The 'Ol Kapowz is just about to send $117.00 (by 3/15/10)for getting caught driving with his i-Pod in both ears.
I knew it was illegal, but NEVER in a $117.00USD YEARS did I think he was going to cite me.
He told me of the safety factor BULLSHIT that I could not hear a horn or sirens.
I asked, “What do deaf people do? It is not illegal TO DRIVE DEAF!”
You should have seen his face. I actually verbally-slapped the taste out his dumb MF-in’ maw.
I said, “I know you don’t write the laws, and I’m not going to argue with you, but this is dumb.” And I left. Happened about 4 weeks ago to the hour.
There was just WAAAY too much pot in a container in plain sight. I’ll slip the County $117.00 to keep my job, reputation, and the roof over my head. Best of luck.
I have several friends that carry two or more phones, mainly business and private ones.
One guy has one for his wife and one for his girlfriend. That turned messy when his daughter picked up the ‘girlfriend’ phone
As far as the ‘driving distraction’ is concerned, several people here have been convicted of driving while eating. A local one was a girl driving with an apple in her hand (not actually eating it).
As a bit of come-uppance, the following week a police officer on the force that arrested her was caught driving his patrol car while eating - doughnuts!
The burden was on me to prove that the bill in hand matched the cell phone I had in the car. (For what it’s worth we have a family plan with five phones in my name. I’d wager tons of people have multiple cell phones.)
But that isn’t really the point. Even if I could enter the bill as evidence, the fact that I call didn’t go through didn’t mean I wasn’t dialing, or using an app, or typing a text message that I cancelled when I saw the red lights in my rearview.
We recently had a policy change at work in cell phone use and handheld devices. It used to be that the use of a cell phone was prohibited, unless it was hands-free. That was thrown out the window when the big boss signed an executive order banning texting while driving. By the time that order filtered down through the bureaucracy it had expanded to be:
[ul]
[li] The use of any handheld device while driving in a company vehicle (or any other vehicle during company time or as a result of company business) is prohibited. That means cell phones, GPS, IPods (or equivalent), CB radio, etc. There is a defined exception for law enforcement and emergency workers using a handheld device as a business tool as part of the emergency.[/li][li] It gets better. The ban extends anyone contacting anyone else who may be using their own cell phone and driving. So at work or during business hours, if I call someone, or I’m called by someone, and they are on a cell phone and driving, the call is to be terminated. It doesn’t matter if I am on a landline, as long as the other party is on a cell phone and driving. We are prohibited from putting someone else in danger as a result of their inappropriate cell phone use.[/li][li] Wait. It gets better. The ban extends to any cell phone use, including personal time and personal cell phone use, if in the course of the conversation anything related to the business is discussed, and/or any party is using a cell phone and there are other laws banning cell phone use and driving.[/li][/ul]
I have no problem with any of this. Oh, yeah. My employer is the federal government.
I think just about all studies have found that it isn’t holding the phone that’s the problem, it’s the distraction of talking on a phone while trying to drive. Here’s an online test to really illustrate this (it takes a loooong time to load). I also noticed that trying to do the driving stuff while also doing the distracting stuff made me irritated and stressed - people need to stop doing that to themselves. Life is stressful enough already.
Yes. I’ll tell you why it happens but beyond that I won’t try and defend it. The dog can’t sit in the back because we have two young children sitting in the back and they annoy the dog, dealing with that is more distracting than having to deal with him on my lap. He is supposed to sit in the passenger seat but he always tries to jump onto my lap and preventing him from jumping across is more distracting than having him on my lap. The best place for the dog while he is in the car is on my lap, BUT the best place for the dog in general, is not in the car at all. I agree with all of your points.
I got very close to the right number of passenger points (missed by 1) but failed to answer 8 questions. I suppose that’s good in a way, as it shows that I prioritised the driving over the talking, but then I know it’s a test, so I might not prioritise that way in real life. She was just talking about inane shit anyway, can’t that stuff wait till I get home?
Sorry, this I don’t understand. If he is supposed to sit in the passenger seat, are there no special seat belts/ harness combinations available so you can belt him in? Is he too big to be put in a carrier, which you could then belt onto the passenger seat? Sure, you would have to get him used to this first, but surely you have him already trained, don’t you? Or could get a dog training school to help?
Please understand, I don’t want to attack you, I’m simply puzzled about this. I assumed from reading the Motorwelt (ADAC monthly member magazine) on how to transport dogs that the technical side of this has been solved for some time now, and the behaviour problem should be solved by making the dog generally obey soft, firm commands.
Source New England Journal of Medicine. 336(7):453-8, 1997 Feb 13.
Abbreviated Source N Engl J Med. 336(7):453-8, 1997 Feb 13.
NLM Journal Name The New England journal of medicine
(Full text available through my university, so I can’t link to it). However, the abstract says
So instead of simulators, they looked at actual accident data - a different approach.
Some more cites from the above article - the simulator tests
A quick search showed reports that talking while driving is generally distracting and should be avoided (hence the sign in buses: Don’t talk to the driver), but is less of a risk than a telephone conversation.
So far, the studies seem to have consisted of asking the test drivers in the simulators questions requiring concentration - adding numbers, what colour is this item, - but not a normal-type conversation that people would have in a car.
I completely ignored the woman and I still couldn’t count the pedestrians. (I’m bad at counting multiple things if it’s all done in my head) If I used a piece of paper with RED and YELLOW headings and put a mark down for everyone I saw, I could probably do it, but that seems like cheating. I know what they’re trying to show, but I don’t think much of the way they’ve done it.
