U.S. Teens Ingoring Texting-While-Driving Law

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

tester24

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2009
235
0
18,830
0
That's why we have lawyers. They get into an accident with you, you sopena their cell phone records see that they were texting, you take away their livelyhood. When they work at mcdonalds the rest of their life no one to blame them but themselves.

However this only works if they are by themselves, always that "reasonable doubt" that the other person could have been texting for them.
 

mr_tuel

Distinguished
May 23, 2009
178
0
18,630
0
STOP TEXTING WHILE DRIVING!! Try walking in a straight line while texting. Same thing happens on the road. STOP IT!!!!!

"blaming her actions on being 'bored and lonely.'

Then don't drive alone, or get off the road so I can get home safely!
 
G

Guest

Guest
all the cops have to do is if they see you driving erratically, pull you over and tell them you want to see their phone and the last text message sent will show the date and time. Easy way to prove if you were just texting while driving.
 

phantomtrooper

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2008
53
0
18,590
1
[citation][nom]XD_dued[/nom]It's not natural selection when both of you die when they crash into you XD[/citation]

Sure it is. You weren't fit enough so you got in a there way and they hit you. Survival of the fittest.
 

grillz9909

Distinguished
Sep 9, 2009
52
0
18,580
0
all the cops have to do is if they see you driving erratically, pull you over and tell them you want to see their phone and the last text message sent will show the date and time. Easy way to prove if you were just texting while driving.
If you're stupid enough to let them check it
 
G

Guest

Guest
When my friends send text messages to me, http://www.drivesafe.ly/ mobile application respond with a message I am not in a position to look at their messages. I am not distracted from what I do.
 

jitpublisher

Distinguished
May 16, 2006
221
0
18,860
13
I think the reason people ignore the laws first of all is because the fines are like a little slap on the hand. Not big enough to worry about, just an annoyance.
Most teenagers are not going to be responsible enough to care if they hit and kill someone. Some do, but most do not, it is a simple fact of life. As far as that goes, many adults don't care either. Yeah, I am talking about you idiot that is passing me at 10 mph over the posted speed limit, or blasting right on through the Crosswalk while people are trying to cross the street.....see it myself every single day! Most people simply do not give a rats ass if they run over someone or not. They are so self centered and involved in what they are doing, they don't care or notice what is going on around them, even while driving. It is a sad state of human nature these days.
Make a law that you cannot use a cell phone period while you are driving, and if you are caught, the fine is $2500. While they are at it, raise the fines on everything else through the roof as well.
A few tickets that actually hurt, and cause a little hardship, and people will start thinking a little bit more about what they are doing, in my humble opinion.

 

jacobdrj

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2005
490
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]jevon[/nom]It's a very similar situation to when wearing seat belts were made law. It was slow to catch on, lots of 'excuses' not to, ignoring the simple safety facts that we all pretty much know and accept today.[/citation]
No similarities at all. You are not more likely to hit another car because you don't wear a seat-belt. If anything, you are likely to drive more cautiously, as you know that if you get in an accident, you are more likely to die.
Texting while driving is reckless endangerment, and should be treated as such. Seat-belts should have been a personal choice, and may have caused as much harm as it prevented.
 

rtfm

Distinguished
Feb 21, 2007
111
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]PhantomTrooper[/nom]Sure it is. You weren't fit enough so you got in a there way and they hit you. Survival of the fittest.[/citation]

I hope that comment was a joke, if it wasn't I think your a selfish prick for thinking like that.
 

phantomtrooper

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2008
53
0
18,590
1
[citation][nom]rtfm[/nom]I hope that comment was a joke, if it wasn't I think your a selfish prick for thinking like that.[/citation]
yes it was a joke
 

jevon

Distinguished
Jun 6, 2004
22
0
18,560
0
No similarities at all. You are not more likely to hit another car because you don't wear a seat-belt. If anything, you are likely to drive more cautiously, as you know that if you get in an accident, you are more likely to die.
Texting while driving is reckless endangerment, and should be treated as such. Seat-belts should have been a personal choice, and may have caused as much harm as it prevented.
No similarities at all? I understand what you mean that no seat belt doesn't make you more likely to cause an accident. I'm talking about the similarities in public perception and adaptation of being more safe - it took a while for seat belts to catch on even after it was put into law, and it's going to be the same with cell phone/texting as we are seeing right now the majority still texting (just like the majority continued to ignore seat belts at first, until everyone realized how important they are).

Are you serious about saying seat belts should have been a personal choice? Or are you just saying that for arguments sake...? It had to happen, and there are many many stats out there even just from basic Google searches on how many lives seat belts save each year. Why NOT make it law to wear them? Unless you're a huge believer in Darwinism of course.

Then there's the whole aspect of you choosing not to wear your seat belt and are driving a lot more careful because of it (......) and some other careless person slams into you, sending you through your windshield...

I also wonder if you actually believe that seat belts cause as much harm as they prevent?? I mean seriously... how many lives and serious injuries have they prevented? Sure they can cause bruising and even cracked ribs, but the air bag is more likely to cause problem than your seat belt. And if you're in an accident significant enough that your seat belt is going to "harm" you then I'm pretty sure you won't be complaining because it's going to be saving you way more than hurting you.

Anyway sorry for such a long post, I'm just not really able to wrap my head around your arguments :)
 

jitpublisher

Distinguished
May 16, 2006
221
0
18,860
13
Yes, seat belts should have been a personal choice, not a law.
No one is arguing that seat belts do not save lives, but IT SHOULD BE MY CHOICE if I want to wear one or not. Me not wearing a seat belt poses no danger to anyone else but me. Car seats and restraints, seat belts, etc should be required for anyone not old enough to obtain a drivers license. Once you get a license, if you choose not to wear a seat belt, so what? If you go out and run into someone else, or someone runs into you, and get thrown out the windshield, and decapitated because you were not wearing a seat belt, I quite frankly do not give a fat rats behind, it was YOUR choice.
Now having said all that, let me say that I will not start my vehicle without a seat belt on. Not wearing a seat belt is one of the dumbest things anyone could possibly do, but it still should be MY CHOICE.
 

jacobdrj

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2005
490
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]jevon[/nom]No similarities at all? I understand what you mean that no seat belt doesn't make you more likely to cause an accident. I'm talking about the similarities in public perception and adaptation of being more safe - it took a while for seat belts to catch on even after it was put into law, and it's going to be the same with cell phone/texting as we are seeing right now the majority still texting (just like the majority continued to ignore seat belts at first, until everyone realized how important they are).Are you serious about saying seat belts should have been a personal choice? Or are you just saying that for arguments sake...? It had to happen, and there are many many stats out there even just from basic Google searches on how many lives seat belts save each year. Why NOT make it law to wear them? Unless you're a huge believer in Darwinism of course. Then there's the whole aspect of you choosing not to wear your seat belt and are driving a lot more careful because of it (......) and some other careless person slams into you, sending you through your windshield...I also wonder if you actually believe that seat belts cause as much harm as they prevent?? I mean seriously... how many lives and serious injuries have they prevented? Sure they can cause bruising and even cracked ribs, but the air bag is more likely to cause problem than your seat belt. And if you're in an accident significant enough that your seat belt is going to "harm" you then I'm pretty sure you won't be complaining because it's going to be saving you way more than hurting you.Anyway sorry for such a long post, I'm just not really able to wrap my head around your arguments[/citation]
You are very perceptive: I am playing a bit of Devil's Advocate. I do believe that texting while driving is a different case, and I understand what people are referring to regards to the behavioral modifications. I am also an avid believer in the seat-belt laws because, while it may cause people to be less cautious when driving, it unfortunately does effect other people indirectly because of the sad state of insurance law, and the fact that if someone refuses to wear a seat-belt, my premium invariably goes up.
But I do think it needed to be stated, out loud, that there is more to the behavioral modification than just the law, and that there is a very real possibility that laws like this cost us more, in money and lives, because of unforeseen externalities. I think this texting offense is not right as it will be enforced. Texting is far worse than speeding, yet even though it is, by definition, reckless driving, cops can't just pull people over for doing it, where before this piece of legislation, perhaps a precedent could have been set for strong litigation for an offender.
 

okibrian

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2009
221
0
18,830
0
[citation][nom]PhantomTrooper[/nom]Sure it is. You weren't fit enough so you got in a there way and they hit you. Survival of the fittest.[/citation]
Yeah, you are at a stop light in heavy traffic (cannot move, bumper to bumper) and some ass rams into the back of you because he was texting killing your new born who in in the car seat in the back. Thath's natural selection, right? DUMB ASS!!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
G Streaming Video & TVs 3
G Streaming Video & TVs 11
G Streaming Video & TVs 82
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 47
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 43
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 10
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 76
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 35
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 60
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 50
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 100
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 62
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 43
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 96
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 68
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 158
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 33
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 98
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 68
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 113

ASK THE COMMUNITY