got hit by a car today

[JulesAZ]

Originally Posted by blurr

Jeez,


CA Codes (veh:23100-23135)


23103. (a) A person who drives a vehicle upon a highway in willful
or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty
of reckless driving.

(b) A person who drives a vehicle in an offstreet parking
facility, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 12500, in willful
or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty
of reckless driving.
(c) Persons convicted of the offense of reckless driving shall be
punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than five days
nor more than 90 days or by a fine of not less than one hundred
forty-five dollars ($145) nor more than one thousand dollars
($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, except as provided
in Section 23104 or 23105

Again your point? Are you drinking today? drugs?

[JulesAZ]

Blurr ....

[blurr]

Originally Posted by JulesAZ

Again your point? Are you drinking today? drugs?

Again, the point is IT IS ALREADY FUCKING ILLEGAL TO OPERATE A MOTORIZED VEHICLE IN A UNSAFE MANNER. People still continue to do so.

oh yea, I love you

[acalliste]

Interesting, Jules... Thanks for taking the time to find all that.

So some contradiction between the studies, a lot uncertainty, and a mention about driver training.

This is why I don't base my entire opinion on studies. Statistics can be skewed to whatever result you prefer. I'd rather use my common sense and personal observation.

For myself, I know that passengers who try to carry on a conversation are very distracting to me (even if they are just talking to each other), more than any other source of distraction, and being aware of this, I often tell my passengers to STFU so I can drive, and actually prefer to drive alone.

One exception to that is small children. I can tune out crying babies and screaching young children easily, probably because I got my license after I already had one kid, and got my initial driving experience with a baby in the car. Whereas I rarely had another adult in the car if I was driving.

[JulesAZ]

Originally Posted by blurr

Again, the point is IT IS ALREADY FUCKING ILLEGAL TO OPERATE A MOTORIZED VEHICLE IN A UNSAFE MANNER. People still continue to do so.

oh yea, I love you

Uh ... Ok I think we all already know this ... and addressed it. I don't think anyone or me disputed that it wasn't illegal. As far as I know the question was as to whether talking hand held or hands free should be illegal.

Yes, common sense would assume that this would be covered under said law but that is not really the question ... as far as I know

Yes, we already know that people operate a vehicle in an unsafe manner every day ....

[JulesAZ]

Originally Posted by acalliste

Interesting, Jules... Thanks for taking the time to find all that.

So some contradiction between the studies, a lot uncertainty, and a mention about driver training.

This is why I don't base my entire opinion on studies. Statistics can be skewed to whatever result you prefer. I'd rather use my common sense and personal observation.

For myself, I know that passengers who try to carry on a conversation are very distracting to me (even if they are just talking to each other), more than any other source of distraction, and being aware of this, I often tell my passengers to STFU so I can drive, and actually prefer to drive alone.

One exception to that is small children. I can tune out crying babies and screaching young children easily, probably because I got my license after I already had one kid, and got my initial driving experience with a baby in the car. Whereas I rarely had another adult in the car if I was driving.

Different opinions, different studies, done in different areas and circumstances ... all valid points ...

[blurr]

Originally Posted by JulesAZ

Uh ... Ok I think we all already know this ... and addressed it. I don't think anyone or me disputed that it wasn't illegal. As far as I know the question was as to whether talking hand held or hands free should be illegal.

The cell phone is merely a tool, one that is so commonly used as AC brought up, it is impossible to actually regulate.

Yes, common sense would assume that this would be covered under said law but that is not really the question ... as far as I know

Like with most things in todays society, the government fails to do its most basic function, society complains, and more laws are passed, more liberties are lost, on and on and on. And that is my main point, we dont need more laws, only enforcement of the basic ones already on the books.

Yes, we already know that people operate a vehicle in an unsafe manner every day ....

And more laws are not going to change that unfortunately. More responsibility will. To correct this we need several things, one, eliminate the bullshit media blackout on accidents, In other words, we do not get pictures of reality. Also I am serious when I say insurance is a bad thing, if people have to think more about their actions, more about "well shit I cant pay if I wreck a 40k car" they will take a bit more care in not destroying said object, if they also know they cannot file suit on an insurance company with the Idea of getting a huge payday, again, they are forced into responsibility.

[JulesAZ]

"Like with most things in todays society, the government fails to do its most basic function, society complains, and more laws are passed, more liberties are lost, on and on and on. And that is my main point, we dont need more laws, only enforcement of the basic ones already on the books."

Unfortunately the real world does not work like that it does not seem. That is why I questioned whether we the people are the ones that force more laws. Just like my post regarding my sales agreement. It's our nature to find a loop hole and jump through it. So a blanket law only forces confusion, law suit challenges etc.

I wish it weren't that way ... but it is.

Example: common sense would tell a restaurant not to make coffee too hot. Common sense would tell you that coffee is hot .... but a woman burned herself ... then came a law suit and now regulations regarding the temperature of coffee.

Maybe you, me, etc don't need a law to replace common sense but there are many people that do unfortunately.

Many people are not blessed with common sense ... dumb people, highly intelligent people, people with avg IQs ...

[blurr]

You cannot legislate stupidity.

[PhilB]

Originally Posted by blurr

no, no you have not, you have proposed yet another band aid law and refused to educate yourself, even calling me full of shit when I posted up link after link completely backing my arguments. ...

Your links do not back your arguments. I've pointed out in the past how and why they do not back your arguments, with logic, and math, and you continue to fail to get it.

So it's back to force in self-defense.

Originally Posted by blurr

Bwaaa haaa, hey, how will you or julez feel when cell phones are band and people continue having accidents?

oh fuck, no way, that cant be. I mean, people stopped robbing people after that was Illegal didnt they?

Wait, you mean people still are murdered too? You mean, bad people still carry guns into banks and rob them!!!! what WHAT!!! lmfao

So you're telling me that laws against robbery and murder are useless and we should legalize those actions because we can't 100% prevent them? That's a remarkably stupid position to take.

Originally Posted by acalliste

Honestly Phil, you are blowing this way out of proportion.

I haven't seen anything that proves hands free is as dangerous as holding a phone to your head. All the tests I've seen are with someone holding a phone. You could hold a shoe to your head and carry on a conversation with a passenger & get the same result as no hands free.

Still no comment on the need to prove actual driving skill in order to get a license?

No, I'm not. This is a practice that is killing people in large numbers, that endangers others every day, pretty much everywhere. The hands-free option HAS been specifically studied, and found to be not better, for the reasons already explained multiple times.

Originally Posted by blurr

... And more laws are not going to change that unfortunately. More responsibility will. ....

Only if more responsiblity actually happens. Which, since y'all who do it are refusing to be responsible and instead defending the practice, obviously isn't going to fucking happen.

So it's back to self-defense. I'm OK with taking the intermediate moderate step of passing a law and having the police enforce it with fines, rather than going strictly self-defense and simply shooting any bastard who endangers my life because he's on the phone.

Originally Posted by blurr

You cannot legislate stupidity.

Nope. But you can (and should) legislate the violation of the rights of some by others. You can, and should, legislate against violence, fraud, theft, property damage, and dangerous negligence.

You still don't have the right to wilfully and callously endanger other people. Period.

PhilB