I don't particularly care whether this is made illegal or not, since I lay on my horn and flick off these jerkweeds who cant drive and talk at the same time.

Now there are plenty of bad drivers on the road but cell phone users are notorious for (a) being a bit out of their lanes on the highways and (b) not having any idea of how slow they are driving on the highway. Pretty dangerous stuff here, and I am sure they don't realize it and think they are capable of driving perfectly fine...I mean who continues to have their left wheels in my lane while going 48 mpg on the highway on purpose?

Either way, I let them know how they are driving with a polite beep of the horn, or polite middle finger.

[Ksyrup]

I just got a Blackberry. Pretty damn cool. Now, instead of just talking on the phone while I drive, I can read email and surf the internet.

[WSUCougar]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I'm yet to be convinced that a conversation on a cell-phone is any more distracting than one in a car

And there's the rub. While I respect your opinion, I totally disagree.

Personally, for whatever reason, talking on the phone requires a significantly different type of attention than conversing in the same room. Maybe that's not true for everyone, you in particular, but to say that they are identical in my case is stating something that is factually wrong. I think that phone attention is much more driven by the reception, perception, or whatever of a signal, whereas conversing is direct and more pervasive.

[Raiders Army]

This post intentially left blank.

[dawgfan]

Here's an idea - how about instead of outlawing talking on phones while driving, we require the cell-phone companies to subsidize ad campaigns emphasizing the safety risks of talking on the phone while driving, promoting safer behavior and suggesting people think twice before making or answering a call while driving. In addition, let's promote to traffic cops that they increase an emphasis on busting drivers for poor driving, especially targeting cell-phone users.

This would help in shaping public behavior while still allowing some freedom for those that have a need for doing both or are better able to handle this multi-tasking.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Here's an idea - how about instead of outlawing talking on phones while driving, we require the cell-phone companies to subsidize ad campaigns emphasizing the safety risks of talking on the phone while driving, promoting safer behavior and suggesting people think twice before making or answering a call while driving.

Because, after all, it's all the evil corperation's fault.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by sabotai

Because, after all, it's all the evil corperation's fault.

That's not it at all. Cell phone service providers and phone manufacturers do have a vested interest though in whether cell-phone usage is kept legal while driving. Providing public service ads could be a way to fend off legislation that outlaws the practice altogether.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

That's not it at all. Cell phone service providers and phone manufacturers do have a vested interest though in whether cell-phone usage is kept legal while driving. Providing public service ads could be a way to fend off legislation that outlaws the practice altogether.

People are too busy talking on their cell phones to pay attention to the ads.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

That's not it at all.

Then why punish them by forcing them to fund an ad campaign?

[dawgfan]

I'm not saying the government should force them to do anything. I'm suggesting that it might be in their best interests though to be proactive on this issue.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I'm not saying the government should force them to do anything. I'm suggesting that it might be in their best interests though to be proactive on this issue.

No, what you said was

Originally Posted by dawgfan

how about instead of outlawing talking on phones while driving, we require the cell-phone companies to subsidize ad campaigns emphasizing the safety risks of talking on the phone while driving, promoting safer behavior and suggesting people think twice before making or answering a call while driving.

It's pretty cut and dry. "we require the cell-phone companies". Requiring the companies to do something would mean a law enforced by the government. You didn't say "they should do this for their own good", you basically said they should be made to it. That's two different things.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Kodos

First, I can't believe that nobody else has praised this joke!

I think that behind the excess anger, RendeR makes some good points. Very few cell phone calls that are made while driving can be considered even remotely "necessary". In isolated circumstances, such as if you are reporting an accident or a drunk driver or some other emergency, using the cell phone while driving can be considered a reasonable thing to do (although pulling over before using the phone would be preferable).

As a rule, I think that talking on the phone is more distracting than talking to someone else who is in the car with you. Fiddling with buttons, trying to hear and be heard, yada yada yada - it can't help your driving. I also think that people enter a semi-hypnotic state when talking on the phone that they don't get into in a conversation with a person sitting next to them. They're trying to picture the person they're talking to, picture what the person is talking about, etc. At the very least, a passenger provides another set of eyes to watch the road, while the person you are talking to on a cell phone doesn't -- unless they happen to be in the car with you, in which case you are probably a simpering moron who should never drive a car anyway...

