genec

Amen.

unterhausen

nobody fact-checks the signs of panhandlers. Although we do have a problem with this. Not everyone that leaves the military with a disability has a visible disability

genec

Not everyone with a disability is standing on a corner panhandling either. Frankly, I tend to believe that FEW folks that are panhandling have any other problem beyond laziness or lack of drive. That isn't to say that a few panhandlers don't have real problems... but I suspect that very few are actually vets.

My way of dealing with those folks is to offer them a granola bar and bottle of water... if they really need it, they take it. "Spare Change," enables too many other things.

RoadTire 

Wow, this as been alive for 4 1/2 months? No, he wasn't. Just read his other posts. There is some legal distinction between drugs/liquor, and personal property, and that must remain so. I do not dispute cell phones being a dangerous distraction, but so are cigarettes, media players ("8 track, cassette or stereo" Heh.), putting on makeup, or holding a map in front of your face when driving. (remember Close Encounters?) It's just that cell phones occupy us for a longer period of time, take more focus when used, and probably used more than just about any other item when in the car.

KD5NRH

Yup; I used to work with a guy who had been a roofer until a wreck left him with no use of his legs and only one partly functional arm. It was enough for him to answer a phone and take messages, and that's what he did 40 hours a week while going to school for a marketing degree. Always wanted to roll him into a disability office and have him heckle the people claiming they couldn't work at all despite driving themselves there and walking in under their own power.

Number400

1 year. Distracted Driver Gets 1 Year In Minn. Crash That Killed Cyclist Mom « CBS Minnesota

Chris516

I am living proof of that. I don't have one (physical)health issue. I have three. Two of them are congenital(since birth). I live every day as if it is my last. Because of what could happen to me anywhere. Including when I am not on my bike.

bluegoatwoods

It's probably just. I'd be inclined to want a lengthier sentence. But the man apparently admitted to the police on-scene just what he'd done. He plead (pleaded?) "Guilty" at trial.

If he tried to do any 'weaseling' in between, I'm not aware of it. He's taking his punishment like a man. And his punishment, presumably, will include hating himself for the rest of his life.

The only thing I'd hope for further from him would be that he spend the rest of his life telling people, "If you do what I did,then you'll regret it!"

prathmann

Agreed. The sentence is substantial enough to send a message to the community that distracted driving can have significant consequences. And the driver in this case should be given some credit for his actions after the crash - staying on the scene and administering CPR to the victim, taking responsibility for his actions, and sparing the victims' family the need for a trial where they'd relive the incident. Based on the reporting that I've seen he is sincerely remorseful and I'm hopeful that he will be one of the safest drivers on the road in the future.

B. Carfree

If I killed someone while driving, I really don't think I could ever get behind the wheel again. I just wouldn't be able to trust myself to not fail again.

LGHT

I agree I often have to honk to remind drivers to go because they are on their cell phones. I typically see 10-20 drivers either texting or talking on a cell phone during a 20 minute commute. If they implemented a why to "confiscate" the cell phone for 30-60 days if caught using one while driving I think we ALL would be a lot safer.

ItsJustMe

I heard on the radio this morning that the NHTSA is calling for a complete ban on all mobile devices while driving, including hands-free. I would be happy to see this. I would be even happier to see enforcement.

keyven

I love that idea - confiscate a phone like one would towing away a car. Force the driver to be without his "beloved tool" for a day and force him to pay a hundred bucks to get it back. For most people it's the data on the phone that's worth more than the phone itself.

That would certainly send a strong message without overdoing it. And would be easier to enforce.

rydabent

I would suggest that cell phones be adjusted so that if they are moving faster than 10 mph they wont work. Several investigations have shown that driving and texting is more dangerous than drunk driving.

genec

Shhhh don't tell ILTB. He still wants documented proof. Studies don't mean a thing... It just isn't true unless you find an actual smoking cell phone.

I-Like-To-Bike

I understand that you and rydabent are on the same wavelength as far as logical thought and ability/willingness to entertain concepts that don't match preconceived notions. I also understand that for the both of you, credible "proof" or "evidence" are irrelevant concepts when it might interfere with the gist of your emotional rants on this or any other subject.

genec

You know... you sound just like the tobacco company apologists sitting before congress denying that their product may have negative effects on health...

Chicago Al 

You know who else insisted on 'proof' and 'evidence'???



HITLER!!!!!


(okay not really. but if you don't agree with me then you are a car-cissist and don't support the troops.)

Chris516

That would be absolutely wonderful if that would happen.
This has actually been mentioned before on BF.

RomansFiveEight

What always drives me nuts about those conditions are that if they had been following the law; they wouldn't be in that mess. Like a DWI condition that the driver not drink and drive. Umm, well, that's ALREADY illegal, and they ALREADY did it. Why do we think they won't now? The condition of his bail is that he not break the law?

RomansFiveEight

The problem with that is passengers and other folks in the car. I use my phone in the car all the time when I'm a passenger and not driving. Why shouldn't I? There's also hands free systems. My cars, for example, both have bluetooth that automatically pairs to my phone. My phone stays in my pocket when I'm driving, but if it rings, I can press a button on the steering wheel to answer and talk through the cars sound system. No different than having a conversation with a passenger. And what about public transit? Lot's of folks would be in an uproar if they couldn't use their phone on the train, in a cab, on the subway or a bus, etc.

Ultimately, as 'good' as the ideas sound; huge sweeping regulations that disadvantage LOTS of people in order to potentially stop a few probably won't be all that effective. We just need better laws to deal with the aftermath. Folks shouldn't get off with community service after killing someone and it should be a serious offense to be caught using your phone while driving. I believe that if an officer stops you because he/she believes you are impaired (swerving, changing speeds, etc.); and then discovers you were using your cellphone; it should be charged and treated just like a DWI. When folks have to shell out thousands for an attorney and fines and risk jail time; suddenly, whatever was so important; isn't so important. In some states there are severe penalties for commercial vehicle drivers (not sure why we pick on them and not everyone else too) using a cellphone while driving. And guess what? They don't do it. It's not worth losing their job.

prathmann

All the studies I've seen that evaluated hand-free calling vs. handheld devices found them both to be about the same level of distraction and both resulted in significantly impaired driving.

And I find it to be very different from having a conversation with a passenger - as did the studies. In the latter case the moment the traffic situation gets a little more complicated I stop talking and the passenger in the car understands why. OTOH, the person on the other end of a phone call has no idea and starts asking questions - that's ok if it's a casual call, but if it's an important business call there's a tendency to try to keep going with the call even though the traffic situation is demanding more attention. Worst were business conference calls when you have a particular point to make and you need to be ready to make it at just the right time in the conversation.

FanaticMN

MN Department of Safety has made an anti-cellphone video out of this, with the cooperation of the driver.

johnbort2

With all due respect, I disagree. As a Marine Combat veteran, I joined in order to protect the American way of life. The Constitution is so woven into the fabric of our country that it is one and the same in my opinion...so yea, the Constitution is pretty important to me. That is just THIS veteran's opinion....