Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

2,600 dead and 330,000 injured

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

2,600 dead and 330,000 injured

Old 12-10-02, 02:49 PM
  #51  
joeprim
Senior Member
 
joeprim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Northern Neck Tidewater Va.
Posts: 1,688
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by bac
I give up - please continue to irresponsibly blab on your phone while you are supposed to be paying attention to the road. I'm sure that your conversation is worth the risk that you pose toward others. However, if you injure or kill one of mine, don't expect me to write it off as an acceptable loss.
You still don't understand. I don't own a cell phone so I'm not likely to be talking on it will driving, or not driving. If I hurt you family I expect you to be angry and maybe to go to jail. I just get tired of the government being in everything.

Joe
joeprim is offline  
Old 12-10-02, 02:52 PM
  #52  
Ajay213
Bring the tech
 
Ajay213's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: S. FLorida
Posts: 1,215
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Perspective, perspective, perspective....that's all I ask. I agree something should be done about all drivers that aren't paying attention on the road, why should I single out cell phone users? Do the women putting on make-up get a pass? How about the men shaving? How about the idiots that are reading the paper, or trying to eat a big mac?

7 people a day die because of an auto accident related to talking on the cell phone. It's horrible and a tragedy when anybody dies because of some level of careless-ness.

But today 127 people will die in some transportation related accident, a majority of them in cars. I'd rather have 7 people die from cell phone accidents if I could cure the problems in the other 120 accidents (which incidently would probably cure the 7 cell phone deaths as well). Fix the problem, don't put a band-aid on it.

Andrew
Ajay213 is offline  
Old 12-10-02, 03:10 PM
  #53  
ngateguy
Center of the Universe
 
ngateguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 4,374

Bikes: Bianchi San Remo, Norvara Intrepid MTB , Softride Solo 700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by Ajay213
Perspective, perspective, perspective....that's all I ask. I'd rather have 7 people die from cell phone accidents if I could cure the problems in the other 120 accidents (which incidently would probably cure the 7 cell phone deaths as well). Fix the problem, don't put a band-aid on it.
how many of those 7 are the ones who actually are on the phone or are just in the wrong place at the wrong time and again we are not talking about accidents that you inflict on your self but on others
__________________
Matthew 6
ngateguy is offline  
Old 12-10-02, 03:37 PM
  #54  
Ajay213
Bring the tech
 
Ajay213's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: S. FLorida
Posts: 1,215
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
how many of those 7 are the ones who actually are on the phone or are just in the wrong place at the wrong time and again we are not talking about accidents that you inflict on your self but on others
Does it matter? Or are you saying it's ok to put a death sentence on somebody who does something stupid (if that's the case there wouldn't be a single person alive on the planet including you and me).

How many of the 120 other transportation deaths today are people just in the wrong place at the wrong time? But those are ok I suppose?

Fix the problem, don't put a band-aid on it. So you enact a new law that makes using your cell phone illegal, big whoop....first if you can get 100% of the people to follow the law (yea right!) you've knocked out a whopping 7 deaths a day....out of the 127 deaths.

Or maybe we could just teach people to be more responsible behind the wheel by requiring real drivers instruction, real drivers testing, and real fines and penalties for doing the wrong things behind the wheel (and get rid of the BS stuff, like ticket quotas and the like). Then maybe we can knock the 127 deaths a day down to 60 deaths a day or even less.

Which is better?

Look at countries in Europe, they are more densly populated, have more pedestrian/cycle traffic, have for the most part higher speed limits, and don't have a road system like ours, yet have a lower death rate on the roads (per vehicle mile driven). I'm thinking that a large part of that is due to the fact that people in Europe have a much MUCH more stringent drivers education system than we do.

Instead of making laws to protect stupid people from themselves and others, why not just educate them so they know better?

Andrew
Ajay213 is offline  
Old 12-10-02, 05:05 PM
  #55  
ngateguy
Center of the Universe
 
ngateguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 4,374

Bikes: Bianchi San Remo, Norvara Intrepid MTB , Softride Solo 700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by Ajay213


Does it matter? Or are you saying it's ok to put a death sentence on somebody who does something stupid (if that's the case there wouldn't be a single person alive on the planet including you and me).

How many of the 120 other transportation deaths today are people just in the wrong place at the wrong time? But those are ok I suppose?

Fix the problem, don't put a band-aid on it. So you enact a new law that makes using your cell phone illegal, big whoop....first if you can get 100% of the people to follow the law (yea right!) you've knocked out a whopping 7 deaths a day....out of the 127 deaths.

Or maybe we could just teach people to be more responsible behind the wheel by requiring real drivers instruction, real drivers testing, and real fines and penalties for doing the wrong things behind the wheel (and get rid of the BS stuff, like ticket quotas and the like). Then maybe we can knock the 127 deaths a day down to 60 deaths a day or even less.

Which is better?

Look at countries in Europe, they are more densly populated, have more pedestrian/cycle traffic, have for the most part higher speed limits, and don't have a road system like ours, yet have a lower death rate on the roads (per vehicle mile driven). I'm thinking that a large part of that is due to the fact that people in Europe have a much MUCH more stringent drivers education system than we do.

Instead of making laws to protect stupid people from themselves and others, why not just educate them so they know better?

Andrew
this is my last post on this mater but you are MISSING the point
1., No death sentance for the cell phone users
2. I do not wish to make cell phones illeagal I wish to make the use of them while operating a vehicle (yeas thta includes cycles) illegal and in the case of those 120 deaths happening in other related traffice mishaps I will bet you most if not all the people at blame will be prosicuted for vehicular manslaughter or some such. so stop whinning about us trying to take away your cell phone we are not going to do that and if you held the logic that since 100% of the people will not obey it then why do we have murder laws in the first place since 100% of the people do not obey it. And oh yes most European countries ban the use of cell phones in there vehicles
__________________
Matthew 6
ngateguy is offline  
Old 12-10-02, 06:17 PM
  #56  
Ajay213
Bring the tech
 
Ajay213's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: S. FLorida
Posts: 1,215
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
this is my last post on this mater but you are MISSING the point
No, I get the point. You want more and more laws to protect people from themselves and others. Where as I want to educate people so we don't need those laws (or lighter laws).

2. I do not wish to make cell phones illeagal I wish to make the use of them while operating a vehicle (yeas thta includes cycles) illegal and in the case of those 120 deaths happening in other related traffice mishaps I will bet you most if not all the people at blame will be prosicuted for vehicular manslaughter or some such.
So wait, in those 120 cases they get manslaughter charges, but in the 7 cell phone cases they don't? Yapping on a cell phone would be very negligent, enough so to warrant severe charges (like a higher level manslaughter charge).

Irregardless out of those 120 deaths today, the only ones that will be charged will be the ones that were doing something negligent. If somebody is at fault in a minor accident but the other person didn't wear their seatbelt and flew threw the windshield, the person at fault isn't going to be charged.

so stop whinning about us trying to take away your cell phone we are not going to do that
I don't even own a cell phone, I'm whining about your desire to create more BS legislation that isn't going to solve any part of a problem.

Fix the problem, don't put a band-aid on it.

and if you held the logic that since 100% of the people will not obey it then why do we have murder laws in the first place since 100% of the people do not obey it.
Exactly my point, you want a cell phone law...then think all 7 deaths a day will go away once it's there. I bet if you took murder off the law books the murder rate wouldn't wildly go out of control. Why? Because people know it's wrong, not just legally, but morally...on a higher level if you will. If people were educated about driving and it's consequences and taught to respect driving a car then a whole bunch of similiar BS laws (such as a cell-phone law) could be taken away because they wouldn't be needed.

Andrew
Ajay213 is offline  
Old 12-11-02, 12:01 PM
  #57  
joeprim
Senior Member
 
joeprim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Northern Neck Tidewater Va.
Posts: 1,688
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Right on Andrew
Joe
joeprim is offline  
Old 12-11-02, 12:12 PM
  #58  
salamibender
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
You can work the numbers anyway you want. It's a lot easier talking on the phone than eating a BigMac while driving. Maybe we should outlaw all eating while driving, and while we are at no more reading the paper and putting on make-up. Just because someone has a new computer don't believe everything they say. If you do you are just a sheep being lead to slaughter
salamibender is offline  
Old 12-11-02, 08:13 PM
  #59  
SamDaBikinMan
Crank Crushing Redneck
 
SamDaBikinMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: A van down by the river.
Posts: 2,600

Bikes: Bikes are environmentally damaging

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
A new law will not solve the problem but it will bring more attention to it and perhaps make a large majority of potential traffic dangers to go away based on the threat of fines and loss of driving priviledges.

I do not put much faith in laws actually solving a problem but it is a start. Education is a very good if not the best solution. But the only way education is going to have much impact is to revoke everyones license and re train/test all drivers. Then we would need them on a probationary period during which time any violations or acts of irresponsibility would deny their continued driving privelidges. Beyond that a more severe system of penalizing violators or irresponsible drivers that gives little room for folks to just not give a crap and still keep their license.

Anyone who thinks they will be able to have faith that drivers will be responsible or do the right thing is just a fool. But at least get their attention with a possible fine or other consequence for irresponsibility. Otherwise the result could be the manslaughter case that may not have happened if they thought they had reprocussions for irresponsible acts. Unfortunately we do have to spell out in detail what is or is not responsible for the majority of people.

But the fact that a new law will not solve the problem is true. It will however produce a consequence for a specific act of irresponsibility.
SamDaBikinMan is offline  
Old 12-11-02, 09:38 PM
  #60  
Chris L
Every lane is a bike lane
 
Chris L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia - passionfruit capital of the universe!
Posts: 9,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by salamibender
Maybe we should outlaw all eating while driving, and while we are at no more reading the paper and putting on make-up
I would have no problem with this.
__________________
I am clinically insane. I am proud of it.

That is all.
Chris L is offline  
Old 12-12-02, 06:34 AM
  #61  
Spire
山馬鹿
 
Spire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Fuchu, Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 1,407

Bikes: TREK 1000 and a junk bike with a basket on the front to go to the shops.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by salamibender
You can work the numbers anyway you want. It's a lot easier talking on the phone than eating a BigMac while driving. Maybe we should outlaw all eating while driving, and while we are at no more reading the paper and putting on make-up. Just because someone has a new computer don't believe everything they say. If you do you are just a sheep being lead to slaughter
People READ while driving? What kind of people do this? How can one possibly expect to control a car while reading? Has anyone actually witnessed this?
__________________
https://www.sporra.net - Cycling Motivator
http://www.cyclistsroadmap.com/eng/ - Cyclists' road map. Checkout which roads are good for cycling and rate roads in your area.
Spire is offline  
Old 12-12-02, 08:02 AM
  #62  
Ajay213
Bring the tech
 
Ajay213's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: S. FLorida
Posts: 1,215
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
People READ while driving? What kind of people do this? How can one possibly expect to control a car while reading? Has anyone actually witnessed this?
I've seen it, it's not as rare as you may think. Although I do see people talking on their phones, women putting on makeup, and people eating far more often.

Andrew
Ajay213 is offline  
Old 12-12-02, 08:03 AM
  #63  
joeprim
Senior Member
 
joeprim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Northern Neck Tidewater Va.
Posts: 1,688
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by Spire


People READ while driving? What kind of people do this? How can one possibly expect to control a car while reading? Has anyone actually witnessed this?
Yep! Sometimes I have to go toward DC during morning rush hour. Reading, shaving, putting on make-up, knitting, talking on phones or CBs, ... When you think about all the accidents that occur in that envirnment and how could they happen - well now you know.

Joe
joeprim is offline  
Old 12-12-02, 10:50 AM
  #64  
hayneda
Carfree Retro Grouch
 
hayneda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Redneckia
Posts: 326
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Screw it. Let's just ban driving. That'll take care of the lot.

Dave
hayneda is offline  
Old 12-12-02, 12:17 PM
  #65  
ngateguy
Center of the Universe
 
ngateguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 4,374

Bikes: Bianchi San Remo, Norvara Intrepid MTB , Softride Solo 700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by hayneda
Screw it. Let's just ban driving. That'll take care of the lot.

Dave
Boy do I second that!
__________________
Matthew 6
ngateguy is offline  
Old 12-12-02, 09:21 PM
  #66  
wabbit
Sprockette
 
wabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I actually remember reading Dave Barry's column once, about bad drivers and he said he once saw a guy SHAVING HIS HEAD in the car.

Laws are not supposed to SOLVE problems, only we can do that, but laws give you a framework. If we could rely on everyone to always behave responsibly under every situation, we wouldnt' need laws. Unfortunately, that's not the case whether it's cars, cell phones, booze, weapons- as we have all seen. So like it or not, laws have a purpose beyond simply government interference. Listen, I am not big on government interference myself, but there is a public health and safety issue involved. Unfortunately, if you make it harder to use cells in cars, then, yes, there might be a slippery slope of banning this and that kind of device. I think if anything impairs your ability to drive, then there should be some kind of responsibility. Let's face it, we have all seen that it's kind of impossible to expect drivers to be responsible, do they really need more distractions?
__________________
You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. That's great...if you want to attract vermin.
wabbit is offline  
Old 12-12-02, 09:27 PM
  #67  
Chris L
Every lane is a bike lane
 
Chris L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia - passionfruit capital of the universe!
Posts: 9,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Originally posted by wabbit
Laws are not supposed to SOLVE problems, only we can do that, but laws give you a framework. If we could rely on everyone to always behave responsibly under every situation, we wouldnt' need laws. Unfortunately, that's not the case whether it's cars, cell phones, booze, weapons- as we have all seen. So like it or not, laws have a purpose beyond simply government interference. Listen, I am not big on government interference myself, but there is a public health and safety issue involved. Unfortunately, if you make it harder to use cells in cars, then, yes, there might be a slippery slope of banning this and that kind of device. I think if anything impairs your ability to drive, then there should be some kind of responsibility. Let's face it, we have all seen that it's kind of impossible to expect drivers to be responsible, do they really need more distractions?
Thank you.
__________________
I am clinically insane. I am proud of it.

That is all.
Chris L is offline  
Old 12-12-02, 11:59 PM
  #68  
ngateguy
Center of the Universe
 
ngateguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 4,374

Bikes: Bianchi San Remo, Norvara Intrepid MTB , Softride Solo 700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally posted by wabbit
I actually remember reading Dave Barry's column once, about bad drivers and he said he once saw a guy SHAVING HIS HEAD in the car.

Laws are not supposed to SOLVE problems, only we can do that, but laws give you a framework. If we could rely on everyone to always behave responsibly under every situation, we wouldnt' need laws. Unfortunately, that's not the case whether it's cars, cell phones, booze, weapons- as we have all seen. So like it or not, laws have a purpose beyond simply government interference. Listen, I am not big on government interference myself, but there is a public health and safety issue involved. Unfortunately, if you make it harder to use cells in cars, then, yes, there might be a slippery slope of banning this and that kind of device. I think if anything impairs your ability to drive, then there should be some kind of responsibility. Let's face it, we have all seen that it's kind of impossible to expect drivers to be responsible, do they really need more distractions?
well put, and I thank you also
__________________
Matthew 6
ngateguy is offline  
Old 12-13-02, 12:18 PM
  #69  
bikerider
Senior Member
 
bikerider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 376
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Enacting a law would be a waste of time, like nearly all recent new laws.

Amazingly enough, in Ontario we already have a law against 'careless driving' which, roughly, is "an offence for any person to drive a vehicle on a highway without due care and attention or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway".

http://www.lawyers.ca/dharris/articl...essdriving.htm

Like so many other laws on the books, this one is frequently violated and very, very rarely prosecuted. I suppose it's possible that a law against cell phone usage while driving might just be magical enough for people to respect it with our current levels of enforcement of traffic violations but I remain extremely skeptical.
bikerider is offline  
Old 12-13-02, 07:15 PM
  #70  
wabbit
Sprockette
 
wabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Well, the problem with that law is that it's so VAGUE, it could be interpreted as ANYTHING. If it was specfic, like SPEEDING, that's one thing. But it leaves it up to the interpretation of the law enforcement officials. OTOH, if they were too specific, it would leave all kinds of holes.
__________________
You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. That's great...if you want to attract vermin.
wabbit is offline  
Old 12-16-02, 05:20 PM
  #71  
roadbuzz
Just ride.
 
roadbuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: C-ville, Va
Posts: 3,252
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
This fire needs more fuel.

With the advent of PCS, every provider must have a tower every couple of miles to provide seamless coverage. Lovely!

And now, at least in the US, they want to force the broadcasters to stop broadcasting a "normal" video signal (in favor of HDTV), so they can reuse the bandwidth for cellular!. What on TV is worth a $2K receiver?
roadbuzz is offline  
Old 12-16-02, 05:30 PM
  #72  
Ajay213
Bring the tech
 
Ajay213's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: S. FLorida
Posts: 1,215
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
What on TV is worth a $2K receiver?
Well not to nitpick but a HDTV reciever only costs around $500 or so, maybe a tad more for something a little fancier, a little less for no-frills. But even then once the "wow" factor goes away there isn't much on TV worth even the $500.

Andrew
Ajay213 is offline  
Old 12-01-03, 10:30 AM
  #73  
willic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: N.E.England.(geordieland)
Posts: 605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Well! Its the first day of the ban on hand held mobile phones here in the U.k. from today anyone caught using one will be fined a fixed penalty of 30, with fines up to 1,000 for repeated offending.

Listening to the radio before work this morning,there was a lot of comment on the start of the ban (for or against) so out of interest I thought I would watch carefully for drivers on the commute into work and low and behold I did not have to wait long before seeing the first offender, just 3 cars into my ride, "sheesh"

They were still informing on the ban over the radio news anowncments at lunch time. It was interesting to hear that a Scottish lady seemingly was the first to be apprehended for misuse of her mobile, but the police were taking a lenient view for the first couple of months to give motorists the chance to drop their cell phone habit. "We shall see"
willic is offline  
Old 12-01-03, 10:48 PM
  #74  
Dchiefransom
Senior Member
 
Dchiefransom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Newark, CA. San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 6,244
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by nathank
ok, about 5 years ago i had a one-hour car commute on the highway to work for 6 months! uh, that was miserable! anyway, i bought a cell phone for the explicit purpose of using it on the drive to make use of the time as well as quell the boredom, so i understand the mentality behind cell-phone usgae...

it has to do with attitude: if you blindly accept that massive auto usage is just a fact of life and you are willing to ignore/downplay the associated dangers and you are expecting to spend 2 or more hours per day in your car, then using a cell phone while driving fits in to the lifestyle: since i'm going to be in the car so often, why not?

anyway, i now believe that the risks are not worth the convenience and cell phones usage should not be allowed while driving -- i know from personal experience that it is a distraction and also, just because of ettiquette it is usually unacceptable to suddenly throw the phone down and quit talking if something needing your attention arrises - you wait and politely tell the person to hold on - but these 2-10 seconds can be VERY important in driving! -- thus it can be quite dangerous.

They had a show on this a couple weeks ago, and a researcher from either Harvard or MIT said their studies showed that people on cell phones exhibited one tenth of the driving involved eye movement, compared to their own normal movement. I believe that included "hands free" accessories.
Dchiefransom is offline  
Old 12-01-03, 10:49 PM
  #75  
Dchiefransom
Senior Member
 
Dchiefransom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Newark, CA. San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 6,244
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Spire
People READ while driving? What kind of people do this? How can one possibly expect to control a car while reading? Has anyone actually witnessed this?
Haven't you seen the note pads that stick on the windshield, so people can write while they drive?
Dchiefransom is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.