Americans still texting while driving despite bans

[jillio]

I don't expect it to. it is only a beginning and a tool it will help prosecute.


like the seat belt laws. with the laws first starting getting passed they were not as strict. they keep become more strict and loop holes started getting closed. yet the law itself doesn't click the belt in place. it is the driver that makes the choice. we can educate the driver, make a law but we can't click the belt for the driver

Exactly. But we can demand that they be held accountable for their choices.

 

[Jiro]

Exactly. But we can demand that they be held accountable for their choices.

so you're not in support of comprehensive driver ed and increased awareness program? and also a more stringent DMV process when issuing license?

 

[Jiro]

Fibromyalgia. That, as well, is not a genetic disorder. It is an auto-immune disorder. It doesn't interfere with my driving at all. I have only been diagnosed with it for the past 5 years, which means, even if it did limit my driving, I'm still more than double the years you have. And the last I checked, driving wasn't a high impact exercise.

Ah yes - Fibromyalgia - I suppose it doesn't interfere with your driving because you have a very short commute on daily basis so yes this condition does limit your driving. BTW - driving can be equivalent to high-impact exercise. Ever heard of pothole?

Those programs are already available to people getting a license for the first time. I'm more worried about the people who have been driving for several years and still do stupid things. Driver's ed won't touch them.

The law exists to prosecute the adult drivers. We have to stop the cycle so that we don't have to keep prosecuting them. I thought you would know... our failing education and deaf education. To fix it - we must fix the root of the problem. Same principle apply to driver ed. Our lax driver ed and punishment system enabled teen drivers to become a reckless adult drivers.

And how exactly is that? What specific action have you taken?

I can't express my thought? What's the point for debate then?

 

[C.C.Sinned]

Exactly. But we can demand that they be held accountable for their choices.

yes

like how there are now more consequences when a distracted driver kills a biker.
lost friends to soccer moms on cell phones

and
loud pipes save lives

 

[jillio]

so you're not in support of comprehensive driver ed and increased awareness program? and also a more stringent DMV process when issuing license?

Where exactly did I say that? I said those programs are already available to those getting their license for the first time. What are you going to do about the drivers that have had a license for....let's say 13 years, and still continue to do stupid things while driving? Make all the drivers in the nation take a driver's ed course before they can renew their license every year? That is very unrealistic.

More stringent how? Tougher driving test? Tougher written exam?

 

[Jiro]

yes

like how there are now more consequences when a distracted driver kills a biker.
lost friends to soccer moms on cell phones

and
loud pipes save lives

sorry to hear, man. We have lost several well-known bikers in our forum as well. It's as bad as losing ADer who are close to us.

Having the attitude by treating each driver as a hostile target saves lives too aka Defensive Driving.

 

[jillio]

Ah yes - Fibromyalgia - I suppose it doesn't interfere with your driving because you have a very short commute on daily basis so yes this condition does limit your driving. BTW - driving can be equivalent to high-impact exercise. Ever heard of pothole?

No, Jiro, fibromyalgia does not limit my driving. You are really grasping at straws here and making a complete fool of yourself in the process. And you have no idea what my commute distance is, nor how many miles I drive in a year. And, no, driving is not considered to be a high impact exercise. In fact, driving is not an exercise at all.


The law exists to prosecute the adult drivers. We have to stop the cycle so that we don't have to keep prosecuting them. I thought you would know... our failing education and deaf education. To fix it - we must fix the root of the problem. Same principle apply to driver ed. Our lax driver ed and punishment system enabled teen drivers to become a reckless adult drivers.

You are attempting to relate two unrelated topics again. You keep cautioning everyone else to stay on topic. You need to do the same. Do you honestly believe that telling kids in a drivers ed class that texting while driving is dangerous is going to have a significant impact immediately. Of course it won't. You still have a 5 year span before that teen becomes an adult driver. So, in the meantime, you just advocate that we abandon the law against texting while driving and wait a minimum of 5 years to see if telling kids its dangerous reduces accidents?

I can't express my thought? What's the point for debate then?

Is your sleep disorder acting up again? No one said you can't express your thoughts. You have been expressing them.

 

[Jiro]

Where exactly did I say that? I said those programs are already available to those getting their license for the first time. What are you going to do about the drivers that have had a license for....let's say 13 years, and still continue to do stupid things while driving? Make all the drivers in the nation take a driver's ed course before they can renew their license every year? That is very unrealistic.

Have you ever seen those programs and what's being taught? Do you know what it takes to pass the test to get a license? See this driver manual regarding driver safety and sample questions regarding safety. It's mediocre at best. In fact - it's laughable! It's mainly based on your basic knowledge test and your basic driving skill. that's all!

as for driver of 13 years - well that's what law is for, right? To punish them if they make fatal mistake. the law already existed for that before this new law. it's called Vehicular Manslaughter. IMO - why bother with DWT Law when we already have existing laws to punish them such as Reckless Driving?

With stringent driver ed, there's no need to make them take driver ed course for every time they renew their license. That's a ludicrous idea (nor was it my idea). Try Again!

More stringent how? Tougher driving test? Tougher written exam?

yep! we could try!

 

[jillio]

Have you ever seen those programs and what's being taught? Do you know what it takes to pass the test to get a license? See this driver manual regarding driver safety and sample questions regarding safety. It's mediocre at best. In fact - it's laughable! It's mainly based on your basic knowledge test and your basic driving skill. that's all!

Yeah, Jiro, I've probably been exposed to many more of those programs than you yourself have. And yes, I am quite familiar with what it takes to get a driver's license. It is a skill based test because it is intended to test driving skill. What in the world would you propose it tested?
as for driver of 13 years - well that's what law is for, right? To punish them if they make fatal mistake. the law already existed for that before this new law. it's called Vehicular Manslaughter. IMO - why bother with DWT Law when we already have existing laws to punish them such as Reckless Driving?

Because, unless there is a reason for that reckless driving, it is simply considered to be an accident. Duh.

With stringent driver ed, there's no need to make them take driver ed course for every time they renew their license. That's a ludicrous idea (nor was it my idea). Try Again!

Then how is it you plan to make your plan effective? Driver's ed doesn't do anything to address the drivers already on the road, only those getting new licenses. So, how do you plan to address the issue of texting while driving for the millions of drivers already on the road?

yep! we could try!

Exactly what would you do to make a skills based test more strigent? And how will that reduce the number of drivers that already have a license and are driving while texting?

 

[Jiro]

No, Jiro, fibromyalgia does not limit my driving. You are really grasping at straws here and making a complete fool of yourself in the process. And you have no idea what my commute distance is, nor how many miles I drive in a year. And, no, driving is not considered to be a high impact exercise. In fact, driving is not an exercise at all.

I said driving over pothole is equivalent to high impact exercise. That's gotta hurt on your joints! So with that condition of yours - are you able to drive 8 hours straight?

You are attempting to relate two unrelated topics again. You keep cautioning everyone else to stay on topic. You need to do the same.

Are you just being selective with certain keyword without even reading into it? It's the same principle that applies to many problems. You must fix the root of the problem because it's proven effective that way. It's called a Long-Term Strategy... something that Obama is all about.

Do you honestly believe that telling kids in a drivers ed class that texting while driving is dangerous is going to have a significant impact immediately. Of course it won't. You still have a 5 year span before that teen becomes an adult driver. So, in the meantime, you just advocate that we abandon the law against texting while driving and wait a minimum of 5 years to see if telling kids its dangerous reduces accidents?

Apparently - it works in Germany. and no... lecture is not going to work effectively. It's the TRAINING. the actual hand-on training. German driver ed program has comprehensive hand-on training as well. The stringent tests along with harsh penalty are in conjunction with its driver ed thus creating effective impact on drivers. Our driver ed and our laws are not in conjunction with each other. It's simply a bandaid solution.

I have repeatedly asked you to point where in my post did I want to abolish the law. You keep bringing it up and still refusing to answer my question. Please answer my question. Show me where I want to abolish it.

Is your sleep disorder acting up again? No one said you can't express your thoughts. You have been expressing them.

so why asked me what specific action have I taken?

 

[jillio]

I said driving over pothole is equivalent to high impact exercise. That's gotta hurt on your joints! So with that condition of yours - are you able to drive 8 hours straight?

Yes, Jiro, I am. I am also alert enough to avoid potholes, or to slow down before passing over them if they cannot be avoided completely. And it still is not a high impact exercise. Much more of a concern to me is someone with only 13 years experience and a sleep disorder that means they sometimes go days with insomnia, thus greatly reducing their alertness and reaction time being on the road.

Are you just being selective with certain keyword without even reading into it? It's the same principle that applies to many problems. You must fix the root of the problem because it's proven effective that way. It's called a Long-Term Strategy... something that Obama is all about.

And what do you do about the immediate problem? When you institute a program to deal with a root cause, it is years before you see any effect on the immediate problem. You also have to have measures in effect to deal with the immediate problem.

Apparently - it works in Germany. and no... lecture is not going to work effectively. It's the TRAINING. the actual hand-on training. German driver ed program has comprehensive hand-on training as well. The stringent tests along with harsh penalty are in conjunction with its driver ed thus creating effective impact on drivers. Our driver ed and our laws are not in conjunction with each other. It's simply a bandaid solution.

OIC. Stricter laws in Germany prevent people from driving while texting, but stricter gun laws in Germany have absolutely nothing to do with the reduced number of death by gunfire? Talk about being selective!!


I have repeatedly asked you to point where in my post did I want to abolish the law. You keep bringing it up and still refusing to answer my question. Please answer my question. Show me where I want to abolish it.

If you don't want to abolish it, then you want it to stand. So you are saying that you want the law against texting while driving to stand. Make up your mind, Jiro. Either you think the law is ineffective and unreasonable and should not exist, or you think it should exist. Which is it?

so why asked me what specific action have I taken?

Because it is pertinent. You said you are advocating for more comprehensive drivers ed and stricter regulations. Exactly what actions have you taken in regard to this advocacy? Simply expressing an opinion on a message board is quite different than advocating for something.

 

[Jiro]

Yeah, Jiro, I've probably been exposed to many more of those programs than you yourself have. And yes, I am quite familiar with what it takes to get a driver's license. It is a skill based test because it is intended to test driving skill. What in the world would you propose it tested?

You have been exposed to many of those programs than I? Good lord... sounds like you're a horrible driver. Were you court-ordered to attend Driver Improvement Programs, Defensive Driving Courses, and Mature Driver Program?

Just simply testing them for driving skill is insufficient to prepare them for safety-related scenarios. They do not know how to drive safely. One must be taught and trained for it. When given a rudimentary driving skill, one will simply develop bad habits as they grow up. Simply look at the professionals. They are thoroughly trained and tested.. thus resulting in relatively low numbers of occupational hazards. For example - the accidental firearm-related injury are lower in law enforcement than in civilian households.

Because, unless there is a reason for that reckless driving, it is simply considered to be an accident. Duh.

Do you exactly know how you can be charged with Reckless Driving? You can be charged for it just by driving fast, changing lane in unsafe manner, or whatsoever.

Then how is it you plan to make your plan effective? Driver's ed doesn't do anything to address the drivers already on the road, only those getting new licenses. So, how do you plan to address the issue of texting while driving for the millions of drivers already on the road?

What's important in here is having right approach to tackling this problem. Once they got it right, then they can hash out the details among themselves.

Exactly what would you do to make a skills based test more strigent? And how will that reduce the number of drivers that already have a license and are driving while texting?

that's what law is for, right?

 

[C.C.Sinned]

I said driving over pothole is equivalent to high impact exercise. That's gotta hurt on your joints!

no. it is not equal.

