Feds Now Want Nationwide Ban on All Portable Electronic Devices While Driving
- Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:13pm by
Liz Klimas
- Print »
- Email »
WASHINGTON (The Blaze/AP) — Many states have already banned use of hand-held cellphones while driving, but they are now being urged by the National Transportation Safety Board to ban use of all cellphones — meaning both hand-held and hands-free — except in emergencies, along with other portable electronic devices like iPods.
The recommendation, unanimously agreed to by the five-member board, applies to hands-free and hand-held phones and significantly exceeds any existing state laws restricting texting and cellphone use behind the wheel.
The recommendation posed to all 50 states and the District of Columbia would apply to all portable devices “other than those designed to support the driving task”.
The board made the recommendation in connection with a deadly highway pileup in Missouri last year. The board said the initial collision in the accident near Gray Summit, Mo., was caused by the inattention of a 19 year-old-pickup driver who sent or received 11 texts in the 11 minutes immediately before the crash.
The pickup, traveling at 55 mph, collided into the back of a tractor truck that had slowed for highway construction. The pickup was rear-ended by a school bus that overrode the smaller vehicle. A second school bus rammed into the back of the first bus.
The pickup driver and a 15-year-old student on one of the school buses were killed. Thirty-eight other people were injured in the Aug. 5, 2010, accident near Gray Summit, Mo.
About 50 students, mostly members of a high school band from St. James, Mo., were on the buses heading to the Six Flags St. Louis amusement park.
The accident is a “big red flag for all drivers,” NTSB chairman Deborah Hersman said at a meeting to determine the cause of the accident and make safety recommendations.
It’s not possible to know from cell phone records if the driver was typing, reaching for the phone or reading a text at the time of the crash, but it’s clear he was manually, cognitively and visually distracted, she said.
“Driving was not his only priority,” Hersman said. “No call, no text, no update is worth a human life.”
The board is expected to recommend new restrictions on driver use of electronic devices behind the wheel. While the NTSB doesn’t have the power to impose restrictions, it’s recommendations carry significant weight with federal regulators and congressional and state lawmakers.
Missouri had a law banning drivers under 21 years old from texting while driving at the time of the crash, but wasn’t aggressively enforcing the ban, board member Robert Sumwalt said.
“Without the enforcement, the laws don’t mean a whole lot,” he said.
Investigators are seeing texting, cell phone calls and other distracting behavior by operators in accidents across all modes of transportation with increasing frequency. It has become routine for investigators to immediately request the preservation of cell phone and texting records when they launch an investigation.
In the last few years the board has investigated a commuter rail accident that killed 25 people in California in which the train engineer was texting; a fatal marine accident in Philadelphia in which a tugboat pilot was talking on his cellphone and using a laptop; and a Northwest Airlines flight that flew more than 100 miles past its destination because both pilots were working on their laptops.
The board has previously recommended bans on texting and cell phone use by commercial truck and bus drivers and beginning drivers, but it has stopped short of calling for a ban on the use of the devices by adults behind the wheel of passenger cars.
The problem of texting while driving is getting worse despite a rush by states to ban the practice, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said last week. In November, Pennsylvania became the 35th state to forbid texting while driving.
About two out of 10 American drivers overall – and half of drivers between 21 and 24 – say they‘ve thumbed messages or emailed from the driver’s seat, according to a survey of more than 6,000 drivers by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
And what’s more, many drivers don‘t think it’s dangerous when they do it — only when others do, the survey found.
At any given moment last year on America’s streets and highways, nearly 1 in every 100 car drivers was texting, emailing, surfing the Web or otherwise using a handheld electronic device, the safety administration said. And those activities spiked 50 percent over the previous year.
The agency takes an annual snapshot of drivers’ behavior behind the wheel by staking out intersections to count people using cellphones and other devices, as well as other distracting behavior.
Driver distraction wasn‘t the only significant safety problem uncovered by NTSB’s investigation of the Missouri accident. Investigators said they believe the pickup driver was suffering from fatigue that may have eroded his judgment at the time of the accident. He had an average of about five and a half hours of sleep a night in the days leading up to the accident and had had fewer than five hours of sleep the night before the accident, they said.
The pickup driver had no history of accidents or traffic violations, investigators said.
Investigators also found significant problems with the brakes of both school buses involved in the accident. A third school bus sent to a hospital after the accident to pick up students crashed in the hospital parking lot when that bus’ brakes failed.
However, the brake problems didn’t cause or contribute to the severity of the accident, investigators said.
Another issue involved the difficulty passengers had exiting the first school bus after the accident. The bus’ front and rear bus doors were unusable after the accident – the front door because the front bus was on top of the tractor truck cab and too high off the ground, and the rear door because the front of the bus had intruded five feet into the rear of the first bus.
Passengers had to exit through an emergency window, but the raised latch on the window kept catching on clothing as students tried to escape, investigators said. Exiting was further slowed because the window design required one person to hold the window up in order for a second person to crawl through, they said.
It was critical for passengers to exit as quickly as possible because a large amount of fuel puddled underneath the bus was a serious fire hazard, investigators said.
“It could have been a much worse situation if there was a fire,” Donald Karol, the NTSB’s highway safety director, said.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 688 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 537 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 466 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 374 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 334 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 308 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 316 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 216 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 301 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 308 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (328)
Bill Wallace
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:45pm“No call, no text, no update is worth a human life.”
I would use the same reasoning in an anti-illegal immigration slogan.
