Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Cellphones

Yet another anti- cellphone bill is works its way through the state legislature. This one would prohibit drivers under 18 from, not only using cellphones while driving, but any other communications device including laptops and hands- free cellphones.

A law prohibiting the use of cellphones, by anybody, while driving without a hands free device already takes effect in July of 2008. Seems to me a bit unfair to come up with a different set of rules for teenagers.

I've said before that I opposed the first cell phone ban, and that's despite the fact I find cellphones and their users rude and annoying.

Despite opposing these cell phone bans, I will manage to smile a bit once the law takes effect and we start seeing people being ticketed for using a cellphone while driving.

*******
Too bad we couldn't get some of the nanny- staters to broaden their scope a little and expand their cell phone bans to more than just cars. How about making it illegal to use a cell phone inside businesses or any place large numbers of people congregate?

I can't believe people feel so important that they have to drop whatever they're doing and get caught up in a phone conversation wherever they might be. It can get to the point of being very rude sometimes.

Twice, while in Winco- once just yesterday, in fact- I've seen people hold up the check out process with their gabbing on the cell phone. At least yesterday the girl continued, albeit slower than she could have, bagging her groceries while talking away.

A couple months ago some chick just stopped bagging her groceries entirely and was just laughing and talking away one her cellphone forcing everybody else to have to funnel their groceries through the second check out lane( what do you call those things?). She was oblivious to the rest of the world and people were getting really annoyed at her behavior, myself included.

How rude!

Then again, I had to wonder how many of the people that seemed so annoyed do similar things themselves.
***********
Winco should do what Myrtlewood Liquors, on Myrtle Avenue in Eureka, tried to do. Myrtlewood Liquors used to have a neat sign on their front door that told of how rude it was to be talking on a cellphone while doing business transactions.

It went on to say that, unless you're talking about business pertinent to their store or you're having a heart attack and are calling an ambulance, talking on a cellphone in the store would result in a $20 charge added to their total.

I loved that! I asked the girl at the counter one time if they'd ever enforced that rule. She said she tried to with one guy once and the guy just got all huffy and stormed out of the store. Good riddance.

Something must of gone wrong with their sign, though. They've removed it and now have a bigger sign that just asks people not to use cell phones in their store. I think they should have kept the other one. I asked the owner what happened to the old sign. he said said something along the line of it being a bit too strongly worded. I didn't think so.

So that's what's needed, you nanny- staters out there: A law making it illegal to use cellphones in public places, or some such. Ok, we'll even specify where signs are posted specifically asking people no to use their cellphones. This could become a national movement.

Hey, I'm a libertarian. I don't know that I could publicly support a law like that, but I'll do my best to try and not criticize it too harshly.

I'm sure the powers- that- be and the rest of the nanny- staters won't get started on my suggestion soon. They're probably too busy talking on their cellphones.

26 Comments:

At 8:56 AM, Blogger The Boy Most Likely to ... said...

There is a liquor store on Myrtle Avenue that prohibits the use of cell phones in the store. I have yet to see what they do to enforce it. So I can see Nanny-staters trying to ban cell phones, and other media devices.

-boy

 
At 9:13 AM, Blogger Rose said...

No Libertarian should be for any of the Nanny-state laws, Fred. And these cell-phone laws are among the worst.

 
At 9:30 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Almost got killed this morning while driving to Eureka. Some idiot in an SUV came onto the freeway and instead of merging when it was safe just blinding was doing about 60 and forced a fully loaded logging truck to essentially lock em up so he could avoid killing the person in the SUV. After I realized I was going to live another day, I sped up and what do you know...the idiot driver in the SUV was gabbing away stupidly on a cell phone impervious to the world around her.

If you need to make a call, pull over. Ban using cell phones while driving.

 
At 9:40 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Its ridiculous that the masses have become little children and have to be told how to live.

 
At 10:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Someday...maybe...we will take driving 2 ton (and nowadays-4-ton) vehicles seriously.

Want to kill someone? Do it with a gun and get life.
Do it with a truck and get 6 months.

We are sick.

 
At 10:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You say NannyStater so often and with such glee, it sounds like the play-yard Nyaa, Nyaa, Hyaa to me.

 
At 10:13 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've said before that I opposed the first cell phone ban, and that's despite the fact I find cellphones and their users rude and annoying.

Hey. "Rude and annoying" has nothing to do with it. We are trying to keep selfish creeps from killing people through inattention to their driving while they talk on their cell phones.

It is self-defense through the rule of law. Love it or leave it.

