Texting

[JasG]

I think we should make the punishments much harsher for texting and drunk driving. In other countries prison, steep fines and lose of license is a given even when no accident occurs. Here if you hire a good lawyer the punishments are a joke. A former employee of my employer had 5 DWI's and could still drive on a conditional license.

Personally I agree with those that think it should be disabled. It wouldn't even have to be the phone, a vehicle could have a built in device to block signals. We looked into it at work because so many people now only use the "private" bathrooms. We know they are going in there to answer and make calls.

Have seen similar information from different sources:

In France, drinking and driving is punishable by the equivalent of a $1,000 fine, imprisonment for one year, and loss of license for three years. Finland and Sweden automatically sentence drunk drivers to one-year jail sentences including hard labor. In Norway, a drunk driver is jailed for three weeks with hard labor and loses their license for a year. If they do it again, they lose their license forever. In South Africa, drinking and driving results in a ten-year prison sentence or the equivalent of a $10,000 fine and, in some cases, both.

 

[aczlan]

Personally I agree with those that think it should be disabled. It wouldn't even have to be the phone, a vehicle could have a built in device to block signals.

Blocking the signal would also block calls. Emitting a jamming signal is currently illegal in the US.
In the case that you can get this passed, who are you going to get to take liability in the following situations:
1. Car crashes, wont go into park, the driver is stuck in the seat unable to call 911.
2. Jammer malfunctions, wont turn off and wont let someone make calls?
3. A "drunk driver" or other dangerous driver on the road where there is a legitimate reason to be making a call while driving
4. Someone taking the jammer, putting a better antenna and/or a amplifier on it so that it blocks out signals for a quarter mile radius
5. Someone using a text to speech to read texts and voice recognition to send texts (which is legal in most states)

I just don't see that as feasible from a political or an engineering standpoint.

Aaron Z

 

[mikehaugen]

Blocking the signal would also block calls. Emitting a jamming signal is currently illegal in the US.
In the case that you can get this passed, who are you going to get to take liability in the following situations:
1. Car crashes, wont go into park, the driver is stuck in the seat unable to call 911.
2. Jammer malfunctions, wont turn off and wont let someone make calls?
3. A "drunk driver" or other dangerous driver on the road where there is a legitimate reason to be making a call while driving
4. Someone taking the jammer, putting a better antenna and/or a amplifier on it so that it blocks out signals for a quarter mile radius
5. Someone using a text to speech to read texts and voice recognition to send texts (which is legal in most states)

I just don't see that as feasible from a political or an engineering standpoint.

Aaron Z

The first one I would chance the odds against the possible damage a texting driver can cause. Also, with most cars being able to sense a crash pretty reliably, I can't see it being much of a concern.

The second one... you mean somebody couldn't use their cell phone until something got fixed? Oh the humanity! This is such a far stretch and far less likely than a phone malfunctioning on it's own or being broken.

The third one someone could pull over and report.

The fourth one could probably be done already, and I don't think this would enable anybody anymore than now.

Text to speech can be done with the phone sitting on the passenger seat or in a docking station that could re-enable it. Which could also possibly be a solution to number one.

 

[JasG]

Blocking the signal would also block calls. Emitting a jamming signal is currently illegal in the US.
In the case that you can get this passed, who are you going to get to take liability in the following situations:
1. Car crashes, wont go into park, the driver is stuck in the seat unable to call 911.
2. Jammer malfunctions, wont turn off and wont let someone make calls?
3. A "drunk driver" or other dangerous driver on the road where there is a legitimate reason to be making a call while driving
4. Someone taking the jammer, putting a better antenna and/or a amplifier on it so that it blocks out signals for a quarter mile radius
5. Someone using a text to speech to read texts and voice recognition to send texts (which is legal in most states)

I just don't see that as feasible from a political or an engineering standpoint.

Aaron Z

How did we survive with out cell phones? It's a wonder humanity ever made it this far.

If you have a real reason to make a call, pull over, like I do, make your call and then move on.

So you would rather have us continue to drive with people basically driving blind?

There isn't a day that goes by that I don't see this on my way to work. Normally I am all about personal freedom, but this is a case where someone's personal freedom is taking lives on a daily basis.

 

[mikehaugen]

Just to clarify, my original post about the blocking device was meant more for texting as I see it way more dangerous than talking on the phone.

I admittedly am guilty of talking on the phone on rare occasions. I rarely talk on the phone as it is, so this is extremely rare. Not trying to justify it, but 90% of my driving is on rural highways. In traffic, in cities, or on the expressway where I feel I need a higher level of concentration, I will refrain from using the phone... and I never text while driving.

 

[aczlan]

Just to clarify, my original post about the blocking device was meant more for texting as I see it way more dangerous than talking on the phone.

The problem is that a text message is sent in the "control channel" for the phone so somehow stopping just that part of the connection would prevent the phone from telling the tower where it is (absent a major rewrite of the way that texts are sent which is not going to happen on current technology).

I agree that its a problem, but I don't see any way around it any more than there is for the problem of drunk driving. Enforcement helps, but it all comes down to the loose nut behind the wheel (perhaps self driving cars are the answer?)...

Aaron Z

 

[mikehaugen]

I don't suggest a blocking of the signal. I think a collaboration between congress, auto manufacturers, and phone manufacturers to create a system that would completely block a user from the texting interface on the phone... maybe even other applications such as web browsing. Reading is nearly as bad as texting and blocking the transmission of messages would do little.the way phones become obsolete, it wouldn't take long for all phones to have this technology. Cars may lag behind, but it is something that is retrofittable if the parents wished.

 

[3930dave]

For a certain (and seemingly growing) subset of the population, there is a perfect storm here of jangley blingey technology, combined with total self-absorption and disregard for other people.

I'm talking about being behind the wheel, but you also see this behaviour leaking over into other areas of "society".

I haven't gone looking for the current research, but it's pretty clear this mobile tech has changed people's "thought" patterns. Even the mainstream media reports on Separation Anxiety when people can't access their phones.

As "smart" phones are now available for $0, most of the phobia is not related to cost.

College level courses today are often designed to force students into situations where they have to interact face to face with other students to collaborate on a project. The main reason for this teaching strategy is that many people that have grown up with this technology don't want to interact directly with other people, at least concerning a matter of any consequence.

In terms of people's interaction with technology, it is often used as an isolation barrier. In the olden days, what many people spew forth for comments on the internet today would have cost them at least a few teeth.

Add to that the isolation skew that getting into a vehicle seems to impart to some people. In common use, Road Rage is a relatively new term.

When all these factors meet up in the right individual, the result is easily preventable injuries and fatalities.

IMO, texting while driving when involved in an accident should be charged at least as seriously as drunk driving.

Rgds, D.

 

[NorTracNY]

Just to clarify, my original post about the blocking device was meant more for texting as I see it way more dangerous than talking on the phone.

I admittedly am guilty of talking on the phone on rare occasions. I rarely talk on the phone as it is, so this is extremely rare. Not trying to justify it, but 90% of my driving is on rural highways. In traffic, in cities, or on the expressway where I feel I need a higher level of concentration, I will refrain from using the phone... and I never text while driving.

And this is the problem. The mentality that it's OK this time/in this situation/I'm good enough to do it this sort of way. Maybe I'm too black and white. Make the punishment so people will be absolute in their resolve not to do it, even if they think they could do it safely.

I'm sickened around my place everytime I see this ribbon on vehicles that is ment to honor 5 "angels" that died shortly after they graduated from a local school. They died because the driver was texting! These people think calling them angels is a way to honor them. If it was my kid, I'd be honoring them by talking in any school I could about the hole in my life because I didn't think it was important to make sure my kid didn't text and drive.

 

[Daver1963]

WARNING!!!! If you are driving in Tennessee and see a tractor trailer truck that's painted in THP colors.......

THP uses a new tool to catch distracted drivers