"Discover Cooking, Discuss Life."

Go Back   Discuss Cooking - Cooking Forums > The Back Porch > Off Topic Discussions
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 01-14-2009, 04:15 PM   #101
Head Chef
 
Mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by DramaQueen View Post

Now let me post another point. I was just at the supermarket and while waiting for a light to change I noticed the guy next to me (he was alone) obviously listening to the radio and "bopping" his head and hands and singing. When you listen to talk radio in the car or sing along with a music station are you not doing the very thing that could distract you? HOw many people do you know never talk to passengers, never listen to music and/or sing along, and never listen to talk radio? I couldn't come up with one if I had to.
So what's one more distraction?

Quote:

Chit chatting while driving is just plain stupid and text messaging is not only stupid it is criminal in my opinion and should result in having their license revoked. I don't want some idiot putting me or my family in jeopardy for the sake of asking, "hey watcha doin.?"
Geez.
I don't want me or my family to be put in jeopardy for the sake of ANY conversation!
__________________
www.Mamas-Southern-Cooking.com
Mama is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 05:03 PM   #102
Head Chef
 
elaine l's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,098
Here is my two cents...well maybe a little bit more.

I wouldn't dare to quote percentages on who is saying what on their cell but if it's anything like the conversations I overhear while in a store then there is a lot of idle chit chat although not all.

Having a cell phone, no matter what you do, is a luxury not an absolute necessity.

But on the other hand there are too many rules and regulations. Anything you do while driving besides concentrating on your driving is a distraction. Drinking coffee, changing stations on the radio, talking to a passenger etc. are all distractions, even if it's for a brief moment. I think anyone driving a car is guilty of at least one of these.

My car is equipped with bluetooth but I generally have my phone off while driving. In my little world, I don't need a phone call in my car. I know this is not true for everyone.
elaine l is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 05:18 PM   #103
Sous Chef
 
B'sgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Utah
Posts: 863
I have heard of places--but I can't remember where so don't quote me on this--that have a law where you can't be pulled over for talking on your phone, but if you get pulled over for some offense and have been talking on your phone or doing a number of other distracting things you get an additional fine. It seems wise to be able to fine people for being irresponsible while driving, but I think it could get out of hand. It places the police officer as a judge to decide whether the driver should have been eating their french fries or not while driving. It seems so arbitrary to me.

I do however agree that you can't argue with numbers and studies truly have shown that drivers make more mistakes while on a cell phone than talking to a passenger. I don't presume to know the reason, but as long as the studies were done correctly, the numbers don't lie.

Article 1

Artice 2
Article 3

There were plenty more articles as well. And it doesn't mean every driver--it just means most drivers are more distracted while on a phone than when talking to a passenger.
__________________
Michelle
https://foodmakeshimsick.blogspot.com/

B'sgirl is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 05:40 PM   #104
Head Chef
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Boston area
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by elaine l View Post
I wouldn't dare to quote percentages on who is saying what on their cell but if it's anything like the conversations I overhear while in a store then there is a lot of idle chit chat although not all.
I agree with your observation, elaine, but I would extend way beyond stores, to conversations overhead IN PUBLIC.

Man, everyone, but everyone is on cell phones in my area: in ALL stores, walking down the street, public transportation, at Red Sox games, in restaurants, on the beach, in the car, at the pool ... oh, wait, I've said all this before .... I continue to tilt at windmills.

But I digress.

My point (this time) is that I agree with those who have observed that the overwhelming majority of cell phone conversations I've overheard are entirely gratuitous.

