There are too many what if's and they are valid but there are too many people are getting killed or badly injured on a daily bases so you can't really base your argument around the what if's that are low in probability
The article says that once something is out there that can prevent distracted driving that laws will be passed to make them mandatory .I am a small government kinda guy so I do not want to see that. However whats going to happen is product liability lawsuits. As it stands now, a cell phone manufacture has never been successfully sued due to someone using the phone and then hitting some innocent person. Once there is technology that allows for a phone to be used and tell the difference between the drive and a passenger, and do it automatically , then every cell phone that does not have that type of program installed will be hit with massive lawsuits every time there is a cell phone caused wreak.
So if you what to get rid of it, the next phone will have it too, because the next cell phone maker does not want to get sued.
Think car set belts, go and try and order a car with out set belts, can not do it, because the car makers know that they would be sued if they sent one out of the factory without one and someone got hurt in that car. Its not laws that are going to make this type of technology common place, its lawsuits.
no if his wife is driving , she is on her way to the doctor. He can do nothing for her, unless he is also her doctor. However, she may be killed because he was texting her while she was driving , and she was already under a lot of stress , text just made her more distracted , so she killed some little girl while she was texting back or reading the text sent by the husband . Oh yes I know, I am a jerk , but this happens every day.
I've had enough of inconsiderate cell phone drivers! If it's truly an emergency that's one thing but I'd wager that 99.99% of all cell phone use while driving is not essential "life or death" communication. More and more people every day waste my time every day with their selfish needs to check their bookface, read email, tweet or the thousands of other stupid uses done behind the wheel.
As a motorcyclist, I fear for my life while they risk having nothing more than a fender-bender. What gives these thoughtless people the right to risk MY life? I'm not only on-board with any technology to lessen reckless cell phone use while driving, but I'm also for extremely harsh penalties for these mindless idiots -- especially if involved in an accident -- especially if a fatality is involved.
And don't try to think that "I'm not the problem, I can drive fine while using the phone" bull$hit. NO YOU CAN'T! I drive 100,000 miles a year and I can tell in an instant when a driver is distracted to the point of knowing whether its a phone call, reading or checking status.
Just drive people and use the phone when you get there!
Ur right about that but what about other people? female in general...are they gonna do the same? just send a quick yes or no
Apple introduced this feature for two things 1 save people lives and 2 saving themeselves from lots and lots of lawsuits
1. Apple hasn't introduced this "feature." It's simply being explored. 2. I don't see what a person's gender has to do with it. Females being verbose is a stereotype.
If she is that close to delivery may be you should be with her. This is for a safety and reducing the number of accidents that texting while driving is causing. Maybe while you are driving her to the hospital a stupid driver is texting and rear ending you. Then how you feel about this?
Just as long as it has an "off" switch. When I am a PASSENGER in a car, I'd be super ticked off if my phone suddenly disabled my ability to text (or any other function).
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/178742/apple-tech-takes-on-distracted-driving-blocks-users-from-texting-while-behind-the-wheel/40#post_2520996" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span>Quote:</span><div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>iMember</strong> <a href="/t/178742/apple-tech-takes-on-distracted-driving-blocks-users-from-texting-while-behind-the-wheel/40#post_2520996"><img src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" class="inlineimg" alt="View Post"/></a><br/><br/><p>Ur right about that but what about other people? female in general...are they gonna do the same? just send a quick yes or no</p><p> </p><p>Apple introduced this feature for two things 1 save people lives and 2 saving themeselves from lots and lots of lawsuits</p></div></div><p> </p>
1. Apple hasn't introduced this "feature." It's simply being explored.
2. I don't see what a person's gender has to do with it. Females being verbose is a stereotype.
A stereotype that is founded on the truth, in my experience.
This is obtuse. If I'm figuring out where to meet someone for lunch/dinner and I'm on the road, I should be able to glance at my phone while I'm stopped at a red light to see what the plans are, or if any changes were made. I shouldn't have to pull into a parking lot and shut off my vehicle just to read a god damn text....
A stereotype that is founded on the truth, in my experience.
All stereotypes are based in some truth. They become stereotypes when vast generalizations are made and/or assumptions are drawn thereafter. The implication that women can't answer a quick text with a "yes" or "no" is a perfect example. I know many women who don't fit the stereotype. iMember's comment was really not pertinent whatsoever.
A car came with two feet of hitting me as I crossed the street walking last week. Guess what, the driver was texting... maybe to his pregnant wife.
Sunday evening, I was run off the road by... guess what... some numnutz texting.
If you don't believe this is a serious problem with all the senseless deaths that have been caused, then you are an idiot. If somebody needs to contact you, they can ring the phone and you can answer on bluetooth... either OEM on your car or a visor mount. There is zero reason to be texting while driving. Zero.
Perhaps you need to find new ways home. You seem to be VERY prone to accidents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillstones
Maybe you should educate yourself. The majority of accidents are not caused by unqualified drivers. You live in CA, you know the driver test behind the wheel does not include parallel parking! They have not done that in decades. You only demonstrated your own ignorance. If you did research, you would know 23% of accidents were caused by cell phone use (1.6M accidents). Do some research before you claim you know what you are talking about. I have done insurance claims for 20 years and inattention by cellphone use, and other distractions, have increased. The majority of accidents are caused by inattention, following too close, turning left in front of traffic, or running red lights. It has nothing to do with unqualified drivers. Sounds like you could care less about safety and drive and text all the time because you claim you are such a hotshot driver, and know-it-all. So you think a car driving itself or sensing surroundings will fix the driver inattention? You are a fool.
Firstly, the parking between cones was to show the absurdity of, not an actual test model. FACT, I never took a physical driving test in CA, so actually, I would not know that. FACT 23% is NOT the majority. Talk about ignorance!
Inattentive or unskilled, I view them as being the same, although I concede I should have used the word inattentive for clarity for you. If you are not able (skilled) to drive due to distractions, you should not drive. If you are unable to know what distractions will lessen your ability to be attentive, then you are too unskilled to drive.
If you are abler to drive with distractions and still be attentive, you have a higher level of skill.
To better phrase. Those unskilled, or unable to drive with distractions, or have the inability to be attentive at all times, should not drive!
This is by NO means me suggesting people should drive and text, or drive and the many other distractions people take on, but to point out, there are more people that should not have a license to drive due to the lack of their skills, then those using phones. Im my most humble opinion. If we gave real driving skills tests in a simulator, that would far greater reduce the risk to others, while probably removing those too stupid to text, drive, and be attentive.
I live in an urban environment and, no, I am not prone to accidents. I am athletic and have never had a broken bone save for a toe broken while jumping into a pool when I was 16.
I walk to work and do cross some major roads, but always in the crosswalks. Arlington, Virginia has laws regarding right-away to pedestrians. These incidents are not the only ones I have seen, but ones that by chance involved me just before this post came out. I will venture to guess that you have seen cars swaying on the road as idiots are texting. I have witnessed this at least a dozen times in the last year. It is a subject of conversation with my friends and relatives. The problem is ubiquitous.
If I were a lawmaker, I would submit a bill that required texting to be shut off during high speed travel, with an automated text reply saying "call on the phone if you need to contact me". I know it's a hassle for people riding trains or passengers in cars, but if it saves just one life or keeps one person from being maimed, isn't that enough?
Comments
There are too many what if's and they are valid but there are too many people are getting killed or badly injured on a daily bases so you can't really base your argument around the what if's that are low in probability
Good to see that it could be coming to iPhone as well. I imagine it would be optional for users to turn on like the WP version.
The article says that once something is out there that can prevent distracted driving that laws will be passed to make them mandatory .I am a small government kinda guy so I do not want to see that. However whats going to happen is product liability lawsuits. As it stands now, a cell phone manufacture has never been successfully sued due to someone using the phone and then hitting some innocent person. Once there is technology that allows for a phone to be used and tell the difference between the drive and a passenger, and do it automatically , then every cell phone that does not have that type of program installed will be hit with massive lawsuits every time there is a cell phone caused wreak.
So if you what to get rid of it, the next phone will have it too, because the next cell phone maker does not want to get sued.
Think car set belts, go and try and order a car with out set belts, can not do it, because the car makers know that they would be sued if they sent one out of the factory without one and someone got hurt in that car. Its not laws that are going to make this type of technology common place, its lawsuits.
no if his wife is driving , she is on her way to the doctor. He can do nothing for her, unless he is also her doctor. However, she may be killed because he was texting her while she was driving , and she was already under a lot of stress , text just made her more distracted , so she killed some little girl while she was texting back or reading the text sent by the husband . Oh yes I know, I am a jerk , but this happens every day.
I've had enough of inconsiderate cell phone drivers! If it's truly an emergency that's one thing but I'd wager that 99.99% of all cell phone use while driving is not essential "life or death" communication. More and more people every day waste my time every day with their selfish needs to check their bookface, read email, tweet or the thousands of other stupid uses done behind the wheel.
