Should Distracted Driving Be Treated The Same As DUI's ?

Badger said:
I'm tired of the inconsideration and the threat to my life.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, this seems to be the common theme for almost EVERYTHING these days. People have little consideration for anything other than themselves..people are VERY selfish and it makes me sad. I think if EVERYONE made a valiant effort to just NOT BE AN ASS, this world would be a much better place. I am sorry folks, it's not always about YOU.
 
I see the texters about everytime I'm out driving, and I understand they think its harmless when in the city.
What really freaks me out is on the interstate I'm doing 75 mph and I get passed by someone doing 80-85 and he/she is head bobbing texting away.

If I was poor driving an old car, I'd just wait for a head bobber to be behind me, then I'd slam on my brakes and get rich.
 
Require carmakers to design the passenger compartment as a Faraday cage. Do it before that Bjorn guy, the one who wants to ban cash, also starts advocating to ban smartphones.
 
Sunset said:
I see the texters about everytime I'm out driving, and I understand they think its harmless when in the city.
What really freaks me out is on the interstate I'm doing 75 mph and I get passed by someone doing 80-85 and he/she is head bobbing texting away.

If I was poor driving an old car, I'd just wait for a head bobber to be behind me, then I'd slam on my brakes and get rich.
Click to expand...
I hope you are not poor, since it seems to me you'd both be guilty and unfortunately probably take out other innocent drivers around you.
 
IMHO, motorists do not have the right to be distracted. Once they have taken the responsibility to transport themselves in a machine that can easily kill vulnerable road users and others in motor vehicles, they need to pay 100% attention to their responsibility. It amazes me that there is even a discussion about this.

People who elect to eat, talk on their phone, discipline a child while driving are risking my safety and should be punished for this. My wife and children do not find this unreasonable. They would find it it unreasonable that as I lie dead at the side of the road that the driver's excuse was I was wiping the ketchup off my face and I was 2 minutes late to my hair appointment.. Never saw that biker.

Cell phones have made things worse. But this whole distracted driving problem needs to be fixed. It can certainly start with each of us by eliminating all behaviors that lead to distracted driving and obeying traffic laws, especially speed limits. Unfortunately, for those who talk about the "nanny state", I expect we will need more enforcement.

Here is how the Netherlands handles vulnerable road users:

"When art. 185 WVW is applicable, it means the motor vehicle user is liable for financial damage, unless that driver can prove the incident was caused by circumstances beyond his/her control. That will be hard, because the driver must then prove he/she drove flawless, or that his/her mistake was not the cause of the incident. If the mistake leading to the incident was made by the non-motorised road user, that mistake has to be so unlikely, that a motor vehicle user could not reasonably have considered it to happen. Failing to give way or jumping a red light (deliberately or by mistake) are not such unlikely events, they happen regularly, so drivers are not granted ‘circumstances beyond control’ very often.

Besides ‘circumstances beyond control’ the driver can also argue the non-motorised road user was at fault. This is only possible for road users from the age of 14. If that road user was indeed at fault, the driver is still liable for 50% of the damage. Dutch law makers considered this to be reasonable, because the non-motorised road user usually suffers more and more severe damage. That warrants this extra legal protection. A protection that is lost when it can be proved the non-motorised road user caused the damage on purpose, or his/her behaviour was so careless, that it can be seen as “recklessness verging on intent”.
 
Last edited:
davef said:
IMHO, motorists do not have the right to be distracted. Once they have taken the responsibility to transport themselves in a machine that can easily kill vulnerable road users and others in motor vehicles, they need to pay 100% attention to their responsibility. It amazes me that there is even a discussion about this.
Click to expand...

+1
Replace "driver" with "pilot" and see how expectations change.
 
Just_Steve said:
Define distracted driving, if I take a sip of coffee or water while driving then that could be distracted driving, I think the nanny state is getting carried away. Why not take all radios out of the cars and ban all conversation while driving. Oh and can I bound and gag my kids with duct tape because they can be pretty distracting sometimes?
Click to expand...

