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

[outofplace]

No libertarian with a clue could remotely believe that a law banning texting while driving would somehow be an inappropriate violation of his/her liberty.

The fork I can't.

As a libertarian, doesn't your right to do whatever the heck you want stop at the point where it hurts others? Given the data regarding accidents caused by texting and driving, I believe causing a car accident qualifies as hurting others. So fighting a ban would call into question whether or not you are truly a libertarian or just some guy who wants to do whatever he feels like regardless of the impact on others. Or it calls into question whether or not you have a clue.

I believe the libertarian argument, which I do not agree with, is that there should only be legal consequences if you actually do cause an accident while texting, driving drunk, etc. Just engaging in behavior that puts others at risk should not be illegal if nobody actually gets hurt or no property is damaged.

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding -- give this man a cigar and tell him to blow the smoke in JR's face......

Wow. My apologies to the Libertarians, but that sounds like a terrible idea.

 

[Bradley Guire]

I don't think I understand technology enough to see a practical point to an app. Could someone with more tech savvy explain, because here's my thought process:

For the app to work, the driver has to activate it. What stops the driver from turning the app off while driving? How does the app know the car is even moving? Plug it in to charge and then wouldn't the car need some kind of software to override the phone? What keeps someone from unplugging it? Can a phone have a sensor to realize it's moving faster than 15 mph? How does the phone know it's in a car and not on a train or a bus?

I'm not sure the app idea is even practical. Interlock devices with breathalyzers make sense. I'm not sure what can be done about phones. Society may have to just rely on appealing to people's better judgment to not do something.

 

[Smallpotatoes]

No libertarian with a clue could remotely believe that a law banning texting while driving would somehow be an inappropriate violation of his/her liberty.

The fork I can't.

As a libertarian, doesn't your right to do whatever the heck you want stop at the point where it hurts others? Given the data regarding accidents caused by texting and driving, I believe causing a car accident qualifies as hurting others. So fighting a ban would call into question whether or not you are truly a libertarian or just some guy who wants to do whatever he feels like regardless of the impact on others. Or it calls into question whether or not you have a clue.

I believe the libertarian argument, which I do not agree with, is that there should only be legal consequences if you actually do cause an accident while texting, driving drunk, etc. Just engaging in behavior that puts others at risk should not be illegal if nobody actually gets hurt or no property is damaged.

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding -- give this man a cigar and tell him to blow the smoke in JR's face......

Wow. My apologies to the Libertarians, but that sounds like a terrible idea.

That's because it is a terrible idea.

 

[imjustagirl]

I don't think I understand technology enough to see a practical point to an app. Could someone with more tech savvy explain, because here's my thought process:

For the app to work, the driver has to activate it. What stops the driver from turning the app off while driving? How does the app know the car is even moving? Plug it in to charge and then wouldn't the car need some kind of software to override the phone? What keeps someone from unplugging it? Can a phone have a sensor to realize it's moving faster than 15 mph? How does the phone know it's in a car and not on a train or a bus?

I'm not sure the app idea is even practical. Interlock devices with breathalyzers make sense. I'm not sure what can be done about phones. Society may have to just rely on appealing to people's better judgment to not do something.

My Waze app locks and won't let me put an address in if my car is moving. But I just hit "passenger" and keep typing.

 

[Starman]

Until I cause a car accident, until I cause someone to get cancer with second hand smoke, until my gun kills someone - leave me the fork alone.

That's pretty much the philosophy

So you think drunk driving should be legal?

Just clarifying.

Sure, until his drunk ass smashes into you and kills you, he sees no problem with it.

 

[zagoshe]

Do you think drunk driving should be legal?

I have VERY strong objections to the definitions of "drunk driving"

.08 or .1 should not be the level of what constitutes drunk driving.

.08 is basically an excuse for municipalities to line their pockets with idiotic tickets and an excuse to set up asinine and frankly unconstitutional "DUI Checkpoints"

You want to tell me the BAC level at .13 or .14 is where you become legally drunk, I would have a much easier time buying drunk driving laws

 

[Smallpotatoes]

Do you think drunk driving should be legal?

I have VERY strong objections to the definitions of "drunk driving"

.08 or .1 should not be the level of what constitutes drunk driving.

