More texting questions

Dec 13, 2011 13:35

Do you think texting and driving at the same time should be banned everywhere in the US? (Or wherever you live?)

On that same note, do you think that texting by voice command should also be banned?

Why or why not? My answer in the comments.

laws, opinions, cars & driving

Leave a comment

Comments 60

hahahabye December 13 2011, 21:37:42 UTC
I personally think both should be banned. When you're driving a car, you need to focus on what you're doing - that is, driving. I've been t-boned by someone who thought it was more important to be texting her boyfriend than to be paying attention to traffic signals, and it was not a pleasant experience.

Reply

bumie December 13 2011, 21:57:13 UTC
ia

Reply

stereosymbiosis December 13 2011, 21:58:41 UTC
agreed

Reply

19_crows December 21 2011, 20:15:52 UTC
agree

Reply


yuriko December 13 2011, 21:41:40 UTC
Yes.
No.

Texting by hand takes the driver's vision and attention away from the road and is incredibly dangerous. Texting by voice does to some degree but no more than the driver having a conversation with someone in their car.

Reply

yuriko December 13 2011, 21:42:52 UTC
(FTR, texting and driving IS illegal in Ontario)

Reply

hahahabye December 13 2011, 21:43:19 UTC
Don't you first have to open the voice-to-text application by actually looking at/using the phone with your hands, though? As far as I know, the iPhone 4S with Siri is the only phone that doesn't require you to use your hands, but I doubt that everyone who drives and texts at the same time has an iPhone 4S.

Reply

sparrxw December 13 2011, 21:46:53 UTC
It depends on the phone. Sometimes you have to go through the menu, sometimes you can set a button on the side of the phone to do it, etc.

Reply


grandwazooo December 13 2011, 21:43:52 UTC
It already is in the UK.

Texting by voice command would probably be ok - assuming it also reads the message back to you.

Reply


human_remain December 13 2011, 21:44:34 UTC
Texting by hand - yes, needs to be banned.
By voice- no. What next? Want to take away my music too?

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

human_remain December 13 2011, 22:19:47 UTC
I don't really see the difference. I usually get more into my music than I do a normal conversation.

Reply

frayed_11 December 14 2011, 09:50:51 UTC
Actually studies have shown that having a conversation with someone on the phone (even hands-free) is a lot more dangerous than having a conversation with someone in the car. For example, if you come to a roundabout / junction, the person in the car will know, and might pause the conversation for a few seconds to let you concentrate (sometimes without even knowing it), whereas the person on the phone won't. Have a look at some studies by Melina Kunar if you're interested, or look here: http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=14733... )

Reply


saturnfall December 13 2011, 21:46:38 UTC
I'm conflicted.

On a libertarian, I don't want the federal government involved in my life standpoint, I'm against it.

On a public safety/I don't want to be run into by someone who can't multitask to that level, I'm for it.

I'd like to see a few "levels" of driver's licenses. Like a general license would get you thrown in jail for texting, talking, .0001 blood alcohol level etc.

Then you could test under tougher criteria to get a license that would allow you to do more. I can talk on the phone while driving but not everyone can, for instance, so I might test for the next level up to get a license that allowed driving and talking on the phone.

It would probably be too expensive and complicated to be run (at least by something as inefficient as a government agency), but it would solve my dilemma.

Reply

electricdruid December 13 2011, 21:52:12 UTC
That's an interesting idea. I like it.

I consider myself a libertarian, too, but I have to say I'm still for it. Something like this (or say, flying an airplane while intoxicated) that poses a clear and serious danger to a people other than the individual engaging in the activity is one of the few things I believe is worth government intervention, but only because I know I can't trust everyone to do the right thing and simply choose not to without the law.

Reply

saturnfall December 14 2011, 00:29:09 UTC
Yeah, you bring up a good point. I'm against mandatory helmet laws for motorcyclists because if they want to kill themselves I'm not going to stand in their way. This has the potential to impact others so it may be a case where you apply an inherently unfair one-size-fits-all solution because it is warranted (though I feel the "greater good" is often a slippery slope).

When I am benevolent dictator of a libertarian paradise (it isn't contradictory if *I'm* the dictator), I'll dedicate a lot of time and thought on the best way to solve this! :D

Reply

grandwazooo December 13 2011, 22:02:25 UTC
"ishhh hokay offisher I wash thish pished when I took my tesht"

Reply


Leave a comment

Up