 |
|
| Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Cell Phones And People
You may find this interesting.
In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. TMT Cell Phones Are Found to Pose Riskiest Distractions for Drivers The Wall Street Journal Online By Karen Lundegaard and Jesse Drucker Among the many distractions faced by car drivers, cellphones and other wireless devices contributed to far and away the most crashes, near-crashes and other incidents, according to a new government study expected to be released next week. The yearlong study, which tracked 100 cars and their drivers by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA, highlights the danger of talking on cellphones. The results come as Connecticut last week passed a law banning the use of hand-held phones while driving. Several other states are considering similar legislation. But even as safety concerns have led several states and local jurisdictions to ban drivers from using hand-held phones, some 40% of cellphone use still takes place while driving. The Virginia Tech study contains some findings first reported in a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal last July. At the time, NHTSA and Transportation Department officials said they were holding off on making recommendations to state officials until they had further research on the issue, including this long-awaited study, which looks at all crash causes, not just cellphones. Rae Tyson, a spokesman for NHTSA, said the new research further reinforces the dangers of cellphones, but the agency is limited as to what it can do on regulations. And while it makes policy recommendations on traffic-safety issues such as drunken driving and seat belts, "it's an entirely different issue when you're talking about electronic devices that we have no regulatory authority over at all." While it can't lobby state governments, NHTSA is free to make recommendations when asked. The latest study could be bad news for the cellular industry, as it may undermine two of the main arguments carriers have used against restrictions on cellphone use for drivers. Many carriers have contended that cellphone-centered restrictions are unfair and ineffective since drivers are distracted by numerous things. Plus, the industry has criticized previous research based on surveys or sophisticated driving simulators. But the Virginia Tech study videotaped 100 cars and their drivers for a year for two million miles and 43,000 hours, and found that drivers involved in crashes, near crashes and incidents -- defined as an evasive maneuver, though not as urgent as a near-crash -- were far more likely to be using their wireless device as any other single distracting activity. Wireless devices contributed to 644 events, including six crashes. The majority of those occurrences, including all the crashes, happened while drivers were on the phone talking and listening, rather than dialing a phone number. The next-biggest distraction, with 411 crashes, near-misses and other incidents, came from "passenger-related" issues, including talking to a fellow passenger and placating children in rear seats. "Acknowledging that cellphone use in a car can be a potential distraction ... we've been very clear on that," said a spokesman for the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, the industry's main trade group. "At the same time, cellphone use is one of what appears to be a number of behaviors in there." He added: "It's certainly not in line with what a number of other studies have found. The fact it is so way out of line would give me some pause." Another NHTSA study that looked at driving and phone usage, presented at a traffic-safety conference last week, raises further questions about the added safety benefits of using headsets and other "hands free" devices. Researchers had 10 participants drive vehicles for six weeks with three different types of phones: hand-held, hands-free headsets and hands-free phones with voice dialing. The voice dialing was so unpopular that drivers ignored instructions to always use it and dialed manually half the time. Hand-held dialing took less time. NHTSA researchers noted that the promise that hands-free phones let drivers keep both hands on the wheel may not be true: Drivers steered with both hands on the wheel only 13% of the time when not on the phone and between 13% and 16% with a hands-free device. With hand-held phones both hands were on the wheel less than 1% of time. The researchers also found drivers looked at the road ahead less while dialing manually (40% of time) than hands-free dialing (50%). That compares with 70% of time looking ahead in driving without talking on a cellphone. While talking, drivers became less aware of their surrounding situation -- instead looking straight ahead most of the time (90% of time for hand-held phones and 77% for hands-free phones, compared with 70% in normal driving). Despite a growing body of research questioning the added safety of hands-free devices, many states continue to ban hand-held phones for drivers, including New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, as well as Washington, D.C. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oh God! Please don't let them ban cell phones on the road. That would
cause even more of the rude *******s to be up in our faces in restaurants. Bob Swinney "Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message oups.com... You may find this interesting. In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. TMT Cell Phones Are Found to Pose Riskiest Distractions for Drivers The Wall Street Journal Online By Karen Lundegaard and Jesse Drucker Among the many distractions faced by car drivers, cellphones and other wireless devices contributed to far and away the most crashes, near-crashes and other incidents, according to a new government study expected to be released next week. The yearlong study, which tracked 100 cars and their drivers by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA, highlights the danger of talking on cellphones. The results come as Connecticut last week passed a law banning the use of hand-held phones while driving. Several other states are considering similar legislation. But even as safety concerns have led several states and local jurisdictions to ban drivers from using hand-held phones, some 40% of cellphone use still takes place while driving. The Virginia Tech study contains some findings first reported in a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal last July. At the time, NHTSA and Transportation Department officials said they were holding off on making recommendations to state officials until they had further research on the issue, including this long-awaited study, which looks at all crash causes, not just cellphones. Rae Tyson, a spokesman for NHTSA, said the new research further reinforces the dangers of cellphones, but the agency is limited as to what it can do on regulations. And while it makes policy recommendations on traffic-safety issues such as drunken driving and seat belts, "it's an entirely different issue when you're talking about electronic devices that we have no regulatory authority over at all." While it can't lobby state governments, NHTSA is free to make recommendations when asked. The latest study could be bad news for the cellular industry, as it may undermine two of the main arguments carriers have used against restrictions on cellphone use for drivers. Many carriers have contended that cellphone-centered restrictions are unfair and ineffective since drivers are distracted by numerous things. Plus, the industry has criticized previous research based on surveys or sophisticated driving simulators. But the Virginia Tech study videotaped 100 cars and their drivers for a year for two million miles and 43,000 hours, and found that drivers involved in crashes, near crashes and incidents -- defined as an evasive maneuver, though not as urgent as a near-crash -- were far more likely to be using their wireless device as any other single distracting activity. Wireless devices contributed to 644 events, including six crashes. The majority of those occurrences, including all the crashes, happened while drivers were on the phone talking and listening, rather than dialing a phone number. The next-biggest distraction, with 411 crashes, near-misses and other incidents, came from "passenger-related" issues, including talking to a fellow passenger and placating children in rear seats. "Acknowledging that cellphone use in a car can be a potential distraction ... we've been very clear on that," said a spokesman for the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, the industry's main trade group. "At the same time, cellphone use is one of what appears to be a number of behaviors in there." He added: "It's certainly not in line with what a number of other studies have found. The fact it is so way out of line would give me some pause." Another NHTSA study that looked at driving and phone usage, presented at a traffic-safety conference last week, raises further questions about the added safety benefits of using headsets and other "hands free" devices. Researchers had 10 participants drive vehicles for six weeks with three different types of phones: hand-held, hands-free headsets and hands-free phones with voice dialing. The voice dialing was so unpopular that drivers ignored instructions to always use it and dialed manually half the time. Hand-held dialing took less time. NHTSA researchers noted that the promise that hands-free phones let drivers keep both hands on the wheel may not be true: Drivers steered with both hands on the wheel only 13% of the time when not on the phone and between 13% and 16% with a hands-free device. With hand-held phones both hands were on the wheel less than 1% of time. The researchers also found drivers looked at the road ahead less while dialing manually (40% of time) than hands-free dialing (50%). That compares with 70% of time looking ahead in driving without talking on a cellphone. While talking, drivers became less aware of their surrounding situation -- instead looking straight ahead most of the time (90% of time for hand-held phones and 77% for hands-free phones, compared with 70% in normal driving). Despite a growing body of research questioning the added safety of hands-free devices, many states continue to ban hand-held phones for drivers, including New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, as well as Washington, D.C. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
You may find this interesting. In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd...ase1Report.pdf Which is kind of pointless, as it doesn't give any breakdown of crashes by type of distraction. I'd like to see actual numbers for hands-free, voice dial, ...... Though 100 cars are not really a great statistical base. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:08:23 -0500, "Robert Swinney"
wrote: Oh God! Please don't let them ban cell phones on the road. That would cause even more of the rude *******s to be up in our faces in restaurants. Think jammer disguised as a cellphone, Bob! |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here in Australia, they've banned all but "hands free" use of mobile phone
for about 3 or 4 years. Mind you, we are over regulated to buggery.The bloody polititians use the road law fines as a cash cow,and milk us at every opportunity. The best lurk that they've come up with, is the automated speed camera. Three mph over the limit and you get a pinky in the post the following day. Its the only part of the public service that is efficient. Try calling any gov't department on the phone and you'll spend 10 minutes pushing buttons on your phone then half an hour listening to crap recorded music then some brainless git will inform you that his department doesn't deal with those matters any more,and you've got to do it all over again on another number! AArgh!!! There I feel better now, Sorry about that. Tom Miller "Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message oups.com... You may find this interesting. In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. TMT Cell Phones Are Found to Pose Riskiest Distractions for Drivers The Wall Street Journal Online By Karen Lundegaard and Jesse Drucker Among the many distractions faced by car drivers, cellphones and other wireless devices contributed to far and away the most crashes, near-crashes and other incidents, according to a new government study expected to be released next week. The yearlong study, which tracked 100 cars and their drivers by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA, highlights the danger of talking on cellphones. The results come as Connecticut last week passed a law banning the use of hand-held phones while driving. Several other states are considering similar legislation. But even as safety concerns have led several states and local jurisdictions to ban drivers from using hand-held phones, some 40% of cellphone use still takes place while driving. The Virginia Tech study contains some findings first reported in a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal last July. At the time, NHTSA and Transportation Department officials said they were holding off on making recommendations