Posted on 07/24/2012 12:53:04 AM PDT by Altariel
Banning texting while driving is one issue, but what about outlawing "distracted driving" as a whole? That's the burning question the Bowling Green City Council faces as they introduced new distracted driving legislation to the community on Tuesday night.
According to The BG News, the ordinance would ban any type of distraction that takes the driver's attention away from the road. While some residents expressed concern that this vague definition would violate their rights, personal injury attorney Mike D. Bell says the heart of the ordinance is in everyone's best interest.
"I understand the intent behind the law and it's great that the legislature is taking advantage of this opportunity to come out to stop distracted driving," Bell said. "As I understand this proposed law, if there's a failure to maintain full time and attention by the driver, they can be cited with a $25 ticket plus court costs--no points on the license--and it's for any driver."
Bell says the proposed law is different from the state texting legislation coming into effect at the end of August, which will ban minor drivers from using any handheld device in a vehicle and adult drivers from texting. Bowling Green's law, if passed, would penalize distracted driving of all forms, which could include eating, changing the radio station and gazing out a side window.
"Texting and driving and handheld devices and Bluetooth are all convenient, but when they're used in the car, they could be incredibly dangerous and we all know that," Bell said. "Bowling Green City Council believes that this legislation is necessary for them."
The council will hold two more meetings to discuss the ordinance with the public before they cast their votes.
The good and the bad all mixed together. This is so vaguely worded that it is a ticket for anything, a great revenue raiser and the driver can’t defend against it. You looked at the parked police car as you drove by - distracted - ticket, etc.
“Talking to a passenger in the car is “distracting”, having children in the car is “distracting”, bill boards are “distracting”, idiots in other cars are distracting, a pretty girl walking down the street is distracting...”
...a formation of F-16’s flying low overhead is distracting, roadside memorials are distracting,...
“There’s no way to rule innocent men.
The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them.
One declares so many things to be a crime
that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”
—Ayn Rand
… a pretty girl walking down the street is distracting …
When I was living in Hawaii about 30 years ago there was a popular bumper sticker – “Hey! Watch my rear, not hers”.
While I do think Texting definitely needs to be banned, one MUST keep in mind the mindset of the nanny-staters.
You people out there don’t have to believe me, and if so, that’s your problem, but facts are facts, so you’ll, eventually, discover that I’m right about what I’m going to say, which is the following:
The Nanny-Staters DESPISE the idea of a person driving their own car, particularly if they are going where they want, and when they want. They can just barely handle people driving themselves if they get permission from the state - basically register to take a trip, and then go where they’re authorized (that’s why Rick Perry and other governors are trying so hard to get GPS into people’s cars, for the purpose of tolling based on where people drive, when they drive, what they drive, and maybe how much money they make).
As to distracted driving - they see the legitimate case against text-messaging as a way to make driving, overall, as MISERABLE as possible (so as to minimize the number of people driving alone - and then to minimize where they go - try to imagine a road trip without eating or drinking in the car and you’ll understand that). Once you go into the world of distracted driving - you open a HUGE can of worms, and you CAN BET they know that. So what’s distracting when a person drives - yes listening to the radio, talking to the wife, talking to the dog, talking to your kids, thinking about something other than what’s ahead of you on the road, etc.
Again, mark my words, you don’t have to agree with my description of what the left thinks about driving in general, but you will later, probably in the near future.
In a “No Time for Sergeants” episode, two officers are involved in a fender-bender on base, and get into a dispute over who did or did not signal properly, or whatever. Andy Griffith makes it clear that he knows the cause of the accident - but won’t articulate how he knows, or what the problem was.Finally the case goes to a court-martial, and Griffith is on the stand and asked what happened. At that moment a drop-dead gorgeous blonde enlisted woman walks though the room. And as Griffith enthusiastically greets her she happily returns her greeting. The officer in charge of the trial repeats the question, and Griffith asks how many fingers he was holding up on his left hand while greeting the corporal.
And of course none of them knows - and Griffins testifies that he was greeting that same corporal on the sidewalk at the time of the accident. In the deliberations that follow, one of the officers asks, “Can we find ‘Justifiable Negligence?"
However I disagree with you. Texting while driving does not need to be banned.
