Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

NHTSA Says No Cells In Cars At All

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 6:59:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Saw an article today - can't find it now - that said NHTSA has a new study
saying hands free cell phone use could even be more dangerous than holding the
phone. The conclusion was that cell phone usage in cars should be banned
althgether.

Lessee, people don't want other people to use cell phones in restaurants,
movies, in the health club (there's a sign in mine, anyway), and now not in
cars at all.

Half the time, the phone isn't useful in: The movie, the mall, in a rural
residence (low power signal), anywhere underground including some lower store
levels, etc.

If they ban 'em in cars, I'll let the contract run out and not renew. My car
is about the only place I really use it.

Dave Head

More about : nhtsa cells cars

July 20, 2004 8:19:53 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <6t1pf0tp997k3munk1cpqur0scmn59f4bd@4ax.com>,
rally2xs@att.net says...
> Saw an article today - can't find it now - that said NHTSA has a new study
> saying hands free cell phone use could even be more dangerous than holding the
> phone. The conclusion was that cell phone usage in cars should be banned
> althgether.
>
> Lessee, people don't want other people to use cell phones in restaurants,
> movies, in the health club (there's a sign in mine, anyway), and now not in
> cars at all.
>
> Half the time, the phone isn't useful in: The movie, the mall, in a rural
> residence (low power signal), anywhere underground including some lower store
> levels, etc.
>
> If they ban 'em in cars, I'll let the contract run out and not renew. My car
> is about the only place I really use it.
>
> Dave Head
>
I have a pet peeve: cell users do not realize that they do not have to
scream into their phones and especially not into their earbud
microphones which they are holding in front of their mouths.

As a result of THINKING we have to scream, we really do become obnoxious
in public places.

I think "CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?" is not a function of volume, but of the
quality of the connection, whether it is breaking up or not, etc. And
screaming really doesn't stop a call from breaking up, we just think it
does and so we scream louder.

I would love to see a campaign, perhaps endorsed by the cell phone
companies themselves, educating people about the fact that they do not
need to scream to be heard. There are campaigns that tell people to be
polite, but when they really feel they want to be heard, politeness
disintegrates; if they understood that screaming doesn't do any good,
that would be a very different story.

Also, perhaps there could be an active campaign to sell headsets that
have amplified microphones.

It disturbs me when I am in a public place, take out my cell, and
everyone around me starts glaring. But it disturbs me just as much when
someone around me is screaming so that I can't think (common in buses
and Starbucks and places like that).

Just my two cents.

Louise
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 8:19:54 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <MPG.1b666780fd9dfb699896e0@news-server.nyc.rr.com>,
Louise <none@nospam.com> wrote:

> In article <6t1pf0tp997k3munk1cpqur0scmn59f4bd@4ax.com>,
> rally2xs@att.net says...
> > Saw an article today - can't find it now - that said NHTSA has a new study
> > saying hands free cell phone use could even be more dangerous than holding
> > the
> > phone. The conclusion was that cell phone usage in cars should be banned
> > althgether.
> >
> > Lessee, people don't want other people to use cell phones in restaurants,
> > movies, in the health club (there's a sign in mine, anyway), and now not in
> > cars at all.
> >
> > Half the time, the phone isn't useful in: The movie, the mall, in a rural
> > residence (low power signal), anywhere underground including some lower
> > store
> > levels, etc.
> >
> > If they ban 'em in cars, I'll let the contract run out and not renew. My
> > car
> > is about the only place I really use it.
> >
> > Dave Head
> >
> I have a pet peeve: cell users do not realize that they do not have to
> scream into their phones and especially not into their earbud
> microphones which they are holding in front of their mouths.
>
> As a result of THINKING we have to scream, we really do become obnoxious
> in public places.
>
> I think "CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?" is not a function of volume, but of the
> quality of the connection, whether it is breaking up or not, etc. And
> screaming really doesn't stop a call from breaking up, we just think it
> does and so we scream louder.
>
> I would love to see a campaign, perhaps endorsed by the cell phone
> companies themselves, educating people about the fact that they do not
> need to scream to be heard. There are campaigns that tell people to be
> polite, but when they really feel they want to be heard, politeness
> disintegrates; if they understood that screaming doesn't do any good,
> that would be a very different story.
>
> Also, perhaps there could be an active campaign to sell headsets that
> have amplified microphones.
>
> It disturbs me when I am in a public place, take out my cell, and
> everyone around me starts glaring. But it disturbs me just as much when
> someone around me is screaming so that I can't think (common in buses
> and Starbucks and places like that).
>
> Just my two cents.
>
> Louise

Funny you should mention it... but I noticed that my Samsung has a
"whisper mode". I've never tried it, but it's supposed to let you
whisper, and still carry on a conversation...