to state officials until they had further research on the issue, including this long-awaited study, which looks at all crash causes, not just cellphones. Rae Tyson, a spokesman for NHTSA, said the new research further reinforces the dangers of cellphones, but the agency is limited as to what it can do on regulations. And while it makes policy recommendations on traffic-safety issues such as drunken driving and seat belts, "it's an entirely different issue when you're talking about electronic devices that we have no regulatory authority over at all." While it can't lobby state governments, NHTSA is free to make recommendations when asked. The latest study could be bad news for the cellular industry, as it may undermine two of the main arguments carriers have used against restrictions on cellphone use for drivers. Many carriers have contended that cellphone-centered restrictions are unfair and ineffective since drivers are distracted by numerous things. Plus, the industry has criticized previous research based on surveys or sophisticated driving simulators. But the Virginia Tech study videotaped 100 cars and their drivers for a year for two million miles and 43,000 hours, and found that drivers involved in crashes, near crashes and incidents -- defined as an evasive maneuver, though not as urgent as a near-crash -- were far more likely to be using their wireless device as any other single distracting activity. Wireless devices contributed to 644 events, including six crashes. The majority of those occurrences, including all the crashes, happened while drivers were on the phone talking and listening, rather than dialing a phone number. The next-biggest distraction, with 411 crashes, near-misses and other incidents, came from "passenger-related" issues, including talking to a fellow passenger and placating children in rear seats. "Acknowledging that cellphone use in a car can be a potential distraction ... we've been very clear on that," said a spokesman for the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, the industry's main trade group. "At the same time, cellphone use is one of what appears to be a number of behaviors in there." He added: "It's certainly not in line with what a number of other studies have found. The fact it is so way out of line would give me some pause." Another NHTSA study that looked at driving and phone usage, presented at a traffic-safety conference last week, raises further questions about the added safety benefits of using headsets and other "hands free" devices. Researchers had 10 participants drive vehicles for six weeks with three different types of phones: hand-held, hands-free headsets and hands-free phones with voice dialing. The voice dialing was so unpopular that drivers ignored instructions to always use it and dialed manually half the time. Hand-held dialing took less time. NHTSA researchers noted that the promise that hands-free phones let drivers keep both hands on the wheel may not be true: Drivers steered with both hands on the wheel only 13% of the time when not on the phone and between 13% and 16% with a hands-free device. With hand-held phones both hands were on the wheel less than 1% of time. The researchers also found drivers looked at the road ahead less while dialing manually (40% of time) than hands-free dialing (50%). That compares with 70% of time looking ahead in driving without talking on a cellphone. While talking, drivers became less aware of their surrounding situation -- instead looking straight ahead most of the time (90% of time for hand-held phones and 77% for hands-free phones, compared with 70% in normal driving). Despite a growing body of research questioning the added safety of hands-free devices, many states continue to ban hand-held phones for drivers, including New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, as well as Washington, D.C. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 17 Jun 2005 22:30:54 GMT, Ian Stirling
wrote: Too_Many_Tools wrote: You may find this interesting. In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd...ase1Report.pdf Which is kind of pointless, as it doesn't give any breakdown of crashes by type of distraction. I'd like to see actual numbers for hands-free, voice dial, ...... Though 100 cars are not really a great statistical base. Dont forget the Phone Sex catagory either. Got to love the old analog cell phones and a good scanner..... Gunner "Considering the events of recent years, the world has a long way to go to regain its credibility and reputation with the US." unknown |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 17 Jun 2005 22:30:54 GMT, Ian Stirling
wrote: Too_Many_Tools wrote: You may find this interesting. In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd...ase1Report.pdf Which is kind of pointless, as it doesn't give any breakdown of crashes by type of distraction. I'd like to see actual numbers for hands-free, voice dial, ...... Though 100 cars are not really a great statistical base. In New Zealand, accroding to the LTSA (Govt road safety dept..), of all in-vehicle distractions in crashes, cell phone use made up only 10%, slightly more than the radio/cd. Passengers made up around 28% and reaching for or adjusting an object around 25%. This is not 10% of all crashes - only 10% of those caused by distractions. The data from CELL PHONE USE WHILE DRIVING, Summary of Research and Analysis, NZ Land Transport Safety Authority, September 2003 is summerised at http://www.fastandsafe.org/site.aspx...ellPhones/data Some more info at http://www.fastandsafe.org/site.aspx...llPhones/index LTSA report at http://www.fastandsafe.org/site.aspx...Phones/reports Geoff |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
oups.com... You may find this interesting. In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. Cell Phones Are Found to Pose Riskiest Distractions for Drivers Cell phones don't cause vehicular accidents; people cause vehicular accidents. The problem isn't cell phones. The problem is bad drivers (who may or may not be using cell phones while driving). We don't need a ban on cell phones while driving, we need a ban on bad drivers (or at least, more stingent driving certification and licensing procedures). - Michael |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 17 Jun 2005 22:30:54 GMT, Ian Stirling
wrote: Too_Many_Tools wrote: You may find this interesting. In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd...ase1Report.pdf Further to my previous post: http://www.drivers.com/article/609/ has some links, including Canada geoff |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
You may find this interesting.
