US Transportation Secretary Ray Lahood wants phone jammers in every car
Thread Starter
Administrator
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 21,958
Likes: 115
From: portland oregon
US Transportation Secretary Ray Lahood wants phone jammers in every car
I dont want this to be a political thread so if it turns into that i will jus tclose it.
but i wanted people to know about this.
The Secretary was on MSNBC "Morning Joe" that he wanted to see jammers in every car to deal with distracted driving. When pressed if he meant a federal requirement he responded " Yes, I think it will be done"
My position? Ray Lahood is a loon.
News for ya Ray
A. What about the PASSENGERS Ray. They aren't driving, your jammers would stop them to.
B. ONSTAR You seriously think its a good idea to stop this from functioning?
C. Emergencies- What if I wreck into a tree and need to call for help . Idiot.
D. What about people walking next to the car on the sidewalk or in a parking lot.
How about people being lost and found by their cell phones? Forget that if their in a car.
E. How about the FBI spying in on the terrorists and mob by turning on the phone and listening in. Those guys would just have all their conversations in the car.
F. Someone gets grabbed and stuffed in the trunk- They would call for help but for your jammers.
and how about this
The Federal Government of the US does not have the Constitutional Authority to implement a requirement for jammers in every persons car.
Idiot.
but i wanted people to know about this.
The Secretary was on MSNBC "Morning Joe" that he wanted to see jammers in every car to deal with distracted driving. When pressed if he meant a federal requirement he responded " Yes, I think it will be done"
My position? Ray Lahood is a loon.
News for ya Ray
A. What about the PASSENGERS Ray. They aren't driving, your jammers would stop them to.
B. ONSTAR You seriously think its a good idea to stop this from functioning?
C. Emergencies- What if I wreck into a tree and need to call for help . Idiot.
D. What about people walking next to the car on the sidewalk or in a parking lot.
How about people being lost and found by their cell phones? Forget that if their in a car.
E. How about the FBI spying in on the terrorists and mob by turning on the phone and listening in. Those guys would just have all their conversations in the car.
F. Someone gets grabbed and stuffed in the trunk- They would call for help but for your jammers.
and how about this
The Federal Government of the US does not have the Constitutional Authority to implement a requirement for jammers in every persons car.
Idiot.
Last edited by zoom44; Nov 19, 2010 at 07:04 PM.
Not to mention cell phone jammers will cause huge issues with cellular alarm backups. What a dumb ****. This is why people should educate themselves on the people they vote for.
its one of those things that would be good in theory but really bad when it comes to its practical implementation......
Just recently, the City of San Antonio banned texting and driving but it has yet to stop people from doing it. The only true way to keep people from doing so would be to implement said jammer, but will it work? Prolly not..... the debate will continue....
Just recently, the City of San Antonio banned texting and driving but it has yet to stop people from doing it. The only true way to keep people from doing so would be to implement said jammer, but will it work? Prolly not..... the debate will continue....
this guys is a flaming IDIOT.
I understand that cell phones are distracting and are a cause for many accidents that normally could have been avoided had the cell phone not been in use but there are other ways of solving this problem.
Hit people where it hurts the most: their wallets.
Oh, still didn't learn your lesson and you got caught talking on your phone again? Guess what... now the fine is tripled. Do it again and lose your license for 6 months.
I understand that cell phones are distracting and are a cause for many accidents that normally could have been avoided had the cell phone not been in use but there are other ways of solving this problem.
Hit people where it hurts the most: their wallets.
Oh, still didn't learn your lesson and you got caught talking on your phone again? Guess what... now the fine is tripled. Do it again and lose your license for 6 months.
It would help if we elected people based on their brains, ability to run a business successfully, and economic knowledge rather than how "personable" they are or how good they are at poker.
this guys is a flaming IDIOT.
I understand that cell phones are distracting and are a cause for many accidents that normally could have been avoided had the cell phone not been in use but there are other ways of solving this problem.
Hit people where it hurts the most: their wallets.
Oh, still didn't learn your lesson and you got caught talking on your phone again? Guess what... now the fine is tripled. Do it again and lose your license for 6 months.
I understand that cell phones are distracting and are a cause for many accidents that normally could have been avoided had the cell phone not been in use but there are other ways of solving this problem.
Hit people where it hurts the most: their wallets.
Oh, still didn't learn your lesson and you got caught talking on your phone again? Guess what... now the fine is tripled. Do it again and lose your license for 6 months.
Registered
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,100
Likes: 7
From: Aurora, CO
As soon as I read the title my first thought was "What about in emergencies?". That's one thing I like a lot about cell phones... in almost any instance, I can call for help if necessary.
Momentum Keeps Me Going
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,036
Likes: 5
From: Colorado
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYdxQ...ayer_embedded#!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vB22cW1ZMY&NR=1
...and many more...rest their souls.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vB22cW1ZMY&NR=1
...and many more...rest their souls.
3-wheeler
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,734
Likes: 1
From: Phoenix
This is a tough topic from an ideological view for me.
Honestly, I think cars should not have the massive amount of electronics. No cellphone or bluetooth, no radio...just a wheel and pedals.
The libertarian in me says that people should be free to make their own choices however when someone wrecks into me due to talking on the phone or texting then my rights are violated. As such, the behavior could be legislated since it has been proven to endanger other drivers around you. Every driver law (in theory) is designed to protect other drivers on the road and keep people from running into each other.
There are some of you out there who say "I'm a good driver and can talk on the phone with no trouble." The truth is you cannot do both and you are not a good driver. A good driver will realize that the distraction isn't acceptable.
I believe the key is to make better drivers but to do so would require people paying hundreds of dollars for hours of additional training and stricter certification for licensing. Getting your license is a right of passage in the United States and as such you'd get massive backlash for pushing much stricter license requirements. Also, it would not address the drivers already on the roads. If you pushed stricter requirements for getting your license such as performance driving and defensive driving people would lose their license. While I would be fine with that you'd have a HUGE mob of pissed people.
Instead, the solution is making a smarter car. Cars that park themselves, stop themselves and warn the driver when they are doing stupid things.
Jammers are not the solution. They cannot make them retroactive so people will simply not buy newer cars and it will push the cost of older costs up quite a lot. It will do nothing to address the cars already on the roads. It will also inter fear with other people outside of the vehicle.
Something does need to be done about distracted driving but nothing short of the car driving itself would be accepted in society.
Honestly, I think cars should not have the massive amount of electronics. No cellphone or bluetooth, no radio...just a wheel and pedals.
The libertarian in me says that people should be free to make their own choices however when someone wrecks into me due to talking on the phone or texting then my rights are violated. As such, the behavior could be legislated since it has been proven to endanger other drivers around you. Every driver law (in theory) is designed to protect other drivers on the road and keep people from running into each other.
There are some of you out there who say "I'm a good driver and can talk on the phone with no trouble." The truth is you cannot do both and you are not a good driver. A good driver will realize that the distraction isn't acceptable.
I believe the key is to make better drivers but to do so would require people paying hundreds of dollars for hours of additional training and stricter certification for licensing. Getting your license is a right of passage in the United States and as such you'd get massive backlash for pushing much stricter license requirements. Also, it would not address the drivers already on the roads. If you pushed stricter requirements for getting your license such as performance driving and defensive driving people would lose their license. While I would be fine with that you'd have a HUGE mob of pissed people.
Instead, the solution is making a smarter car. Cars that park themselves, stop themselves and warn the driver when they are doing stupid things.
Jammers are not the solution. They cannot make them retroactive so people will simply not buy newer cars and it will push the cost of older costs up quite a lot. It will do nothing to address the cars already on the roads. It will also inter fear with other people outside of the vehicle.
Something does need to be done about distracted driving but nothing short of the car driving itself would be accepted in society.
This is a tough topic from an ideological view for me.
Honestly, I think cars should not have the massive amount of electronics. No cellphone or bluetooth, no radio...just a wheel and pedals.
The libertarian in me says that people should be free to make their own choices however when someone wrecks into me due to talking on the phone or texting then my rights are violated. As such, the behavior could be legislated since it has been proven to endanger other drivers around you. Every driver law (in theory) is designed to protect other drivers on the road and keep people from running into each other.
