Do you wear a "blue tooth" (phone headset)?

[Grits and Shins]

Yes I could see how it would be much better to hold the phone in my hand while driving ...

[Pope Flick]

Sorry Goop, but I don't want anyone talking while driving. Bluetooth or not,

people should be focused on the road, not on fiddling with their phone, sticking their earpiece in their ear, or drifting away in conversation while they should be paying attention to driving.

 

And yes, bluetooth users look about as ghey as any form of human I have ever seen....

 

 

That's a bit much. If you've ever spoken to a passenger while driving (and I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you have) then you're in no position to make that asinine declaration.

Edited August 7, 2007 by Pope Flick

[detlef]

That's a bit much. If you've ever spoken to a passenger while driving (and I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you have) then you're in no position to make that asinine declaration.

Kind of thinking the same thing.

 

As for the topic in general, I will not speak to someone if they keep one of those damned things in their ear. I've had salesmen call on me wearing those things and have told them straight up that nothing will get sold today if they don't put their toys away.

 

For that matter, I feel the same way about cell phones in general.

 

I carry one and use it often, but I also remember when we didn't have them. The simple fact that you have the luxury of having someone leave you a message, being able to retrieve it wherever you are, and call them back should be enough. People who make a habit of always answering their cell when talking to someone else face to face should be beaten. If you are expecting an important call and politely excuse yourself, that's another thing.

[Goopster24]

Kind of thinking the same thing.

 

As for the topic in general, I will not speak to someone if they keep one of those damned things in their ear. I've had salesmen call on me wearing those things and have told them straight up that nothing will get sold today if they don't put their toys away.

 

For that matter, I feel the same way about cell phones in general.

 

I carry one and use it often, but I also remember when we didn't have them. The simple fact that you have the luxury of having someone leave you a message, being able to retrieve it wherever you are, and call them back should be enough. People who make a habit of always answering their cell when talking to someone else face to face should be beaten. If you are expecting an important call and politely excuse yourself, that's another thing.

 

I totally agree. Even as a young guy and someone who has grown up with a cell phone, I get very ticked off when my friends are pulling out their phones to text message someone or talk. If I am talking to you face to face, like you said, there aren't many more rude things then to pull out the phone and start moving your fingers on it. Unreal.

Edited August 7, 2007 by Goopster24

[Big Country]

I just realized that we are never going to allow him and seminoles to grow up. ;lol:

 

New word filter for DMD to implement

 

broncosn05= Peter Pan

[AtomicCEO]

Sorry Goop, but I don't want anyone talking while driving.

 

And I don't want people over 50 to be allowed on the roads between 8-9am and 5-6pm, but sometimes life isn't fair.

 

I guess we'll both have to learn to accept things the way they are.

[Big Country]

And I don't want people over 50 to be allowed on the roads between 8-9am and 5-6pm, but sometimes life isn't fair.

 

I guess we'll both have to learn to accept things the way they are.

 

Well.. there should be an upper age limit where at minimum a yearly driving test is required to keep a driver's license :ducksandcoversasAARPcomesknocking:

[i_am_the_swammi]

That's a bit much. If you've ever spoken to a passenger while driving (and I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you have) then you're in no position to make that asinine declaration.

 

There's a much bigger distinction between talking to a passenger while driving than chatting away on a cell phone.

 

If you are chatting to a passenger, you both can view the road, and either of you can pause the conversation while a potential driving threat is averted. But if you are on the phone, you have very limited control over the person you are talking with, and if its a business call, I would bet most would not say "Can you please hold on a moment while I move over and let this tractor-trailer on my arse pass me before I continue to try to sell you a widget"...chances are, you are going to try to handle the call as professionally as you would from a land-line, and that is where the danger comes in...

 

Cell phones are a danger to every driver on the road, and now that I think about it, Blue-tooth may, in some cases, make it worse...with their hands free, maybe they are more likely to try to take notes from the conversation they are in, further distracting them from the road. Since I am not ghey and don't use Blue-tooth, I pull over and return the call when my cell phone rings from a client, knowing I may need to access my laptop, or at least might need to take some notes from the call. How many Blue-tooth users try to do it while driving, since their hands are free? If its more than zero, its a problem.

 

Answer this: why do you think many cities/municipalities/etc. have banned any type of cell phone usage in cars by drivers, but not banned passengers? It ain't that hard to figure out.

[Big Country]

I think radios are a bigger danger.

 

Almost every car has a radio, so you are much more likely to be in, or cause a wreck because of fiddling with the radio than you are talking on your bluetooth.