In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. TMT Cell Phones Are Found to Pose Riskiest Distractions for Drivers The Wall Street Journal Online By Karen Lundegaard and Jesse Drucker Among the many distractions faced by car drivers, cellphones and other wireless devices contributed to far and away the most crashes, near-crashes and other incidents, according to a new government study expected to be released next week. The yearlong study, which tracked 100 cars and their drivers by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA, highlights the danger of talking on cellphones. The results come as Connecticut last week passed a law banning the use of hand-held phones while driving. Several other states are considering similar legislation. But even as safety concerns have led several states and local jurisdictions to ban drivers from using hand-held phones, some 40% of cellphone use still takes place while driving. The Virginia Tech study contains some findings first reported in a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal last July. At the time, NHTSA and Transportation Department officials said they were holding off on making recommendations to state officials until they had further research on the issue, including this long-awaited study, which looks at all crash causes, not just cellphones. Rae Tyson, a spokesman for NHTSA, said the new research further reinforces the dangers of cellphones, but the agency is limited as to what it can do on regulations. And while it makes policy recommendations on traffic-safety issues such as drunken driving and seat belts, "it's an entirely different issue when you're talking about electronic devices that we have no regulatory authority over at all." While it can't lobby state governments, NHTSA is free to make recommendations when asked. The latest study could be bad news for the cellular industry, as it may undermine two of the main arguments carriers have used against restrictions on cellphone use for drivers. Many carriers have contended that cellphone-centered restrictions are unfair and ineffective since drivers are distracted by numerous things. Plus, the industry has criticized previous research based on surveys or sophisticated driving simulators. But the Virginia Tech study videotaped 100 cars and their drivers for a year for two million miles and 43,000 hours, and found that drivers involved in crashes, near crashes and incidents -- defined as an evasive maneuver, though not as urgent as a near-crash -- were far more likely to be using their wireless device as any other single distracting activity. Wireless devices contributed to 644 events, including six crashes. The majority of those occurrences, including all the crashes, happened while drivers were on the phone talking and listening, rather than dialing a phone number. The next-biggest distraction, with 411 crashes, near-misses and other incidents, came from "passenger-related" issues, including talking to a fellow passenger and placating children in rear seats. "Acknowledging that cellphone use in a car can be a potential distraction ... we've been very clear on that," said a spokesman for the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, the industry's main trade group. "At the same time, cellphone use is one of what appears to be a number of behaviors in there." He added: "It's certainly not in line with what a number of other studies have found. The fact it is so way out of line would give me some pause." Another NHTSA study that looked at driving and phone usage, presented at a traffic-safety conference last week, raises further questions about the added safety benefits of using headsets and other "hands free" devices. Researchers had 10 participants drive vehicles for six weeks with three different types of phones: hand-held, hands-free headsets and hands-free phones with voice dialing. The voice dialing was so unpopular that drivers ignored instructions to always use it and dialed manually half the time. Hand-held dialing took less time. NHTSA researchers noted that the promise that hands-free phones let drivers keep both hands on the wheel may not be true: Drivers steered with both hands on the wheel only 13% of the time when not on the phone and between 13% and 16% with a hands-free device. With hand-held phones both hands were on the wheel less than 1% of time. The researchers also found drivers looked at the road ahead less while dialing manually (40% of time) than hands-free dialing (50%). That compares with 70% of time looking ahead in driving without talking on a cellphone. While talking, drivers became less aware of their surrounding situation -- instead looking straight ahead most of the time (90% of time for hand-held phones and 77% for hands-free phones, compared with 70% in normal driving). Despite a growing body of research questioning the added safety of hands-free devices, many states continue to ban hand-held phones for drivers, including New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, as well as Washington, D.C. I think the autos should be wired so that a jamming signal is generated the entire time it's running, so to use the cell phone, you would *have* to pull over, shut off the engine, *then* the cell phone would work. I would hazard a guess that 90% of the active cell phone conversations are bull$hit discussions anyway. Ken. |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
"DeepDiver" wrote: "Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message oups.com... You may find this interesting. In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. Cell Phones Are Found to Pose Riskiest Distractions for Drivers Cell phones don't cause vehicular accidents; people cause vehicular accidents. The problem isn't cell phones. The problem is bad drivers (who may or may not be using cell phones while driving). We don't need a ban on cell phones while driving, we need a ban on bad drivers (or at least, more stingent driving certification and licensing procedures). How about raising the drivers licence fee $100 for each accident you are involved in. After 5 accidents you have an extra $500/year cost for your licence. Bad drivers will get the message. -- Free men own guns, slaves don't www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/ |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , Robert Swinney says...
