Skip to comments.Hey, they still let us drive
Posted on 12/16/2011 11:28:37 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The National Transportation Safety Board wants a complete ban on cellphone use while driving, even on hands-free calls. Some will protest this as yet another government encroachment on freedom, but we should think twice before rocking the boat here.
After all, have you considered how lucky we are that the government lets us drive cars at all?
Imagine if cars hadnt been around for a century, but instead were just invented today. Is there any way theyd be approved for individual use? Its an era of bans on incandescent bulbs; if you suggested putting millions of internal-combustion engines out there, youd get looks like you were Hitler proposing the Final Solution.
Even aside from pollution, the government wouldnt allow the risks to safety.
So youre proposing that people speed around in tons of metal? You must mean only really smart, well-trained people?
No. Everyone. Even stupid people.
Wont millions be killed?
Oh, no. Not that many. Just a little more than 40,000 a year.
Oh . . . millions.
Theres no way that would get approved today.
Driving is basically a grandfathered freedom from back when people cared less about pollution and danger and valued progress and liberty over safety. They had different equations related to human life then: We could lose 10,000 men in a single battle in a war and call it a victory....
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
2d, I have to laugh to avoid being so furious my head explodes.
The Feral bureaucracy has to go.
They’re so stupid really, thinking they can stop or control anything. When governments do that, throughout history (oh, I guess they’d have to have honestly studied it to know), everything just goes underground. Everything.
Hey... ban smoking,city bus fumes, ban kitchen knives, gasoline and lawn mowers, swimming pools and diving from rocks.
Eff a nanny state.
A surprising number of FReepers were on board for an FCC mandate controlling the volume of commercials. As I recall, you're a ham. The power of the FCC should be limited to the very narrow area of ensuring that harmful interference doesn't occur between operators. Period. Dictating content in any way is far beyond the scope of why the commission exists.
“I just wish the government would stop trying to save my life. I don't want to live forever!” Jim from C-town
The long-term goal of the left is to outlaw the automobile and force people onto various mass-transit systems. Buses, subways, high-speed rail, etc., all of which can be used to control free movement.
All one need do is build a simple limiting amp that cuts off the commercials should they hit a certain decibel.
BTW I was listening to WBCQ tonight on short wave and apparently there are like 750,000 HAM operators in the US today.
The numbers are on the rise, rather than the wane.
People want autonomy.
The right thing is watch less TV or cancel.
If we had actual competition, we’d have other TV options where the volume was not increased.
Try reading the Executive Summary of the FCC budget.
JOKE. COMPLETE FARCE. The biggest reasons they were claiming for their existence (budget), i.e., things that they actually DO - ..... “modernize their technology”.
If the Executive summary sounds like my 9th grade paper where I just put in fluff - how fluffy are the details behind the summary ?
It’s really stealing from the taxpayer and laughing in the taxpayer’s face. Disgusting.
You are correct, it’s all social engineering.
You know what the monkey said that got his tail caught in the lawnmower?
“It won’t be long now”
That is an excellent & somewhat horrifying thought experiment. Kudos!
No, I don’t text ever, and I’m not on the phone much at all.
We should be held accountable for our own auto accidents, though, not pulled over and ticketed for talking on the phone, any more than we should be pulled over for singing while we listen to the radio, or get in an argument with a passenger.
Auto insurance removes the financial consequences of causing an accident, so many people just don’t care any more.
The law has always covered civil and criminal penalties for damages we cause.
Cell phone laws get into a new area: you haven’t swerved out of your lane, you have complete control of your car, but you have a cup of coffee in your hand, and we don’t think you can handle it, so we’re charging you with a crime.
If I’m drinking coffee or talking and I swerve out of my lane - THAT already is a crime, swerving out of my lane. Doesn’t matter why I did, I did.
Town governments love to hire more LE, though the taxpayers don’t like to pay the bill. So more traffic stops !
Hey, the government will decide when you die. They will have a program, an agency, and a staff to make such decisions.
I keep reading about this ban, and I have to wonder about the hands-free portion. My car has the hands-free built in. One push of a button, and the rest is voice activated. So how are they going to enforce this in this situation? I mean, I have no earpiece, so for all they know I could be singing to the radio or speaking to someone in the backseat. Am I going to get pulled over simply because I’m speaking at all? Besides, no one even bothers to enforce most of the traffic laws already in existence. I was at a light yesterday when a guy blew the red like a big dog, and there was a sheriff’s care on the other side, and he did nothing. So why even bother at this point with more arbitrary and ridiculous nanny state laws?
I see the cell phone restrictions as another attempt to invade the privacy of citizens, by letting LE pull you over and get their eyes (and nose) inside your vehicle on the "suspicion" that you were using the device. In order to get the necessary proof of the offense, they will then have to download all information from your phone using one of those portable devices that were in the news recently and are already being used. EVERY automobile accident will result in the phones being downloaded, to determine whether either of the parties was illegally using their phone.
...And they will download EVERYTHING.
“All one need do is build a simple limiting amp that cuts off the commercials should they hit a certain decibel.”
