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

Skip to comments.

NHTSA Puts Industry On Notice: A Car Is Not A Mobile Device
The Car Connection.com ^

Posted on 06/18/2011 8:30:40 AM PDT by Still Thinking

Continuing a campaign initiated by Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, the administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) addressed the Telematics Detroit 2011 conference with harsh words on the growing trend to integrate infotainment technology into cars.

David Strickland told those assembled, “I’m just putting everyone on notice. A car is not a mobile device. I’m not in the business of helping people tweet better. I’m not in the business of helping people post on Facebook better.”

That’s not to say that the NHTSA and DOT are opposed to all telematics applications. In fact, the agencies support systems that provide remote vehicle diagnostics, on-board navigation and automated crash response (like GM’s OnStar and Hyundai’s Blue Link). What the agencies oppose is any on-board system that leads to distracted driving, frequently citing that 995 of the 30,797 fatal crashes in 2009 involved drivers using cell phones.

Automakers, on the other hand, are caught between what the government requires and what their customers want. Generation Y drivers are focused on in-car technology and don’t see texting as a distraction to driving; instead, they see driving as a distraction to texting, which is an alarming trend by itself.

Unless--or until--cars become automated transportation pods requiring no driver involvement, this clash between technology, the NHTSA and automakers won’t find an easy resolution.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: bluelink; cars; davidstrickland; detroit; dot; generalmotors; hyundai; michigan; nhtsa; onstar; raylahood; texting; twitter
Note that he LIKES all the statist intrusive stuff that allows people outside your car to snoop and meddle with property you've bought and paid for.
1 posted on 06/18/2011 8:30:45 AM PDT by Still Thinking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

So what kind of device is an auto if not mobile?


2 posted on 06/18/2011 8:33:41 AM PDT by TangoLimaSierra (To the left the truth looks Right-Wing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Agreed there are too many distractions. A car should get you from point A to point B in relative safety. Nothing more, nothing less.


3 posted on 06/18/2011 8:34:18 AM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

So if you have sex in the back seat you’ll still have to use your phone to tweet the pics.


4 posted on 06/18/2011 8:36:40 AM PDT by AZ .44 MAG (Repeal Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bgill

“You can have any color you want as long as it’s black” LOL


5 posted on 06/18/2011 8:42:55 AM PDT by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
Generation Y drivers are focused on in-car technology and don’t see texting as a distraction to driving; instead, they see driving as a distraction to texting
It is truly incredible how ignorant and stupid some people can be.

6 posted on 06/18/2011 8:44:06 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TangoLimaSierra
So what kind of device is an auto if not mobile?

LOL

7 posted on 06/18/2011 8:52:58 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Whilst I agree with his sentiment, The Sec Trans (being an Obamaloon appointee) will NEVER be in any business because businesses need folks with creativity and talent. Ergo, no Obamaloon appointees make the grade.

BTW, the no talent thing is what got Chrysler and GM. Still does.


8 posted on 06/18/2011 8:55:45 AM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bgill
Agreed there are too many distractions. A car should get you from point A to point B in relative safety. Nothing more, nothing less.

Agree in principle. Where I may disagree with Ray TheHood is whether it's the government's problem or an individual's responsibility. Why not just step back from having any rules at all on distracted driving and just hold the individual responsible for the results? If some guy has attention surplus disorder and can safely do both at the same time, fine, but if someone else can't, it's their responsibility to know that and act accordingly. I definitely disagree with TheHood on OnStar and similar Big Brother systems.

9 posted on 06/18/2011 8:56:12 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AZ .44 MAG
So if you have sex in the back seat you’ll still have to use your phone to tweet the pics.

Weiner is deeply saddened.

10 posted on 06/18/2011 8:57:00 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

Plenty of them here on FR sadly. I’m sure some will turn up on this thread soon.


11 posted on 06/18/2011 9:15:53 AM PDT by packrat35 (America is rapidly becoming a police state that East Germany could be proud of!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
David Strickland told those assembled, “I’m just putting everyone on notice. A car is not a mobile device. I’m not in the business of helping people tweet better. I’m not in the business of helping people post on Facebook better.”

Notice the "I", "I", "I" focus of his remarks. David Strickland is a power-drunk statist who exemplifies much of what's wrong with our bloated Federal nanny state.

Look at some of the freedom-stifling "accomplishments" that he proudly touts on his bio page at http://www.nhtsa.gov/Administrator:

Mr. Strickland advised Congressional members on safety reforms and funding increases for NHTSA's seat-belt and drunk-driving grant programs and earned national recognition from Mothers Against Drunk Driving, who named him Congressional Staffer of the Year in 2004 for his role in making the driving public safer.

MADD - gutting the Fourth Amendment is their goal. Random pull-over-motorists-and-search-their-cars police checkpoints are the proper tools for the Gestapo, the Stasi, and the KGB. Regardless of any ill-advised court rulings to the contrary, they are an affront to a decent, free people, and should not be tolerated.

12 posted on 06/18/2011 9:22:48 AM PDT by Zeppo ("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
Why not just step back from having any rules at all on distracted driving and just hold the individual responsible for the results?
Surely you jest. Did you "Stop Thinking" when you wrote that?
13 posted on 06/18/2011 9:38:17 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Zeppo

You forgot to mention black helicopters.


14 posted on 06/18/2011 9:39:58 AM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Zeppo
MADD - gutting the Fourth Amendment is their goal. Random pull-over-motorists-and-search-their-cars police checkpoints are the proper tools for the Gestapo, the Stasi, and the KGB. Regardless of any ill-advised court rulings to the contrary, they are an affront to a decent, free people, and should not be tolerated.

Yes I love how one of their brainless, soulless hags justified probable-cause-free checkpoints. She said that at the BAL's they had managed to get enacted, someone might be over the limit and yet their driving might not be affected so that they would draw the attention of a patrol officer. [facepalm]

Whatever you do, never reexamine your original premise. Just erect more statist scaffolding to support your original wrong idea. D'oh! Like envirobots who won't simply admit they were wrong about plastic grocery bags or diet Nazis about replacing animal fats with hydrogenated poison, just trash the stuff YOU forced on us and steal our freedom to do THAT too, as if we wanted to. Never admit you didn't know what you were talking about in the first place.

Oh, and don't forget the perfidy and fraud of MADD trumpeting the "increase" in "drunk driving" for fund-raising purposes, when the "increase" was actually due to a more stringent definition THEY brought about!

15 posted on 06/18/2011 9:44:52 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

No I did not. Prior restraint is almost never a good idea. It’s like having gun control when there are already laws against murder and holding up liquor stores.


16 posted on 06/18/2011 9:46:00 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

There’s a solution to the texting while driving.

Those devices has GPS capabilities, and if there are some that don’t have it, then maybe it should be mandatory.

So, the GPS capability can sense when it’s moving at a fast pace, say, 5mph or more, and if that’s the case, the texting capability should be automatically disabled on the smartphone. Of course, there will be people who use their smartphones while going for a jog, but even then, it’s a bit dangerous to run and text at the same time.


17 posted on 06/18/2011 9:52:24 AM PDT by adorno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: adorno

Excellent. If I’m riding in your car, I shouldn’t be able to text.


18 posted on 06/18/2011 9:53:14 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood is a Luddite asshole.


19 posted on 06/18/2011 9:54:22 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood is a Luddite asshole.

"Democrat" is shorter.

Besides, he supports new technology, as long as it invades YOUR privacy, dilutes YOUR control, and gives them to him and his henchmen, so you can't really call him a "Luddite".

20 posted on 06/18/2011 9:56:33 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
“I’m just putting everyone on notice"

FU Gubmint twit.

21 posted on 06/18/2011 10:03:38 AM PDT by johniegrad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
Excellent. If I’m riding in your car, I shouldn’t be able to text.

If you're the driver, no, you shouldn't be texting.

I mentioned that situation, about 2 years ago, in a post I made regarding that question and situation you make.

A car should also be equipped to determine when a phone is being used by someone in the driver's seat, and that can be done by a proximity determining capability in the car for smartphones, and such a capability is already available with near field communication.

However, when people are on the move, why not just limit themselves to voice communications? What is there that you need to text that can't wait until you're out of the vehicle or that can't be communicated via regular voice communication? Furthermore, if something is so critical that texting is needed, why not just pull off to the side of the road and text to your heart's content while still sitting in the car?
22 posted on 06/18/2011 10:12:32 AM PDT by adorno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven
You forgot to mention black helicopters.

Silly non-sequitur is a non-sequitur.

What, U mad?

23 posted on 06/18/2011 11:13:47 AM PDT by Zeppo ("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
It’s like having gun control when there are already laws against murder and holding up liquor stores.
You're argument holds water like a colander.
Talking & texting while driving are no different than Russian Roulette - except you also maim/kill innocent victims. Statistically, distracted drivers are the same as DWI drivers.
That you want it left up to each individual to decide in this day and age of damned near non-existent personal responsibility, is in itself, irresponsible.
24 posted on 06/18/2011 5:24:00 PM PDT by oh8eleven (RVN '67-'68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
A car is not a mobile device.

That's been my experience with the Detroit models.

25 posted on 06/18/2011 5:38:20 PM PDT by Nachoman (Wisdom is learned, cynicism is earned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Maybe your car isn’t a mobile device, but mine’s a Toyota.


26 posted on 06/18/2011 6:41:27 PM PDT by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oh8eleven

My position is anything but irresponsible. I agree that texting and driving is a really bad idea, for me at least, and I don’t do it. There doesn’t need to be a law. If someone gets in an accident because they’re texting and someone dies, charge them with negligent homicide. Shoot, second degree murder. Same for drinking and driving. I also agree that personal responsibility is far too rare of a concept these days, but we won’t get back to it if we keep teaching its antithesis by having someone else decide what’s safe enough for you or me to do.


27 posted on 06/18/2011 6:53:46 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona

Rolls Canardly?


28 posted on 06/18/2011 6:55:00 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
...995 of the 30,797 fatal crashes in 2009 involved drivers using cell phones.
For all the stink being raised about cell phones and distracted driving, I would have expected that percentage to be much higher than about 3 1/4%.
29 posted on 06/18/2011 7:12:41 PM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking; Eric Blair 2084

Nanny state ping!


30 posted on 06/18/2011 7:48:55 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson