Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
On Jan 27, 2010, at 10:32 AM, mike wrote: Why does it matter what someone was doing on the cell phone? Shouldn't using it be enough? Start worrying about what they were doing and suddenly our idiot lawmakers will make it so certain apps are exempt. This is just a M$ plot to suppress sales of the Jesus Tablet. Make using it illegal. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
Only slightly. With the introduction of micro brews it hastened competition. Liquor is still only available at state run liquor stores, but the alcohol content in brews have increase, except for the young crowd who still think drinking a Bud is a cool thing. Thankfully I've grown passed believing water diluted urine that tastes somewhat like beer is actually beer. The reservations have switched from alcohol to gambling. To bring this back on subject somewhat, thankfully they haven't created apps that are those realtime gabling slot machines. People would be driving all over the road with those damn things. Jeff Miles jmile...@charter.net Join my Mafia http://apps.facebook.com/inthemafia/status_invite.php?from=550968726 On Jan 27, 2010, at 6:33 PM, Rich Schinnell wrote: Jeff, when I was growing up in Washington State, Indians could only buy 3.2 beer, no hard liquor and all liquor was available in a state liquor store and you had to have a liquor card to buy. Also, it was against the law to pick up a beer/drink from the bar and walk to your table with it. A waiter/waitress had to do that. And it looks like they have not progressed much. Rich * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
I suggest that cell phone records should be pulled in the event of an accident and if a cell was in use, within, say 5 minutes, of the incident, by ANYONE in the vehicle, that the driver should be considered, at the very least, negligent. This would apply to all vehicles involved. I remind you that the driver of a vehicle is liable if a passenger litters or commits other infractions. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123084040 *It found that month-to-month fluctuations in collision accident claims didn't change before and after cell phone bans took effect. Nor did accident patterns change compared with those in nearby states without cell phone bans. * *The laws aren't reducing crashes, even though we know that such laws have reduced hand-held phone use, and several studies have established that phoning while driving increases crash risk, said Adrian Lund, president of the HLDI.* On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 12:16 PM, David D Odell waffenf...@atlanticbb.netwrote: I suggest that cell phone records should be pulled in the event of an accident and if a cell was in use, within, say 5 minutes, of the incident, by ANYONE in the vehicle, that the driver should be considered, at the very least, negligent. This would apply to all vehicles involved. I remind you that the driver of a vehicle is liable if a passenger litters or commits other infractions. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 7:02 PM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123084040 *It found that month-to-month fluctuations in collision accident claims didn't change before and after cell phone bans took effect. Nor did accident patterns change compared with those in nearby states without cell phone bans. * *The laws aren't reducing crashes, even though we know that such laws have reduced hand-held phone use, and several studies have established that phoning while driving increases crash risk, said Adrian Lund, president of the HLDI.* As Obama might say, let's be clear about this. The study is not about the effects of banning cell phone use. The study is about how one uses cell phones, and whether or not how a cell phone is used makes anyone safer. The study determined that banning hand held phone use, but allowing for hands-free use did not change the accident rate. In other words, it is just as distracting to drivers to be using a hands-free phone as it is to be using a hand held one. How an entity constructs the story and how the results of the study are presented to the public can alter perceptions. There are plenty of studies, not disputed by any reasonable person, that clearly show that drivers on their cell phones are more likely to be involved in or to cause an accident than when not using their cell phones. Inadvertently or not, the quoted text in the original message seems to imply that it is just as safe to talk while driving as it is to not do so. That is not the case at all, and is not what the study concluded as far as I can discern. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:32 AM, Constance Warner cawar...@his.com wrote: Distracted, cellphone-using, and computer-using drivers are a particular menace to anyone who takes public transportation and who is therefore a pedestrian a lot of the time. For the most part, I see no great distinction between a computer and a cell phone. These days, and with all the latest models being offered, cell phones have morphed into becoming small, portable computers. I am sure that the new iPad will be quite popular with drivers. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
Yes, I wasn't thinking about vulnerable pedestrians in the mix. The stakes are considerably higher in the human vs. large, speeding machine context. Good point. But even here I bet there will be a tech solution to preventing car collisions with ANYTHING, humans, animals, trees, ice patches. Even now there are (infrared?) sensors that can pick out warm people on a dark night, warning a driver of their presence. But I agree that at present people should not be using their devices while driving. The New York Times had an article about pedestrians who are getting injured while walking and using electronic devices. One teenager gave himself a concussion by walking head-first into a pole! Safer cars don't do very much for pedestrians, who are no match for drivers on cellphones or computers. Human flesh versus a ton of speeding metal--it's no contest. No many how many safety improvements you put in the car. --Constance Warner * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
At 12:01 PM 1/28/2010, George Carr wrote: But even here I bet there will be a tech solution to preventing car collisions with ANYTHING, humans, animals, trees, ice patches. Even now there are (infrared?) sensors that can pick out warm people on a dark night, warning a driver of their presence. But I agree that at present people should not be using their devices while driving. Such may be possible as long as some combination of steering, brake, (accelerator) can do the job, but only within the stability limits of the vehicle. If a human, animal, vehicle moves in front of the vehicle too close to stop with brakes, the only option is to swerve, which may not be an option at all if the swerve is into something else. One needs to be observant and slow down if one's mind determines that there is an increased potential for a bad situation to develop. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:01 PM, George Carr geo...@georgecarrstudio.com wrote: The New York Times had an article about pedestrians who are getting injured while walking and using electronic devices. One teenager gave himself a concussion by walking head-first into a pole! A TV station here in the District of Columbia recently sent a camera team out onto the streets for a couple of hours to get footage of ordinary folks walking around town while talking on or gaping, slack jawed, at the screen on their cell phones. They showed the results on the evening news. A couple of people stumbling and falling down stairs. One colliding with a park bench. One person walking into a tree. A woman walking across a street against the light, causing an oncoming truck to have to brake lest she get run over. Other assorted collisions, accidents or near accidents. Funny, yet also very pathetic. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
I guess it must be something missing in my genes that I don't have the constant urge to yak, yak, yak endlessly. All of the conversations I overhear (not by choice - people seem to find it necessary to babble as loudly as possible while using cellphones, regardless of how personal their conversations are) are about virtually nothing at all. Are people afraid to just be alone and think? Mike phartz...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:01 PM, George Carr geo...@georgecarrstudio.com wrote: The New York Times had an article about pedestrians who are getting injured while walking and using electronic devices. One teenager gave himself a concussion by walking head-first into a pole! A TV station here in the District of Columbia recently sent a camera team out onto the streets for a couple of hours to get footage of ordinary folks walking around town while talking on or gaping, slack jawed, at the screen on their cell phones. They showed the results on the evening news. A couple of people stumbling and falling down stairs. One colliding with a park bench. One person walking into a tree. A woman walking across a street against the light, causing an oncoming truck to have to brake lest she get run over. Other assorted collisions, accidents or near accidents. Funny, yet also very pathetic. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Mike Sloane mikeslo...@verizon.net wrote: I guess it must be something missing in my genes that I don't have the constant urge to yak, yak, yak endlessly. All of the conversations I overhear (not by choice - people seem to find it necessary to babble as loudly as possible while using cellphones, regardless of how personal their conversations are) are about virtually nothing at all. Are people afraid to just be alone and think? I know quite a number of people who definitely get nervous if their cell phone has not rung in the last 10 or 15 minutes with a call or text message. These folks will stop whatever they are doing and pick up their cell phone, seemingly worried that the battery may have died or that they just did not hear it ring. This will go on all day long, and over time, it becomes very apparent that these individuals have anxiety attacks when periods of no contact occur. I have even brought this habit to the attention of a few of these folks and they have all admitted that they are, in their own words, addicted to their cell phones. A couple of these folks initially denied such an addiction, but over time, and being in close contact with those folks, they finally had to admit to their almost slavish relationship with their phones. Don't think for a minute that the cell phone industry does not fully understand this addiction thing and use it to their advantage. As to the overly loud talking, there is no doubt about that. What also amuses me is that these newer, very thin phones can let you hear both sides of the conversation very easily. There is just not sufficient mass to these phones to prevent the sound from the speaker from radiating out the rear of the device, thus enabling it to be heard by anyone within earshot. On many occasions I have heard both sides of conversations, including some that I wish I had not heard. I have often informed some of these people of this fact, sometimes to their chagrin. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
