Fed takeover of the roadways? US ban on cellphone use while driving sought.

In Quebec, it's already illegal to use a phone or to text while driving. But women's are still allowed to put their make-up on, and everyone's still allowed to read the huge billboard ads on highways. I got a ticket for talking on the phone waiting on a red light, I contested the ticket & won.

reply to post by FortAnthem


Cell phone use by drivers is extremely careless.
If you choose to not where your seat belt you are putting yourself in harms way. If you talk on the phone you endanger everyone on the road including children riding as passengers..

Are these calls so important that its worth endangering others? I'll bet 90% or better could have been postponed
without causing a problem..(except emergency vehicles etc).
Where is common sense these days? It appears it has disappeared along with our savings...

reply to post by FortAnthem


This is rather alarming. Who appointed this yahoo,,and what happened to States rights protected by the constitution? Well, he is from Illinois, Barry's home state. Wikipedia has that in 2005 he voted against extending the patrot act, and he quotes "opposed extending it's intrusive police powers". His son also holds a billet

Text On January 21, 2012, LaHood's son, Sam LaHood, was detained by the Egyptian government and not allowed to leave the country as part of a politically charged criminal investigation by the Egyptian government into the activities of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) monitoring local elections in Egypt. LaHood's son is the Egypt director of the International Republican Institute. The Egyptian government has detained twelve NGO representatives from leaving Egypt. [26]

On February 5, 2012, Egyptian authorities charged LaHood's son and 42 other individuals with "spending money from organizations that were operating in Egypt without a license." Nineteen Americans are part of the 42 charged. The U.S. government has made it clear that $1.5 billion in U.S. aid to Egypt could be withheld if the investigation is not finished quickly. Faiza Abu Naga, Egypt's Minister of International Cooperation, is seen as the person pushing the investigation forward. [27][28]

reply to post by bo12au

This is rather alarming. Who appointed this yahoo,,and what happened to States rights protected by the constitution?

Yeah, let's get rid of all Federeal regulations.

They are infringing on our freedoms!!!!

God Bless the Marxist radical revolutionaries!!!!

Regulation=Big Government Fascist totalitarianism

Zeig Heil

reply to post by neo96

Regulation=Big Government Fascist totalitarianism

Yes!!! Let's get rid of all the pesky regulations on car and workplace safety!!!!!

GOD DAMN FASCISTS!!!!!!!

I think they should be banned while driving.. I'm tired of these idiots. Hang up and drive!

Not much more frustrating than idiots on mobile phones, when they should be paying full attention to the road to ensure they don't wipe out some poor family just because they can't wait to make a phone call or a text?!
I'm in the uk - its illegal over here but the amount of people I see doing it still is ridiculous, I wish more police would enforce this law.
Truck drivers are the worst! Big 44 wheelers with drivers on phones, drink in the other hand...should have the book thrown at them...

Hooray! No more drivers with one hand on the wheel and the other stuck on their ear, multitasking, talking like a half-pro while driving like an idiot, or vice versa. Celling while driving about as bad as being intoxicated, swerving, not able to turn the head to look around, with blinders on, turning an SUV with one arm around a U-turn. I never understood how someone who could afford a luxury car would be so cheap or stupid to not afford a way to communicate via speakerphone or earpiece, or to afford an office with a personal assistant.

The cellphone-as-pacifier (as in, driving sucks so let me redirect my focus to a phone to make it better) trend has to go away in society; we must learn to look at faces again, even the ugly ones. We must start hating long commutes enough to move closer to work.

I am so happy, my government is doing something right!

Originally posted by MiddleClassWarrior
Comparing this to seat belt laws is silly.

Seat belts don't cause accidents, they prevent injury, and every state has already passed seat belt laws.

Texting while driving CAUSES accidents, hurts other people, and it's not a nationwide law passed by states.