To give these nanny staters more power is ridiculous.They the government are at war against we the people. And then we give them more power so they can "protect" us? NO.This goes against freedom and individualism no matter how dangerous or how right these gov nanny staters make something sound ( as in texting while driving) : We cannot compromise our value, we cannot give up our freedom to these nanny staters, let them go to hell! this is just socialism that "sounds good". This is taking away of individual rights for the "common good". So they ban texting while driving and then they get away with it so what do they ban next, pretty girls walking down the street, billboards ( distracting) , etc. We have no jobs , crime is up, illegals are invading, immigrants are everywhere and these nanny staters are concentrating on controlling our texting , our driving our drinking sodas.
People have been texting for several years now , Also driking 60 ounce sodas. has civilization broken down? No but civilization is breaking down BECAUSE of the incredible GROWTH of government and number of new laws.
To give these nanny stater government idiots more power over us is ridiculous. They the government at all levels are at war against we the people. The media puts some fake threat out there to make everyday people say “ they ought to do something about that” and then the other tag team member the politicians write a law to “Protect” us from fake threat. No what they are after is control and destruction of our liberty.
All government is evil and against liberty. yet many are willing to give these morons more power. Go live in an inner city public housing project and see how the government as landlord worked out.
Yes so gov nanny stater idiots will say ban all pretty girls from walking down the street. gov can't make things perfect only worse.
Texting while driving does not need to be banned.
To give these nanny staters more power is ridiculous.They the government are at war against we the people. And then we give them more power so they can “protect” us? NO.This goes against freedom and individualism no matter how dangerous or how right these gov nanny staters make something sound ( as in texting while driving) : We cannot compromise our value, we cannot give up our freedom to these nanny staters, let them go to hell! this is just socialism that “sounds good”. This is taking away of individual rights for the “common good”. So they ban texting while driving and then they get away with it so what do they ban next, pretty girls walking down the street, billboards ( distracting) , etc. We have no jobs , crime is up, illegals are invading, immigrants are everywhere and these nanny staters are concentrating on controlling our texting , our driving our drinking sodas.
People have been texting for several years now , Also driking 60 ounce sodas. has civilization broken down? No but civilization is breaking down BECAUSE of the incredible GROWTH of government and number of new laws.
“Texting is incredibly dangerous. I have seen more people doing this weaving all over the road. Same goes for applying makeup.”
So to stop this let’s make it illegal to look out our side window. Or listen to the radio. Or scratch our nose.
Of course the cops won’t use this crap as an excuse to pull over and hand an easy quota filler ticket out to anyone at random.
cop: “The reason I pulled you over is because I saw you looking out the side window”
driver: “But officer, I was looking for an address”
cop: “That’s illegal now. Gimmee your papers”
How about we just make driving illegal?
Talking to a passenger in the car is “distracting”, having children in the car is “distracting”, bill boards are “distracting”, idiots in other cars are distracting, a pretty girl walking down the street is distracting - when will this stop?
<><><><><><
Maybe it will stop idiot politicians from standing at the busiest intersections with their signage.
In an ideal, Libertarian, world, people that texted and drove would see their insurance rates go through the roof, as they left a body trail behind. Likewise, for workplace safety laws - in most cases, there’s no need to spend money on safety, since accidents are rare, and if you have a small business, you simply go bankrupt.
Believe it not, that’s the argument that Libertarians have tossed at me (they did later grow up, by the way).
When I grew up, we had no child seats, we had no seat belt laws - and most of us made it. But we also had no text messaging laws - not because we were more free, but because they didn’t exist. In other words, had text messages not popped up on the scene, no one would be talking about the need to ban them. That’s my test. Seat belt laws anger me, because if I don’t wear a seat belt, no one else is endangered. Child seat and child seat belt laws I’m mixed on, because kids don’t get that choice. Cell phones I don’t consider a problem (unless you have Verizon, that keeps dropping you and gives you an unreadable display), but having a Texting conversation is simply DANGEROUS, and it’s DANGEROUS to me when it’s being done by the high-school babe coming up to my traffic light and not noticing it. I WANT HER STOPPED!!
Get over yourself. I did not say say yea or nay. I said it was incredibly dangerous.
By your logic then allow goverment idiots to ban billboards, or pretty girls walking down the street. Then allow them to put cameras in our cars to see that we are not doing anything which they deem to be dangerous. Enough . you trust government beauracrats to solve imaginary problems like global warming or texters. it is the idea that government is a good that is the threat. the threat is the idea that thee government goons can make our life better and that should be allowed to write laws for anything that they say is for our own good/
we have too many laws too much government at all levels.Enough . what we need is to repeal laws, government and regulations. Yes we made it without seatbelts and government schools and we’ll able to make it without texting laws you liberal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.