I agree and some of the biggest offenders are law enforcement and government. Most police, (Sheriffs, city, state) now have laptops mounted on their consoles for data look ups of traffic stops etc. Plus they all have cell phones (A lot down here push to talk) and I see these folks constantly talking on the phone while driving. Yesterday while driving home from a meeting, I got off the interstate, and was almost cut off by a silver car with government (GSA) plates. As I looked over the idiot was talking on the cell phone while driving. I get after my wife all the time for calling me while she knows I am on the road. (MY blue tooth does not work.) Stewart At 06:54 AM 1/27/2010, you wrote: Yesterday afternoon, as a passenger in a car on westbound Route 66 nearing an exit to Manassas, Virginia, we were passing a minivan when I saw yet another example of why mobile computing, and I include cell phones in that category, must be banned. A guy was driving that van at about 60 mph in heavy rush hour traffic as he was working on his laptop computer. This male idiot driver, and not the first one I have seen doing this, who somehow had this laptop mounted to his right and high enough so that I could easily see the screen, was busily working the keyboard while steering with his left hand that was simultaneously clutching his cell phone. I am guessing that he would cease his computer activity and begin steering with his right hand were his cell phone to ring. As we were nearing this guy on the roadway It was the constant looking off to his right and the weaving about that initially caught my attention as well as the attention of the driver of the car I was in. A likely killer was obviously on the loose. What is wrong with people like this? What mental illness are they suffering from? And, for whatever it is worth, I think it is well past time to stop regarding cell phones as being differentiated from computers, especially when it comes to using them while driving. Most cell phones that drivers just cannot seem to put aside are, in fact, portable computers. Drivers talk on these so called cell phones, they send and receive text messages, they watch videos, they play games, they cruise the internet, look at and take photos and do just about anything else that you might normally do on your home computer, and they are doing these things while they are driving. These devices are not phones, they are computers, and in areas other than their size they bear far more resemblance to computers than they do to telephones. We tend to be aghast when drivers use computers while operating a vehicle, yet we tend to give them a pass if they are using their cell phones to perform the same functions under the same circumstances. Why? i'm just getting mad as hell at these idiots and it is getting worse every day with each new function that gets added to the arsenal available in cell phones. I do not wish to become one of the victims of these Type A people, and nor do I wish that fate upon anyone else. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Rev. Stewart Marshall revsamarsh...@earthlink.net wrote: I agree and some of the biggest offenders are law enforcement and government. Various of these agencies, as well as some businesses, are exempted from state laws that could be used to prosecute those quilty of distracted driving. Some government agencies are taking steps to disallow their employees who are driving from using any computer, cell phones included, while on the job and in motion. Governments, in general, are not interested in processes that might tend to limit the number of vehicles on the road. Traffic laws and attendant punishments that are too restrictive or too severe causes the number of vehicles on the roads to decrease. This is anathema to the collection of revenue. This revenue situation could easily be remedied by increasing the fines associated with such problems, but such a tack is usually viewed by politicians as being potential political suicide. Most police, (Sheriffs, city, state) now have laptops mounted on their consoles for data look ups of traffic stops etc. Plus they all have cell phones (A lot down here push to talk) and I see these folks constantly talking on the phone while driving. As above, this is allowed. The risk is offset by the common good that is anticipated as a result of using those devices. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
At 08:03 AM 1/27/2010, you wrote: I agree and some of the biggest offenders are law enforcement and government. There is no official word yet on this one, but generally accepted that this is what happened in this accident: http://www.pressconnects.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20101210382 [clips] SIDNEY -- The first female New York state trooper was killed in the line of duty when her patrol car drifted across the center line of Route 23 and collided with a westbound tractor-trailer, state police said Thursday. The speed limit was 55 mph, but speed was not a factor based on interviews with people who witnessed the crash, Molinari said. He also said drug screening came back negative, but police haven't ruled out the possibility that the trooper may have been using a cell phone or texting at the time of the crash. Sue * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Sue Cubic scu...@earthlink.net wrote: The speed limit was 55 mph, but speed was not a factor based on interviews with people who witnessed the crash, Molinari said. He also said drug screening came back negative, but police haven't ruled out the possibility that the trooper may have been using a cell phone or texting at the time of the crash. Herein is part of the problem. When police issue reports that cell phone use may have played a role in a crash, it is usually not specified or even known what type of use that was. Tjhe public usually assumes it was someone talking on their phone. It could have been a conversation, but it could have been text messaging. It could have even been watching a video, or checking the stock reports on the internet, it could have been playing a game. It is just as likely to have been the use of any of that ever growing myriad of apps. Point is, we just cannot have folks driving around doing all that stuff, sometimes multiple things at once, hands-free or not. It is very bad right now, and it is going to get very, very bad very soon unless our lawmakers take the problem seriously. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
Why does it matter what someone was doing on the cell phone? Shouldn't using it be enough? Start worrying about what they were doing and suddenly our idiot lawmakers will make it so certain apps are exempt. On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 7:35 AM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.comwrote: On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Sue Cubic scu...@earthlink.net wrote: The speed limit was 55 mph, but speed was not a factor based on interviews with people who witnessed the crash, Molinari said. He also said drug screening came back negative, but police haven't ruled out the possibility that the trooper may have been using a cell phone or texting at the time of the crash. Herein is part of the problem. When police issue reports that cell phone use may have played a role in a crash, it is usually not specified or even known what type of use that was. Tjhe public usually assumes it was someone talking on their phone. It could have been a conversation, but it could have been text messaging. It could have even been watching a video, or checking the stock reports on the internet, it could have been playing a game. It is just as likely to have been the use of any of that ever growing myriad of apps. Point is, we just cannot have folks driving around doing all that stuff, sometimes multiple things at once, hands-free or not. It is very bad right now, and it is going to get very, very bad very soon unless our lawmakers take the problem seriously. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
I get after my wife all the time for calling me while she knows I am on the road. (MY blue tooth does not work.) We've solved that one. Anyone in the family can call anyone else when we know they're driving, but the driver won't answer (we don't even look at the phone). Instead, the driver returns the call when it's safe to do so. Hooray for caller ID. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
Technology helped to create this problem but technology eventually will provide solutions such as safer cars, reliable crash-avoidance systems, and even vehicles that drive themselves. Meanwhile people need to focus on their driving. Did I read somewhere about a car-based system that would disable cell phones when the car is moving? we just cannot have folks driving around doing all that stuff, sometimes multiple things at once, hands-free or not. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
If traveling with someone I say its for you! Stewart At 10:18 AM 1/27/2010, you wrote: I get after my wife all the time for calling me while she knows I am on the road. (MY blue tooth does not work.) We've solved that one. Anyone in the family can call anyone else when we know they're driving, but the driver won't answer (we don't even look at the phone). Instead, the driver returns the call when it's safe to do so. Hooray for caller ID. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 11:27 AM, George Carr geo...@georgecarrstudio.comwrote: Technology helped to create this problem but technology eventually will provide solutions such as safer cars, reliable crash-avoidance systems, and even vehicles that drive themselves. Meanwhile people need to focus on their driving. Did I read somewhere about a car-based system that would disable cell phones when the car is moving? I would suspect that the FCC would call that illegal interference. -- John Duncan Yoyo ---o) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:32 AM, mike xha...@gmail.com wrote: Why does it matter what someone was doing on the cell phone? Shouldn't using it be enough? Start worrying about what they were doing and suddenly our idiot lawmakers will make it so certain apps are exempt. I do not disagree. As it currently stands, our idiot lawmakers are already only making certain uses of cell phones illegal. Such as allowing you to talk as much as you want, while banning texting but allowing you to watch videos and surf the internet. In Virginia, a driver can be ticketed for distracted driving, but there is a catch. A conviction for distracted driving can only be obtained if the issuer of the ticket can prove to the court that the distracted driver was also guilty of reckless driving. Merely weaving about on the roadway does not in and of itself meet the requirements of recklessness. The officer would have to convince the court that said distracted driving was presenting an imminent threat to the life and safety of others, going far beyond simply exhibiting a basic inability to properly control the vehicle. This is actually very hard to prove and therefore results in few such tickets being issued. Similar laws in other states vary, and Virginia is near the bottom of the list when it comes to rules of the road the serve safety over expediency. Remember, this is the state infamous for the $10 fine for texting while driving. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
Speaking to the negative drug test result. I'm still on the side that cell phone or other similar electronic devices used while driving should be charged with the same harshness as DUI. If someone is killed due to the use, it should also be charged the same as killing while under the influence. I think they call it here in Washington State, vehicular manslaughter. While I agree we can't regulate stupidity, we can regulate actions stemming from that stupidity. However, I have to admit, the DUI laws in Washington state have gone totally wacky. We have instances of people charged with DUI while on bicycles. Others charged with DUI while asleep in their parked cars because they had their keys with them and were considered in physical control of the vehicle, even though it was stopped, parked and off. I think Washington state is striving for a return of those blue laws, or where they called dry laws. I don't remember. Jeff Miles jmile...@charter.net Join my Mafia http://apps.facebook.com/inthemafia/status_invite.php?from=550968726 On Jan 27, 2010, at 6:04 AM, Sue Cubic wrote: At 08:03 AM 1/27/2010, you wrote: I agree and some of the biggest offenders are law enforcement and government. There is no official word yet on this one, but generally accepted that this is what happened in this accident: http://www.pressconnects.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20101210382 [clips] SIDNEY -- The first female New York state trooper was killed in the line of duty when her patrol car drifted across the center line of Route 23 and collided with a westbound tractor-trailer, state police said Thursday. The speed limit was 55 mph, but speed was not a factor based on interviews with people who witnessed the crash, Molinari said. He also said drug screening came back negative, but police haven't ruled out the possibility that the trooper may have been using a cell phone or texting at the time of the crash. Sue * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
Isn't this easy enough to find out? Don't cell phones and/or the provider keep time stamped logs of usage? Jeff Miles jmile...@charter.net Join my Mafia http://apps.facebook.com/inthemafia/status_invite.php?from=550968726 On Jan 27, 2010, at 6:35 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Sue Cubic scu...@earthlink.net wrote: The speed limit was 55 mph, but speed was not a factor based on interviews with people who witnessed the crash, Molinari said. He also said drug screening came back negative, but police haven't ruled out the possibility that the trooper may have been using a cell phone or texting at the time of the crash. Herein is part of the problem. When police issue reports that cell phone use may have played a role in a crash, it is usually not specified or even known what type of use that was. Tjhe public usually assumes it was someone talking on their phone. It could have been a conversation, but it could have been text messaging. It could have even been watching a video, or checking the stock reports on the internet, it could have been playing a game. It is just as likely to have been the use of any of that ever growing myriad of apps. Point is, we just cannot have folks driving around doing all that stuff, sometimes multiple things at once, hands-free or not. It is very bad right now, and it is going to get very, very bad very soon unless our lawmakers take the problem seriously. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