“No job is worth a human life.”
That is the reason behind illegal immigration, is it not? A job. A better way of life for the people left back in their homeland?
How many car accidents involve illegal immigrants? How many lives lost due to violence involving illegal immigrants?
It is not worth even one life. Sorry. Find a job or fix your own nation before you bring your problems to my doorstep.
Report Post »Faith1029
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:58pmI absolutley agree with them on this one. I’ve seen many people on their cell almost causing accidents. In my city, three teenage girls were riding around and the teen driver was on her cell. She slammed into another care and they were killed. What is so pressing that we can’t wait until we get out of the car to make a call? People can’t even shop without talking on the phone. Ridiculous! I am all for this ban and I don‘t care if it is the government that’s getting involved. I don’t see this as a punishment at all. I don’t want to lose my life because of the stupidty of someone else. I hope it passes. We did without Cells before and I’m sure we can do it again.
Report Post »jiggasparks
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:10pmI really dont like that i am being classed as incapable of driving while using a portable device. I have had a cell phone for 10 years, and i use it to call, text and email, and i have lived in california that whole time, i have yet to even come close ot hitting someone or being in an wreck. You people who agree with this make me sick. I am really sick of the whole, this is to make you safer, how about if i am using my device and i hit someone 3x or 10x my fine or jail time. I should have known, if i kill someone, manslaughter but to me this is just another reason for the police to pull people over for “Using a cell phone” and who will dictate an emergency? All you people claim to be about smaller government but when this comes along you are all for it. Dont you realize what is going on here?
Report Post »Faith1029
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:17pmJIGG: “All you people claim to be about smaller government but when this comes along you are all for it. Dont you realize what is going on here?”
You know, sometimes it’s not about conspiracy. Sometimes it’s just common sense.
GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:26pm@Jig
You’re exactly correct, and Jill’s answer to you only made your point stronger.
Most people don’t want actual smaller government, most people want government small where it affects them personally, but by golly, they’re all about big government, you know, the kind where an unelected bureaucracy is suggesting mandates which are totally unconstitutional, at precisely those points where they get annoyed with others.
Because you see, it’s all about common sense. Of course it’s common sense for an unelected bureaucracy to create law on the fly, without oversight or our ability to say no. That’s the American Way after all. But hey, at least CONGRESS isn’t making a law against freedom of speech (which applies when you’re in your own property kids, sorry).
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:26pmNot Jill, Faith, sorry, don’t know where I got “Jill” at.
Report Post »JRook
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:29pmPeople this is exactly what happens when Corporate Lobbyists run Washington. This has nothing to do with safety or our well being although they might be secondary benefits. It has all to do with Auto Insurance companies reducing their risk and payouts. Of course don’t expect a cross the board reduction in premiums. The profit gains will be dispersed to the CEO and perhaps a trickle to the investors.
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:39pm@JRook
A corporate lobbyist cannot cast a single vote.
Once again we see a Leftist absolve government bureaucrats of any wrong doing for their direct actions, while blaming the actions of those who have no way to create law.
Stunning.
Report Post »Truthbeliever2
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:39pm@FAITH
I too is the smart…
Report Post »kentuckypatriot
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:41pmhate to say this, but the ban has already started, well on Jan 1 it will. My husband is a truck driver ( 18 wheeler ), and beginning Jan 1, all truck drivers, who are Haz Mat endorsed ( like he is ) will be banned from using ANY hand held device unless they are on break. This includes at a stop light, pulled on the side of the road, anything. If he gets caught, he gets a fine up to 2500 bucks and the company can get a fine up to 11K! He is allowed hands free, blue tooth, etc but it’s only a matter of time….
Report Post »watchtheotherhand
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:06pmI find it interesting that this is all done in the name of “safety”. I suggest that it is merely an acceptable cover to continue to grab more and more control over our lives. No doubt that it may in fact prevent some accidents but I get so tired of humanity that thinks we should live in a bubble where accidents never happen and if they do we must pass laws further restricting people’s freedoms. How about eating and driving? Will that be next? What about being tired and driving? It is just becoming so ridiculous. Do I feel for the families of those killed absolutely. Terrible tragedy. But it seems like our reflex to any accident is to assign blame and then pass laws. My question how can these laws be enforced regularly. Will my private phone records be checked if I am in an accident? I don’t like this big brother we know what is best for you government. We have become a nation of enslaved regulated people and because it has happened slowly and under the premise of safety not a single battle has occurred to make it happen. Truly sad when will people stop looking to the government for salvation and start using some common sense?
Report Post »AhLeahIris
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:15pmThis is one more dang good reason even a plurality of Democrats now think big government is the greatest threat: http://wp.me/p1HGwx-1Ib
Report Post »Baddoggy
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:33pmGet ready to see the rise of road deaths from people being run over while pulled off to the side of the road to use their phone. A bad law like this will make more deaths. Guarantee it.
Screw you, catch me if you can coppers! I will use my phone as i drive. I will probably not text and drive, but its my right to. Screw the law.