So with that condition of yours - are you able to drive 8 hours straight?

she could most likely do more

 

[Jiro]

no. it is not equal.

she could most likely do more

COULD? so you don't really know for sure.

 

[C.C.Sinned]

this thread getting goofy.

no matter what education is introduced, training given, tests made or laws passed... it comes down to the driver taking personal responsibility to drive the vehicle safely, without distractions or causing accidents...

 

[Jiro]

this thread getting goofy.

no matter what education is introduced, training given, tests made or laws passed... it comes down to the driver taking personal responsibility to drive the vehicle safely, without distractions or causing accidents...

driving safely is learned, not born.

 

[C.C.Sinned]

COULD? so you don't really know for sure.

know what her ailment is like, a family member has it and has it bad.

I have far more severe disability and I can drive for 26 hours straight...


and your constant nit-picking and searching for arguments regardless of what subject maybe, is honestly, making you look like a _______... (fill in the blank)


example: you bring up cell phones and GPS to nit-pick the subject. we discuss it, than you nit-pick it is off topic.


now you are nit picking with someones medical condition. which is way off topic.

 

[Jiro]

know what her ailment is like, a family member has it and has it bad.

I have far more severe disability and I can drive for 26 hours straight...


and your constant nit-picking and searching for arguments regardless of what subject maybe, is honestly, making you look like a _______... (fill in the blank)


example: you bring up cell phones and GPS to nit-pick the subject. we discuss it, than you nit-pick it is off topic.


now you are nit picking with someones medical condition. which is way off topic.

the beauty about internet is anyone can say anything

as for gps and cellphone - it's because you're using it on wrong context.

 

[C.C.Sinned]

driving safely is learned, not born.

not shit! that is why the words education was in my statement...

 

[Jiro]

Yes, Jiro, I am. I am also alert enough to avoid potholes, or to slow down before passing over them if they cannot be avoided completely. And it still is not a high impact exercise. Much more of a concern to me is someone with only 13 years experience and a sleep disorder that means they sometimes go days with insomnia, thus greatly reducing their alertness and reaction time being on the road.

I've never go days without sleep and if I were sleepy, as a responsible driver - I don't drive If I were feeling tired while driving, I simply drive over to Service Rest Area to take a quick nap and/or to refresh myself with a nice hot coffee. so what if you're on highway at 70 mph and there's a sudden pothole ahead of you? I doubt you can SAFELY reduce the speed without having someone hitting you from behind. You cannot safely swerve it either when there are drivers at your either side or your car can spin out of control. I don't even want to imagine what will happens if you ran over it that will send a bone-jarring shock to you that can result in loss control of vehicle. Anyway we digress.... Back to topic. Enough of this silly "zing war"

And what do you do about the immediate problem? When you institute a program to deal with a root cause, it is years before you see any effect on the immediate problem. You also have to have measures in effect to deal with the immediate problem.

That's what law is for.. the immediate problem. But what do you propose for long-term strategy? Do nothing, do less, or everything is fine the way it is?

OIC. Stricter laws in Germany prevent people from driving while texting, but stricter gun laws in Germany have absolutely nothing to do with the reduced number of death by gunfire? Talk about being selective!!

1. its driver ed program has stringent training + test which is about
2. there is no stringent firearm training + test since they simply ban them all
3. Simply look at Switzerland - along with stringent training. this contributed to its low firearm-related incidents

If you don't want to abolish it, then you want it to stand. So you are saying that you want the law against texting while driving to stand. Make up your mind, Jiro. Either you think the law is ineffective and unreasonable and should not exist, or you think it should exist. Which is it?

Again - please show me where did I say that I want to abolish it. Show me the post number.

Because it is pertinent. You said you are advocating for more comprehensive drivers ed and stricter regulations. Exactly what actions have you taken in regard to this advocacy? Simply expressing an opinion on a message board is quite different than advocating for something.

I thought you just said I can express my opinion about it. Is there anything wrong with suggesting some ideas?