Exactly. In fact IMO it's seat belt laws that are intrusive. It should be up to me whether I wear a seat belt. But use of a hand held 'phone (including texting ffs) is the behaviour of a moron. I don't care whether such idiots injure themselves - it's other road users - and pedestrians even - who need protecting.

Originally posted by Bakatono

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by FortAnthem

 

You don't seem to understand the federal system of government. Let me try and explain;

1) Federal government outlaws texting while driving.
2) States pass laws to comply with federal law.
3) States that don't pass laws to comply with federal law have federal funds withheld.
4) The end.

Ultimately, the federal government enforces laws like these through funding. They don't make state troopers and
local sheriff's start pulling people over. The FBI aren't going to pull you over for traffic violations anytime soon either.

This is how the federal government makes states obey federal laws. Not a single state governor wants to stop taking money from the federal government.

This is exactly how the federal government mandated a nationwide 55 mph speed limit back when the energy crisis happened in the 1970's (I think that's when it happened).
I agree with FortAnthem in that it isn't the way things should work, but that is how they did it.

edit on 27-4-2012 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

*sigh*

Not correct at all. Wow.

There is no federal law for a 55 mph speed limit. There is no federal seat-belt law mandating the USE of seatbelts, except for those in rigs who are conducting commerce and are subject to the commerce clause. There is no federal 21 drinking age. And so on.

As has been stated above. The federal government subsidizes, (bribes or blackmails) the states into making these laws. If they do not comply the FEDS withhold money from the states (which is ironic because the money belongs to the states and the residents of those states to begin with). So, the states comply so they can get the money. Please, at least do a google search next time.

hmmm....
Wow. I didn't say that there is any federal law for a 55 mph speed limit.
I said that the federal government mandated it. The way that they accomplished it was to threaten federal funding to states that did not pass laws establishing a 55 mph speed limit. Every state in the union complied with the federal governments wishes.

Please, at least do a google search next time.

Please, at least read my post next time.

Originally posted by neo96
Regulation=Big Government Fascist totalitarianism

Zeig Heil

Wrong.

Regulation = Accountability For Negligence

Originally posted by Morpheas
I think they should be banned while driving.. I'm tired of these idiots. Hang up and drive!

I agree with you. However, does it need to be a FEDERAL law. Are you sure your state doesn't already ban them? If they don't why don't you contact your local representative to the STATE legislature and ask them why? I bet you could even call them on the phone or go have lunch sometime.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by Bakatono

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by FortAnthem

 

You don't seem to understand the federal system of government. Let me try and explain;

1) Federal government outlaws texting while driving.
2) States pass laws to comply with federal law.
3) States that don't pass laws to comply with federal law have federal funds withheld.
4) The end.

Ultimately, the federal government enforces laws like these through funding. They don't make state troopers and
local sheriff's start pulling people over. The FBI aren't going to pull you over for traffic violations anytime soon either.

This is how the federal government makes states obey federal laws. Not a single state governor wants to stop taking money from the federal government.

This is exactly how the federal government mandated a nationwide 55 mph speed limit back when the energy crisis happened in the 1970's (I think that's when it happened).
I agree with FortAnthem in that it isn't the way things should work, but that is how they did it.

edit on 27-4-2012 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

*sigh*

Not correct at all. Wow.

There is no federal law for a 55 mph speed limit. There is no federal seat-belt law mandating the USE of seatbelts, except for those in rigs who are conducting commerce and are subject to the commerce clause. There is no federal 21 drinking age. And so on.

As has been stated above. The federal government subsidizes, (bribes or blackmails) the states into making these laws. If they do not comply the FEDS withhold money from the states (which is ironic because the money belongs to the states and the residents of those states to begin with). So, the states comply so they can get the money. Please, at least do a google search next time.

hmmm....
Wow. I didn't say that there is any federal law for a 55 mph speed limit.
I said that the federal government mandated it. The way that they accomplished it was to threaten federal funding to states that did not pass laws establishing a 55 mph speed limit. Every state in the union complied with the federal governments wishes.