Limiters are the problem. The way they make the commercials louder is by pushing the tape or file harder into the limiter. TV makers today include compressors and limiters in their TV’s but they don;t really work as effectively as their audio industry counterparts. I have a cheap (250.00)limiter I run the TV audio through. I NAIL the input, as a way of overcoming the varying degrees that program producers do, then I set the output volume and forget it. It’s the only way the idea will work.
Right on! And what’s with these tyrannical drunk driving laws too? And despotic school zones? I mean, if some idiot is driving home from the bar at 7:00 in the morning and some kid’s trying to get across the street but walks in front of the drunk’s SUV and gets splattered all over the road, just prosecute the drunk for negligent homicide. Don’t restrict MY freedom just because most of my fellow citizens can’t handle theirs!
/sarc some wouldn’t even notice
Whatever happened to the notion of personal responsibility?
Dear NTSB - STFU and MYOB
“A surprising number of FReepers were on board for an FCC mandate controlling the volume of commercials. As I recall, you’re a ham. The power of the FCC should be limited to the very narrow area of ensuring that harmful interference doesn’t occur between operators. Period. Dictating content in any way is far beyond the scope of why the commission exists.”
Cable around here is _effectively_ a monopoly. In return for having a monopoly (gas, electric, water, and so on) companies have for more than a century given up some of their freedoms. I might agree that this is not the FCC’s job, the local and state authorities should be empowered to do this, assuming that they haven’t been paid off, which is, of course, highly unlikely.
I find it infuriating to be blasted out of a chair at night by loud commercials. You may say “get rid of cable” but I don’t have any other choice for a similar product - and no, satellite, over the air, and the Internet are not “similar” here.
Not a Federal issue or right. However, if a state wants to outlaw cell phone use and driving - heck yes!
Put away the damn phone and drive!
May your chains rest lightly...
“Maybe I am a conspiracy nutjob, maybe not.”...
This is an interesting theory, but the problem is, that most of the information required isn’t on your phone anyway, it’s “safely” in databases at the provider’s facilities.
My car has the same. Next, they will not allow us to speak to each other in the car, as well as holler at the kids in the backseat. The radios will go next, because Limbaugh, Beck, and Hannity are a distraction. They haven't addressed women (or men) putting on make-up) or reading, eating, and everything else people have done behind the wheel the past dozen decades.
I’ve been thinking EXACTLY the same thing for years — if cars were invented today, there is NO WAY that our benevolent overseers would allow citizens to own and operate one. Never!
Aspirin would be prescription-only, public access to electricity would NEVER be allowed, aircraft would belong strictly to the military, and firearms ... HA!
This is the Nanny State in action, folks. It’s getting worse by the day and still we take no action.
That idea has been abandoned as of yesterday. I read that they woke up and realized it would be unenforceable and would tick off too many people.
When driving with passengers, should it be illegal to talk with them? Will radios be banned from cars?
Becasue after all, we as a people are just too damned stupid to figure out what is dangerous and what is not.
All about you.
I wish the government would do something about the di-hydrogen monoxide pollution. Where I am you can see it all the time.
Abandoned eh? Good because I wasn’t going to do it anyway. I was planning on talking on my phone while driving just like I always do.
Seattle is often deluged by it.
Yes me too. LOL!!!
They can still get your contacts list, call history, and browsing history (from your smartphone) right from the device, according to the articles I read a while back.
Anybody seen talking in a car alone could be pulled over. Can’t ask ON*Star about locations. Imagine paying $100,000 for a car and not being able to use the built in phone.
Why do I think this law won’t apply to government folks or celebrities?
I can’t figure out why the R L Lee thread was pulled.
AnotherUnixGeek: From yet another one in the world of such geekdom (Solaris, FreeBSD and Linux), even my choice of an operating system is a lesson in personal responsibility. The lack of "Are you sure?" prompting for actions at the command line is part of the appeal of working with complete freedom and all that implies.
It really does what I tell it to do without the need for an intrusive nanny cautioning me. Yes, I've had my share of "Oops" moments but I have learned from them...err, most of the time. :-)
rm -rduring my first internship, shortly followed by the wonders of
tar -xvfas I worked desperately to restore the lost directories from backup before my manager got back from lunch =).
I think this is mistake. Prior stories indicated “hands-free” devices were not part of the proposed ban.
>> I think this is mistake. Prior stories indicated hands-free devices were not part of the proposed ban. <<
You are mistaken.
The “hands free” devices have been shown to be more distracting than the hand held ones when driving. Its not the physical activity of holding a phone, but the mental distraction that is the problem.
You forgot the “chimney Police.”
Yea, I do like quotes.
Here’s one back at ya...
They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin, 1759
I have done Unix sysdamin for many, many years and one thing I did when I needed to do the “rm” command is I would do a “ls” on the path to see what I going to irrevocably remove before dong and “rm” command. Thanks to “bash” shell, I could go back to the “ls” command and then backspace and replace “ls” with “rm”.
The parent thread mentioned about operating systems, I have used many different one’s over the years. I want to add in OpenBSD, NetBSD, Windows/DOS and Mac OS X which also uses a BSD baseline kernel.
> Yeah, I remember learning the power of rm -r
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.