There are some of you out there who say "I'm a good driver and can talk on the phone with no trouble." The truth is you cannot do both and you are not a good driver. A good driver will realize that the distraction isn't acceptable.
I believe the key is to make better drivers but to do so would require people paying hundreds of dollars for hours of additional training and stricter certification for licensing. Getting your license is a right of passage in the United States and as such you'd get massive backlash for pushing much stricter license requirements. Also, it would not address the drivers already on the roads. If you pushed stricter requirements for getting your license such as performance driving and defensive driving people would lose their license. While I would be fine with that you'd have a HUGE mob of pissed people.
Instead, the solution is making a smarter car. Cars that park themselves, stop themselves and warn the driver when they are doing stupid things.
Jammers are not the solution. They cannot make them retroactive so people will simply not buy newer cars and it will push the cost of older costs up quite a lot. It will do nothing to address the cars already on the roads. It will also inter fear with other people outside of the vehicle.
Something does need to be done about distracted driving but nothing short of the car driving itself would be accepted in society.
Honestly, I think cars should not have the massive amount of electronics. No cellphone or bluetooth, no radio...just a wheel and pedals.
The libertarian in me says that people should be free to make their own choices however when someone wrecks into me due to talking on the phone or texting then my rights are violated. As such, the behavior could be legislated since it has been proven to endanger other drivers around you. Every driver law (in theory) is designed to protect other drivers on the road and keep people from running into each other.
There are some of you out there who say "I'm a good driver and can talk on the phone with no trouble." The truth is you cannot do both and you are not a good driver. A good driver will realize that the distraction isn't acceptable.
I believe the key is to make better drivers but to do so would require people paying hundreds of dollars for hours of additional training and stricter certification for licensing. Getting your license is a right of passage in the United States and as such you'd get massive backlash for pushing much stricter license requirements. Also, it would not address the drivers already on the roads. If you pushed stricter requirements for getting your license such as performance driving and defensive driving people would lose their license. While I would be fine with that you'd have a HUGE mob of pissed people.
Instead, the solution is making a smarter car. Cars that park themselves, stop themselves and warn the driver when they are doing stupid things.
Jammers are not the solution. They cannot make them retroactive so people will simply not buy newer cars and it will push the cost of older costs up quite a lot. It will do nothing to address the cars already on the roads. It will also inter fear with other people outside of the vehicle.
Something does need to be done about distracted driving but nothing short of the car driving itself would be accepted in society.
It's called a bus.
Leave the road to the people that want to drive.
Sure, fine them. But yank their license for 6 months or something as well. Put them where they clearly need to be.
Mu ha.. ha...
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,361
Likes: 3
From: Cali
Well my brother was killed by a cell phone driver and When I moved into our house, a texting driver total the Buick and damaged my wifes car.
Driving while using the phone should be the same penalty as drunken driving.
Let's start off with a 1000 fine plus court cost.
Didn't California make this an infraction on your driving ticket?
Driving while using the phone should be the same penalty as drunken driving.
Let's start off with a 1000 fine plus court cost.
Didn't California make this an infraction on your driving ticket?
For the people that just want an appliance to get from point A to point B, while interrupting their life as little as possible, allowing them to get work done, put on makeup, chat with friends, post on facebook, eat their meal, while being isolated from the traffic and road, at the lowest cost possible....well, they have something for these people.
It's called a bus.
Leave the road to the people that want to drive.
Sure, fine them. But yank their license for 6 months or something as well. Put them where they clearly need to be.
It's called a bus.
Leave the road to the people that want to drive.
Sure, fine them. But yank their license for 6 months or something as well. Put them where they clearly need to be.
Super Moderator
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 10,880
Likes: 340
From: Australia
Well the World survived without mobile phones (Cell...what is cellular about todays phones?).
Frankly, they should be fu**ing banned permanently. I hate the fu**ing things.
The are a TOY....People talking CRAP, Text, watching, snapping for WHAT!..
Hi babe...can you pick up some milk on the way home...luv ya..., fu**en sickening..
Does not matter if they smash into an innocent pedestrian or other driver and kill them.
CARS ARE NOT A toy, THEY ARE WEAPONS.
ALL THIS CRAP IS NOT NECESSARY.
Frankly, they should be fu**ing banned permanently. I hate the fu**ing things.
The are a TOY....People talking CRAP, Text, watching, snapping for WHAT!..
Hi babe...can you pick up some milk on the way home...luv ya..., fu**en sickening..
Does not matter if they smash into an innocent pedestrian or other driver and kill them.
CARS ARE NOT A toy, THEY ARE WEAPONS.
ALL THIS CRAP IS NOT NECESSARY.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
From: Manvel, Tx
Full Jammer? Idiotic very much so...now I don't think it would be hard to implement from a manufacturer stand point if they tap in to cell phones accelerometer I'm sure it could be programmed to not function if the cell phone senses its traveling faster then a set speed. designated by law. I agree ASH8 in that sense 2 mph wouldnt be good probably 12mph would be the lowest without causing problems for people on bikes (pedal bikes) and really fast running pedestrians LOL
Well the World survived without mobile phones (Cell...what is cellular about todays phones?).
Frankly, they should be fu**ing banned permanently. I hate the fu**ing things.
The are a TOY....People talking CRAP, Text, watching, snapping for WHAT!..
Hi babe...can you pick up some milk on the way home...luv ya..., fu**en sickening..
Does not matter if they smash into an innocent pedestrian or other driver and kill them.
CARS ARE NOT A toy, THEY ARE WEAPONS.
ALL THIS CRAP IS NOT NECESSARY.
Frankly, they should be fu**ing banned permanently. I hate the fu**ing things.
The are a TOY....People talking CRAP, Text, watching, snapping for WHAT!..
Hi babe...can you pick up some milk on the way home...luv ya..., fu**en sickening..
Does not matter if they smash into an innocent pedestrian or other driver and kill them.
CARS ARE NOT A toy, THEY ARE WEAPONS.
ALL THIS CRAP IS NOT NECESSARY.
Phones are useful. Cell phones are phones with more conveniences and features. A businessman, for example, can just have 1 cell phone instead of needing one for his office and one at home. There are plenty of instances where having a cell phone allows people to reduce the number of phones necessary or allows them to be contacted out of necessity when out and about out of their home or office/work place. There are especially a lot of emergency situations where cell phones are beneficial.
I know there are plenty of instances where there cell phones are used poorly or unsafely, but I feel the benefits are too great to just call them evil and unnecessary.
Momentum Keeps Me Going
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,036
Likes: 5
From: Colorado
^Team knows his stuff ...here's a few more 'case in point' examples... and we trust people like this with complex machines like cars????? ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE
.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27f0I...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJuNgBkloFE
.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27f0I...eature=related
The Professor
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,479
Likes: 7
From: Omaha, NE
agree with flashwing.
Making better drivers +1
I think they should implement a tiered license system.
Class 1 extend the learner's permit to age of 18. Only Manual Transmission Cars allowed
Only travel to-from work, no travel after dark, no travel on busy intersections. Tickets cost triple normal rate.
Class 2
Unrestricted travel times, Automatic Transmission allowed, tickets cost double normal prices.
Class 3
Unrestricted, no speed limit.
Making better drivers +1
I think they should implement a tiered license system.
Class 1 extend the learner's permit to age of 18. Only Manual Transmission Cars allowed
Only travel to-from work, no travel after dark, no travel on busy intersections. Tickets cost triple normal rate.
Class 2
Unrestricted travel times, Automatic Transmission allowed, tickets cost double normal prices.
Class 3
Unrestricted, no speed limit.
Registered
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
From: NE Wisconsin
If you have to touch the phone, it's bad, I think we can all agree...but no hands free? I personally don't see any difference between using hands free and talking with passengers. So what next? Ban passengers? I bet you little kids in the back seats are just as much of a distraction, if not more. And then there're those stupid radio hosts, the cute girls in the car next to me, the list goes on....
If he wants jammers by law, he might as well start building a nation wide public transport system. Who appoints these idiots?
If he wants jammers by law, he might as well start building a nation wide public transport system. Who appoints these idiots?