I once got a cabbie who’d disabled his buzzer by inserting a piece of folded cardboard into the piece where the seatbelt goes. After that I’ve seen and refrained from getting into two other cabs with similar devices.
I really don’t understand how any reasonable person is bothered by other people using their phones. While driving, yes, that’s dangerous to everyone around, but riding on a bus? Sitting at a table in a restaurant? Mind your business, people!
Yeah. That’s what it really comes down to. People should be courteous enough to take their personal business to a more private place (like outside the restaurant) or at least, keep the volume down. By the same token, those who complain about others’ cell phone use should tune it out. It’s really not that difficult.
Yeah. This is a locus of control issue. You really don’t have much right to control what others do in a public space (within reason). Yes, we can expect a level of civility (nobody should touch you, expose themselves, etc.) but if you personally don’t like the way someone sounds, looks, smells, and so forth, get the fuck over yourself. Take measures to limit your exposure to the stimuli (wear a blindfold, stick a clothespin on your nose, get earplugs, etc.), or better yet, opt for a private mode of transport.
All of these options are superior to inconveniencing others because it bothers you.
I can appreciate folks sharing examples of life-or-death situations as to why they need cellphone access, but honestly, it’s not even on that level. Limiting someone’s ability to communicate, really about anything, in a place where that communication is allowed, is a disgusting and offensive overreach of one’s influence. And since we have technology like noise canceling headphones and earplugs easily available and this dick chose not to utilize those options - or not ride the bus altogether, it’s readily apparent to me that he is an execrable self-centered douchebag who thinks that the word should revolve around him.
Asked and answered many times in this thread already. Did you read the thread?
I’m inclined to contribute to his defense fund.
The long term solution is self-driving cars. I expect to first cars to arrive sometime between 2020 to 2030. In the United States, the legal problems are much more intractable than the technical issues.
The first car is supposed to be a Mercedes Benz S-Class in 2013, but it be limited to speeds below 40kph.
http://news.drive.com.au/drive/motor-news/self-driving-cars-by-2013-20111115-1ngbx.html
Things like this are why implied consent exists. If there is any real danger to your childs well being, medical professionals are allowed to act without your consent, just not against your express protest. As a parent, I understand your desire to be there and help deal with the situation but its not an absolute need on their end.
In a true emergency, there are already mechanisms in place to deal with it. ER staff regularly deal with situations like car accidents where the parents are unable to give consent due to being critically injured themselves and unable to discuss the situation.
Kid has a tummy ache and needs to go home is not an emergency, its a deal with it as soon as practical.
Plenty of parents work in environments not conducive to easy phone contact on demand or departure on demand. For example, an ICU nurse does not just get to walk away from a patient because of a family emergency, and abandoning patients can at best get their licence pulled, at worst land them in jail.
A friend of mine works in a locked psych unit of a prison. All cell phones and personal belongings are placed in lockers outside the unit and only specific phones in the area can even dial out of the prison.
LA and SF bay areas have plenty of parents who commute 2-3 hours to work. I can go on with dozens of examples, many of them advanced professionals requiring hefty degrees who are otherwise model parents.
I’m writing this post in a restaurant, and I have a serious question. How is a cell phone user any different from a loud, obnoxious conversation amongst a group of customers who are physically present?
Drachillix, your point is well taken. I know that there is such an animal as implied consent. IME, however, providers prefer explicit consent whenever possible, and I can give that by phone. That’s all. 
On a psychological level, hearing half a conversation is just annoying. I remember hearing an NPR segment that delved into the issue- not that I remember the specifics of why it’s a pain. I suppose that you could look at it as a positive: it’s better to be forced listen to one idiot than two idiots.
I was not intending to pick on you specifically, just using your example.
The little ex EMT in me despises the abuse of the term emergency and crisis.
Other than what Marley23 pointed out, not much. Loud obnoxious behavior is never acceptable. But I think that people tend to do that more on cell phones than in person.
