Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

States outlaw multi-tasking at the wheel
Waterbury Republican-American ^ | February 9, 2007 | John Curran (A.P.)

Posted on 02/09/2007 8:21:46 AM PST by Graybeard58

BARRE, Vt. -- Put down the flute and keep your eyes on the road.

And forget about sipping that cup of coffee on the way to work, or smoking a cigarette on the way home. In some states, it could soon be illegal -- if it isn't already.

Emboldened by the passage of cell phone bans for drivers in some communities, states are turning their attention to other things that drive motorists to distraction.

Vermont lawmakers are considering a measure that would ban eating, drinking, smoking, reading, writing, personal grooming, playing an instrument, "interacting with pets or cargo," talking on a cell phone or using any other personal communication device while driving. The punishment: a fine of up to $600.

Similar bills are under consideration in Maryland and Texas.

Connecticut has passed one that generically bans any activity that could interfere with the safe operation of a motor vehicle.

"Cell phones attracted people to this issue," said Matt Sundeen, a transportation analyst with the National Conference of State Legislatures. "Now that people are more focused on distracted driving issues, they're beginning to talk about the broader range of distractions."

For the sponsor of the Vermont bill, the motivation came from his own observations.

"What finally pushed me over the edge was when I was at a stop sign and somebody opposite me was trying to navigate around the corner with a cell phone to the ear in one hand and a cigarette in the other, and she wasn't doing very well," said Republican state Rep. Thomas F. Koch.

He said his wife recently saw a driver playing the flute, which led him to include the instrument ban in his bill.

"There are a lot of bad habits out on the road. This isn't just for drivers' own good. This is to protect the other people on the road," he said.

Often, they need protection:

In Illinois, a bicyclist was killed by a driver who had been downloading cell phone ring tones while behind the wheel last September.

In Westminster, Calif., a 7-year-old boy was struck and killed by an SUV whose driver lost control as he was trying to reach a cell phone and plowed into a family at a bus stop Nov. 29, authorities said.

In Spokane, Wash., a trucker who was allegedly using a cell phone crossed a highway median and struck another truck head-on, killing five children, in 2005.

In Athens, Ala., a woman lost control of her car while reaching for a ringing cell phone and crashed into a church last month.

Distracted drivers were involved in nearly eight out of 10 collisions or near-crashes in a study released last year by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Young drivers are some of the worst offenders.

A study of more than 5,600 students released last month by the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and State Farm Insurance Co. reported that nearly 90 percent had seen friends drive while talking on cell phones and that half saw drivers playing hand-held games, using listening devices or sending text messages.

Jeff Rogers, 44, of Barre, filling up his pickup at a gas station Thursday, said the Vermont bill is "going a little too far."

"I can understand the cell phone thing," he said. "But the rest of it, how are they going to enforce that?"


TOPICS: Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS: donutwatch; doublestandard; dui; dwi; gubmintgonewild; impaireddriving; nannystate; policestate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last
To: Graybeard58

Before long, they'll consider the road a distraction to driving.


41 posted on 02/09/2007 9:31:08 AM PST by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what an Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Great. How am I going to change my clothes while I'm driving home now?


42 posted on 02/09/2007 9:33:45 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mopp4

He isn't trained tin multi-tasking. His left foot could be used to steer the car.


43 posted on 02/09/2007 9:35:00 AM PST by BobS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
Once the pride of America ...Vermont has been lost to the liberals
Abortion on demand .
Legalized sodomy.
Very questionable judges with sex offenders.
High taxes , high water and electric rates .
No jobs,and the young people are leaving
and this from a population of mostly Christians.
Go figure.
44 posted on 02/09/2007 9:39:25 AM PST by heavy9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

I think a driver's attention ought to remain mostly on the road, but a little common sense and experience should be the guideline.

Listening to the radio, smoking, drinking coffee, eating a french fry, I don't see the harm here, unless the driver takes his eyes off the road and leaves them off the road for an extended period, or when he's following another car with three feet between them.

There are already laws on the books concerning reckless driving, and any act described by these proposed laws that creates a real risk certainly is covered by these statutes.

Instead of common sense, however, we are gradually becoming subject to ridiculous government justifications for their existence that outlaw not just actual risk, but potential risk, and if followed to logical conclusion, then yes, eventually every act will be outlawed in one form or another.

This is how the Roman Empire met its end. You'd think the lesson had been learned, but it hasn't, or perhaps, a better way to put it, the lesson is being ignored by other considerations.

