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

Skip to comments.

CAR PHONE BAN GOES TOO FAR
boblonsberry.com | 01/14/09 | Bob Lonsberry

Posted on 01/14/2009 5:17:04 AM PST by shortstop

Do you sing in the car?

Or shout at the bonehead on your radio?

If so, you could get pulled over.

That's one of the potentical consequences of a stupid suggestion this week -- by the self-proclaimed National Safety Council -- that cell phones be banned in cars.

They want them done away with. They say that the piecemeal banning of cell phones -- mostly in our most liberal states -- doesn't go far enough. They won't be happy until every cell phone in every car is turned off or broken.

Specifically, they say that talking on a cell phone while driving is a dangerous as being drunk -- that cell phones in cares are the same thing as a DWI.

Which is, of course, preposterous. Their claim is not based in reality, but in the exageration of the activist, in the made-up nonsense they pump out in an effort to get people to surrender their freedom. Talking on a cell phone while driving is potentially, for some, distracting. It is, however, in no way like being drunk. It is, in fact, an activity that is, for most drivers, very easily manageable.

People talk on the cell phone all the time while driving. Even in states that outlaw it, talking on the cell while driving is common and safe.

That is proven by the fact that cars aren't piled into one another or into bridge abutments all over the place. Tens of millions of Americans talk and drive safely every day.

In fact, over the last decade plus, as this technology has become part of the mainstream of American life, the rate of highway accidents and fatalities has gone down. Over the period we've had more phones -- countless more phones -- and yet we've had fewer accidents. That is part of an uninterrupted trend toward safer highways resulting from evolving road and car design. Phones have not had an impact on traffic accidents or deaths, and yet these busybodies want to take them out of the hands of drivers.

And not just out of the hands.The National Safety Council says that hands-free phones must also be outlawed. That means the OnStar microphone in the rearview mirror, and the Blue Tooth in the ear. You simply can't talk while driving. Any form of telecommunications device used in any way while you are driving the car is going to be banned.

You break their rule, and they're going to have a cop pull you over and write you up.

Which is where the singing comes in.

How possibly do these morons propose to impose their new rules on your life? How is an officer alongside the road going to be able to tell if you are singing to the radio or talking on a hands-free phone?

Of what if you have a child in the car with you, someone small who doesn't reach up above the windows, and you're talking to him? Or to your dog. Or are hashing out an argument you had with your spouse. Or maybe you just like to talk to yourself.

Will running your mouth behind the wheel now be Fourth Amendment probable cause to pull you over? What about mouth breathers, will Big Brother hold them forever suspect?

This is all just nonsense. It shows what mischief can arise from these freedom-grabbing jerks who want to cram their rules down our throats.

And that's all that's happening here. This is about the piecemeal stripping of freedom from the American people. There remain few corners of life where people can actually choose what they want to do. Freedom of choice ends when you walk out the abortionist's front door.

So let me tell you how it should be.

If you want to talk on your cell phone while driving in your car, it's your business.

And the heck with anybody who says different. These freaking busybodies and their domineering arrogance. They feel completely entitled to play with your life like you are a rat in a cage.

But we should tell them to bug off. It's not their job to protect us, or to define what protection is. We have laws that define safe driving. They tell us how fast to go, and how to pass, and not to leave our lane, and how close to follow, when to yield and where to stop. If we violate any of those laws, ticket us. If we are not violating any of those laws then we, no matter what we are doing, are driving safely.

It is up to us to decide if we can do a certain activity and operate a vehicle safely. If the vehicle actually operates unsafely, pull us over. Until then, it's none of anybody's business.

If you want to eat while you drive, or listen to the radio, or talk on the phone, it's none of anybody's business.

Especially these unelected do-gooders.

We've got to keep the government off our backs. And we've got to recognize that by "protecting" us the government is doing nothing but enslaving us. Because the government can't give you safety without taking away freedom.

And this is America -- the land of the free.

At least it used to be.


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: accidents; baddrivers; bigbrother; cellphonedriving; cellphones; distraction; drivingwhileimpaired; dwi; lonsberry; prodeath; recklessdriving
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 201-208 next last
To: shortstop

only an idiot would condone cell phones and texting while driving. This thread is gay.


121 posted on 01/14/2009 9:39:31 AM PST by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hoffer Rand
Re: "Busy lifestyles have resulted in drivers making the most of their idle time in the car."

Good article, ETL. This attitude is a big part of the problem. Come on, people. You're not idle unless you're the passenger. You're operating a large piece of machinery that requires your attention.

That article was apparently from the 90s (before cellphones). The situation is a lot worse now (with cellphones). Driving requires both hands and total concentration. Because it's not just your own life that's on the line, it's those of other people, be they other drivers or pedestrians.

122 posted on 01/14/2009 9:55:24 AM PST by ETL (Smoking gun evidence on ALL the ObamaRat-commie connections at my newly revised FR Home/About page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: shortstop
As I stated to a nanny-state supporting do-gooder on another thread...

We should just ban ALL activities that MIGHT lead to the “careless driving” violations of law, including....

...Driving while under stress.
...Having an argument with your spouse less than one hour before getting behind the wheel.
...Getting fired or laided off prior to driving.
...Scantily clad pedestrians.
...Ugly pedestrians
...pedestrians in general
...billboards
...any vehicle that MIGHT cause a laughing distraction (such as “22’s”, “spinners” etc).
...Nose picking while driving (NPWD)
...teeth picking while driving (TPWD)
...outbursts from snot-nosed rebellious teenagers withing 30 minutes fo giettign behid the wheel
...Getting nagged by your mother or mother-in-law prior (DUIN)
...Receiving a overdraft notice prior to getting behind the wheel
...Drinking one too many cups of coffee

All of those things should be illegal.
Heck, just make everyone a criminal right from the start, under the notion that they will ultimately commit some crime at some time in the future.

That just saves so much more time.

Dontchathink?

123 posted on 01/14/2009 10:15:32 AM PST by woollyone ("When the tide is low, even a shrimp has its own puddle." - Vance Havner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ETL

I noticed the date on the article, and you’re right, it’s getting worse with more things to distract us. Cellphones are a big one. What I notice is that the worse the driving conditions are (i.e. rush hour, construction, weather) the MORE people are using cell phones. I also notice that a lot of drivers tend to drive like maniacs once they’ve gotten past a construction site or accident or something that backed traffic up and caused a delay. It’s as though they can somehow make up for the inconvenience by speeding, running lights, etc.


124 posted on 01/14/2009 10:35:27 AM PST by Hoffer Rand (There ARE two Americas: "God's children" and the tax payers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Badeye

We are all going to die someday somehow, unfortunately we don’t get to choose when or where or how.

If you don’t want to die certain ways, the only way to ensure that would to be totally refrain from participating in whatever event or avoid going to whatever place or abstain from doing whatever action.

Don’t want to die on the highway you would have to stop driving or riding with others on the highways or do away with driving for everyone!

So if you have a blowout or a belt break and you lose control and flip your vehicle and kill yourself - was that an accident or a wreck caused by your neglegence or that of the manufacturer of the tires or belts?

Laws are only made because our elected officials are too ignorant to find a real solution.


125 posted on 01/14/2009 10:53:07 AM PST by Kentuckian (Ignoring the obvious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Kentuckian

Nice theory for around the coffee table over cocktails.

Meanwhile, here in the real world, I don’t want idiot drivers distracted by bs from a hand held cell phone.


126 posted on 01/14/2009 11:05:05 AM PST by Badeye (There are no 'great moments' in Moderate Political History. Only losses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
No, actually it is people like you who are the problem; a person who believes that irresponsible acts which endanger other people while performing actions licensed by the state (a privelege) are a "right."

Everything you list is protected under the Constitution, most of all your property.

The Constitution is a wonderful document, you might try reading it sometime...as you claim to be a "federalist."

You would then know the difference between a "right" which is inherent and cannot be taken from "the people" and a "privelege" which is "granted by the state."
127 posted on 01/14/2009 1:44:42 PM PST by Sudetenland (Those diplomats serve best, who serve as cannon fodder to protect our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: shortstop

Yikes! I do apologize, I meant to link to comment #1, not your comment#2.


128 posted on 01/14/2009 1:46:45 PM PST by Sudetenland (Those diplomats serve best, who serve as cannon fodder to protect our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper
I never said a word about the red-herring you bring up. I do not believe that "speed kills."

I have always believed the contrary, having looked at the Autobahn in Germany and the traffic statistics there. As well as the states which used to have no speed limits.