+1
 
Looks like iOS and Android users could at least block texting while driving NOW if "we" wanted to, some apps have been around since 2012! Block texting while driving with these top apps

And Apple has been/is working on the issue. Apple aims to disable texting while driving - CNET

Not unlike driving under the influence of alcohol/drugs - we ALL know better, yet we do it anyway! Should "we" look to tech companies and/or law enforcement to fix a (texting while driving) problem we could all fix ourselves? First world problems...
 
Last edited:
davef said:
... Here is how the Netherlands handles vulnerable road users:

"When art. 185 WVW is applicable, it means the motor vehicle user is liable for financial damage, unless that driver can prove the incident was caused by circumstances beyond his/her control.
Click to expand...

That would scare people of some means. However, these people like the ER posters here who are financially independent already know to exercise self-discipline to get to this point.

So, what do you do with the violators like young adult speeders or texters? Hang them?

The whole thing is a curse of technology.
 
If it were left to me, I would not have such age discrimination.

Hang them all, regardless of age.
 
NW-Bound said:
If it were left to me, I would not have such age discrimination.

Hang them all, regardless of age.
Click to expand...

+1

The smart ones will survive proving Darwin was correct.
 
samclem said:
It wouldn't be technically challenging to make cell phones inoperative when they are on the move. Doing that in a blanket fashion would also make it impossible for others in the car to use their phones, and it would make it impossible for drivers to use GPS on their phones in the way they do now (though there are workarounds for that). Perhaps after one conviction for texting/prohibited use of a phone in a car, a person's mobile cell account should be barred from any on-the-move data access. Their phone number is added to their drivers license, and if a cop finds a phone with any different number within their reach in a car, they are in violation of the terms of their release and go directly to the slammer.

It's quite evident when these folks are going down the road, often well under the speed limit, roaming around in their lane, and paying scarce attention to the world outside.
Click to expand...

This is the best solution I've seen.
It wouldn't address people shaving, applying make up, reading, etc. while driving, but it would be a damm good start.
 
Why not slap someone with a $10k fine if they're caught using a smart phone...kind of like what they do when you get busted for a dui.

I was driving on the highway the other day and a big billboard with a dui message: "you just blew $10,000." I thought it was great.

I would say its more excusable to drive while intoxicated than playing with a cell phone when you're sober and driving. When you're drunk a chemical is destroying your body. When you're sober and texting you're just being a &%#@ and there is no excuse. And no...I dont care if you're waiting on a call from the hospital about a family member who is on deaths door...I would rather you not kill someone else in the process of taking a call.
 
ponyboy said:
Why not slap someone with a $10k fine if they're caught using a smart phone...kind of like what they do when you get busted for a dui.

I was driving on the highway the other day and a big billboard with a dui message: "you just blew $10,000." I thought it was great.

I would say its more excusable to drive while intoxicated than playing with a cell phone when you're sober and driving. When you're drunk a chemical is destroying your body. When you're sober and texting you're just being a &%#@ and there is no excuse. And no...I dont care if you're waiting on a call from the hospital about a family member who is on deaths door...I would rather you not kill someone else in the process of taking a call.
Click to expand...
Well, that chemical you refer to was ingested on a voluntary basis..so no IMO it's not more excusable....
 
Just_Steve said:
Define distracted driving, if I take a sip of coffee or water while driving then that could be distracted driving, I think the nanny state is getting carried away. Why not take all radios out of the cars and ban all conversation while driving. Oh and can I bound and gag my kids with duct tape because they can be pretty distracting sometimes?
Click to expand...

Agree. I believe it has been shown that having a conversation of any kind, be it with a passenger or on a hand-free device, increases accident rates. Certainly the complexity of instrumentation on the dash seems to have increased dramatically in the last 10 years. Speeding is a leading cause of accidents, wouldn't it be wise to put limiters on all cars at some selected speed. Say 75 or 80 mph or some set amount above the state speed limit. Speed limiters are mandatory on transport trucks in Ontario. Set at 105 kph (65.5 mph). The speed limit is 100 kph (62.5 mph) on major highways.

My cop friends say that in our jurisdiction they just fall back on the dangerous driving laws. It isn't really necessary to prove that someone was texting or reading the newspaper or whatever if they were operating a motor vehicle in an unsafe manner. Now they would have to witness that incident to ticket someone. But perhaps, looking at the phone usage would be a way to go if people got serious (as pointed out in other posts). I recall at least one publicized accident in which the driver was texting with friends right up to the impact. In the end, there is no way to legislate common sense.
 
Just_Steve said:
Define distracted driving, if I take a sip of coffee or water while driving then that could be distracted driving, I think the nanny state is getting carried away. Why not take all radios out of the cars and ban all conversation while driving. Oh and can I bound and gag my kids with duct tape because they can be pretty distracting sometimes?
Click to expand...

If you or yours was ever a victim of someone driving irresponsibly, you'd probably not only feel differently but be screaming bloody murder for people to listen before more victims are created. Think Russian roulette, not open carry. It's a closer analogy.
 
Tadpole said:
If you or yours was ever a victim of someone driving irresponsibly, you'd probably not only feel differently but be screaming bloody murder for people to listen before more victims are created. Think Russian roulette, not open carry. It's a closer analogy.
Click to expand...


If I'm ever in an accident caused by some a-hole on a phone, they'd better kill me. Otherwise, said driver's phone will be relocated next to where their head was at the time of the accident...

As for drinking coffee while driving, I can pretty much do that on autopilot.
 
6miths said:
Speeding is a leading cause of accidents
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Certainly the severity of the accident increases in direct proportion with the velocity at impact, but speed alone is rarely responsible for causing the accident in the first place. Nobody is out there doing 35 mph in a 30 mph zone, then suddenly losing control of their car and wrapping it around a baby carriage full of puppies. That's nanny-state propaganda.
 
kombat said:
Nonsense. Certainly the severity of the accident increases in direct proportion with the velocity at impact, but speed alone is rarely responsible for causing the accident in the first place. Nobody is out there doing 35 mph in a 30 mph zone, then suddenly losing control of their car and wrapping it around a baby carriage full of puppies. That's nanny-state propaganda.
Click to expand...


Perhaps "excessive speed" or "unsafe speed for the prevailing conditions"?
 
Tadpole said:
If you or yours was ever a victim of someone driving irresponsibly, you'd probably not only feel differently but be screaming bloody murder for people to listen before more victims are created. Think Russian roulette, not open carry. It's a closer analogy.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I was rear ended by a women on a cell phone about 10 years ago.
I still think the nanny state is getting carried away. We don't live in a cocoon.
 
HFWR said:
Perhaps "excessive speed" or "unsafe speed for the prevailing conditions"?
Click to expand...

Thank you HFWR. I seem to have touched a nerve. Five years ago, two of my 23 year-old students were killed in a single vehicle MVA not far from my home. Perfect road conditions, no drugs or alcohol, no other vehicles... speeding. I don't really consider 35 in a 30 or 75 in a 65 'speeding' as that is the prevailing traffic speed under normal conditions.
 
kombat said:
Nonsense. Certainly the severity of the accident increases in direct proportion with the velocity at impact ...
Click to expand...

Violating the laws of physics is against community rules.

Sorry, it is not in 'direct proportion'. Impact forces increase with the square of the increase in speed. IOW, a 50 mph impact has 4 times the forces of a 25 mph impact, not 2 times.


https://driversed.com/driving-information/the-vehicle/factors-determining-force-of-impact.aspx

Force of impact is the force generated when objects meet. The faster you drive, the greater the impact or striking power of your vehicle. The laws of physics determine that the force of impact increases with the square of the increase in speed.
Click to expand...

-ERD50
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Midpack
  • Locked
Beware of the Class Warriors
2 3
Replies
58
Views
6K
FIREd
F
M Paquette
For all the retired submariners out there...
Replies
2
Views
2K
Gumby
Gumby

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom