Stop Sign Ahead for Texting While Driving? (Obama Will Stop It)

AP ^ | 10/01/09 | KEN THOMAS

[Hodar]

Here’s your falacy.

An aircraft runway has constant communciations going on, telling of arrivals, departures and taxi status. This is communicated and controlled, through levels of software and overseen by human beings. The airport also has a fence around it. We don’t have deers, cattle, little old ladies or drunk drivers on our runways.

A road has no communications, so while your theory of navigating across the city sound great, what happens when you have a kid on a bicycle tip over? Or a deer wanders on the road? A car has a flat tire? Granny crosses the street at a random spot? Little kid chases the ball onto the street?

Splat. The great thing about humans, is that we can react quickly, and most of the time our reaction is timely and intelligent - thus more often than not, we avoid accidents.

This is why, despite the technology to land these aircraft safely exists - it exists as an emergency backup measure only. Every aircraft in the world, that carries humans, has a human as a pilot. The pilot alone assumes control of the aircraft upon both take-off and especially during landing.

So, while the theory sounds great - real life is a great deal more complex.

[HIDEK6]

I have no problem with this.

I do.

He has no constitutional power to mess with something that should be governed by the states.

[BornToBeAmerican]

I agree 100%

I am not a fan of Assault rifles and cannot ever see myself owning one. BUT, I would never concede my right or anyone else owning one.

Stupid is what stupid does.

[shezza]

Maybe some people see this as an infringement on their rights, but the last thing I want is to be injured or kill by some idiot gossiping about some garbage.

While you're at it, then, ban car radios, talking amongst passengers, eating and drinking, bickering kids, maps, GPS systems, anything and everything that could possibly distract a driver. How about roadblocks to check for evidence of french fries in the floorboard?

(The road to hell--and fascism--is paved with good intentions.)

[thefactor]

i hate it when people walk too slowly on the sidewalk. it's dangerous and people get hurt. i think we need a federal law against slow walkers.

close-talkers spread germs. we need a law against that too.

[Sir Gawain]

Already laws on the books against reckless driving. Not needed.

[Wooly]

It is strange that when we talk of the use of cellphones in vehicle that people adopt a libertarian view that I have this right. As such would you be in favor of doing away with speed limits, driver's licenses, drunk driving laws, age limits on driving, probably not.
The one legitimate area that government has a responsibility is Public Safety and the use of cellphone usage while driving is proving to be a safety issue that is increasing rapidly.
Studies have shown that driving a vehicle down a road uses one heck of a lot of your brain's capacity to process the information you encounter. At the same time when you talk on a phone your brain also devotes it's attention to hearing, digesting the information, formulating a response, and delivering that response, at which time it repeats the process. This is why when you are behind someone talking on a phone you often see them slowing down and then speeding up, Making hand gestures and taking their hands off the steering wheel, or as I have witnessed running into the back of another car without even braking.
Phone usage, of any type, in vehicles that are in motion is more dangerous than a drunk behind the wheel.
Before there were cell phones, you did not need to stop at every pay phone you pasted to call someone about some garbage, so why do people need to drive around talking all the time.