Oh God! Please don't let them ban cell phones on the road. That would cause even more of the rude *******s to be up in our faces in restaurants. Bob, at least there you can throw food at them when they're being rude. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Throwing food - now that is tacky!
Bob Swinney "jim rozen" wrote in message ... In article , Robert Swinney says... Oh God! Please don't let them ban cell phones on the road. That would cause even more of the rude *******s to be up in our faces in restaurants. Bob, at least there you can throw food at them when they're being rude. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Do I detect some sarcasm her?
Mike Eberlein jim rozen wrote: In article , DeepDiver says... The problem isn't cell phones. The problem is bad drivers (who may or may not be using cell phones while driving). I agree. This is why I view red lights as purely optional to me. I never run through a red light if would be unsafe, but they keep giving me tickets for doing this. That is *so* unfair. The problem is bad drivers who disregard red lights when it's unsafe to do so. They should ban those bad drivers and let *me* go ahead and run the red lights because I only do it when it's safe to do so. Don't ticket red-light runners. Only ticket the bad drivers. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 17 Jun 2005 22:30:54 GMT, Ian Stirling
wrote: Too_Many_Tools wrote: You may find this interesting. In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd...ase1Report.pdf Which is kind of pointless, as it doesn't give any breakdown of crashes by type of distraction. I'd like to see actual numbers for hands-free, voice dial, ...... Though 100 cars are not really a great statistical base. I've noticed in one part of town they have an inordinate amount of SUV's with home based business signs that cover the whole vehicle like busses do. Those are really dangerous distractions. Another is those chrome strips on the bottom of simi mud flaps that flash in your eyes over and over. They should just ticket those that clearly are not paying attention. To me driving isn't too demanding that talking on the phone becomes much of a problem and if it does I just tell them I'll get back to them. And that is mainly cause I have to shift ,steer, and deal with the idiots at the same time. I don't get enough calls to warrant a head set and I have to answer or just start pushing a cart. |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
I like your idea.... Have the $500 that
5-accidenters are charged REDUCE the ammount that good drivers pay. Then the public profits, instead of the gov't stealing. Rich |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , mikee says...
Do I detect some sarcasm here? Irony. It's not meant in a mean vein, so I would say it's really irony. But the point is valid, folks try to do all *kinds* of stuff when driving. Some of it is downright hazardous to other road users, and so has been made illegal. In NY state, that includes the use of hand-held cell phones while driving. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
I would like to see the numbers too, but the report did say " far and
away ". I foolishly assume that means at least 50% more than the next closest cause. The numbers may be tilted because many of those that use cell phones a lot seem to be air heads that feel a need to be talking continuously. I know there are people that use them briefly when necessary. I even see some of them pulled over to the shoulder when they are talking on their cell phone. Dan |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ken Sterling wrote:
I would hazard a guess that 90% of the active cell phone conversations are bull$hit discussions anyway. Ken. Fer sure. In the Pre-Cell Phone Era, they had to store up all the meaningless chatter in their heads to release at work, lunch, dinner table, etc. :-) Fred |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
jim rozen wrote:
In article , mikee says... Do I detect some sarcasm here? Irony. It's not meant in a mean vein, so I would say it's really irony. Yes, but it takes carbony to turn irony into steely. --Winston |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ken Sterling wrote:
You may find this interesting. In my opinion, a federal ban could not come too soon. TMT Cell Phones Are Found to Pose Riskiest Distractions for Drivers The Wall Street Journal Online By Karen Lundegaard and Jesse Drucker Among the many distractions faced by car drivers, cellphones and other wireless devices contributed to far and away the most crashes, near-crashes and other incidents, according to a new government study expected to be released next week. The yearlong study, which tracked 100 cars and their drivers by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, or NHTSA, highlights the danger of talking on cellphones. The results come as Connecticut last week passed a law banning the use of hand-held phones while driving. Several other states are considering similar legislation. But even as safety concerns have led several states and local jurisdictions to ban drivers from using hand-held phones, some 40% of cellphone use still takes place while driving. The Virginia Tech study contains some findings first reported in a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal last July. At the time, NHTSA and Transportation Department officials said they were holding off on making recommendations to state officials until they had further research on the issue, including this long-awaited study, which looks at all crash causes, not just cellphones. Rae Tyson, a spokesman for NHTSA, said the new research further reinforces the dangers of cellphones, but the agency is limited as to what it can do on regulations. And while it makes policy recommendations on traffic-safety issues such as drunken driving and seat belts, "it's an entirely different issue when you're talking about electronic devices that we have no regulatory authority over at all." While it can't lobby state governments, NHTSA is free to make recommendations when asked. The latest study could be bad news for the cellular industry, as it may undermine two of the main arguments carriers have used against restrictions on cellphone use for drivers. Many carriers have contended that cellphone-centered restrictions are unfair and ineffective since drivers are distracted by numerous things. Plus, the industry has criticized previous research based on surveys or sophisticated driving simulators. But the Virginia Tech study videotaped 100 cars and their drivers for a year for two million miles and 43,000 hours, and found that drivers involved in crashes, near crashes and incidents -- defined as an evasive maneuver, though not as urgent as a near-crash -- were far more likely to be using their wireless device as any other single distracting activity. Wireless devices contributed to 644 events, including six crashes. The majority of those occurrences, including all the crashes, happened while drivers were on the phone talking and listening, rather than dialing a phone number. The next-biggest distraction, with 411 crashes, near-misses and other incidents, came from "passenger-related" issues, including talking to a fellow passenger and placating children in rear seats. "Acknowledging that cellphone use in a car can be a potential distraction ... we've been very clear on that," said a spokesman for the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, the industry's main trade group. "At the same time, cellphone use is one of what appears to be a number of behaviors in there." He added: "It's certainly not in line with what a number of other studies have found. The fact it is so way out of line would give me some pause." Another NHTSA study that looked at driving and phone usage, presented at a traffic-safety conference last week, raises further questions about the added safety benefits of using headsets and other "hands free" devices. Researchers had 10 participants drive vehicles for six weeks with three different types of phones: hand-held, hands-free headsets and hands-free phones with voice dialing. The voice dialing was so unpopular that drivers ignored instructions to always use it and dialed manually half the time. Hand-held dialing took less time. NHTSA researchers noted that the promise that hands-free phones let drivers keep both hands on the wheel may not be true: Drivers steered with both hands on the wheel only 13% of the time when not on the phone and between 13% and 16% with a hands-free device. With hand-held phones both hands were on the wheel less than 1% of time. The researchers also found drivers looked at the road ahead less while dialing manually (40% of time) than hands-free dialing (50%). That compares with 70% of time looking ahead in driving without talking on a cellphone. While talking, drivers became less aware of their surrounding situation -- instead looking straight ahead most of the time (90% of time for hand-held phones and 77% for hands-free phones, compared with 70% in normal driving). Despite a growing body of research questioning the added safety of hands-free devices, many states continue to ban hand-held phones for drivers, including New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, as well as Washington, D.C. I think the autos should be wired so that a jamming signal is generated the entire time it's running, so to use the cell phone, you would *have* to pull over, shut off the engine, *then* the cell phone would work. I would hazard a guess that 90% of the active cell phone conversations are bull$hit discussions anyway. Ken. And you get the first lawsuit when a life can't be saved because to many anti-cell signals are close to a person calling for help or their loved one for the last time - NO not in my book ever. I want the last chance and so does my wife. I want to be able to call the highway patrol when a drunk goes screaming down the rainy road. I have in the past. Martin ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here's another step in the right direction...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050625/...BHNlYwN0b WE- States Bar Teen Drivers Using Cell Phones By ROBERT TANNER, AP National Writer Sat Jun 25, 7:16 PM ET There are a few things that the average teenager absolutely must have in 21st century America - a license to drive is one, a cell phone is another. But police officers, parents, and, increasingly, lawmakers are coming to the conclusion that those essentials are a dangerous mix when combined with inexperience on the road. A growing number of states are creating legal barriers to keep young drivers from using cell phones, even as few ban adults from talking - at least handsfree - while driving. "It's not a silver bullet solution, but it's one piece of a puzzle we need to put in place if we're serious about eliminating highway deaths, highway crashes, as the No. 1 cause of death of young Americans," said Maryland Delegate William Bronrott. The year began with just two states limiting cell phone use for teen drivers. But as legislative sessions moved ahead, lawmakers in six states passed bills to bar all cell phones, handheld or handsfree, for teenage drivers with learner permits or provisional licenses. Now, laws in Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland and Tennessee say young drivers must keep the phone off. Illinois's measure is waiting for Gov. Rod Blagojevich to sign it into law, but his staff says he intends to. Maine already bars cell phones for drivers with provisional licenses up to age 21, and New Jersey bans them for those drivers at any age. At least a dozen more states considered similar measures in recent months and balked, though advocates say they'll be back. Lawmakers don't necessarily expect teenagers to like it - and they don't. "I don't know anybody who says it's a good idea, or it's fair to single out 16- or 17-year-olds," said Adam Bonefeste, a 17-year-old from Springfield, Ill. Nearly all his friends have their own cell phone, and everybody needs to drive for work, school and social life, he said. "I drive and talk on my cell phone all the time," he said. "I've never had any problems, never run into anything or got a ticket." Whether or not they're using cell phones, teenagers are much more likely than older drivers to get into accidents. At age 16, boys get into 27 crashes per million miles driven and girls 28 crashes. Those numbers drop quickly as drivers age. By the time drivers reach the 20-to-24-year-old group, there are eight crashes per million miles for men, and nine crashes for women, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, based on 2001 data. Those crashes take a deadly toll. The insurance institute says that 32 16-year-olds died per 100,000 drivers in 2003, four times the fatality rate of the 30-to-59 age group. Researchers say there is clearly a problem with teenage drivers becoming easily distracted on the road. Their work has bolstered efforts to ease teenagers into the driving world, giving them more time to learn, restricting nighttime driving and barring other teenage passengers, who sometimes incite dangerous behavior. Now 45 states have some version of what's called graduated drivers licenses. But many researchers say convincing evidence is lacking on any link between cell phone use and accidents - even with academic studies like one published last winter that found young motorists talking on cell phones react as slowly as senior citizens, and are more impaired than drunk drivers. "It's just not clear," said Susan Ferguson, vice president of research at the insurance institute. The National Transportation Safety Board and the Governors Highway Safety Association both endorse bans for cell phone for novice drivers. But they back off on bans for adult drivers. State legislators and governors, too, have proved largely reluctant to limit or ban cell phones for all drivers. New York banned handheld devices in 2001, and since then only New Jersey in 2004, and the Connecticut legislature - this year - approved a ban. Connecticut's law is waiting on the governor's signature. "This is part of an evolution, part of a revolution as we learn more and more about human factors in driving," said Ellen Engleman Conners, the chairman designate at the National Transportation Safety Board. More research is being pursued to shape public policy, but until then, it makes sense to protect teenagers because their vulnerability to distractions and accidents is indisputable, she said. It's easy to pass a law, but harder to change behavior, said Sheriff Dave Owens in McLean County, Ill. "Just the fact that that becomes law .... is that enough to get people to stop? We have speeding laws in this country and people routinely speed," he said. In Maryland, advocates had pushed for years to get tougher restrictions on teenagers that included many of the elements of graduated drivers licenses. They had always failed - until this year, when a series of fatal crashes sharpened public attention to the problem. "There were 18 teens killed in about three months," said Bronrott, a longtime advocate of safe driving rules. "It was a huge wakeup call." |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
What needs to be done is this:
There are already laws in every state that provide for citing people who "fail to pay full time and attention" to driving. Start enforcing it. I don't care if a person is fiddling with the radio, eating, talking on a cell, putting on makeup, eating, slapping their kid, or whatever. If you ain't paying full time and attention to driving while you are driving, you are behaving criminally, and deserve any punishment dealt to you. Steve |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article MZpve.4342$8o.2020@fed1read03, SteveB says...
There are already laws in every state that provide for citing people who "fail to pay full time and attention" to driving. Start enforcing it. There are also laws against tailgating, and failure to keep right except when passing. Those are never enforced either. More accidents are caused by inattention and tailgating but the unfortunate fact is that traffic enforcement is not about preventing accidents or about making the roads safer. It is about revenue generation - speed enforcement in particular. Cops don't care what's going on in the car unless they can hit it with Lidar or a radar gun and give it a ticket. The subjective issues like driving skill, attention, or politeness simply are too far down on their priority list to matter. This is why you see idiots simply driving off the road because they're too busy talking on the phone. This is why you have the poor confused elderly person driving at 40 mph in the fast lane of a superhighway, causing all kinds of havoc behind them. This is why the soccer mom who is disciplining their kid can get away with being two feet away from your rear bumper. Nobody cares anymore. The US roads have become a free-for-all of bad behavior and me-centric activity. I need to talk on the phone. I need to drink coffee now. I need to see what my kids doing in the backseat. I need to get there in a hurry. I need to drive in the fast lane, screw everyone else. I need to put my makeup on before I get to work. I need to read the newspaper. I need to use my eyelash curler tongs now. Cell phones are just the latest, most obvious form of me-centric bad behavior that endagers all other road users simply because the moron who's chatting away thinks that his phone call is more important than driving his car. Because cops in NY state can actually *see* a driver with a hand-held cell phone in use, they can then generate revenue by issuing tickets. Pretty soon we will have cell phone trap stops like we now have seatbelt trap stops. The seatbelt ones seem to work, I would say that seatbelt use is nearly 100% around here. Jim -- ================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ================================================== |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