Please, at least do a google search next time.

Please, at least read my post next time.

I did read your post and you were echoing the post of the other poster who was way wrong. You stated that they mandated it, true, but you stated it in such a way that a normal person would construe your meaning to be that you agreed with the prior poster and it was a law (as he stated in bullet #1).

So, I am glad you have clarified your understanding and that it is, in fact, federal blackmail of the states, or bribery, whichever you choose. They haven't passed a law but threatened to withhold money. Either way, it is corrupt.

reply to post by Bakatono

So, I am glad you have clarified your understanding and that it is, in fact, federal blackmail of the states, or bribery, whichever you choose. They haven't passed a law but threatened to withhold money. Either way, it is corrupt.

Sorry that I wasn't clear in my post.
I am not sure what it amounts to bribery or blackmail. The individual states have become accustomed to receiving their federal 'milk'. They look at it as if they can't survive without it.

I always thought that the governments that I receive the biggest bang for my tax dollar are the local ones. They take away the trash, provide water and sewer services. There are federal dollars going to those municipal governments though. I feel that the people can manage the local issues with local government a lot better than adding state and federal bureaucracies on top of them.

I hate to be pessimistic about things, but I don't foresee any changes in how things work. I think things are going to get worse.

why should you be texting while driving?
was you writing letters with pen and paper while driving before phones that could text?

No because that would be stupid and cause a accident, so is texting and driving.

So whats going to happen if your family members or friends get hit by a person carelessly texting people and putting other people at risk, its selfish.

Australia has already done the ban, 3 points and I think a 300 - 400 dollar fine.

Cell/Mobile phones have taken over why do people need to live in our pockets, I am so over my phone i forget to charge it up these days. annoying annoying text messages.
"what are you doing?"

"yeah"

"I see"

"ok"

get the drift its pointless messages like this that get sen everyday, making the telco's super rich.
29c for a text message these days from telstra, stuff that ill come and visit you face to face with out crashing my car and save my money on my phone in case of emergency or some importance.

reply to post by FortAnthem


I don't see anything in this law about hands free cell phone use. What are the stats on hands free vs handheld? This is another power grab by the federal control freaks. What about cops on cell phones? Sorry, if it's not safe for citizens it's even less safe for law enforcement to use a cell phone when they may be trying to navigate a stressful situation, and if they aren't in the middle of a situation, they don't need to be on the phone any more than the rest of us.

There are more than enough laws are on the books to cover cell phone use while driving. For those who are genuinely concerned about safety, and if you think your states laws are too lax, talk to your state rep. The feds do not need to be looking over everyone's shoulder when they drive, remember the slippery slope, we are fast sliding down it into 1984.

I think it's safe to use a voice activated speaker phone to talk while driving.

Talking while driving is nothing like driving drunk. Horrible analogy.

It is exceptionally dangerous to use a cell phone while driving. Recently I was almost in a horrific accident because a girl who was texting stopped dead in the road, and a car and semi behind her couldn't stop fast enough and collided, I was lucky enough to drive off the road and avoid rear ending the semi and my car was undamaged, but a semi truck behind me swerved, went into the right lane and hit yet another car. All because one person was texting and was distracted. Fortunately in this case no one was seriously hurt. In many cases people are not so lucky. I absolutely think it should be banned. If you need to use the phone, pull off the road for a few minutes and use it. I disagree with the assertion that being drunk is a bad analogy. Lets say you are using your smart phone and are going to play some music, you are going 65 miles an hour, and you look at your phone for about 7 seconds to play the song. In the time you took your eyes off the road, your car moved almost 700 feet. So if there is anything in that space that is moving slower than you, say a car moves into your lane in that time, and is moving slower than you, you are going to hit it.It is DEFINITELY impairment.

You shouldn't be on your phone driving, ESPECIALLY when texting. I'm glad the government is stepping up and enforcing strict laws on these things.

I really don't want to be driving on the road while some douchebag is texting in the other lane.