.08 is basically an excuse for municipalities to line their pockets with idiotic tickets and an excuse to set up asinine and frankly unconstitutional "DUI Checkpoints"

You want to tell me the BAC level at .13 or .14 is where you become legally drunk, I would have a much easier time buying drunk driving laws

Regardless of any research that proves that people are impaired at .08 or .10?

 

[LongTimeListener]

All that research is bullshirt straight from the whiny don't-want-people-killed lobby.

 

[KYSportsWriter]

Do you think drunk driving should be legal?

I have VERY strong objections to the definitions of "drunk driving"

.08 or .1 should not be the level of what constitutes drunk driving.

.08 is basically an excuse for municipalities to line their pockets with idiotic tickets and an excuse to set up asinine and frankly unconstitutional "DUI Checkpoints"

You want to tell me the BAC level at .13 or .14 is where you become legally drunk, I would have a much easier time buying drunk driving laws

At a .08 BAC level, drivers are so impaired that they are 11 times more likely to have a single-vehicle crash than drivers with no alcohol in their system. But 25 years of research has shown that some impairment begins for both males and females even after one drink.

.02 BAC Level
At the .02 blood alcohol concentration level, experiments have demostrated that people exhibit some loss of judgment, begin to relax and feel good. But tests have also shown that drivers at the .02 level experience a decline in visual functions, affecting their ability to track a moving object, and experience a decline in the ability to perform two tasks at the same time.

These changes may be very subtle and barely noticable to the person who has had only one drink, but in an emergency situation while behind the wheel of a vehicle, they could cause the driver to react (or not react) as they would without having had a drink.

.05 BAC Level
At the .05 BAC level, people begin to exhibit exaggerated behavior, experience loss of small-muscle control -- such as being able to focus their eyes quickly -- have impaired judgment, lowered alertness and a release of inhibition.

If someone with a BAC level of .05 gets behind the wheel, they would be operating the vehicle with reduce coordination, a futher deminished ability to track moving objects, more difficulty in steering and a markedly reduced response in emergency situations.

.08 BAC Level
When someone drinking is approaching the borderline of legal intoxication, studies show that he or she has poor muscle coordination -- affecting their balance, speech, vision, reaction time and hearing -- find it more difficult to detect danger, and exhibit impaired judgement, self-control, reasoning ability and memory.

A driver with a BAC of .08 will find it more difficult to concentrate, judge the speed of the vehicle, experience reduced information processing capability and exhibit impaired perception.

Slower Reaction Time
For the person who is drinking, the above impairments may be hardly noticeable at the time, but the slow reaction times that they can produce could prove fatal in a emergency driving situation. That's why it is not a good idea to drive no matter how much or how little that you have had to drink.

There is another consideration: Alcohol affects people differently. Some people have a higher response to drinking alcohol than others. In other words, people with a high response to alcohol can experience signs of impairment at the .02 BAC level that others do not experience until the .05 level.

 

[Starman]

All that research is bullshirt straight from the whiny don't-want-people-killed lobby.

Those assholes, always pissing in our cheerios. Next they'll want to make THAT illegal!!

If pissing in your cheerios is outlawed, only outlaws will pish in your cheerios!

Freedom, and stuff!!

 

[Starman]

I'm not for lunatics shooting up schools.
I'm not for wackos robbing people with guns.
I'm not for losers shooting up malls.
I'm not for wannabe thugs driveby shooting unless they do us a favor and shoot at each other

I'm also not for gun laws, gun registration, background checks and all the other inane regulations the liberty-haters among us want to force feed down our throats.

oh ok so you are against all those nasty things, but you are against laws designed as disincentives for forkers to do them??

okey dokey

 

[zagoshe]

Do you think drunk driving should be legal?

I have VERY strong objections to the definitions of "drunk driving"

.08 or .1 should not be the level of what constitutes drunk driving.

.08 is basically an excuse for municipalities to line their pockets with idiotic tickets and an excuse to set up asinine and frankly unconstitutional "DUI Checkpoints"

You want to tell me the BAC level at .13 or .14 is where you become legally drunk, I would have a much easier time buying drunk driving laws

Regardless of any research that proves that people are impaired at .08 or .10?

If you have two beers and you aren't a total fat ass you are at .08, so yes, that level is way too low regardless of what those studies suggest.