Damn cell phones

Page 3 of 3  
If you know anything about drunks, you would know that something like that is the trigger which shows them they need help and compels them to get it. Not always, but as a cop, I never gave up hope on people.
And I have seen such drunks become totally the opposite of what they were. And yes, I have seen others who continued in the same rut. What I would NEVER do is blame someone for using a cell phone or any other means (CB or whatever) to summon help for anyone, drunk or sober. You just put someone down for doing something unselfish. Is that the kind of world you want to live in?
wrote:

Hey! Spikey Likes IT! 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sean Dinh wrote:

judge and jury

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Are those convictions as bad as being a victim?
WhyDoYouAsk wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The original rail is against someone using a cell phone for doing something good by helping strangers without regard to any factor other than need. That is humanitarianism. That is altruism. Hopefully, whether you were at fault or a victim, someone would do as much for you. As for the question posed; now that depends upon your point of view, doesn't it. It also depends upon the status of each, victim and drunk driver in their respective lives. The victim may be an outstanding citizen or considered by family and others as the worse human being to walk the earth. The drunk driver may be a pillar of the community why rarely drinks, but just happened to be celebrating the birth of a child, wedding of a daughter, or some other significant occasion.
So...."Are those convictions as bad as being a victim?" 1. If you are the victim, of course not. 2. If you are the drunk, depending upon your conscience, etc, it might be worse or might not be bad enough. In my years in law enforcement I have seen both. 3. If you are the family or friends of the victim, probably not, but I have seen families who felt relieved that the victim would be out of their lives for as long as possible. 4. If you happen to be someone who has endured a similar situation, though you don't know these people, probably not. For example, when my 12 year old son was run down by a school bus driver who, for reasons unknown, drove up on the sidewalk, hit my son, continued half a block to the intersection, across the intersection, went up an embankment, and dropped into a sunken driveway. I may be more inclined to be against the driver in any school bus accident. You might find it strange, but my former spouse and her husband both attended the trial and at sentencing, asked for leniency for the driver out of their religious beliefs. 5. If you are a total stranger, who has never had reason to have strong feelings one way or the other, you might think it enough, or not enough, or have no thought at all.
Perspective. After years of patrol work, I developed an attitude. Driving down the street, I could look at people and decide whether they were good or bad by the way they dressed and acted. One day I did that, and while checking out the individual, I found out it was a priest from the local church. That was when I realized that I sorely needed an attitude adjustment.
From many years of law enforcement, until I retired, I learned that things are not always as they appear at first sight. I have investigated accidents where it was obvious who was at fault... UNTIL I conducted the investigation, and found the evidence proved the other driver to be at fault.
Would you reaction be the same if the driver were a fireman who had just spend a great many hours at Ground Zero saving lives, and nodded off while driving home? Would you, inn either position, want someone to call for help, or would you prefer they ignore the accident and continue on their way.
wrote:

Hey! Spikey Likes IT! 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<much snippage>...

mean
police
down
find
road
Sorry I wasn't more clear. By "vehicle-specific", I was referring to line-of-sight, as in you aim the gun at a single vehicle at a time and only that vehicle is affected. Apparently, the device required no codes unique to a given make/model -- it acted on any ignition.
The cop community was also toying with the idea of using a low-profile (it was rather flat!) rocket-propelled cart which accomplished the same thing. It would reside under the front bumper of the cop car. When needed, the pursuing cop would release it and send it speeding under the offending vehicle, whereby it would send an EMP burst up under the car and knock out the ignition. I saw this one demonstrated on a tv news broadcast a few years back. Another EMP design involves a portable or permanent disc in the road. The offending vehicle drives over it and bam! The cops flip a switch and the suspect's ignition is dead.
Anyhoo, I was only joking about actually putting this technology in the hands of civilians.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ray L. Volts wrote:
<snip>

Rocket propelled carts being launched by police cars in pursuit? There's a low risk set up! Would the cart be tethered to the police car? Have it's own guidance system? Sounds like a low powered torpedo with wheels!
What's the range of an EMP sufficient to shut down a car, e.g., anybody nearby going to get shutdown as well?
IMHO hands free cell phones don't address the real problem, i.e., diverting the driver's attention if the call gets "complicated".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

(it
There's
=YESHave it's own guidance system? Sounds like a low powered torpedo with wheels!

==Nope, only the car it is UNDER

--
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'd love to be a fly on the wall of the responsible organization if such a device got implemented and "El~Kayieeda" got their hands on it while Dick Cheney was driving along in a motorcade........
"Today, The Newly Elected President Was Killed When His Pacemaker Was Shut Off Accidentally By Law Enforcement Officials..."
Either that or a trial lawyer...
I say let an NGO handle the cell phone issue. Too many laws on the books as it is.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Don't tease me like that.
TM

the
vehicle
only
unique
(it
thing.
out
The
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
=======You would just make it worse because they would be trying to figure out what happened to the phone and calling the person back...all the while not watching the road. ==============

--
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You waste your airtime on useless calls? The only people that get my cell number are people I want to reach me.
Happy modeming, Bill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I don't use a home phone, I spend most of my time away from home. So I feel a cell phone is somewhat useful. However it does not require me to take your call when you call me. I am still allowed to use discretion. If I don't feel like calling someone back right away, I don't. Having a cell phone doesn't make me instantly accessible to anyone who wants to get a hold of me, it makes me instantly accessible to whoever I want to get a hold of. I control when I use it, and how I use it.
Seriously, when you drive, you pay attention to the road. If you take on the responsibility of doing something else while you are driving that becomes your problem. If you can't multitask and you cause a problem, then frankly you must pay for it. Much like no one made a law that you couldn't cook, watch the kids, and talk on the phone at home because you might knock the pot of boiling water onto your kid when you got the cord wrapped around it. Much like it isn't against the law to change the radio station, or change cd's, or anything else. It becomes something that we need to teach people responsibility. Not a law. Laws don't make things better, or safer, or any of that crap. Responsibility for ones own actions is the key.
I see people everyday that are talking on their cell phones, braking on the freeway for no reason, or cutting someone off, or some other stupid action. I still don't think a blanket law will help that. Laws just complicate life even more. We have too many laws. Everyones quick solution to everything is make a law. Laws don't make the world safe. If you want to make a change, start by teaching your kids.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
berkshire bill wrote:

for some reason telemarketers dont call cell phones, or at least mine. ive got virgin mobile, and it costs nothing to check my voicemail from my home phone.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
he never said he answered the phone, but with it being off, I thought that would be a given.
TM

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Firearms sound like the answer then,
widely available, widely used and only $0.45 per "use"
:-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Full_Name wrote:

Now this is the sort of clear thinking we need more of in DC! ;)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Lemme guess - you're in favor of banning conversations between driver and passenger(s) too, right? If not, you better be since there is no difference.
These geniuses in legislation have everyone so brainwashed that "cell phones" are bad and cause all these accidents.
What will their excuse be when they get all their laws passed and realize that it affected nothing?
Ahh, it's not worth it. Too many people just don't get it and refuse to take their blinders off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

_________________________________________________________
You have to dial your passengers? Cool! And you can make 'em shut up with the "end" button? Cooler!
--
BT

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I think that you need control of the privacy glass for full effect ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

difference.
And you have to mentally visualize them as well?
The study i've heard about suggests that that is the major problem with cell phone usage while driving.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.