Tuesday, July 01, 2008

Cell Phone Silliness

Enough has been said about today being the first day of the new cell phone restriction while driving. I'm glad to see the CHP won't be giving warnings. Despite being opposed to this law in the first place, now that it's been passed, go get 'em CHP. You have my blessing.

One of the things that really burns me up about too many of you cell phone addicts, is the attitude illustrated by a gal quoted in today's Times- Standard. Mckinleyville resident, Chris Plocher:

”I don't want to wear an earpiece all the time,” Plocher said. “When the phone rings, you have to reach for it..."

NO YOU DON'T! You can have either your home answering machine or your cell phone's voice mail take a message. Few of us are so important that we have to answer the phone every time it rings, especially while driving.

Those of you who feel you are that important, enjoy your ticket.

16 Comments:

At 10:57 AM, Blogger Anon.R.mous said...

Truckers have been using CBs for how many years without having problems needing a law, what is wrong with people with cellphones that in 10 years, they need a law?

Is the common man that much dumber than a truck driver?

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

It's not the common MAN that's the problem.

 
At 1:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Part of the answer is that there are not many women truckers!!!

 
At 1:37 PM, Blogger Pogo said...

Don't worry folks. For those of you who CAN walk and chew gum simultaneously, it's just another revenue measure for the Highway gestapo to help grab your cash. Meanwhile keep sending those "progressives" to Sacramento.

 
At 7:04 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know Fred, a Libertarian for a law like this? Should we ban talking on cell phones, even with a headphone? I'm told talking on a cell phone is dangerous. So, talking in a car must be dangerous, right. You've ridden with the person who can't stop looking at you while they're driving. Don't allow talking? What about the radio, switching channels is distracting, right? The safest driver has no distractions.

Slippery slope Fred.

 
At 7:27 PM, Blogger mresquan said...

So Fred,should eating or drinking in a car be outlawed as well?And maybe if you have a vehicle with cup holders you must ditch it and buy a new one which doesn't (because car manufacturers will be required to not put them in any more vehicles).And should drive thru coffee and fast food joints be shut down because people will be distracted while drinking or eating in their vehicles?

 
At 9:15 PM, Blogger Rose said...

Not important? Well, it's probably my kids, and they need a ride or need to tell me somethin' - and that's why I - and they - have phones. And I am takin' that call, no matter what, because to ignore it could be stupid and very very costly if it is a call for help.

This law is an abomination, STUPID beyond belief. Every single legislator that voted for it ought to be removed from office. their priorities are all wrong.

I'm with Ernie, Happy STUPID NEW LAW Day!

And I think every elected official who voted this in who gets caught talkin' on the cellphone while driving ought to permanently removed from office. Period.

 
At 6:24 AM, Blogger Fred said...

Esquan asks, "So Fred,should eating or drinking in a car be outlawed as well?".

Nope. As I've said at least a few times, I was opposed to the law from the get- go.

Now that it's here, I'll enjoy watching all of you who think you're so important that you have to be in contact with everyone you know every second of the day get tickets.

 
At 6:31 AM, Blogger Fred said...

Rose protests, "Not important? Well, it's probably my kids, and they need a ride or need to tell me somethin' - and that's why I - and they - have phones.".

Seems to me, I grew up without a cell phone. Even walked two miles to school during junior high without having to hold my mother's hand all the way. I survived quite well and can't remember any time where a cell phone was necessary. Convenient? Maybe, but not necessary.

Went into some back and forth with another blogger some years ago over cell phone use. He mentioned something about having his cell phone ring while he was in a movie theater, or some such.

I told him that's pretty rude to have his phone on in the theater. He replied that he felt it necessary to have his phone on at all times in case his kids needed to get hold of him in case they got in an accident, or whatever.

I come to find out his kids were in their mid- twenties. Just goes to show how nutty this dependence thing has become.

I suggested it was about time he let them go and that they could take care of themselves. He didn't see it that way. Nutty.

 
At 7:25 AM, Blogger Carol said...

I think it is rude to have cellphones ringing in public places. The vibrator feature works well and is not distracting to others.

We have pagers, so if someone needs to get a hold of us urgently, then they page us, and we call them back. One has a chance to catch a breath before they pull over and make the call. When I worked as a nurse in obstetrics, this was how we made contact with the physicians. It works. The pager works all over the state.

 
At 7:26 AM, Blogger Carol said...

Oh, the cost of a pager is small. $19/ month for our 2 pagers.

 
At 9:31 AM, Blogger Fred said...

I read that most emergency personnel rely on pagers rather than cell phones. It might of been Chris Crawford that mentioned that in one of his Tech Beat columns, or whatever they're called.

I guess the technology that makes pagers works is more reliable than cell phones. It might of been because the technology is actually less sophisticated.

Seems the emergency folks feel that if some major disaster happens, it would likely knock out cell phone transmitters but it would be less likely to knock out pager transmitters.

Even with pagers, though, how often could being paged be replaced with an answering machine? I realize some people really are, literally, on- call. Most people, though, just like to think they're so important that they should be available to everyone else immediately.

I should be so lucky to feel that way.

 
At 1:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Lord! Rose- TELL me you are not that dim!

"It might be MY kids calling"??

Yeah, to tell you they just ran over one of MY kids with their SUV while texting their little vacuous friends!

Rose, this law was enacted because people were DYING.

NOT to inconvenience you.

I also suspect you were the one on the cell phone that almost killed me by running the red light on Harris a couple days ago?

 
At 2:00 PM, Anonymous Andrew Bird said...

Talking on a cell phone that you are holding to your ear is a distraction from concentrating on the important task at hand: Driving. We've all encountered drivers on cell phones. It's clear they are distract. Their cars weave, they aren't aware of what's going on around them. It's certainly been proven that this activity was a major cause of accidents. We elect legislators to pass laws in the interest of public safety. And that's all this law is about. Those who voted for it in Sacramento have my support.

 
At 11:30 PM, Blogger mresquan said...

It is funny Fred that here you are bashing cell phone users,yet a few posts down you're bragging about winning one!!No offense to ya,just funny.

 
At 7:23 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The real question is why anyone would willingly place a microwave antenna next to their brain on a regular basis. Yes, use an ear piece, ALWAYS.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home