[i_am_the_swammi]

And I don't want people over 50 to be allowed on the roads between 8-9am and 5-6pm, but sometimes life isn't fair.

 

I guess we'll both have to learn to accept things the way they are.

 

Maybe not...many towns/cities are outlawing cell phone usage by drivers...and I think your point about age-restrictions on older drivers is an excellent one. I certainly think that, just as you need to take a test at an early age to drive, you should also be required to take a test at an elderly age to ensure you are safe on our nation's roadways.

[detlef]

Answer this: why do you think many cities/municipalities/etc. have banned any type of cell phone usage in cars by drivers, but not banned passengers? It ain't that hard to figure out.

Because, like you, the gubment is reactionary and inclined to focus on the lowest common denominator. Rather than simply ticketing people who drive like idiots, they try to remove any variable that may contribute to an idiot driving like one at the expense of others who can manage just fine. Why not make it so cars can't speed? I mean, there's a lot of accidents caused by speeding.

 

I often talk on my cell while driving and I am always the guy getting pissed because somebody is spacing out when the light turns green.

 

FWIW, I have no problem telling someone on the other line that they need to wait while I contend with some potential issue on the road. Yes, even clients, and they completely understand.

[Big John]

Well.. there should be an upper age limit where at minimum a yearly driving test is required to keep a driver's license :ducksandcoversasAARPcomesknocking:

We assume this does not include the Skylive tour?

[alexgaddis]

Because, like you, the gubment is reactionary and inclined to focus on the lowest common denominator. Rather than simply ticketing people who drive like idiots, they try to remove any variable that may contribute to an idiot driving like one at the expense of others who can manage just fine. Why not make it so cars can't speed? I mean, there's a lot of accidents caused by speeding.

 

I often talk on my cell while driving and I am always the guy getting pissed because somebody is spacing out when the light turns green.

 

FWIW, I have no problem telling someone on the other line that they need to wait while I contend with some potential issue on the road. Yes, even clients, and they completely understand.

I'm with you...we should also have testing for alcohol limits...Just because some lightweight can't drive at .08 doesn't mean I can't...

[i_am_the_swammi]

Because, like you, the gubment is reactionary and inclined to focus on the lowest common denominator. Rather than simply ticketing people who drive like idiots, they try to remove any variable that may contribute to an idiot driving like one at the expense of others who can manage just fine. Why not make it so cars can't speed? I mean, there's a lot of accidents caused by speeding.

I completely disagree...this in not reactionary, but precautionary. If enacting a law that prevents one death on the road because some schmcuk is ordering a pizza from his cell phone when he could easily pull over/wait until he gets home, then its worth it.

 

How in god's name is the government supposed to determine "who can manage just fine???

 

I often talk on my cell while driving and I am always the guy getting pissed because somebody is spacing out when the light turns green.

 

Sounds like you are not only a potentially unsafe driver, but also suffer from road rage (if you get pissed that someone doesn't hit the gas the second the light turns green). I think I know who you are, and I hope my kids never encounter someone like you on the interstate. Do you also tailgate a driver in the left lane who is going slower than you, or politely wait until he moves out of the way?

 

FWIW, I have no problem telling someone on the other line that they need to wait while I contend with some potential issue on the road. Yes, even clients, and they completely understand.

 

The you better pray one of your clients hasn't lost a loved one because of a cell-phone using driver....I doubt they'd completely understand when you tell them to hold on while you avert a potential issue to which you likely contributed.

[keggerz]

There's a much bigger distinction between talking to a passenger while driving than chatting away on a cell phone.

 

If you are chatting to a passenger, you both can view the road, and either of you can pause the conversation while a potential driving threat is averted. But if you are on the phone, you have very limited control over the person you are talking with, and if its a business call, I would bet most would not say "Can you please hold on a moment while I move over and let this tractor-trailer on my arse pass me before I continue to try to sell you a widget"...chances are, you are going to try to handle the call as professionally as you would from a land-line, and that is where the danger comes in...

 

Cell phones are a danger to every driver on the road, and now that I think about it, Blue-tooth may, in some cases, make it worse...with their hands free, maybe they are more likely to try to take notes from the conversation they are in, further distracting them from the road. Since I am not ghey and don't use Blue-tooth, I pull over and return the call when my cell phone rings from a client, knowing I may need to access my laptop, or at least might need to take some notes from the call. How many Blue-tooth users try to do it while driving, since their hands are free? If its more than zero, its a problem.