In the end, I see cell phone use while driving as just another example of people simply choosing to follow their own selfish motives and do whatever they feel like, regardless of any compelling evidence that might be presented that their course of action is not the wisest choice for them personally nor the safest option for everyone that they encounter on the road. I personally never talk on the phone while driving, and would favor any law that restricted other drivers from doing so. Drunk driving was once acceptable, but is now viewed as unlawful. I'm hoping that society will soon begin to realize that talking on the cell phone is just as bad and create laws to deal with the problem.

In the meantime, while I wait for the cell phone laws to materialize, I will just have content myself by listening to my beloved SUV drivers bitching about the skyrocketing costs of gasoline.

The alien is wise in many ways

SI

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

The alien is wise in many ways

SI

No, he isn't. He thought I was joking about driving and playing guitar. He ain't THAT wise.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

No, he isn't. He thought I was joking about driving and playing guitar. He ain't THAT wise.

He's also unwise in many ways, but he's wise in some ways, too

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I'm not saying the government should force them to do anything. I'm suggesting that it might be in their best interests though to be proactive on this issue.

I love this solution: It makes absolutely no sense. Why is it in their interest to do something like this? People will cell phones won't care, people without won't buy. Why is it in their best interests? Sure, it's in the public's best interest but I'm pretty sure the number of times completely altruistic motives have come up in large corporate boardrooms in the last twenty years can be counted on one hand.

SI

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by sabotai

t's pretty cut and dry. "we require the cell-phone companies". Requiring the companies to do something would mean a law enforced by the government. You didn't say "they should do this for their own good", you basically said they should be made to it. That's two different things.

You're correct - I said "require" when what I was more accurately thinking was "strongly suggest".

Do you object to beer companies making commercials discouraging teenage drinking and drunk driving, or tobacco companies making print ads describing the health effects of smoking? Are these unfair burdens on those industries?

It's not directly the fault of cell-phone manufacturers or service providers when idiot drivers cause accidents while talking on a cell-phone, but it's something that is affecting the public image of their industry. If they were to produce ads that promoted safer, more responsible use of their products (as well as more consideration when in public) they could improve their image an perhaps realize longer-term financial rewards if certain segments of the population reduced their annoyance with cell-phone behavior.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I love this solution: It makes absolutely no sense. Why is it in their interest to do something like this? People will cell phones won't care, people without won't buy. Why is it in their best interests? Sure, it's in the public's best interest but I'm pretty sure the number of times completely altruistic motives have come up in large corporate boardrooms in the last twenty years can be counted on one hand.

SI

It makes no sense for the cell-phone industry to promote more responsible use of their product? Have you read the vitriol in this thread towards cell-phones?

What we have is a technology that is still in its youth, and we as a culture have been slow to adapt and adjust to accommodate the changes that mobile telephones bring to public behavior. There are segments of the population that have developed a dislike of cell-phones beyond any practical reasoning but is based on a dislike of the behavior of those with the phones.

While there are any number of individuals bitching about the effect of cell-phone use on both driving and in terms of public courtesy, an ad campaign by the industry could provide a more structured and unifying message to the public. I don't expect such a campaign would have a huge immediate impact on behavior, but I think it would accomplish the following:

1. Show the public that the industry is aware of the problems that many have with their product and that they care about responsible usage;
2. Start a more public discourse on these issues, and provide the perception that the industry is willing to work with its critics;
3. Long-term, I think it could help speed up the way our culture adapts to cell-phones and what is considered appropriate usage
4. Also long-term, if the campaign was successful in helping shift our cell-phone habits and in conjuction with improving their public image, it would lead to penetration into a greater percentage of the public and thus more revenue

Do you think the beer company ads regarding teenage drinking and designated drivers has had no positive impact?

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

You're correct - I said "require" when what I was more accurately thinking was "strongly suggest".

There you go. Much better.

Do you object to beer companies making commercials discouraging teenage drinking and drunk driving, or tobacco companies making print ads describing the health effects of smoking? Are these unfair burdens on those industries?

If they are forced to do it, then yes. If they do on their own, then no because they are doing it to themselves.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by sabotai

If they are forced to do it, then yes. If they do on their own, then no because they are doing it to themselves.

I don't believe the beer companies are being "forced" to produce those ads, but I think they were "strongly encouraged" in the wake of the Spuds McKenzie ad campaigns (in the case of teenage drinking). I'm not sure if groups like MADD and others brought about the decision to produce the designated driver ads, but I think it was a good, practical decision.