It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Govt. looking at tech. to disable cell phones in cars

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
DOT exploring technology that would disable cell phones in cars


The Transportation Department is looking into technology to disable cell phones in vehicles, according to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

"There's a lot of technology out there that can disable phones and we're looking at that," LaHood said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."

"A number of those people came to our distracted driving meeting here in Washington and that's one way," he said.

LaHood seemed to suggest that this technology has a good chance of making its way into cars.

"I think it will be done," he said.


thehill.com...

As much as I hate to give even more" power" to the government, I think I have to agree with them on this one. I am tired of US drivers illegally driving, talking, and texting while on our roads. On a personal level, I have almost been hit by these type of drivers at least a dozen times that I can recall in the past year. Furthermore, these distracted drivers are not only causing accidents, but they are effecting others' lives by causing time delays, and resulting road rages.

Please, shut up and drive already! If you must talk/text/surf, pull over!



What do y'all think?

edit on 3-12-2010 by sonjah1 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:00 PM
link   
great so this will stop you calling for help when you are trapped in your car from an accident..
/been kidnapped.
edit on 3-12-2010 by MR BOB because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by MR BOB
 


Supposedly, when you turn your car off, it will re-activate?



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   
I wouldn't think it would be too hard to do seeing as most newer cells have gps capability. All they would have to do is when the gps detects the phone going over say 20mph it shuts off calling features to everything but 911. Pretty good idea I think. Seeing as some people can't quite grasp the concept of not texting while driving.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by jaynkeel
 


I don't know about over 20 mph...I've been behind waayy toooo many people who go through a whole life-cycle of a traffic signal gabbing away.

I would be in favor of call 911 capability only.

Thanks for your thoughts



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:10 PM
link   
imo this is the biggest piece of crap idea that the government has ever come up with. you get just as many accidents from people TALKING on cells as you get from people changing the radio station. again this is all opinion. and if this passes whats next. stereos out of the vehicle too? do you know how much more road rage that would cause? like a previous poster stated that most newer cell phones have gps in them and alot of people use that gps to get to their destinations. without cell phones people would have to resort to going out and buying a new gps for them to use therefore feeding TPTB even more. but if you think about it if the signal jams the gps and the cell phone all together what would prevent it from jamming the GPS that someone bought instead?

Make Bluetooth in every car manditory. use the cars tech to take those phone calls

and think about it...you get mugged/kidnapped/or anything else and the only safest place is in your car but yuo cant use your phone cause of the jamming.

again this is all opinion
edit on 3-12-2010 by AbandonFaieth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   
The argument against this will be: "what if I have an emergency and need to call 911". This argument alone will probably prevent this technology from being implemented. However, is that one potentially lifesaving call to 911 worth the countless lives that are taken each year due to driver inattention because of cell phone usage?

Maybe they can setup the technology so that you can dial 911, but nothing else. I would be in favor of this technology. I see near misses all the time with ignorant folks talking/texting while driving. Simply outlawing cell phone use while driving does not go far enough, it's simply too difficult to enforce; however, this technology would outright prevent the distraction. This isn't about the right of the individual driver, it's about the right of all other drivers to be safe on the roadways.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 

And then everyone would ring 911 for minor matters because they couldn't ring the people they needed to ring.

We need education, not force, when communicationis such an important part of our lives.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Hmmm ...my wife will be mad lol, I do all the driving and she talks on the phone while I drive...


2nd line



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


Well what did we do before cell phones? Sure in the case of an accident it has saved many of lives, but realistically many generations before us survived without a phone. Plus like I posted earlier all they have to do is enable 911 calling then it no longer is an issue. Dis regard last sentence, after rereading your post..
edit on 3-12-2010 by jaynkeel because: fix error



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kailassa
reply to post by Aggie Man
 

And then everyone would ring 911 for minor matters because they couldn't ring the people they needed to ring.

We need education, not force, when communicationis such an important part of our lives.


I believe folks are well educated on the potentially negative impacts of driving and texting, talking, etc. The problem is that everyone thinks that they know best. It is always those "other people" who cause accidents. The "i can handle it" mentality. You know, drunk drivers think the same way. There is no room for judgment on this.

I love your use of the word "force". I suppose you feel "forced" to obey the speed limit? Or "forced" to stop at red lights?



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Originally posted by Kailassa
reply to post by Aggie Man
 

And then everyone would ring 911 for minor matters because they couldn't ring the people they needed to ring.

We need education, not force, when communicationis such an important part of our lives.


I believe folks are well educated on the potentially negative impacts of driving and texting, talking, etc. The problem is that everyone thinks that they know best. It is always those "other people" who cause accidents. The "i can handle it" mentality. You know, drunk drivers think the same way. There is no room for judgment on this.

I love your use of the word "force". I suppose you feel "forced" to obey the speed limit? Or "forced" to stop at red lights?



you bring up the drunk driver and i agree with you on their thoughts... in my opinion if this law passes then why not throw breathalizers into every vehicle so that every person has to do the same exact thing that those who have this in their car for numerous reasons.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Here are examples, and are some other links that identify the hazards associated with cell phone use in vehicles/while driving:


Several recent high visibility trucking and transit crashes have been directly linked to texting from a cell phone. VTTI’s research showed that text messaging, which had the highest risk of over 20 times worse than driving while not using a phone, also had the longest duration of eyes-off-road time (4.6-second over a six-second interval). This equates to a driver traveling the length of a football field at 55 miles per hour without looking at the roadway.



A snapshot of risk estimates from these studies includes the following.

For light vehicles or cars

Dialing a cell phone made the risk of crash or near-crash event 2.8 times as high as non-distracted driving;
Talking or listening to a cell phone made the risk of crash or near-crash event 1.3 times as high as non-distracted driving; and
Reaching for an object such as an electronic device made the risk of crash or near-crash event 1.4 times as high as non-distracted driving.
For heavy vehicles or trucks

Dialing a cell phone made the risk of crash or near-crash event 5.9 times as high as non-distracted driving;
Talking or listening to a cell phone made the risk of crash or near-crash event 1.0 times as high as non-distracted driving;
Use of, or reach for, an electronic device made the risk of crash or near-crash event 6.7 times as high as non-distracted driving; and
Text messaging made the risk of crash or near-crash event 23.2 times as high as non-distracted driving.


from:
www.vtnews.vt.edu...

and

www-nass.nhtsa.dot.gov...
edit on 3-12-2010 by sonjah1 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-12-2010 by sonjah1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by AbandonFaieth
[you bring up the drunk driver and i agree with you on their thoughts... in my opinion if this law passes then why not throw breathalizers into every vehicle so that every person has to do the same exact thing that those who have this in their car for numerous reasons.


I would agrue that the number of people on cell phones--for whatever reason--in vehicles is significantly higher than those intoxicated at any place, at any given time in vehicles...
edit on 3-12-2010 by sonjah1 because: left out word



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by AbandonFaieth
in my opinion if this law passes then why not throw breathalizers into every vehicle so that every person has to do the same exact thing that those who have this in their car for numerous reasons.


If breathalizers were ever implemented into all vehicles, then I am opening up a cab company.



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reevster
Hmmm ...my wife will be mad lol, I do all the driving and she talks on the phone while I drive...


2nd line


That is something to consider...passengers on cell phones...

Your poor wife will have to talk to *you* the whole time you are driving...
...better for you or her?



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   
This is A GOOD THING!!!!!

People that use their cell phones while driving are JUST AS DANGEROUS as someone with an open whiskey bottle in their hand pouring the contents of it down their throat.

I see it nearly everyday where people are locking up their brakes and skidding off the road with a cell phone up to their ear. Even during a near fatal accident, they STILL maintain the control to keep it up to their ear because they are SO DISTRACTED BY IT.

I wonder just how many fatal or near-fatal accidents have already occurred due to people yapping away on their cell phones while not paying a shred of attention to others around them.. I have been nearly rear ended EIGHT TIMES ALREADY in the last 3 years, and all eight times the drivers had a cell phone up to their ear. EVERY TIME!!!. A two ton vehicle and a cell phone in a persons ear does NOT MIX well for the safety of others around them.

[color=skyblue]GOVERNMENT: PLEASE BAN THE USE OF CELL PHONES WHILE DIVING... PLEASE!!!!!!!!!
edit on 3-12-2010 by jontap because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by jontap
 

Thanks for your input and thoughts, jontap


I thought it was banned in every state?! Yes/No?

Here in California, it is BANNED but there IS NO ENFORCEMENT


The other day, on I-5. I witnessed a woman, in a truck with a child next to her, towing a trailer, and texting! She weaved into the median, almost flipped the trailer over, and then to overcompensate, came within inches of me!



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Technology to detect and disable cell phones, technology to detect alcohol levels and prevent the start of a car, technology to detect whether one is too tired to drive (yes, it's out there) and shut off your car, technology to detect whether one is driving too close to another and compensate, and on and on and on. Wwhere do you want the interference to end?



posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by LadySkadi
 


Thanks for your thoughts, LadyS.

However, your points quickly lead to a slippery slope fallacy.


Calling for tech in only *one* arena--which is the focus of this thread--doesn't necessarily lead to the domino effect you propose.

I don't know where you are, but this is a daily problem in CA.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join