 

Answer this: why do you think many cities/municipalities/etc. have banned any type of cell phone usage in cars by drivers, but not banned passengers? It ain't that hard to figure out.

i wonder if any municipalities/etc. will ever ban having kicking/screaming and crying kids under the age of 5 in a car...i am sure that drivers have no problems concentrating on the road when that stuff is going on....and while they are at it they should outlaw maps in cars because i cant tell you how many times i see momos driving around with their maps open trying to read them while they are driving...oh and the should probably outlaw Navigation systems too since they have the potential to distract you from driving and then while they are at it they should make OnStar illegal since that is much like talking on a cell phone

 

edit: oh and they should make drive thrus illegal too...i mean how many people actually make sure everything is secure before they pull off? I bet that more then 50% of drive thru customers are eating while driving too...you know what we should just ban driving!

 

 

and and fwiw I wore a BT ear piece while I was building out my store...it made it easier for me to take calls that needed to be taken and say I will call you back to those that I didnt need to talk to right away....but when you are measuring things etc just touching your ear to answer the call made me more efficient.

Edited August 7, 2007 by keggerz

[Azazello1313]

There's a much bigger distinction between talking to a passenger while driving than chatting away on a cell phone.

 

If you are chatting to a passenger, you both can view the road, and either of you can pause the conversation while a potential driving threat is averted. But if you are on the phone, you have very limited control over the person you are talking with, and if its a business call, I would bet most would not say "Can you please hold on a moment while I move over and let this tractor-trailer on my arse pass me before I continue to try to sell you a widget"...chances are, you are going to try to handle the call as professionally as you would from a land-line, and that is where the danger comes in...

 

Cell phones are a danger to every driver on the road, and now that I think about it, Blue-tooth may, in some cases, make it worse...with their hands free, maybe they are more likely to try to take notes from the conversation they are in, further distracting them from the road. Since I am not ghey and don't use Blue-tooth, I pull over and return the call when my cell phone rings from a client, knowing I may need to access my laptop, or at least might need to take some notes from the call. How many Blue-tooth users try to do it while driving, since their hands are free? If its more than zero, its a problem.

 

Answer this: why do you think many cities/municipalities/etc. have banned any type of cell phone usage in cars by drivers, but not banned passengers? It ain't that hard to figure out.

 

well, i think i agree with you as far as talking on a blue tooth being just as potentially distracting as talking into a handset, and as far as BOTH being more distracting, in general, than talking to a passenger. i think it's pretty dumb to try and outlaw any of them though.

[keggerz]

oh and smoking while driving should be illegal too....well at least they dont put lighters in cars anymore...must be because they were to distracting to drivers

 

it comes down to this: PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY....some people take it and others have to have it legislated....I am sure many people have lost loved ones due to people doing irresponsible things...unfortunately that is just a sad reality and what is even sadder is that legislators will do what is in their best interest to generate votes ...do not kid yourself that they are doing what the think is best for you(for the most part anyway).

[i_am_the_swammi]

and while they are at it they should outlaw maps in cars because i cant tell you how many times i see momos driving around with their maps open trying to read them while they are driving...oh and the should probably outlaw Navigation systems too since they have the potential to distract you from driving and then while they are at it they should make OnStar illegal since that is much like talking on a cell phone

 

edit: oh and they should make drive thrus illegal too...i mean how many people actually make sure everything is secure before they pull off? I bet that more then 50% of drive thru customers are eating while driving too...you know what we should just ban driving!

 

check your state driver's handbook...activities such as these fall under "Reckless Driving"...and yes, you can be cited for it you cause an accident because you were engaged in any of the activities you mention above. Thanks for making the point clearly.

 

and and fwiw I wore a BT ear piece while I was building out my store...it made it easier for me to take calls that needed to be taken and say I will call you back to those that I didnt need to talk to right away....but when you are measuring things etc just touching your ear to answer the call made me more efficient.

 

while the convenience of the BT is not being questioned, the gheyness of the look is a no-brainer....

[keggerz]

while the convenience of the BT is not being questioned, the gheyness of the look is a no-brainer....

if you are dressed ghey and no one can see you are you really dressed ghey?

[keggerz]

check your state driver's handbook...activities such as these fall under "Reckless Driving"...and yes, you can be cited for it you cause an accident because you were engaged in any of the activities you mention above. Thanks for making the point clearly.

oh and thanks for ignoring my other points

[detlef]

I completely disagree...this in not reactionary, but precautionary. If enacting a law that prevents one death on the road because some schmcuk is ordering a pizza from his cell phone when he could easily pull over/wait until he gets home, then its worth it.

 

How in god's name is the government supposed to determine "who can manage just fine???

Sounds like you are not only a potentially unsafe driver, but also suffer from road rage (if you get pissed that someone doesn't hit the gas the second the light turns green). I think I know who you are, and I hope my kids never encounter someone like you on the interstate. Do you also tailgate a driver in the left lane who is going slower than you, or politely wait until he moves out of the way?

The you better pray one of your clients hasn't lost a loved one because of a cell-phone using driver....I doubt they'd completely understand when you tell them to hold on while you avert a potential issue to which you likely contributed.

Thank you for making my point that you are a reactionary little pr!ck.

 

Let's see now. How do you tell who can manage just fine? Well, if they're managing just fine for starters. Once again, give tickets for poor driving. It seems like right now you either have to be swerving from lane to lane, speeding, or using a cell phone to get pulled over.

 

What about getting a ticket because you realized that you needed to make a turn and hold up traffic while trying to get over 2 lanes at the intersection? Why not ticket people who stop in the middle of roundabouts even though they have the right of way? In short, rather than ticket people for doing things that some people are too stupid to manage, ticket the people for actually driving poorly.

 

You act as if it is so simple and that every phone call is as routine as someone ordering a pizza. Do you realize how many laws could be enacted that would save lives? Do realize how many would be insanely stupid?

 

You know, if you actually had a point, you wouldn't have to bolster whatever hack stance you have by pretending that someone who gets pissed by bad drivers is leaning on the horn the nanosecond the light turns. If you are 10th in line at a busy light and miss it because the jerk-off in front was spacing out when the light turned, do you not get pissed? Well Gandhi, I'm really proud of you if you don't.

 

Lastly, you have no f'ing idea who I am.

[keggerz]

when it comes to driving most people are horrid drivers and shouldnt even be behind the wheel and yeah I get pissed off when someone doesnt go when the light turns green...i mean that is what they were waiting for to happen..so JUST GO ALREADY! oh and those people that take forever to turn they really get my ire up too...and driving under the speed limit and then those inconsiderate SUPERCALIFRAGILISTICEXPIALIDOCIOUS !!!s that refuse to move out of the fast lane when they are going so damned slow that they make you just want to pull your own hair out .

 

wow I so miss driving up north especially on 95 and the jersey turnpike

Edited August 7, 2007 by keggerz

[wildcat2334]

I use my blue tooth all the time- absolutely love it. I put it away when I am in public to not looks liike a jackass, but cmon.....

 

Bluetooth alllows me to work, email, talk at the same time- makes my work day easier, and I am more efficient.

 

Drving? you kiidding? I have to use the phone while driving, so bluetooth? check. Much easier and safer

 

Bluetooths aren't going anywhere, in fact cellphones will eventually be just a bluetooth attached to yer ear here fairly soon.

[i_am_the_swammi]

oh and thanks for ignoring my other points

 

what other points? the screaming kids? I doubt there is any way you can fault a driver for the conduct of his passengers. You can only fault a driver for his own misconduct, I would think. At that point, it comes down to, as you posted before, personal responsibility. If my kids are screaming and bitching while I am driving, I absolutely pull over to address the problem. No brainer. The last thing I want to do is be looking int he rear-view mirror, fighting with one of my four kids, while I am driving. Seems pretty basic.

 

I think your other points were adressed...eating/smoking/map-reading...you cause an accident because of them, you are at fault and will be cited...period. Will they ever outlaw them? Probably not. But I can't remember one incident of a traffic accident occuring because someone was drinking a soft drink/smoking a cigarette. Unless the press is being choosey, it seems much easier to remember instances when cell-phone usage was cited as a reason for an accident, especially with the increased usage of cells/texting.

 

I can't fault the government for not enacting laws to prevent EVERY possible accident...you are correct, the bulk of it comes down to personal responsibility....it just seems that banning cell phone usage while trying to drive, with my life and yours at risk, is a much easier law to digest.

 

Owning a cell phone, or as you suggest, a map, Onstar, or a naviagtion system, should not be illegal....using one while trying to drive should be.

[Azazello1313]

I have to use the phone while driving, so bluetooth? check. Much easier and safer

 

i'm not sure what makes you think so. here's an interesting article...

 

THURSDAY, June 29 (HealthDay News) -- Maneuvering through traffic while talking on the phone increases the likelihood of an accident five-fold and is actually more dangerous than driving drunk, U.S. researchers report.