"SteveB" wrote in message news:MZpve.4342$8o.2020@fed1read03... What needs to be done is this: There are already laws in every state that provide for citing people who "fail to pay full time and attention" to driving. Start enforcing it. I don't care if a person is fiddling with the radio, eating, talking on a cell, putting on makeup, eating, slapping their kid, or whatever. If you ain't paying full time and attention to driving while you are driving, you are behaving criminally, and deserve any punishment dealt to you. Steve Ah - someone who finally understands the problem. Life is a set of priorities -- when driving, that is #1, NOT #8 behind eating,talking, shaving,reading etc. I shudder every time I see the new Verizon commercials for the cell phones with streaming video on them - I can just see the drivers now. mikey |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Fields" wrote Ah - someone who finally understands the problem. Life is a set of priorities -- when driving, that is #1, NOT #8 behind eating,talking, shaving,reading etc. I shudder every time I see the new Verizon commercials for the cell phones with streaming video on them - I can just see the drivers now. mikey The only thing worse is driving down the road and seeing those people in the commercials in the car NEXT TO YOU. I have seen some people do some absolutely incredibly stupid things. I am sure they are nice people out of their cars. Loving parents. Caring people. Wouldn't swat a fly kind of people. But, when they get in the car, they change. Some of them get terminal stupidity and some of them into absolutely raging maniacs. Steve |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 26 Jun 2005 10:12:40 -0700, jim rozen
wrote: This is why the soccer mom who is disciplining their kid can get away with being two feet away from your rear bumper. I saw a similar accident last week. A woman was talking on the cell..and rear ended a small car with what appeared to be a 13-14 yr old boy in the back of a small car with a big hatchback type rear window. Not belted in btw..as he came flying out through the glass and ended up sprawled across the hood and windshield of the car that hit his car. Neither of which vehicles were traveling much more than about 20 mph in very slow traffic..but I saw the initial hit out of the corner of my eye..and the spray of glass and kid as I turned my head to look. I was in the #2 lane..and all 4 lanes of traffic slid to a stop instantly. The kid got off the car..dusted himself off and limped to the side of the road..apparently not to badly busted up. Gunner "Considering the events of recent years, the world has a long way to go to regain its credibility and reputation with the US." unknown |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
SteveB wrote:
"Mike Fields" wrote Ah - someone who finally understands the problem. Life is a set of priorities -- when driving, that is #1, NOT #8 behind eating,talking, shaving,reading etc. I shudder every time I see the new Verizon commercials for the cell phones with streaming video on them - I can just see the drivers now. mikey The only thing worse is driving down the road and seeing those people in the commercials in the car NEXT TO YOU. I have seen some people do some absolutely incredibly stupid things. I am sure they are nice people out of their cars. Loving parents. Caring people. Wouldn't swat a fly kind of people. But, when they get in the car, they change. Some of them get terminal stupidity and some of them into absolutely raging maniacs. Steve A few days ago I was headed home and the cute blonde in the convertible ahead of me caught my eye. Because she was trying to talk on the phone and tie her hair back at the same time. Both hands in the air, leaving nothing doing the steering. When she drifted close enough to the curb that she had to suddenly grab the wheel and swerve, the cell phone went up in the air and bounced in the road. So I took aim and crunched it. That's one small splat for mankind ... Tove |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Tove Momerathsson" wrote in message
... A few days ago I was headed home and the cute blonde in the convertible ahead of me caught my eye. Because she was trying to talk on the phone and tie her hair back at the same time. Both hands in the air, leaving nothing doing the steering. Perhaps she was steering with a different pair of...err...appendages.  |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 21:12:35 -0400, Tove Momerathsson
wrote: SteveB wrote: "Mike Fields" wrote Ah - someone who finally understands the problem. Life is a set of priorities -- when driving, that is #1, NOT #8 behind eating,talking, shaving,reading etc. I shudder every time I see the new Verizon commercials for the cell phones with streaming video on them - I can just see the drivers now. mikey The only thing worse is driving down the road and seeing those people in the commercials in the car NEXT TO YOU. I have seen some people do some absolutely incredibly stupid things. I am sure they are nice people out of their cars. Loving parents. Caring people. Wouldn't swat a fly kind of people. But, when they get in the car, they change. Some of them get terminal stupidity and some of them into absolutely raging maniacs. Steve A few days ago I was headed home and the cute blonde in the convertible ahead of me caught my eye. Because she was trying to talk on the phone and tie her hair back at the same time. Both hands in the air, leaving nothing doing the steering. When she drifted close enough to the curb that she had to suddenly grab the wheel and swerve, the cell phone went up in the air and bounced in the road. So I took aim and crunched it. That's one small splat for mankind ... Tove Bravo! Gunner "Considering the events of recent years, the world has a long way to go to regain its credibility and reputation with the US." unknown |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Speedfit technique | UK diy | |||
| SELL this FBI NOC LIST and MAKE MILLIONS like TOM CRUISE did in MISSION IMPOSSIBLE | Woodworking | |||
| A challenge for old house lovers | UK diy | |||
| Cell Phone | Electronics | |||
| OT - Man angry at Verizon hurls phones | Woodworking | |||
Linear Mode
