Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-15-2011, 08:15 AM   #61
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by teejayevans View Post
Let me know if you find a story of a 40+ year old
Not sure of this guys age but he's definitely over 17...



...and his passenger was over 40 and so was the driver he rear-ended.
__________________

__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 12-15-2011, 08:50 AM   #62
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by teejayevans View Post
Was the accident really caused by the cell phone or maybe the fact the driver was 17.
Let me know if you find a story of a 40+ year old
TJ
A very quick google search gave me this. While not 40+, certainly not a teen. I'm sure there are tons more.

Favaloro was attempting to cross the street when she was hit and thrown 25 feet. The driver, a 27 year old woman, admitted that she was texting while driving at the time of the car accident.
Car Accident Caused By Texting While Driving| Seattle Car Accident Lawyer
__________________

__________________
george76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 08:55 AM   #63
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Dawg52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Central MS/Orange Beach, AL
Posts: 7,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauAnn View Post
I'm all for eliminating all cell phone use while driving. It should have happened years ago IMO. Talking on the phone is not the same as passively listening to the radio.

Currently our municipality can pull you over for texting but the fine is a paltry $50, a slap on the wrist. If they were serious about curbing texting while driving, they should have made the fine a $500. Not only would it be a great deterrent it would go a long way to solving the city's budget issues.
Agree. A small fine won't do the job, but a $500 dollar one? That would get the attention of many. I do agree with others that current laws on the books should be enforced. I saw a guy the other day driving down the highway reading a news paper. That also deserves a hefty fine. But, what are the odds of a cop diving up behind a guy like this and seeing it? Not easy to enforce.
__________________
Retired 3/31/2007@52
Full time wuss.......
Dawg52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 08:58 AM   #64
Moderator
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Eee Bah Gum
Posts: 21,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by teejayevans View Post
Was the accident really caused by the cell phone or maybe the fact the driver was 17.
Let me know if you find a story of a 40+ year old
TJ
A couple of years ago a train crash in London found that the driver of the train was texting at the time of the crash and missed all the warning signals.

While looking for that report I saw the following fatal US train crash caused by texting.

Train driver texting just before fatal crash | Reuters

and this one in Boston

MBTA: Conductor in Boston trolley crash was texting his girlfriend - Local News Updates - The Boston Globe
__________________
Retired in Jan, 2010 at 55, moved to England in May 2016
Now it's adventure before dementia
Alan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 09:01 AM   #65
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Dawg52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Central MS/Orange Beach, AL
Posts: 7,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by REWahoo View Post
Not sure of this guys age but he's definitely over 17...


...and his passenger was over 40 and so was the driver he rear-ended.
What's crazy is the driver should have known he was being taped and could be fired even if not in an accident. Or you would think.
__________________
Retired 3/31/2007@52
Full time wuss.......
Dawg52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 09:34 AM   #66
Moderator Emeritus
Bestwifeever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 16,375
You don't have to create new laws to prohibit this--the insurance companies can make it part of their policies that they will not cover damage if it occurs while a communication device is being used. You can be sure they'll be looking up the cell phone usage for every accident reported to them.
__________________
“Would you like an adventure now, or would you like to have your tea first?” J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan
Bestwifeever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 09:35 AM   #67
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
TromboneAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadpole View Post
As I said before though, laws are useless when they exist but are not enforced.
Often you'll hear that the police can't afford to enforce something. Can't they structure the fines so that those fines pay for the enforcement?
__________________
TromboneAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 09:42 AM   #68
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg52 View Post
What's crazy is the driver should have known he was being taped and could be fired even if not in an accident. Or you would think.
Another example of how texting while driving impairs cognitive reasoning.
__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 10:43 AM   #69
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by REWahoo View Post
Not sure of this guys age but he's definitely over 17...
... and fired (not the good kind of FIREd, either).
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 11:19 AM   #70
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by haha View Post
I believe the the convenience of calling home to say you will be late, or calling clients to set up appointments should be sacrificed in favor of greater safety.
Totally agree.

Also, ban radios from cars. Too much distraction.

Of course, banning eating while driving is a given.

Next, those distracting navigation systems. If you're looking at the little moving map, you're not looking at the road!

Passengers should still be allowed, but only if they're quiet and don't distract you.

Hopefully it won't be long before we're all driving around in complete silence in our sterile cars, wearing helmets and 5-point safety harnesses.
__________________
kombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 11:26 AM   #71
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisa99 View Post
It's already been passed in Las Vegas.
False. The Las Vegas law only covers handheld use. Hands-free conversations are still permitted.

The article cited in this thread advocates banning cell phone use by drivers altogether, including hands-free devices.

I don't know of any jurisdictions that have enacted such an outright ban to date.
__________________
kombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 11:28 AM   #72
Administrator
W2R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 38,928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bestwifeever View Post
You don't have to create new laws to prohibit this--the insurance companies can make it part of their policies that they will not cover damage if it occurs while a communication device is being used. You can be sure they'll be looking up the cell phone usage for every accident reported to them.
+1 Bravo! Excellent idea. Laws might not be enforced, and people may ignore them, but it seems to me that most people would not ignore a possible financial hit due to an accident while using a cell phone.
__________________
Already we are boldly launched upon the deep; but soon we shall be lost in its unshored, harbourless immensities.

- - H. Melville, 1851
W2R is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 11:30 AM   #73
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by clifp View Post
I guess I am looking for statistic to show that cell phone is serious cause of death of injury in the US. Cause frankly when I look at the data I just don't see it.
It's because they don't/can't track it.

This is definitely a problem, but it doesn't mean it's not happening. Lots of accidents are caused by people chatting on their phones, but when it comes time to write the report, the driver certainly isn't going to openly admit to driving distracted. They'll just say something like, "I must have been doing a shoulder check and missed the light turning red" or whatever. The police aren't about to devote expensive resources subpoenaing wireless carriers for cell phone call/text logs over a little fender-bender, so it never gets reported.
__________________
kombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 11:31 AM   #74
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by W2R View Post
+1 Bravo! Excellent idea. Laws might not be enforced, and people may ignore them, but it seems to me that most people would not ignore a possible financial hit due to an accident while using a cell phone.
Sure, but we've already heard enough anecdotes about health insurers refusing to cover legitimate claims for one reason or another. It's not hard for me to imagine them insisting that there was cell phone use involved even when there wasn't, so they can avoid paying out a claim.

Do we really trust insurance companies with this? I don't.
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 11:31 AM   #75
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bikerdude View Post
After a little thought I would think it would be relatively easy to disable texting while in motion using GPS or position to cell towers.
So, your passengers shouldn't be allowed to text while you're driving, either?
__________________
kombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 11:33 AM   #76
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
I don't understand how hands-free phone calls are any better or worse than talking to a passenger(s) while driving.
It's because a passenger who is physically present with you has context. If you're in the middle of explaining your weekend plans, and you need to merge into traffic, your passenger sees this and instinctively waits. Someone on the other end of a phone, however, will simply prod you with, "Hello? Jim? Are you still there?"
__________________
kombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 11:37 AM   #77
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by DFW_M5 View Post
As to studies, do you believe everything that has a study associated with it?
Reminds me of one of my favorite Homer Simpson quotes:

"Facts, schmacts. Facts can be used to prove anything even remotely true!"
__________________
kombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 01:23 PM   #78
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Rustward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by clifp View Post
I guess I am looking for statistic to show that cell phone is serious cause of death of injury in the US. Cause frankly when I look at the data I just don't see it.

<snip>
At what data are you looking? Feel free to post some links, or research references. Please do.


Cars and roads are safer now. You cannot just blindly compare traffic fatalities from years ago to current numbers. On some level, a crash that would have had a 90% fatality rate in, say 1970, would have a much, much lower fatality rate today.


Duh. It does not take a genius to go out into traffic and see that people talking on the phone are less attentive to their driving that those who are not. They slow down, brake when there is no need to, make much wider turns, weave,.... I certainly agree that messing with the radio, looking for sunglasses, getting a massage in the car, etc. are also distractions, but phone usage seems to be at the top of the list.
__________________
Rustward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 02:05 PM   #79
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Rustward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bestwifeever View Post
You don't have to create new laws to prohibit this--the insurance companies can make it part of their policies that they will not cover damage if it occurs while a communication device is being used. You can be sure they'll be looking up the cell phone usage for every accident reported to them.
Nice thought, and it would be nice if it worked that way.

Do the insurance companies care? Kinda seems like their rates are based on the claims paid, but I have to admit that I do not understand how the business works.

I don't think insurance companies even have access to mobile phone records.

And if they did, and denied a claim based on a phone being in use, how do they prove that the driver was the one using the phone? In some other thread long ago, I remember seeing something like "No I didn't call you. My butt called you" -- must have had something to do with somebody sitting on their phone. So just because a phone was active, that does not mean the driver was using it.

Additionally, you just don't seem to hear about claims being denied based on the insured doing something they should not have done. That kind of goes against the idea of mutual protection. Maybe they will not be renewed, but the claims get paid.
__________________
Rustward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 02:28 PM   #80
Moderator Emeritus
Bestwifeever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 16,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustward View Post
Nice thought, and it would be nice if it worked that way.

Do the insurance companies care? Kinda seems like their rates are based on the claims paid, but I have to admit that I do not understand how the business works.

I don't think insurance companies even have access to mobile phone records.

And if they did, and denied a claim based on a phone being in use, how do they prove that the driver was the one using the phone? In some other thread long ago, I remember seeing something like "No I didn't call you. My butt called you" -- must have had something to do with somebody sitting on their phone. So just because a phone was active, that does not mean the driver was using it.

Additionally, you just don't seem to hear about claims being denied based on the insured doing something they should not have done. That kind of goes against the idea of mutual protection. Maybe they will not be renewed, but the claims get paid.
Good points. My other great idea was for drivers' ed to teach kids how to talk on the phone while driving I guess that's not going to work either.
__________________

__________________
“Would you like an adventure now, or would you like to have your tea first?” J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan
Bestwifeever is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:07 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.