Lee
QSis is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 05:47 PM   #105
Chef Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Park Drive Bar/Grill Los Angeles
Posts: 13,218
The ones that look really silly are the ones that seem to be talking to themselves while walking down the street. I would rather see a real phone at their ears so at least they look normal...
roadfix is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 05:49 PM   #106
Senior Cook
 
n2cookin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 124
I use hands free and speed dial on my cell phone. I am a firm believer that people should not text while driving. I do not think the cell phone companies will loose too much money if laws pass not allowing cell phones even if hands free to be used while driving. Their is too much money being made allowing drivers to talk while driving. I know safety should come before profits. But I just have a feeling that this is one law that will not go without a lot of lobbying.
n2cookin is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 05:51 PM   #107
Head Chef
 
Adillo303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Haledon, New Jersey
Posts: 1,072
Send a message via AIM to Adillo303
I really think that it has a lot to do with the individual driving. Some folks can talk and drive safely others cannot. Instead of making law after law and taking all the possibly dangerous toys away from each person till we end up with lots of laws that are not enforceable why not just hold people responsible for their actions. Swerve lanes exhibit intention etc. Get a ticket for thatction. Remember, we are paying legislator's salaries
__________________
One difference between a cook and a chef is that the cook mows the lawn, while the bread is rising.
Adillo303 is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 06:02 PM   #108
Chef Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Park Drive Bar/Grill Los Angeles
Posts: 13,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by n2cookin View Post
Their is too much money being made allowing drivers to talk while driving. I know safety should come before profits. But I just have a feeling that this is one law that will not go without a lot of lobbying.
Probably same reason why they (cell phone companies) will oppose private ownership and use of portable cell phone jammers. I could have so much fun with such device if I owned one.
roadfix is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 06:17 PM   #109
Head Chef
 
DramaQueen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by jennyema View Post
Did you read what I posted?
Yes, I read your post. If we believe that theory, then we have to believe that no one ever had an accident before cell phones, no one was or is now distracted while carrying on a conversation before cell phones, that if no one was allowed to even bring cell phone into a car at all, there would never be another distraction caused accident.

As for the the comment from Roadfix who said OUR cell phones are merely an accessory, maybe yours is but mine isn't. A couple of months ago, my 17 year old grandson bought a car. The day after he got that car I got a cell phone call from him - he was in a panic. I happened to be in my car a mile away when he told me he ran out of gas at a very busy intersection at 4 pm in the afternoon. Now this kid had just gotten his license the day before he bought the car so this really threw him. (Just for the record his gas gauge showed nearly half a tank - it was broken.)
If I hadn't had my phone or didn't have it turned on, this kid would have been in trouble. He was blocking traffic from all angles. His mother is not allowed to have her cell phone on her at work and my son was in his garage without his phone. I was the only one available to help him. I never consider my phone an "accessory" not as long as I have family out there. I hope none of you ever have you family try to get in touch with you during an emergency.
__________________
Visit my blogsite: Chew On This
DramaQueen is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 06:31 PM   #110
Head Chef
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Boston area
Posts: 2,488
DramaQueen,

1. Jennyema, b'sgirl and I did not post "theories". We posted research findings.

2. It is acknowledged (and obvious) that many things cause accidents besides talking on cell phones. But the point remains that talkng on cell phones while driving is hazardous. MORE so than talking to a passenger, for example.



Lee
QSis is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 06:51 PM   #111
Everymom
 
Alix's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 23,230
OK folks everyone take a breath. This thread is heating up again. LOL.

Out of curiosity, do you believe that those studies are completely unbiased? Or that the statistics you read are not manipulated in some way?

My personal feeling is that numbers can be manipulated to support nearly any position. I had an example to share, but it will really hijack this baby so I'm not posting it.
__________________
You're only given a little spark of madness. You mustn't lose it. Robin Williams
Alix
Alix is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 07:12 PM   #112
Head Chef
 
Mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alix View Post
...My personal feeling is that numbers can be manipulated to support nearly any position. I had an example to share, but it will really hijack this baby so I'm not posting it.
I totally agree with you that studies can and sometimes are biased. That being said, IMO that usually happens when someone has something to benefit from the study turning out one way or another.

I don't think these cell phone studies are biased because of several reason:
1) the cell phone companies are going to be up in arms over lost revenue.
2) there are several independent studies being done by folks who stand to gain nothing from this law passing.
3) My own observations lead me to believe these studies are indeed true.
__________________
www.Mamas-Southern-Cooking.com
Mama is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 07:13 PM   #113
Head Chef
 
DramaQueen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alix View Post
OK folks everyone take a breath. This thread is heating up again. LOL.

Out of curiosity, do you believe that those studies are completely unbiased? Or that the statistics you read are not manipulated in some way?

My personal feeling is that numbers can be manipulated to support nearly any position. I had an example to share, but it will really hijack this baby so I'm not posting it.
That's funny. Your comment about studies being biased was exactly why I called it a theory, but like you, I didn't want to open that can of worms.
__________________
Visit my blogsite: Chew On This
DramaQueen is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 07:18 PM   #114
Head Chef
 
DramaQueen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mama View Post
I totally agree with you that studies can and sometimes are biased. That being said, IMO that usually happens when someone has something to benefit from the study turning out one way or another.

I don't think these cell phone studies are biased because of several reason:
1) the cell phone companies are going to be up in arms over lost revenue.
2) there are several independent studies being done by folks who stand to gain nothing from this law passing.
3) My own observations lead me to believe these studies are indeed true.
This thread is still alive no matter how hard we beat it, so let me ask the question. How do phone companies lose revenue over people not being able to talk while driving? Not getting that one. I pay for a certain number of minutes per month no matter where I am while talking.
__________________
Visit my blogsite: Chew On This
DramaQueen is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 07:21 PM   #115
Head Chef
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Boston area
Posts: 2,488
Lol! Omg .... Uncle!
QSis is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 07:22 PM   #116
Head Chef
 
Mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,810
There are lots and lots of plans that are either prepaid or you can "pay-as-you-go". The more you talk the more money they make. Even if you don't have one of those plans, if you talk enough, you will run out of minutes and when you do, they charge you a ridiculous amount per minute.
__________________
www.Mamas-Southern-Cooking.com
Mama is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 09:26 PM   #117
Sous Chef
 
RobsanX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alix View Post
OK folks everyone take a breath. This thread is heating up again. LOL.

Out of curiosity, do you believe that those studies are completely unbiased? Or that the statistics you read are not manipulated in some way?

My personal feeling is that numbers can be manipulated to support nearly any position. I had an example to share, but it will really hijack this baby so I'm not posting it.
Quote:
There are three kinds of lies: lies, ****ed lies, and statistics. -- Mark Twain
This quote is so true. A town can have one traffic accident in the 70's and two in the 80's, and someone will be there to say that traffic accidents doubled in just 10 years...
__________________
I ain't got no sprinkle cheese. All I got's this here Velveeta cheese...
RobsanX is offline  
Old 01-15-2009, 12:11 PM   #118
Head Chef
 
DramaQueen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobsanX View Post
This quote is so true. A town can have one traffic accident in the 70's and two in the 80's, and someone will be there to say that traffic accidents doubled in just 10 years...
Well said.
__________________
Visit my blogsite: Chew On This
DramaQueen is offline  
Old 01-15-2009, 03:12 PM   #119
Chef Extraordinaire
 
buckytom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: My mountain
Posts: 21,539
awww, that's a terribly flawed arguement.

they didn't even have cell phones in the 70's...


lol.

it's only common sense that some people are able to use a cell phone and drive very well. but it's also common sense that many, many people cannot. it's just too obvious.

like i said, i almost always believe in the case for more freedom and more personal responsibilty. but since the thing you're doing can (and does everyday) easily harm or kill, you have to err on the lower demoniator.
of course, i think it's not as applicable in less populated areas.

hmmm, didn't anyone ever see jiminey cricket when they were young?
__________________
The past is gone it's all been said.
So here's to what the future brings,
I know tomorrow you'll find better things
buckytom is offline  
Old 01-15-2009, 03:26 PM   #120
Sous Chef
 
B'sgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Utah
Posts: 863
You guys are right in pointing out that studies can be biased. I haven't read them so I don't know which are and which aren't. A law like that will always be controversial because even if good studies prove this or that about cell phones, where do you draw the line? No dogs in the car? No children? I am most likely to lose control of my vehicle while trying to calm a hysterical child in the back seat.
__________________
Michelle
https://foodmakeshimsick.blogspot.com/

B'sgirl is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.