Report Post »newt
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:47pm@bill wallace…stay on topic
Report Post »Hobbs57
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:18pmI tried to make this argument in class, let’s see how it goes here. Statistics say that 16,000 deaths are caused by texting and driving, drinking and driving has caused 11,000 ( roughly). If a person is caught drinking and driving, they lose their license for a year, pay fines, and in some states have to have a machine placed on their car. The penalties increase for repeat offenders. I know people are going to respond that one is out of control when drinking and driving, unable to respond. I beg to differ. I had 3 Dui’s and not one was an accident. I been sober for nearly a decade, but my point is, why is it texting seems as any less than drinking alcohol, especially if more lives are lost ? I understand that number of people driving and texting is far greater, but maybe not. That is only a guess. Imagine how many people drive home from the bar who if for some reason pulled over, would breath over the low bac…. Anyways, I am just bringing this up for discussion. I love to hear people say it is ok to text and kill people but for a person to drink and do it is just outrageous. What’s the difference. hahaha just sayin
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:19pmWell, if we can’t talk while on a hands-free device, then we can’t talk at all, while driving.
That would include amongst other passengers.
I don’t know when people are going to stand up and say enough.
Maybe never.
It is both pathetic and sad, beyond comprehension.
Will you people wake up and realize our constitutional republic is gone, and the “UNITED STATES”
is a corporation, run behind the scenes by the U.N. and IMF ?
They will carry out their agendas regardless of public opinion or the will of the people.
The real owners of the “UNITED STATES” behind those curtains, are the global elite.
This is slow tyranny !!!!
Want proof of corruption?
Here is a recent, blatant example:
National Defense Authorization Act #1867 S
Just voted on the senate floor 93 yes to 7 No, for a bill to detain american citizens for political “belligerence” indefinately, without warrants, proof, or a trial.
Detainees can also be tortured and executed.
This is another peice of evidence that America really has been under martial law and in a state of emergency since 1861.
remember ‘Trading with the enemies act’ ?
A FDR delclaration that American “civilians” are enemy combatants.
This clue will lead you in the right direction.
Print this information and/or copy to CDs/DvDs before they control the internet and remove this type of information.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlCs7u1ihws
Report Post »jungle J
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:30pmgood comment.
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:34pm* American “citizens” are enemy combatants.
Report Post »Old Truckers
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:34pmIt is a shame we need a law on this. Wouldn’t it be great if everyone had the common sense to put their phones away while driving? How did we get to the point where we cannot get rid of the cell phone?
Report Post »Libertarian
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:39pm@Faith1029,
This law is unconstitutional. It is a state right issue.
It is sad that people who watch Glenn Beck still do not understand the constitution. Mr. Beck has drilled the constitution into anybody who watches, so you either don’t watch/listen Glenn Beck or you don’t LISTEN. You reasoning is liberal, utility over philosophy in complete disregard of the US constitution.
It is why the United States is in the place it is.
God bless
Report Post »Ruler4You
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:52pmIf I’m not mistaken, “OnStar” “IS” a hands free electronic communication device.
Are they going to start removing radios. too?
Report Post »NEAF
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:56pmYes, Yes. Those evil phones causing all those accidents. Thanks to this new regulation no more accidents. Thanks to DUI laws all accidents with alcohol related suddenly stop. Now, we need one for; eating while driving, makeup while driving, talking to the person sit it next to you while driving, picking your nose while driving, fart while driving, listen music while driving, write a check while driving, turning on or off the windshield wipers while driving, look the rear mirror while driving, change clothing while driving, etc… Thank you big brother, I am feeling more safer thanks to you.
Report Post »US_SOLDIER
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 6:03pmGovernment has a duty and responsibility to protect us from oursleves. We are but feeble ignorant masses who only seek to harm ourselves with drugs, alcohol and prescription drug abuses. Now we claim the right to use a device in the privacy of our own vehicles with no reperrcutions or interference from our masters. The sooner we all realize we are but slaves and bow down to our masters the easier the transition will be from the greatest empire the world has ever seen to third world enslavement camp (sarcasm)
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 6:25pmThese people are pathetic. Go the ‘recommendation’ link highlighted in this article.
Report Post »First conclusion states that “the Board” determined that 6 factors did NOT cause the accident, so that means in their progressive/socialist, feeble minds, they belive it to be a prioi assuption or ultimate fact that there are ONLY 7 possible reasons for this.
No, morons. I can name hundreds of OTHER factors that could have caused this accident.
Moreover, note the amount of agencies this federal monster has created.
These “safety boards” are the same people who love semantics.
They mandate seatbelts because 54% of fatalities are NOT wearing their seatbelt.
They probably could not mandate this if they stated that 46% of fatalities WERE wearing a seatbelt.
damn near 50%-50% to me. I am sure that this “board” and their statistics are bi-partisan
sources.
If I can’t take a chance on a 46%-54% scenario, then where do we draw a line?
Can I not skydive because it increases my percentage of death by 8% ?
Can I no longer ride a motorcycle because I may have a 8% increase in dying, as opposed to driving a government mandated car ? ( installed with cameras to see if I am induging in criminal, nefarious activities by talking to my friend in the car )
txn4justice
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 6:32pm@Bill Wallace
I agree.
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 7:10pm*a priori assumption
Take note that the “board” found that if these vehicles had cameras installed in them they could then determine who was at fault, and why.
Report Post »That means that this case will be used as precedent to make ALL vehicles on the road install cameras.
They will also make the case this reduces insurance freud. That is a advantageous aspect to cameras, but the real clandestine ,nefarious reason is because the global elite love to monitor and control their factotums.They love to watch.
Look at ‘Horace the all-seeing eye’ on the back of the federal reserve note.
Also look at the Great seal and the Rothschild’s family crest and tell me that it is a coincidence.
They want to know why you are not earning the 640,000 dollars that you were pledged to the federal reserve private bank for.