Low speed limits on long stretches of highway are hazardous because they allow a drivers focus to wander under the illusion that they are "safe" at the posted speeds. That is also one reason I was against the national Jimmah Cahtah 55 mph speed limit.

Do try to stay on topic.
129 posted on 01/14/2009 1:52:11 PM PST by Sudetenland (Those diplomats serve best, who serve as cannon fodder to protect our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Pawtucket Patriot
You're right, they quit working when you pull off the road...I think. I say that because I have seen too many people walking to their cars not talking on their cell phones and the minute the get into their cars and start moving, they pull out their phones and start talking.
130 posted on 01/14/2009 2:02:30 PM PST by Sudetenland (Those diplomats serve best, who serve as cannon fodder to protect our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Kentuckian

I realized having a sneezing fit while driving is very dangerous.


131 posted on 01/14/2009 2:05:43 PM PST by HungarianGypsy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: CSM

I apologize for my ambiguity. I should have specified “in the car.”


132 posted on 01/14/2009 2:07:38 PM PST by Sudetenland (Those diplomats serve best, who serve as cannon fodder to protect our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Badeye

I really don’t want to go out while naked or on the crapper - but I’m not going to stop showering, changing close, having sex, or taking a dump.

If you want to be able to dictate what other do, then you should look for an actual democracy wherein a majority determines what is lawful and illegal.

In a Republic, hence the country we live in and the reason behind this site name - no one person or group of people or majority of people have any business nor right to tell anyone what can or cannot be done. Regardless of the subject so long as it does not compromise our freedom, our inalienable rights, or bring about the end of the world - you cannot determine what is or is not ok for others to do or refrain from doing.

Unfortunately we’ve lost site of that aspect of our nation and have an illegal democracy being projected to the public which has allowed misguided or downright corrupted officials to kill liberty. We have to revive it or it will be lost forever. The first place we can start is by realizing none of us have the right to tell others how to live.


133 posted on 01/14/2009 2:09:50 PM PST by Kentuckian (Ignoring the obvious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: woollyone

you forgot sneezing while driving. you’re eyes are closing. they have yet to outlaw knitting while driving or letting your pet monkey drive without a license.


134 posted on 01/14/2009 2:12:24 PM PST by HungarianGypsy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Kentuckian
But you are wrong sir...driving is an action which requires a license that can only be acquired from the state. It is not a "right" or a "freedom," it is a privelege that the state permits (note the word "permits"-as in licenses) you to engage in.

Driving is not "an unalienable right" it is a permitted action. THEREFORE, no one is abridging or "taking away" your rights, nor are they killing liberty," they are altering the terms under which they permit you to perform that act of privelege.

You still have the "right" to object, petition your government to refrain from taking this action and you still have the right to negate the contract represented by your license and stop driving if you are unhappy with the changes. You can still walk. The state does not have the power to license that.

Living in a "true democracy" or a "republic" (as we do) is completely irrelevent. It is not the form of government with which we are concerned or is cogent to the conversation, it is the action...which is a privelege.
135 posted on 01/14/2009 2:32:56 PM PST by Sudetenland (Those diplomats serve best, who serve as cannon fodder to protect our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: HungarianGypsy

good points!

...and can’t forget the trunk monkey...he tends to bounce around back there with the tire iron


136 posted on 01/14/2009 3:11:08 PM PST by woollyone ("When the tide is low, even a shrimp has its own puddle." - Vance Havner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: randog

“Speculation as to why that is...?”

Probably because conversations on the 2-way were much shorter and to the point.

You know what’s funny? Look at all the junk the cops have in their cars these days - they’re using a computer with a keyboard while they’re driving. Now that’s gotta be distracting. Just dialing a phone, even using the memory, while driving is very distracting - just those few seconds of glances at the phone that are required. Texting while driving is definitely stupid.


137 posted on 01/14/2009 6:31:50 PM PST by -YYZ- (Strong like bull, smart like ox.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: BlueMondaySkipper

Grass is greener. You’re right.


138 posted on 01/14/2009 6:39:16 PM PST by rightwingcrazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle

LOL!


139 posted on 01/14/2009 7:13:23 PM PST by visualops (portraits.artlife.us or visit my freeper page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Sudetenland; CSM
First, driving is a privilege, not a right.

You are mistaken.

Driving on American Roads is a Constitutional Right, not a State-Granted 'Privlege'

140 posted on 01/14/2009 7:13:51 PM PST by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 201-208 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