We have people who are simply not qualified to lead, issuing directives for the sole purpose of hiding the fact that they have no business telling others what to do.

Instead of voting them out of office, or simply taking our country back by force, we sit still and hope someone else will do it.

This isn't going to end well, per Darwin, per simple laws of nature, per basic cause and effect.

Taken on the whole, the human race is an unfit species, and it appears to me that we are at, or shortly past the top of our existential curve.


45 posted on 02/09/2007 9:41:48 AM PST by jeffers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doc30
"Before long, they'll consider the road a distraction to driving. "

You can avoid traffic jams by driving on the sidewalk.

46 posted on 02/09/2007 9:42:11 AM PST by BobS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Great. How am I going to change my clothes while I'm driving home now?

A 10hp shop vac positioned just above the brake peddle will suck your clothes right off!

47 posted on 02/09/2007 9:42:55 AM PST by JoeSixPack1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
Ok I have a question............would "children" be the "cargo" they mention?? What else could it be? Why don't they just outlaw drving cars and be done with it?

When police officers have to be denigrated to baby sitting drivers and monitoring their every move, there is NO TIME to pursue criminals!
48 posted on 02/09/2007 9:44:01 AM PST by gidget7 (2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fruitintheroom
....none of these laws cover the number one distraction, and I guess there is no cool way of mentioning it.

Read the article....there definitely going to ban playing the skin flute.

Yeah, I guess that has to qualify as 'interacting with a passenger'.

49 posted on 02/09/2007 9:44:28 AM PST by capt. norm (Liberalism = cowardice disguised as tolerance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace; 50sDad
The two of you have labeled the whole concept for what it is!
50 posted on 02/09/2007 9:46:01 AM PST by gidget7 (2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dallas59

Yeah, no kidding! Ever ride along with a cop? They're constantly on the computer, typing or reading while driving, and generally distracted. It made me nervous.


51 posted on 02/09/2007 9:48:59 AM PST by Some hope remaining.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ramius

You are so right! What is a driver to do if there is a person in the crosswalk, a green light, and someone running it from the red side?? What about traffic cones, a siron from an abulance, and heavy traffic. Driving IS multi tasking!


52 posted on 02/09/2007 9:49:20 AM PST by gidget7 (2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: gidget7

Huh?


53 posted on 02/09/2007 9:52:34 AM PST by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
"Vermont lawmakers are considering a measure that would ban eating, drinking, smoking, reading, writing, personal grooming, playing an instrument, "interacting with pets or cargo,"

-----

hmmm, think of all the grateful moms of small children out there ("Mom, she's loooooking at me", flying toddler shoes, etc.) "I'm sorry, junior, Mommy has to go to the store alone - your kind of cargo is banned from the car by the government".

Maybe I'll spearhead this law in my state! j/k
54 posted on 02/09/2007 9:56:45 AM PST by keepitreal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobS; Southside_Chicago_Republican
All of what you say is true, however, in all states there are already laws against reckless driving, erratic driving, whatever a state labels it. All those things you both mentioned fall under that category, there is no need to specifically label each individual distraction.

I have done many things behind the wheel, but I am distracted from THEM, not my driving.
55 posted on 02/09/2007 9:57:43 AM PST by gidget7 (2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace
Was in response to your post about fascism.
56 posted on 02/09/2007 10:03:48 AM PST by gidget7 (2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

Could we put flossing your teeth in there? Saw that one last month at 50 mph.


57 posted on 02/09/2007 10:05:28 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gidget7
in all states there are already laws against reckless driving, erratic driving, whatever a state labels it. All those things you both mentioned fall under that category, there is no need to specifically label each individual distraction.

I agree. There would be no end to the list, and some of the things that might be on the list are not distractions to everyone. If I were to get pulled over because a cop saw me drinking coffee or eating something or smoking, I'd get pulled over every day. If they nail the people who are driving recklessly or erractically -- whatever the cause -- they've gone a long way toward taking care of the problem.

58 posted on 02/09/2007 10:06:22 AM PST by Southside_Chicago_Republican (????? in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
Vermont lawmakers are considering a measure that would ban eating, drinking, smoking, reading, writing, personal grooming, playing an instrument, "interacting with pets or cargo," talking on a cell phone or using any other personal communication device while driving. The punishment: a fine of up to $600.

Are you sure?

59 posted on 02/09/2007 10:09:12 AM PST by eyedigress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: gidget7

I was trying to figure out if you were razzin' me, or expressing agreement.


60 posted on 02/09/2007 10:12:24 AM PST by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson