Texting and driving documentary: "From One Second to the Next"

[Johnny Dangerously]

As I said on a similar thread not long after seeing "The Departed" (when I was informed how it's really no big deal to be able to text without looking at the phone), I want to track some of you so I'll know to be two states away from anywhere you might possibly be driving when I'm on the road.

 

[outofplace]

Even talking on a hands-free cellphone has been proven to be distracting enough to impair a driver. You don't have to take your eyes off the road to be distracted enough to cause or avoid an accident.

Which brings us back to eating and makeup and radios and heaters. Ban one, ban them all.

In fact, if you don't put your seatbelt on before the car is in motion, putting it on while your moving is a distraction that could kill you and others, so might as well ban belting while in motion, too.

Again, where is your research demonstrating the danger of those activities?

 

[BTExpress]

People can text without taking their eyes off the road, too.

No they can't. They may think they can, or do, but they're fooling themselves.

And they sure as heck can't read what's being texted to them without taking their eyes off the road.

 

[old_tony]

As I said on a similar thread not long after seeing "The Departed" (when I was informed how it's really no big deal to be able to text without looking at the phone), I want to track some of you so I'll know to be two states away from anywhere you might possibly be driving when I'm on the road.

Just check in with the NSA. I'm sure they'll be able to tell you.

 

[SpeedTchr]

Every state should have distracted driving statutes. Enforce those laws. Whether it's a lady putting on eyeliner at 70 mph, a person with a dog/cat roaming free in the car, a dude eating a two-handed burger, a lawyer reading his briefs, or a baller picking a song from his massive iPod collection, treat those fools just like the texter/phone user -- ticket them or arrest them if the offense is egregious.

 

[outofplace]

To be clear, I have no problem banning other forms of distracted driving, though the bit about dragging the car radio and AC/heat into the discussion just shows how desperate Zag/Tony/A_QB are to find an argument.


Please note that I have challenged them to provide actual data about the dangers of those things as well as eating or putting on make-up while driving, yet they have not even responded. Guess they are all taking old_tony's favorite route of simply ignoring points/questions that they have no decent answer to.

 

[Starman]

i vam twxy wityjout lppkimg st mu pjome jhst fime. i sm dyre nosy og upu vam ss qell.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Every state should have distracted driving statutes. Enforce those laws. Whether it's a lady putting on eyeliner at 70 mph, a person with a dog/cat roaming free in the car, a dude eating a two-handed burger, a lawyer reading his briefs, or a baller picking a song from his massive iPod collection, treat those fools just like the texter/phone user -- ticket them or arrest them if the offense is egregious.

Is this on a Tea Party bulletin board or something?

These are not the same as texting and driving. They aren't close. They never will be. No matter how many people say it. I make a small exception for the makeup example, but that is nowhere near the problem that texting is. Again: Texting and driving is as dangerous as drinking and driving.

Addressing texting specifically also serves to address a key element: younger drivers, who are statistically a group of inattentive and terrible drivers. Not always so good at following regulations, either, particularly if it's just a speeding ticket that their parents will take care of.

 

[old_tony]

To be clear, I have no problem banning other forms of distracted driving, though the bit about dragging the car radio and AC/heat into the discussion just shows how desperate Zag/Tony/A_QB are to find an argument.


Please note that I have challenged them to provide actual data about the dangers of those things as well as eating or putting on make-up while driving, yet they have not even responded. Guess they are all taking old_tony's favorite route of simply ignoring points/questions that they have no decent answer to.

Sorry, but the conversation is about things that are a distraction while driving. If you believe that radios and other things that take eyes off the road are NOT distractions, you're going to have to show me the data that it's not dangerous to take your eyes off the road for one thing but not another.

 

[Songbird]

Why on God's green earth would you even tempt creating a catastrophe because you think you can text and drive?

It's selfish forking bullshirt, and if you try to argue against that you're an idiot who doesn't deserve to have a driver's license.

The way some of you try to take a shirt on common sense is dumbfounding.

 

[BTExpress]

If you believe that radios and other things that take eyes off the road are NOT distractions, you're going to have to show me the data that it's not dangerous to take your eyes off the road for one thing but not another.

What part of "your eyes are not off the road when changing the preset from 1 to 2" are you having trouble understanding?

And, of course, hitting 2 or 3 radio presets --- easily done at stoplights, BTW --- is perhaps quite different than carrying on a text conversation involving dozens of keystrokes, not to mention reading the texts sent to you.

 

[outofplace]

To be clear, I have no problem banning other forms of distracted driving, though the bit about dragging the car radio and AC/heat into the discussion just shows how desperate Zag/Tony/A_QB are to find an argument.


Please note that I have challenged them to provide actual data about the dangers of those things as well as eating or putting on make-up while driving, yet they have not even responded. Guess they are all taking old_tony's favorite route of simply ignoring points/questions that they have no decent answer to.

Sorry, but the conversation is about things that are a distraction while driving. If you believe that radios and other things that take eyes off the road are NOT distractions, you're going to have to show me the data that it's not dangerous to take your eyes off the road for one thing but not another.

As I thought. You don't have a reasonable argument.

This isn't about belief. We're talking about laws here, so there should be data to back it up.

The people calling for laws against texting while driving and harsher penalties where those laws already exist have data to back up their argument.

You claim other potentially distracting behaviors are just as much of an issue, yet you have no data at all to back up your claim. In other words, you are talking out the wrong end of your anatomy.