So THAT’S why they kicked me out of Olive Garden!
I thought of a way to jam cellphones responsibly - allow incoming calls only, and limit them to 30 seconds. Maybe not on the bus, but in movie theatres and moving cars, etc. - you can take an incoming emergency call, find out what you need to know, and get back to what is going on around you.
How 'bout that? Does that satisfy everyone?
Well, now you know. 
Cat Whisperer, I just don’t see the need for it. Here in Austin, the Alamo Drafthouse’s non-cellphone policy went viral. That’s how you handle it.
I have no truck with a private business turfing obnoxious customers out the door with extreme prejudice. However, it’s hard to ascertain the harm of an individual talking on a cell phone while on a public conveyance. It’s not like people were quiet as dormice before cell phones became ubiquitous.
I’m not sure why people are saying buses are otherwise very loud places. Most people in conversation are talking in normal conversational tone or quieter. The only times that it gets to shouting level is when there are teenagers, drunken sports fans, and old Chinese ladies.
Two things about this.
Firstly, it sounds like the people at the day care were absolutely fucking stupid. I do not need anyone’s permission, as a citizen of the United States, to call emergency medical services and have a child in an emergency medical situation sent to the hospital. The daycare, when it was unable to get in touch with you should have called 911 because if your story is as described it seems like a very clear cut case of a medical emergency.
Secondly, current law allows emergency medical treatment of minors without parental consent, notification, or accompaniment in the case of a medical emergency when the parent can’t be contacted cite. So if the daycare had called 911 (as anyone can do, and the EMS will definitely move someone with a medical emergency to the hospital) the doctors would have not just let your son sit there and die–and if they did they would be negligent.
I grew up in a community where many people’s parents worked in underground coal mines, where even today you will not be able to get in touch with them during a shift. It’s just simply not the case that properly functioning caretakers of children will just let a kid seize up and die because they are unable to get in touch with the parent.
Your story is very light on the details so if anything I’ve said contradicts some detail you haven’t shared, I’m not particularly interested–I’m addressing a general point here and am not particularly interested or concerned with the particulars of your story beyond the general concept of it.
Here’s the thing, I’m not saying we shouldn’t carry cell phones. I’m not saying we should ban cell phones on a bus. I’m just saying I don’t get the people who complain about cell phones but then also say “but you can’t help but carry one because of emergencies.” Aside from narrow cases, most people could indeed get by without carrying a cellphone, so that isn’t really a normally valid reason for someone with an expressed distaste for cellphones to carry one.
In this same vein, something I’ve never understood is the person who never lets a phone just go to voicemail. I’ve known people who will literally look at their phone, say “ugh, I do not want to talk to this person” and then answer. Every. Single. Time. I’ve also been told when I ask “why do you do that?” that they “have” to answer “because it might be important” or “it might be an emergency.” Unless it is a work thing and you’re expected to answer or get in trouble, I see no reason that either of those is a compelling reason to take a call you otherwise would not take. I’m assuming in a situation where something is important or an emergency a voicemail would be left and you’d know in 2-3 minutes if it was an emergency or not.
I’m not going to share the particulars. Suffice it to say, however, that babies get very sick very quickly. What started out as a mild fever got much worse in the 90 or so minutes it took to get a hold of me.
And my general point is that there are some occasions when a conversation on a cell phone on the bus is necessary. I don’t particularly care what miners do or don’t do. I do care that I’m reachable, and if that offends you, that’s too bad.
No. If someone is being too loud/obnoxious on their phone, either ask them to pipe down nicely, talk to someone in charge (if you’re somewhere that has a policy against it), or deal with it (whether that means ignoring it, wearing earplugs, or whatever).
People In Public can be aggravating as shit, definitely. But you are also a Person In Public; chances are really goddamned good that you’ve aggravated someone at one time or another, even if you weren’t aware of it.