As a motorcyclist, I fear for my life while they risk having nothing more than a fender-bender. What gives these thoughtless people the right to risk MY life? I'm not only on-board with any technology to lessen reckless cell phone use while driving, but I'm also for extremely harsh penalties for these mindless idiots -- especially if involved in an accident -- especially if a fatality is involved.
And don't try to think that "I'm not the problem, I can drive fine while using the phone" bull$hit. NO YOU CAN'T! I drive 100,000 miles a year and I can tell in an instant when a driver is distracted to the point of knowing whether its a phone call, reading or checking status.
Just drive people and use the phone when you get there!
Ur right about that but what about other people? female in general...are they gonna do the same? just send a quick yes or no
Apple introduced this feature for two things 1 save people lives and 2 saving themeselves from lots and lots of lawsuits
1. Apple hasn't introduced this "feature." It's simply being explored.2. I don't see what a person's gender has to do with it. Females being verbose is a stereotype.
If she is that close to delivery may be you should be with her. This is for a safety and reducing the number of accidents that texting while driving is causing. Maybe while you are driving her to the hospital a stupid driver is texting and rear ending you. Then how you feel about this?
A stereotype that is founded on the truth, in my experience.
A stereotype that is founded on the truth, in my experience.
All stereotypes are based in some truth. They become stereotypes when vast generalizations are made and/or assumptions are drawn thereafter. The implication that women can't answer a quick text with a "yes" or "no" is a perfect example. I know many women who don't fit the stereotype. iMember's comment was really not pertinent whatsoever.
A car came with two feet of hitting me as I crossed the street walking last week. Guess what, the driver was texting... maybe to his pregnant wife.
Sunday evening, I was run off the road by... guess what... some numnutz texting.
If you don't believe this is a serious problem with all the senseless deaths that have been caused, then you are an idiot. If somebody needs to contact you, they can ring the phone and you can answer on bluetooth... either OEM on your car or a visor mount. There is zero reason to be texting while driving. Zero.
Perhaps you need to find new ways home. You seem to be VERY prone to accidents.
Maybe you should educate yourself. The majority of accidents are not caused by unqualified drivers. You live in CA, you know the driver test behind the wheel does not include parallel parking! They have not done that in decades. You only demonstrated your own ignorance. If you did research, you would know 23% of accidents were caused by cell phone use (1.6M accidents). Do some research before you claim you know what you are talking about. I have done insurance claims for 20 years and inattention by cellphone use, and other distractions, have increased. The majority of accidents are caused by inattention, following too close, turning left in front of traffic, or running red lights. It has nothing to do with unqualified drivers. Sounds like you could care less about safety and drive and text all the time because you claim you are such a hotshot driver, and know-it-all. So you think a car driving itself or sensing surroundings will fix the driver inattention? You are a fool.
http://www.textinganddrivingsafety.com/texting-and-driving-stats/
Firstly, the parking between cones was to show the absurdity of, not an actual test model. FACT, I never took a physical driving test in CA, so actually, I would not know that. FACT 23% is NOT the majority. Talk about ignorance!
Inattentive or unskilled, I view them as being the same, although I concede I should have used the word inattentive for clarity for you. If you are not able (skilled) to drive due to distractions, you should not drive. If you are unable to know what distractions will lessen your ability to be attentive, then you are too unskilled to drive.
If you are abler to drive with distractions and still be attentive, you have a higher level of skill.
To better phrase. Those unskilled, or unable to drive with distractions, or have the inability to be attentive at all times, should not drive!
This is by NO means me suggesting people should drive and text, or drive and the many other distractions people take on, but to point out, there are more people that should not have a license to drive due to the lack of their skills, then those using phones. Im my most humble opinion. If we gave real driving skills tests in a simulator, that would far greater reduce the risk to others, while probably removing those too stupid to text, drive, and be attentive.
Thanks for the reply.
I live in an urban environment and, no, I am not prone to accidents. I am athletic and have never had a broken bone save for a toe broken while jumping into a pool when I was 16.
I walk to work and do cross some major roads, but always in the crosswalks. Arlington, Virginia has laws regarding right-away to pedestrians. These incidents are not the only ones I have seen, but ones that by chance involved me just before this post came out. I will venture to guess that you have seen cars swaying on the road as idiots are texting. I have witnessed this at least a dozen times in the last year. It is a subject of conversation with my friends and relatives. The problem is ubiquitous.
If I were a lawmaker, I would submit a bill that required texting to be shut off during high speed travel, with an automated text reply saying "call on the phone if you need to contact me". I know it's a hassle for people riding trains or passengers in cars, but if it saves just one life or keeps one person from being maimed, isn't that enough?