 

That finding held true whether the driver was holding a cell phone or using a hands-free device, the researchers noted.

 

"As a society, we have agreed on not tolerating the risk associated with drunk driving," said researcher Frank Drews, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Utah. "This study shows us that somebody who is conversing on a cell phone is exposing him or herself and others to a similar risk -- cell phones actually are a higher risk," he said.

 

His team's report appears in the summer issue of the journal Human Factors.

 

In the study, 40 people followed a pace car along a prescribed course, using a driving simulator. Some people drove while talking on a cell phone, others navigated while drunk (meaning their blood-alcohol limit matched the legal limit of 0.08 percent), and others drove with no such distractions or impairments.

 

"We found an increased accident rate when people were conversing on the cell phone," Drews said. Drivers on cell phones were 5.36 times more likely to get in an accident than non-distracted drivers, the researchers found.

 

The phone users fared even worse than the inebriated, the Utah team found. There were three accidents among those talking on cell phones -- all of them involving a rear-ending of the pace car. In contrast, there were no accidents recorded among participants who were drunk, or the sober, cell-phone-free group.

 

The bottom line: Cell-phone use was linked to "a significant increase in the accident rate," Drews said.

 

He said there was a difference between the behaviors of drunk drivers and those who were talking on the phone. Drunk drivers tended to be aggressive, while those talking on the phone were more sluggish, Drews said.

 

In addition, the researchers found talking on the cell phone reduce reaction time by 9 percent in terms of braking and 19 percent in terms of picking up speed after braking. "This is significant, because it has an impact on traffic as a system," Drews said. "If we have drivers who are taking a lot of time in accelerating once having slowed down, the overall flow of traffic is dramatically reduced," he said.

 

In response to safety concerns, some states have outlawed the use of hand-held cell phones while driving. But that type of legislation may not be effective, because the Utah researchers found no difference in driver performance whether the driver was holding the phone or talking on a hands-free model.

 

"We have seen again and again that there is no difference between hands-free and hand-held devices," Drews said. "The problem is the conversation," he added.

 

According to Drews, drivers talking on the phone are paying attention to the conversation -- not their driving. "Drivers are not perceiving the driving environment," he said. "We found 50 percent of the visual information wasn't processed at all -- this could be a red light. This increases the risk of getting into an accident dramatically," he said.

 

The reason that there aren't more accidents linked to cell phone use is probably due to the reactions of other -- more alert -- drivers, Drews said. "Currently, our system seems to be able to handle 8 percent of cell-phone drivers, because other drivers are paying attention," he said. "They are compensating for the errors these drivers are causing," he speculated.

 

This is a growing public health problem, Drews said. As more people are talking and driving, the accident rate will go up, he said.

 

One expert agreed that driving and cell phone use can be a deadly mix.

 

"We don't believe talking on a cell phone while driving is safe," said Rae Tyson, a spokesman for the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). "It is a level of distraction that can affect your driving performance," he said.

 

NHTSA has just completed a study that showed that 75 percent of all traffic accidents were preceded by some type of driver distraction, Tyson said.

 

Tyson pointed out that talking on the phone is very different than talking to the person in the passenger seat. "If you are engaged in a conversation with a passenger, the passenger has some situational awareness, whereas a person on the phone has no idea what you are dealing with on the road," he said.

 

"Our recommendation is that you should not talk on the phone while driving, whether it's a hand-held or hand-free device," Tyson said. "We realize that a lot of people believe that they can multi-task, and in a lot of situations they probably can, but it's that moment when you need your full attention, and it's not there because you are busy talking, that you increase the likelihood that you are going to be involved in a crash," he said.

 

Tyson also sees this as a growing public health issue. "Every time we do a survey, there are more people using cell phones while driving," he said. "And the popularity of hand-held devices like Palm Pilots or Blackberries, and people using them in the car, is another problem," he added.

 

An industry spokesman said cell phones don't cause accidents, people do.

 

"If cell phones were truly the culprit some studies make them out to be, it's only logical that we'd see a huge spike in the number of accidents [since their introduction]," said John Walls, a vice president at the industry group, the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association-The Wireless Association. "To the contrary, we've experienced a decline in accidents, and an even more impressive decline in the accident rate per million miles driven," he said.

 

"We believe educating drivers on how to best handle all of the possible distractions when you're behind the wheel is the most effective means to make better drivers, and that legislation focusing on a specific behavior falls short of that well-intended goal and creates a false sense of security," Walls said.