 
At 10:34 AM, Blogger The Boy Most Likely to ... said...

Just maybe, and I am only guessing here... People will have no trouble making cell phone use while driving illegal, but some people are concerned about how far local and state legislators will go in limiting what we can do. Cell phones and in-car DVD players are the newest driver distractions. They join make-up, food, drinks, and unruly passengers on the list of things that distract drivers.

-boy

 
At 10:40 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh-so what if i wanna text message while im changing the porn-dvd im watchin while i drive my navigator- its so bad ass cool- who cares if i run over people....


(yes, that was sarcasm...but there ARE people out there who are like this....)

 
At 11:20 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK Fred, if you don't want to a separate set of rules for new drivers (e.g., teens), then let's just raise the driving age to 21. Nah, that's when they start drinking, right? Let's raise the driving age to 25, and beef up our public transportation system.

 
At 12:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, yeah 11:20, that will really help all the college students get around. Sounds like a bunch of aging baby boomers who are getting crotchety in their old age. "don't trust anyone over 30."

 
At 1:31 PM, Blogger hucktunes said...

When radios were first introduced in the late twenties it created a controversy about whether or not they were safe to allow in cars. As for myself, I prefer to drive with no distractions. No radio, etc. Just the muffled rumble of the motor heard through the exhaust pipe, the sound of the rubber on the road with the rhythmic bump of rolling over the expansion joints, such a nice soft seat. Stretch out the legs to meet the control pedals. Ah, and the head rest. So relaxing.

 
At 2:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The next big excuse: CELL PHONE PROFILING!

 
At 3:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

anonymous said: "Ban using cell phones while driving."

I say: How about just banning reckless driving regardless of the reason? Oh... wait a minute... we already do! Cell phones don't kill people, people do...or something.

 
At 4:09 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cut global warming. No one under forty gets a driver's license.

 
At 4:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am not saying ban cell phones, just ban them while driving. Make it illegal like speeding. I just don't get you guys.

 
At 8:29 PM, Blogger Rose said...

While you are at it 4:39 - ban fiddling with the CD player, the radio, the TV monitors, the windshield wipers, ban eating while driving, ban kids in the backseat (you've already kicked 'em out of the front seat), ban dogs (you're well on the way to that already), and make it illegal to have a loose object rolling around every time you make a turn - yeah, then you'll be nice and safe, and you won't be "annoyed."

Fred, you should just have everyone make a list of pet peeves (wasn't that a previous post, and then we'll know what to make illegal. So no one will be annoyed.

 
At 10:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's a question of safety, not annoyance.

It annoys me when people refuse to acknowledge the difference.

 
At 2:08 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The state needs to take its hands off peoples right to drive. Who owns the insurance industry? The international bankers. Don't you find it strange that the state demands you purchase a specific product in order to drive?

Course none of you ever think to ask those questions AND you criticize those who do.

 
At 8:23 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Abd don't forget that the Federal Reserve is a plot by Theodore Roosevelt to control the US economy from beyond the grave!!!!

 
At 12:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 8:23, just because you don't know the facts doesn't mean the facts aren't real.

Course I hope that you'd do more than whine but maybe actually research the subject independently.

 
At 2:08 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

WHY is it so hard for some of you to see the difference between a cell phone glued to your ear while driving,
versus listening to the radio, or talking, or even (horrors!) smoking a cigarette.

Look up some insurance industry stats since cell phones became popular.
You will NEVER let your kid drive with one again!

 
At 2:28 PM, Blogger hucktunes said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 2:31 PM, Blogger hucktunes said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 2:34 PM, Blogger hucktunes said...

Anonymous said...
Abd don't forget that the Federal Reserve is a plot by Theodore Roosevelt to control the US economy from beyond the grave!!!!

Here's an interesting BBC radio program about that. Seems that the reason we enjoy Social Security is because of a deal made after a foiled coup attempt in 1933.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/document/document_20070723.shtml

 
At 11:43 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I smoked for 20 years. Smoking a cigarette while driving is easy. It's automatic. Smokers do it pretty much the same way every time.

Same with a radio. Turn it on. Listen. Turn to a different channel. Relax, listen, and watch the road.

I see drivers here using cell phones. I see them paying lots of attention to operating the cell phones and to talking on the cell phones. I see them paying a lot more attention to their cell phones than to their driving.

Hey! My life is worth something! That's why I welcome laws to force drivers to start paying more attention to the lethal weapons (their cars) that they are driving on our public roads.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home