You were pledged as collateral due to the Bankruptcy of 1933.
Birth certificates became law in all states in 1933 and Social Security in 1936.
These are securities (bonds) for the creditors to hold. ( Social SECURITY )
The federal reserve and the International courts came to ‘accord and satisfaction’, crediting 640 grand off the debt to the ‘Corporation of the United States’ for each of it’s citizens, under the agreement that these Bonds ( You and I ) would work and pay taxes (debt Payments to the fed).
That was before the 1944 bretton woods agreement, when things got even worse.
Do your history people. I have given you clues to go on.
ProbIemSoIver
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 7:14pm*off the debt OF the ‘Corporation
Report Post »trench99
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 7:15pmI was thinking the exact same thing!!! Who the hell do these people think they are!
Report Post »Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 7:28pmListening to the report on Shepard Smith, if you have a handsfree device already in your car (i.e. Onstar, a GM product) then you can keep it and use it. But if it is a device you actually can grab, then it is forbidden. So why is the Govt. Motors OK??? Because that will increase GM sales and put more money in the pockets of the Unions. Follow the money on this, it’s not about safety, someone is getting a lot of money out of this, probably the car companies. And just think, now you will have to have a seperate hands free phone installed in your car, that is added money, oh and I am sure they will have some sort of tracking device. I will now take off my tinfoil hat.
Report Post »your sensei
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 9:01pmHere’s the difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives live in the land of symbols, in this case stock photos of squeaky faced automotons who aren’t part of the real world. Liberals see the world fro what it truly is – good and bad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J8QX6XVJq8&feature=related
But hey, don’t let that worry, you, Lawrence Welk is just about to start. They’re doing a whole hour on State Fair.
You wanna be a danger to yourself go right ahead. But if I see you texting, Im gonna pin you into a parking place and leave you there. I’l be the one in the Hot Pink Hummer.
Report Post »TEXAS-T
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 10:02pmIf the “NTSB” wants to save lives, stop the sale of “cold” beer in the stores. In my 15 years as a firefight, responding to wrecks, where alcohol was the cause, than radio or phone use. Cut the cold beer sales and cut the number of drunks that pick up a cold six pack or two for the drive home. Just set outside any corner store and take note of how many come out with a can in a bag. You will be suppressed!
Report Post »Wolf
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 11:25pmSo now we’re going to ban cell phone useage while driving. Interesting. Will there be a law prohibiting speaking with passengers next? Or even having passengers?
Report Post »People who agree with foolish laws restricting someone‘s activities don’t understand the first thing about freedom and personal rights or responsibilities. So ready and willing to pass laws restricting how we behave, but not the least interested in teaching children they don’t need to spend all their time texting or talking on the phone. Oh, right: we can’t teach them something we do ourselves, so let’s just make a law against it, let the cops and courts worry about it.
Fools.
Learn what personal freedom really is, then live it, don’t legislate it.
Mil-Dot
Posted on December 14, 2011 at 5:33amJust because young punks have no brains or sense of responsibility don’t take it out on the rest of us. Start prosecuting people and dispensing harsh penalties to people that hurt others because of their texting addiction. Just like you do people who drive drunk or impaired. But, keep the big govt goons out of my face. If you want to hassle somebody, hassle those that are causing the problems.
Report Post »chazman
Posted on December 14, 2011 at 6:35am… I agree, but once again, the FED needs to stay the HELL out of our lives!! Let the states handle it while the FED stays busy shrinking it’s bloated size!!!
Report Post »americansfightingforcommonsense
Posted on December 14, 2011 at 7:26amThis doesn’t surprise me at all. This administration is doing anything and everything they can to KILL small businesses. This is no different. By doing away with cell phones in the car you will shut down productivity and destroy business. Wake up people we are under attack by Obama and his Cronies. Next thing will be no more fast food, because it is too dangerous for you to eat a hamburger and drive. Hot coffee might spill in your lap.
Report Post »Get real, there are inherent risks in everything we do and driving is no different. Under this logic of TOO DISTRACTING you then would need to do away with radios, kids, gps, pen and paper, makeup, etc…… In cars. This POTUS must go. He is destroying this country. Go Michelle Bachman!!!!!!!
poorrichard09
Posted on December 14, 2011 at 7:56amIs this just an 0bamao admin DIVERSION from the real legislation such as being able to arrest and detain US citizens as terrorists without legal recourse?? How the hell is this a nat‘l gov’t issue?
Report Post »WATCH THE OTHER HAND!
@leftfighter
Posted on December 14, 2011 at 9:46am@JRook
Corporate lobbyists are a Red Herring.
I’m sure Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, etc. all have lobbyists in D.C. too. This isn’t about the lobby, it’s about control.
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on December 14, 2011 at 2:36pm@americansfightingforcommonsense
Go Bachmann?
The same laws would be passed whether their is a Democratic left-wing socialist like Obama, or a “conservative” Republican like Bush.
I bet you didn’t know that they were cousins.
One day you will look back on some of your transcripts and realize how uninformed you were.
I keep trying to tell people that these ‘politicians” (about 95%) are NOT politicians.
The ‘Corporation of the United States’ will carry out their agendas ( global elite initiatives )
regardless of the will of the people.
They will make sure not to move too fast, for they would be detected, and overthrown.
They are moving fast now, because they see Americans are pushovers, and will accept nearly anything they are told to believe, or do.
Did you not see that the Unconstitutional senate bill passed on the floor 93 Yea to 7 Nay ?
Do you seriously believe there are 93 progressives and 7 Conservatives in the senate ????
Bachmann signed an extension of the Patriot Act. Just another declaration that the U.S. is under emergency powers and martial law.
We have been under matial law and emergency powers since 1861.
How do you think a president signs executive orders ? He can only do so under emergency powers.
The Constitution’s first Article and first Section stares that no laws should be made outside of congress.
Once you read this link, you will want to change your old posts.
http://teamlaw.net/history.htm
Report Post »ltb
Posted on December 15, 2011 at 10:19amThis is one federal law I would support. Most people don’t know how to drive when they are paying attention, let alone when they’re yakking on the phone, especially teenagers.
Report Post »microace
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:44pmSo let’s ban cupholders, radios, rear view mirrors, girls jogging down the street…I can think of a million things to ban…what we should be banning is the ability of the Federal Government to dictate to our personal lives.
Report Post »SavingtheRepublic.com
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:53pmCmon man there is no comparison btwn those things and ppl messing around on their phones. Ive lst count at the number of wrecks have avoided b/c of some fool on a phone. There is a difference it is a problem.
Oh take note of what I said here folks wreck not accident WRECK. Accident is a baby knocking a bottle off a high chair, accident is someone slipping on ice/ wet floor. You or I or someone we know getting T-boned by some dolt texting or on a phone is NOT an accident.
Ohio Girl
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:53pmBecause the American people are like children and the government is our parents. We are not smart enought to know what is right and what is wrong. I know that there are those that do whatever and not even think of the consequences. The few makes up the whole. What up is down.
Report Post »Detroit paperboy
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:55pmHow bout a ban on the Federal Criminal Gang, or cut it by 75%… now that is what i can support !!!! HOOORAY!!!!!!
Report Post »NeverSurrender
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:57pmYou’re forgetting passengers. Is it more distracrting for me to talk on mu bluetooth with my eyes on the road or to my passenger as I turn every few seconds to look them in the face?
Report Post »V-MAN MACE
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:58pmIt’s just a recommendation. So there is no law to enforce.
Tell them that you recommend that they kiss your ass.
Report Post »@leftfighter
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:59pmLet’s think of a few more things they can ban:
- Hot dog venodrs in bikinis on the side of the road,
- Children in the back seat.
- Anyone speaking in the car.
- Radios
- Make-up
- drivers with A.D.D.
- Squirrel!
Can anyone else think of anything that can distract a driver on the road?
BAN IT ALL! It’s the only solution to *ANYTHING!*
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:11pm@left
Report Post »The objective is to minimize the number of distractions BECAUSE so many of them exist. You can’t control hot dog vendors in bikinis, but you can drive without talking on the phone. Unfortunately, many people don’t, and they put my life in danger. That’s unconstitutional.
TexJoy
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:14pmOh and by all means we must ban passengers in the car lest we may hold a conversation with them!!!
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:38pm@Firebrand
Show me your right to safety. Thanks in advance.
Report Post »PPMStudios
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:55pm@leftfighter
LOL
Last weekend I counted 40 drivers in Denver NOT using their turn indicators to either change lanes or turn a corner. As I went by, I noticed ONLY 2 who were not on a cell phone. So 2 out of 40 were just too lazy or too stupid to use their turn signals…. The rest were busy yacking on the phone when they should have been concentrating on handling the TON of equipment they were controlling.
Leave the bikini girls please!! I do agree with the hands-free phone though….
Report Post »JohnQTaxpayer
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:58pmjust do not take the TV out of my car, that is where I draw the line
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:23pmWhen i‘m driving I listen to talk radio so i don’t get drowsy. But at night there is no decent talk radio so I listen to comedy albums on my MP3 player. I don‘t get drowsy when I’m laughing.
So what increases safety more, letting me chose a device that helps keep me alert of forcing me to drive with no “distractions”?
Government is stupid by nature. People who support this rule are stupid by choice.
Report Post »kansas hawks 3
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:27pmI agree, What about upholding the law of speeding or tailgating or agressive driving don’t the government think they kill people to?? I don’t see any cops pulling over people going around me and they are doing 80 or over. Stop the lawbreakers and make the tickets stick don’t let them plea down and get away with breaking the law. And big government stay the HELL out of my personal vehicle
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:31pm“Can anyone else think of anything that can distract a driver on the road?”
@Leftfighter,
I find pretty women in other cars distracting. Make them dress in burkas! That wil fix it.
Bumber stickers that annoy me are distracting. Ban them!
Cars that are way cooler than mine are distracting. Everyone must drive the same style olive drap Taurus’s (or it it Taurii?) No one must stick oput, so that we can focus on our driving.
Life is so much simpler when we PLAN IT. Thank you Big Brother, I mean Uncle, Sam
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:05pmI’ve already been involved in two accidents where the driver admitted he and she were on the phone and texting when they hit me. Thankfully..the damage was minor but the potential for a serious accident is there. People are irresponsible with their cell phones this is clear. Reason is beyond them. Common sense is alien to them. Either ban cell phone use while driving or impose VERY harsh penalties but something needs to shake up the somnambulistic population that spends most of it‘s day with it’s head to the floor and thumbs clicking incessantly.
Report Post »@leftfighter
Posted on December 14, 2011 at 9:31am@Firebrand
No sir, YOU are the one that’s missing the point. If you ban one distraction you have to ban them all.
Today, it’s cell phones (which, when operated hands-free, is no more distracting than someone in the passenger seat), tomorrow it’s bikini hot dog stands, then it’s you.
Never beg for chains to be put on other people. They always come back to bind you.
Now, as to me putting your life in danger, please show me the clause making that unconstitutional. Is that in the Good and Plenty Clause?
Report Post »Wolf
Posted on December 14, 2011 at 3:38pm@Savingtherepublic… wrong. Except for texting, there’s no difference in talking on a bluetooth than talking to a passenger- and probably less problem since there’s no inclination to look at the blue tooth while talking into it.
Report Post »This law is about control, not about saving lives. And Ace is correct: next they’ll be banning girls jogging and women with baby strollers crossing the streets. Anyone who thinks the government is ‘concerned’ about saving lives hasn’t looked at the abortion counts lately. And if abortion doesn’t concern them, then they’re not concerned about life at all so their opinion about banning cell phones and driving is moot.
PPMStudios
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:44pmUmm, I do agree that ‘hands-free’ is the way to go.
But, the Fed withholding highway funds is over reaching isn’t it?
Report Post »CatB
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:06pmThey are nothing but a bunch of thugs .. States should not be threatened by the Feds!
Report Post »Detroit paperboy
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:40pmban hot chicks jogging, that distracts the helll outa me ; )))…..
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:35pmI prefer “hands off” to “hands free”. Hands off my freedom while driving, big government!
Report Post »saranda
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 5:34pm@isles – your idea of freedom puts you in line for a Darwin award. I love to hear of people either too stupid or too stubborn to accept this kind of common sense change.
Report Post »US_SOLDIER
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 6:08pmIf I was governor, scary thought, I would with hold funds sent to the fed every year that they attempted to threaten me to pass some crap in my own state. See how they like being intimidated. Or even use this threat and if they say they are going to with hold “X” amount of dollars if I dont pass the legislation they want then “X” amount of dollars doesnt go to the feds next year and I work on my own highways. Sometimes simplicity is paramount
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 6:40pmThanks, Saranda, for reminding me that without the government telling me what to do I would be unable to do things safely.
All hail the powerful Oz!
Report Post »ColorMeRedd
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:43pmIt all comes down to two things. Stupid people do stupid things, and sometimes accidents happen. When will these progressive big-government goons realize that no matter how many laws or regulations are in place, you will never be able to take the humans out of humanity. You must simply accept that. People sometimes make poor decisions, and sometimes those decisions effect other people. Sad, but true. And what makes you think that a law will stop people from doing what they want? If so, the drug war would have been won decades ago, and nobody would ever drink and drive. Probably would be just another state-run fund-raiser like DWI’s.
Report Post »This_Individual
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:43pmThe fed can go eff themselves.
Report Post »@leftfighter
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:00pmThat’s a general statement that you can apply to just about anything these days…
Report Post »This_Individual
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:14pmDamn straight hard charger! Semper Fi!
Report Post »FB247
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:43pmWhat’s next. You can’t talk to any passengers in your vehicle while driving. No singing to the radio. How about voice activated car commands, like your GPS unit or radio. Laws will not stop stupidity, only take freedoms away.
Report Post »Stephen1
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:42pmYou know, it seems like every day the Federal Government takes someother freedom or Right away from the people or the States. Oh, wait, it is every day.
Do as Obama pointed out, cling to your guns and God!
Report Post »Dougral Supports Israel
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:42pmThis should be left to the states, the Federal government has no business intervening in this issue.
Report Post »RoqueGerig
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:17pm!!!!!!!!!BINGOo!!!!!!!!
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:40pmHow about a ban on bans until we get through 2012? Ban the banners! F the fed and the Tahoes they drove in on while using their nextel/att phones. Just like gun laws, zero common sense at work but that is not a prerequisite for federal employment. How about we ban stupidity and sloth at the post office? Ban activist judges and drunk driving illegals? Ban liberal pc language and illogical economics plans? Ban spending like a drunk gay sailor in San Fran while being in debt and beyond broke?
Report Post »fatsomann
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:50pmLove it.
Report Post »Brooke Lorren
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:07pmI think that they did that on an episode of “Martha Speaks”, a show about a talking dog, once.
Report Post »whosafraidofspookydude1
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:28pmyup Martha speaks is on Propaganda Broadcast System
Report Post »stillshocked
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:39pmIt may be hard to prove…but too many accidents and deaths happen with cell use by the driver…I vote we OUTLAW it all nationally!
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:47pmYour vote against freedom of speech and freedom of action is duly noted. Thanks for playing, and may posterity forget you were ever our countryman.
P.S. – liberty isn’t about statistics and safety. The world is unsafe, get used to it.
Report Post »NeverSurrender
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:56pmWhy don’t we also outlaw “not getting a good 8 hours of sleep” before driving. Since fatigue causes just as many accidents as cell phone use. (I get my stats from the same plce you got your stat)!!!
Report Post »fcbs46
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:01pmYes we should give up our freedom so that a few (dummies that couldn’t drive before the cell came around) can make all of us throw away our cell phones.
Report Post »In Portland Oregon a delivery driver bent over to grab a coke cup that spilled. He killed a lady and narrowly missed her two kids. A lady, one frosty morning,in front of me bend down into the other seat to pick up her make up (no one killed ) she could have easily kill some one on the sidewalk.
Lets outlaw everything in a car but the driver and lock up the passengers in a steel cocoon.
Lets have steel doors and alarms be made mandatory on apartments and houses, lets make riding a horse without a helmet and a bungee cord against the law. You keep going and we (the country ) sound like a bunch of little girls wanting everything to be SASE.
@leftfighter
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:07pmThen they can also ban…
- Hot dog vendors in bikinis on the side of the road,
- Children in the back seat.
- Anyone speaking in the car.
- Radios
- Make-up
- drivers with A.D.D.
- Squirrel!
BAN IT ALL! Government answers are the only solution to *ANYTHING!*
What a sad, pathetic being you are, to beg for others to be put in chains that the government will eventually use to bind you.
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:08pmHow about we ban all communication not vetted by your local govt watcher/handler? Maybe get an ok from your shop steward before calling home to see if anything neccesary from store?
Report Post »SoupSandwich
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:34pmElvis died on the crapper but I doubt you use a bed pan. Please uncle, tell me how to live. Please oh please uncle, show me how to live like an over weight, under educated, over paid, under worked fed employee.
Report Post »pmjr-jones
Posted on December 15, 2011 at 7:48pmI think some ceo thought this up to keep us from knowing what the economy is doing
Report Post »Rob
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:38pmSure, let Big Brother take more control…. anyone that isn’t afraid of the growth of government is foolish.
Report Post »MangoT21
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:36pmhow’s this any business of the federal government? shouldn’t this be state or local?
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:43pmWorse than that, when is this the business of a *federal bureaucracy*, not even Congress, but a friggin’ bureaucracy?
Czars and bureaucrats. And people still crow on as if we have government constrained with the Constitution.
Report Post »phillipwgirard
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:06pmI agree with you both, Phil
Report Post »Melvin Spittle
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:35pmIt’s about time! All audio playing devices need to be banned as well to include distracting girlfriends and wives! I’m sure wives alone have contributed to at least a couple of fender-benders last year and maybe an injury or death! Anything that can break your attention while driving should be banned. We all know that your eyes should remain on the road with the exception of quick scanning of your instruments and mirrors. Don’t forget hand position and properly adjusted seats and mirrors! Every time I see someone driving with mirrors out of adjustment, I get the urge to grab my AR-15 and light them up! Chewing gum while driving is another of my pet peeves even though it is not a distraction, it is just rude!
Report Post »Defending Truth
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:34pmDoesn’t talking on your phone (or texting) constitute “speech?” And if so, wouldn’t the passing of any law banning talking or texting be a restriction on that speech? And if so, doesn’t that violate the language of the first amendment?
Oh wait … I see the problem there. The first amendment has been so misconstrued and discombobulated, it doesn’t really stand for anything anymore. Well, at least it still looks pretty in print!
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:49pmBut you see, there is no law to pass, only a mandate from a bureaucracy. This isn’t Congress saying this, it’s a bureaucracy.
Welcome to rule by the unelected.
Report Post »capitalismrocks
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:34pmNot up to the Fed, its up to the Individual States who enforce the laws, there are no federal highway law enforcement offices, only State Law Enforcement and therefor it is up to the States, the Fed can go flip itself the bird!
Report Post »SoiledDove
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:34pmSorry to say the feds are right on this one. Talking hands free has been shown to be just as unsafe as talking with your hand. I enjoy my freedom as much as the rest of you, but none of us have the right to do something (easily preventable) that is going to put others in extreme danger.
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:50pmTalking hands free is the same as talking to your kids or your friend or wife in the car.
If you want pure 100% safety, go buy a nice thick styrofoam house and never walk out doors.
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:43pm@ghost
Report Post »First of all, good afternoon. Second, I’m not so sure your argument here is very strong. Do you believe that people should be able to go out their front door and start shooting in the air? By your logic it would be the responsibility of the people in the path of the falling bullet to make sure they aren’t in the way when the bullet comes back to earth. There‘s a law that says we can’t shoot into the air for a reason. The funny thing is, you are probably less likely to kill someone from firing a bullet into the air than you are from talking or texting on your phone in the car.
Brooke Lorren
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:46pmThey’re not talking just about phones here. They’re talking about all portable electronics, including iPods with FM transmitters, which you can start before the car starts moving, and not touch the entire time that you’re driving.
Report Post »@leftfighter
Posted on December 14, 2011 at 9:41am@GhostOfJefferson
Exactly.
Report Post »SREGN
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:32pmF the feds.
Report Post »GodHatesFigs
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:31pmYou may not agree that the federal government should do this but there should be laws banning cell phone use while driving. It’s just as dangerous as drunk driving. I’m on the road for a living and I can spot someone driving while talking on a cell phone from a good distance. It really doesn’t matter much that it is hands free either.
Report Post »NeoFan
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:34pmInstead of banning my responsible use of my own property why don’t we make people face the consequences of their actions? Some people are stupid. They should pay a price instead of punishing all of us for the few that are morons?
Report Post »Johnny Cocheroo
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:41pmI suppose you would agree that they should add these then.
- eating while driving
- Dogs
- Noisy kids
- Changing the radio
- looking at yourself in the mirror
- reaching for something by your feet
- rubber necking
Or we could just say you must buy insurance to drive and if you cause an accident – you pay for it.
Should be pointless soon anyways – I bet cars will have automatic pilots soon. I personally can’t wait.
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:53pm@neo
It’s not about your responsible use. It’s about the fact that doing just about anything other than driving while you are driving puts other people at risk. The constitution guarantees that another citizen can’t infringe on my life. By “you” being distracted, my life is put at risk.
Another point is that a recent study showed that 66% of teen drivers “admit” to texting while driving. The demographic already has the highest percentage of deaths by automobile for any age group. Texting and cell usage serves only to increase that number. It‘s not that you aren’t responsible, but that you aren’t the only one on the road. I am in favor of signal jammers that block all cell phone usage in all vehicles that are travelling over 20 mph.
Ever driven behind someone that didn’t have tail lights? That’s why we require tail lights. Ever driven behind a teen (or adult) trying to text and drive? Just yesterday I witnessed 3 different drivers swerve in and out of their lane while texting. Something needs to be done. What is your solution?
On a separate but related note, have you ever wondered why school zones have 20 mph limits? That was the maximum speed determined to be non-fatal in a pedestrian-automobile collision for the pedestrian.
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:41pm@Firebrand
We‘re all glad to hear that you’re in favor of mandated “law” decreed by unelected bureaucrats.
It’s the Mandarin way…er um…the American way!
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:51pm@ghost
Report Post »I concede the point you are trying to make. I believe it should be law, voted on by our representatives, whole heartedly. I am not nor have ever been in favor of bureaucratic mandates. Sorry for the mis-read.
Brooke Lorren
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 3:55pmThen pass a law banning cell phones, not all portable electronic devices, including ones that you don’t have to touch while driving.
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:11pm@brooke
Thanks for your input. I think that’s a good idea and agree. I have my MP3 player hooked up by USB to my stereo. I have steering wheel controls that allow me to switch between songs and control the volume. So I could see how that would work. If you could get phones to do the same thing, I say “Great!”. Unfortunately, there’s no way to do that with texting. So how do you solve the problem of the teenager that tells the officer, “I was just turning on my hands free, i wasn’t texting.”?
People drove in cars without phones for a hundred years. It won’t kill them to do it again. =o)
Report Post »Baddoggy
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 4:35pmI say screw you. If you want to make laws to restrict peoples freedoms where do you stop? Libtardia awaits you sir! Get a grip and start to understand freedom…even if it causes death!!!
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 7:34pm@bad
Report Post »Again, if it doesn’t pick my pocket or break my leg…..
But teens with their eyes in their crotch, on their phone, and not on the road has the capacity to do both of the former. Just because you like to drive while talking on the phone and texting and haven’t gotten into a wreck yet, doesn‘t mean it’s safer for you to do so. Obviously common sense isn’t enough to keep people from doing it, so there has to be a law to protect other adults and children. See my “shooting in the air” logic above. Plus, why the attack? We may disagree, but what have I done to warrant your response?
NeoFan
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:31pmHow about we ban anything that is Un-Constitutional like an overreaching federal government that refuses to stop spending the money of its citizens on useless crap.
Report Post »fatsomann
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:51pmPerfect.
Report Post »dlivelli
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:29pm1984…..may I use the bathroom mr G-man? I guess the word “freedom” will soon be either removed from the dictionary or the definition changed/updated…..doing what, when, where, why and how you are told by the g-men.
Look out people the worst is yet to come!
Report Post »82dAirborne
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:25pmOnce again the “Feds” have things exactly bassakwards. We need to ban motorized transportation! Us e your cell phone all you want while driving the ox cart. Simple. We would save thousands of human lives. Until of course people starved because we can’t move food fast enough or figured out that maybe mule powered ambulances aren’t going to work out too well.
What’s next?
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:35pmAnd, why are trying to Save Lives? Obama won the Election; I say speed up Cars to 200 mph and give all the voters Cell Phones!
Report Post »Drum Man
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:24pmNext Fed Ruling: NO DRIVING while DRIVING. The other cars are a distraction.
Report Post »LindaB11
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:23pmSo, the nanny state needs to step in because of someone’s stupidity. I am sorry for any loss of life, but to punish the population as a whole against and irresponsible driver is outrageous.
Report Post »ozchambers
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:32pmBut don’t you realize that preventing the senseless loss of even one child is worth the cost of losing our liberty and freedom?
Report Post »LindaB11
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:44pmOZ I will assume you’re being facetious
Report Post »TRONINTHEMORNING
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:23pm“HERE COME THE FED, HERE COME THE FED…” Just another power grab at work. It indeed, must stop.
Report Post »cessna152
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:17pmThe Feds? When will this madness end? What’s next…no picking your nose while driving? No scratching your butt? No drinking coffee or changing the radio station?
My goodness brainwashed dopes, it’s SUCKY drivers that cause accidents…PERIOD!!!! Once again, the good (many) have to pay for the STUPID!
Report Post »CatB
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:20pmI agree .. and what ever happened to STATES having control over things NOT given to the Feds in the Constitiution? This insanity must stop.
Report Post »SurfinRallylizard
Posted on December 13, 2011 at 2:27pmI agree, just one of a million potential distractions and you can’t ban them all (or enforce it if you do, especially the “noisy backseat kids” distraction). It all boil down to the drivers responsibility, if you cause an accident, the penalties need to be much larger period. DUI? No license for 20 years. Cause a serious accident due to road rage or extreme aggressive driving? No license for life. Get caught driving without a license? 5 years mandatory prison, 5 year probation where you get 20 years for another infraction. Boom, done. I’m tired of *****-footing around these issues by slapping people on the wrist, punish people for being irresponsible and get them off the street.
Report Post »