Partially it is the intolerance of anyone under the influence and what they can get away with charging. Makes DA's look good tough on crime etc. Also raises lots of dough for local municipality etc. Plus the fact that some of these are usually plea dealed down it gives them a stronger hand to start with. My sons companion a few months ago was pulled over and given three tickets. No license (which he will agree with) improper lane change, and finally driving under the influence. (He is a disabled vet and takes a few meds to deal with injuries etc.) Small town, and they are notorious for this kind of thing. Local judge found him guilty on all three. (Even though he gave evidence of prescriptions for all of these etc.) Is appealing sentence, and DA is saying they will probably deal on a few of the charges as some seem improper etc. So even though they go crazy doing this a good DA will weed through these and make them better. (all though it will still add money to the coffers) Stewart At 07:32 PM 1/27/2010, you wrote: Speaking to the negative drug test result. I'm still on the side that cell phone or other similar electronic devices used while driving should be charged with the same harshness as DUI. If someone is killed due to the use, it should also be charged the same as killing while under the influence. I think they call it here in Washington State, vehicular manslaughter. While I agree we can't regulate stupidity, we can regulate actions stemming from that stupidity. However, I have to admit, the DUI laws in Washington state have gone totally wacky. We have instances of people charged with DUI while on bicycles. Others charged with DUI while asleep in their parked cars because they had their keys with them and were considered in physical control of the vehicle, even though it was stopped, parked and off. I think Washington state is striving for a return of those blue laws, or where they called dry laws. I don't remember. Jeff Miles jmile...@charter.net * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
Jeff, when I was growing up in Washington State, Indians could only buy 3.2 beer, no hard liquor and all liquor was available in a state liquor store and you had to have a liquor card to buy. Also, it was against the law to pick up a beer/drink from the bar and walk to your table with it. A waiter/waitress had to do that. And it looks like they have not progressed much. Rich At 08:36 PM 1/27/2010, you wrote: Date:Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:32:24 -0800 From:Jeff Miles jmile...@charter.net Speaking to the negative drug test result. I'm still on the side that cell phone or other similar electronic devices used while driving should be charged with the same harshness as DUI. If someone is killed due to the use, it should also be charged the same as killing while under the influence. I think they call it here in Washington State, vehicular manslaughter. While I agree we can't regulate stupidity, we can regulate actions stemming from that stupidity. However, I have to admit, the DUI laws in Washington state have gone totally wacky. We have instances of people charged with DUI while on bicycles. Others charged with DUI while asleep in their parked cars because they had their keys with them and were considered in physical control of the vehicle, even though it was stopped, parked and off. I think Washington state is striving for a return of those blue laws, or where they called dry laws. I don't remember. Jeff Miles jmile...@charter.net * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
At 08:36 PM 1/27/2010, you wrote: Isn't this easy enough to find out? Don't cell phones and/or the provider keep time stamped logs of usage? Of course they do, but I doubt we ever hear the end of the story--if anyone even wants to look. The funeral was huge--big parade of police cars. The reporting would have been totally different had it not been a police officer. Sue * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Ban mobile computing
Safer cars don't do very much for pedestrians, who are no match for drivers on cellphones or computers. Distracted, cellphone-using, and computer-using drivers are a particular menace to anyone who takes public transportation and who is therefore a pedestrian a lot of the time. Just try crossing any street in, for example, Bethesda, where the ambitious, constantly electronically connected, Type A drivers cruise--you're taking your life in your hands, because you can't count on any of them paying attention to the road. And don't even think about the tourists, who have always thought of Washington as some kind of giant theme park with audioanimatronic robots instead of pedestrians, and who are even more potentially lethal now that they're riveted to their GPS units and their cellphones. Human flesh versus a ton of speeding metal--it's no contest. No many how many safety improvements you put in the car. --Constance Warner On Jan 27, 2010, at 11:27 AM, George Carr wrote: Technology helped to create this problem but technology eventually will provide solutions such as safer cars, reliable crash-avoidance systems, and even vehicles that drive themselves. Meanwhile people need to focus on their driving. Did I read somewhere about a car-based system that would disable cell phones when the car is moving? we just cannot have folks driving around doing all that stuff, sometimes multiple things at once, hands-free or not. Steve ** *** ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http:// www.cguys.org/ ** ** *** * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
