U.S. Bill - Mandatory Cell Phone Jammers in All Cars

[Mike]

I believe this is an over-reaction by some busy-body legislatures. No one I've ever known has been the victim of a cell phone related accident, so some people may say I'm being selfish. But I believe this is a case of baby-kissers playing to the latest public craze.

"Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, the nation’s preeminent anti-distracted-driving crusader, said in an interview on MSNBC yesterday that federal officials are looking at technology to disable cell phones inside cars.
“I think it will be done,†LaHood said. “I think the technology is there and I think you’re going to see the technology become adaptable in automobiles to disable these cell phones. We need to do a lot more if were going to save lives.â€

To Thwart Distracted Driving, US Government Considers Cell Phone Jammers in Cars | Popular Science

I can see the value of this being an option, especially for parents. I can see auto insurance companies offering discounted rates when these are installed. But if someone is using a hands-free system, how is that any more distracting than talking to someone else in the car? Having a person physically present includes a visual distraction that hands-free cell usage doesn't. What about all the other distractions that take your hand(s) and eyes off the wheel? Eating? Tuning the radio/working CD's? Are we going to ban passengers and car stereos?

I have selfish reasons for objecting to this, because driving is a time when I can get business and personal calls done. But, if this were to be the answer to distracted drivers, I would have to consider it. It's not!

 

[farouk]

And what about law abiding safe drivers who are independent contractors with their work, for whom their car, when parked safely, is their office? We need to get away from the old fashioned idea of the 9AM-5PM physical-presence-in-the-office assumption, which simply does not apply to large numbers of workers. (E.g., why should women active in business be regarded as second class workers if they multi-task safely from a parked car instead of from someone else's assumption what their office 'ought' to look like?) We also need to get away from the idea that single issue campaigners should impose their supposedly unique insights onto the complex labor market.

 

[jasoncran]

i agree mike, the whole i reason i have a cell phone is for business.

 

[cyberjosh]

And if you find yourself in an emergency how on earth are you going to make a phone call? You couldn't call 911 if you get in a wreck and can't get out of the car.

And I'm quite sure that Jack Bauer wouldn't live through another season of 24 if they jammed his cell phone. That thing is his life-line.

 

[Mike]

And if you find yourself in an emergency how on earth are you going to make a phone call? You couldn't call 911 if you get in a wreck and can't get out of the car.

And I'm quite sure that Jack Bauer wouldn't live through another season of 24 if they jammed his cell phone. That thing is his life-line.

That's a good point for the average Joe, but Jack isn't Joe. He could be in a steel vault 200 feet below ground, and He'll have no problem getting a perfect connection to Chloe. Jack wouldn't get jammed!

 

[Theofilus]

[video=youtube;fbiHwGBsRr0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbiHwGBsRr0&feature=related[/video]​

Still think thre's no reason to try to stop people using their cell phones while driving?

 

[Mike]

Still think thre's no reason to try to stop people using their cell phones while driving?

Stop texting? Okay. Agreed that it's very dangerous. Talking on your cell phone, less dangerous. Talking "hands free" on your cell phone? No more dangerous than talking to a passenger, IMO and a far cry from using two hands to text. Not comparable.

 

[Theofilus]

Stop texting? Okay. Agreed that it's very dangerous. Talking on your cell phone, less dangerous. Talking "hands free" on your cell phone? No more dangerous than talking to a passenger, IMO and a far cry from using two hands to text. Not comparable.

I admit that texting is more dangerous than talking on the phone, but talking is also dangerous. If you look at the video again, they didn't talk about their steering abilities, but about their reflexes. The increase in reaction time wasn't caused by taking their hands off the wheel, but by taking their minds off their driving. Talking on the phone can do the same thing.

Some people here have said that they use their cell phones for work. If you're on the phone talking with your boss or a client, where is your concentration - on your business or on your driving?

 

[jasoncran]

I admit that texting is more dangerous than talking on the phone, but talking is also dangerous. If you look at the video again, they didn't talk about their steering abilities, but about their reflexes. The increase in reaction time wasn't caused by taking their hands off the wheel, but by taking their minds off their driving. Talking on the phone can do the same thing.

Some people here have said that they use their cell phones for work. If you're on the phone talking with your boss or a client, where is your concentration - on your business or on your driving?

then they should also ban paper delivery then as i drive with one hand the wheel most of the times doing that. or no hands for a brief secs.

 

[Mike]

I admit that texting is more dangerous than talking on the phone, but talking is also dangerous. If you look at the video again, they didn't talk about their steering abilities, but about their reflexes. The increase in reaction time wasn't caused by taking their hands off the wheel, but by taking their minds off their driving. Talking on the phone can do the same thing.

Some people here have said that they use their cell phones for work. If you're on the phone talking with your boss or a client, where is your concentration - on your business or on your driving?

Again, how is this different or less distracting than talking with a passenger? Should we outlaw carpools or anyone in the car with a driver?

I understand laws against texting. I even understand law against talking on a cell if you're holding the phone up to your ear. But, with all of the technology poured into syncing, and even character recognition so emails can be read and given orally, it hard for me to understand this kind of legislation. This might have a tough go in getting passed in America, because of all the money that's been spent on the technology. But that isn't a reason to not pass it. The reason would be that talking with a blue tooth or a sync system can't be more dangerous than talking with a passenger, which has been done since cars were in production.

Having quiet drive time is great, but legislating the right to talk with both hands on the wheel is not reasonable.

 

[jasoncran]

truckers have used cb radios for yrs. what's the difference?

 

[Ashua]

No thanks. I hate cell phone drivers 10X more than anyone else here, but I know when the government needs to step back.

Yeah, I can imagine how lame it would be if the 'cell phone jammer' broke in your car. You'd have yet another worthless part to have to replace.

Here is an idea:

Treat cell phone driving as a type of DUI and enforce it no tolerance. Don't put jammers in cars though. That is asinine. Especially when an actual emergency or something arises.

 

[theLords]

Government control is getting worse and worse 2

 

[evan33]

If anything jammers sound like they would be MORE dangerous because you wouldn't be able to call for help!

I've heard that after Georgia passed their texting ban there have been more accidents because people try and hide their phones instead of holding it in front of the dashboard so they can see the phone and the road.

wouldn't it make more since to say.. require all cars to come with a bluetooth device? OR to develop a "car mode" type software on cell phones where text messages are converted to text to speech and speech to text?

seems waaaaay more logical than disrupting everyone's business life and putting accident victims in serious danger.

 

[Lewis]

I believe this is an over-reaction by some busy-body legislatures. No one I've ever known has been the victim of a cell phone related accident, so some people may say I'm being selfish. But I believe this is a case of baby-kissers playing to the latest public craze.

"Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, the nation’s preeminent anti-distracted-driving crusader, said in an interview on MSNBC yesterday that federal officials are looking at technology to disable cell phones inside cars.
“I think it will be done,†LaHood said. “I think the technology is there and I think you’re going to see the technology become adaptable in automobiles to disable these cell phones. We need to do a lot more if were going to save lives.â€

To Thwart Distracted Driving, US Government Considers Cell Phone Jammers in Cars | Popular Science

I can see the value of this being an option, especially for parents. I can see auto insurance companies offering discounted rates when these are installed. But if someone is using a hands-free system, how is that any more distracting than talking to someone else in the car? Having a person physically present includes a visual distraction that hands-free cell usage doesn't. What about all the other distractions that take your hand(s) and eyes off the wheel? Eating? Tuning the radio/working CD's? Are we going to ban passengers and car stereos?

I have selfish reasons for objecting to this, because driving is a time when I can get business and personal calls done. But, if this were to be the answer to distracted drivers, I would have to consider it. It's not!

I am with you, I have a Blackberry Bold 9700, and I use it with a bluetooth when I am driving.

 

[Vic C.]

I don't like this idea at all.

 

[Johnsons]

But don't you think that a cell phone jammer can be very helpful for people sometimes, I don't mean to install them compulsively, but it should not be banned I think.

 

[tim-from-pa]

Besides Congress meddling into things that the federal government should not be instead of fixing real problems (while we all wonder why things are so bad the way they are --- this is an example why), there are two main reasons why this won't fly--- or at least there would have to be an electronic exception regarding these two things where jammers are turned off:

1) Hands free talking is an acceptable way to talk while driving, no different than talking with one of your passengers. In addition, a cell phone may need to be used while driving in an area that one cannot pull over to report and emergency, aggressive driving and whatnot. A jammer would limit these safe ways of cell phone usage.

2) GPS and GPS tracking would be jammed as well. Say goodbye to OnStar tracking for emergencies, or GPS navigation. Also say goodbye to GPS tracking for auto thieves. Just recently two robbers were caught in this area because the car they stole either had a GPS locator on it, or in the case of a bank robbery they planted a GPS tracker on the crooks.

So, unless there was an electronic way to bypass in these two instances, I think the companies that make a living off what I just cited will be up in arms.

BTW, this sounds like more congressional space-filler. Is this another one of the leftist, liberal brainstorming? Seems like the hippy generation they came from rebelled enough and wanted to challenge authority. Now they act like hypocrites and ram more restrictive laws down our throats than what they rebelled against. I could see that if this was some third world country, but this is getting ridiculous here.