Fred

--
"Light moves faster than sound. That's why some
folks appear bright until you hear them speak..."
Related resources
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 8:19:54 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 04:19:53 GMT, Louise <none@nospam.com> wrote:

>
>It disturbs me when I am in a public place, take out my cell, and
>everyone around me starts glaring. But it disturbs me just as much when
>someone around me is screaming so that I can't think (common in buses
>and Starbucks and places like that).

I actually miss phone booths.
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 2:55:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Dave Head wrote:

> Saw an article today - can't find it now - that said NHTSA has a new study
> saying hands free cell phone use could even be more dangerous than holding the
> phone. The conclusion was that cell phone usage in cars should be banned
> althgether.

> Lessee, people don't want other people to use cell phones in restaurants,
> movies, in the health club (there's a sign in mine, anyway), and now not in
> cars at all.

I can understand cars. And who knows, maybe it is true that cell phones
are dangerous while driving even with a hands free.

Okay fine, lets ban communication devices in cars.

Now, what exactly are police departments going to do? A police officer
must juggle not only a police radio (which is decidedly not hands-free),
but many have to look at a laptop, too. All while driving a moving
bomb-on-wheels if they happen to be in a Ford Crown Victoria (see
http://www.autosafety.org/article.php?scid=&did=357 ).

And *this* is not dangerous? It's a little harder for a police officer
to be above the law if genuine safety issues are raised.



--
e-mail address fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my address in order to reply.
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 3:07:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Louise wrote:


> I have a pet peeve: cell users do not realize that they do not have to
> scream into their phones and especially not into their earbud
> microphones which they are holding in front of their mouths.
>
> As a result of THINKING we have to scream, we really do become obnoxious
> in public places.
>
> I think "CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?" is not a function of volume, but of the
> quality of the connection, whether it is breaking up or not, etc. And
> screaming really doesn't stop a call from breaking up, we just think it
> does and so we scream louder.
>
> I would love to see a campaign, perhaps endorsed by the cell phone
> companies themselves, educating people about the fact that they do not
> need to scream to be heard.


Actually, there's a much more effective way to solve the screaming
problem. Cell phone manufacturers need to incorporate sidetone.

Think about it. When you're on your POTS landline phone, you can
usually hear your own voice coming back at you from the other end when
you're speaking. This is sidetone. It has a psychological effect in
that your brain knows that you can be clearly heard, and can therefore
regulate your volume so that your voice is at the minimum loudness
necessary to make your speech audible.

On a cell phone, there is usually no sidetone. People do not hear their
own voice coming back at them through the earpiece and therefore, the
mechanism that your brain uses to regulate voice volume is broken. By
reflex, you start to shout because you are uncertain if you are speaking
loud enough to be heard at the other end of the line.

The past reasoning for the loss of sidetone is that on a digital cell
phone network, there's a delay between the time your voice is encoded at
your end, and the time that your voice is decoded at the other end. As
a result, you would hear an echo. However, it doesn't seem like there
would be much of a problem in having handsets emulate sidetone by
reflecting a bit your speech locally to the earpiece.

--
e-mail address fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my address in order to reply.
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 5:43:31 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 00:30:19 -0400, FPP wrote:

> Funny you should mention it... but I noticed that my Samsung has a
> "whisper mode". I've never tried it, but it's supposed to let you
> whisper, and still carry on a conversation...

The whisper mode works great when using a car speakerphone kit as well.
You don't have to talk loud if the mike is mounted on the car dashboard.
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 6:45:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On 7/19/04 11:08 PM, in article f5apf0hmlbh86gkhmud3iuqmv3f9oic39d@4ax.com,
"singha_lvr" <singha_lvr@charter.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 04:19:53 GMT, Louise <none@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> It disturbs me when I am in a public place, take out my cell, and
>> everyone around me starts glaring. But it disturbs me just as much when
>> someone around me is screaming so that I can't think (common in buses
>> and Starbucks and places like that).
>
> I actually miss phone booths.

What's a phone booth?

Just kidding, but I always think it's funny that it is one of those things
that kids nowadays don't know what they are (or were).
Anonymous
July 20, 2004 9:44:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Steve Johnson <sjohnson29@hotmail.com> wrote:

>What's a phone booth?
>
>Just kidding, but I always think it's funny that it is one of those things
>that kids nowadays don't know what they are (or were).

Wasn't that a joke in one of the first Superman movies? Clark runs up to a booth
to change into his outfit and it's one of those half shells with a phone in it?

These days tose are even a rarity.
Anonymous
July 21, 2004 1:09:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Why not just turn the volume down. My phone (vx6000) has a volume
control on the side of it, and is really easy to change without taking
it down form your ear.


On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 11:07:48 -0400, Isaiah Beard
<sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote:

>Louise wrote:
>
>
>> I have a pet peeve: cell users do not realize that they do not have to
>> scream into their phones and especially not into their earbud
>> microphones which they are holding in front of their mouths.
>>
>> As a result of THINKING we have to scream, we really do become obnoxious
>> in public places.
>>
>> I think "CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?" is not a function of volume, but of the
>> quality of the connection, whether it is breaking up or not, etc. And
>> screaming really doesn't stop a call from breaking up, we just think it
>> does and so we scream louder.
>>
>> I would love to see a campaign, perhaps endorsed by the cell phone
>> companies themselves, educating people about the fact that they do not
>> need to scream to be heard.
>
>
>Actually, there's a much more effective way to solve the screaming
>problem. Cell phone manufacturers need to incorporate sidetone.
>
>Think about it. When you're on your POTS landline phone, you can
>usually hear your own voice coming back at you from the other end when
>you're speaking. This is sidetone. It has a psychological effect in
>that your brain knows that you can be clearly heard, and can therefore
>regulate your volume so that your voice is at the minimum loudness
>necessary to make your speech audible.
>
>On a cell phone, there is usually no sidetone. People do not hear their
>own voice coming back at them through the earpiece and therefore, the
>mechanism that your brain uses to regulate voice volume is broken. By
>reflex, you start to shout because you are uncertain if you are speaking
>loud enough to be heard at the other end of the line.
>
>The past reasoning for the loss of sidetone is that on a digital cell
>phone network, there's a delay between the time your voice is encoded at
>your end, and the time that your voice is decoded at the other end. As
>a result, you would hear an echo. However, it doesn't seem like there
>would be much of a problem in having handsets emulate sidetone by
>reflecting a bit your speech locally to the earpiece.
Anonymous
July 21, 2004 1:32:20 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 10:55:11 -0400, Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
wrote:

>Dave Head wrote:
>
>> Saw an article today - can't find it now - that said NHTSA has a new study
>> saying hands free cell phone use could even be more dangerous than holding the
>> phone. The conclusion was that cell phone usage in cars should be banned
>> althgether.
>
>> Lessee, people don't want other people to use cell phones in restaurants,
>> movies, in the health club (there's a sign in mine, anyway), and now not in
>> cars at all.
>
>I can understand cars. And who knows, maybe it is true that cell phones
>are dangerous while driving even with a hands free.

Well, sure it is - 'cuz driving itself is dangerous. But is it more or less
dangerous than talking to a passenger, tuning the radio, changing a CD,
swatting the kids, etc? Or, is it just a new thing, a subject of some
jealousy / status / whatever?

I think people are attacking cell phones in cars for several reasons. But the
best one is probably that you can see when people are using them. You can't
necessarily tell that the reason the dork in front of you is weaving all over
the road is 'cuz he's busy trying to find the best rap station in the area, or
is busy knocking the kids up side the head for their latest silliness, or a lot
of other things. But you can see if he's on a cell phone.

>Okay fine, lets ban communication devices in cars.

Whole boatload of negative unintended consequences.

And don't forget talking to passengers. Go out to one of those kinky websites,
purchase one of those inflatable gags, stick it in and pump it up before
getting behind the wheel, and don't take it out 'til U get there. No blabbing
at anyone, anytime, while driving. <G>

>Now, what exactly are police departments going to do?

They'll be exempt, of course.

>A police officer
>must juggle not only a police radio (which is decidedly not hands-free),
>but many have to look at a laptop, too.

That shouldn't be allowed even if they are cops.

>All while driving a moving
>bomb-on-wheels if they happen to be in a Ford Crown Victoria (see
>http://www.autosafety.org/article.php?scid=&did=357 ).

Uh-huh.
>
>And *this* is not dangerous?

Yes it is.

>It's a little harder for a police officer
>to be above the law if genuine safety issues are raised.

They'll do it anyway... Speeding down the road like a bat out of hell - 90+ mph
- is also a safety issue, but they do it all the time, no emergency even in the
same time zone, and just because they can.

Dave Head
Anonymous
July 21, 2004 1:32:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Dave Head wrote:
>
> I think people are attacking cell phones in cars for several reasons.
> But the best one is probably that you can see when people are using
> them. You can't necessarily tell that the reason the dork in front
> of you is weaving all over the road is 'cuz he's busy trying to find
> the best rap station in the area, or is busy knocking the kids up
> side the head for their latest silliness, or a lot of other things.
> But you can see if he's on a cell phone.

> And don't forget talking to passengers.

I think there is a diffference. It's one of timing. Anyone with
you in a vehicle has pretty much the same situational input that
you do. When you get cut off, somebody blows an intersection,
etc, ever notice how most of the time *everybody* in the car
goes instantly silent or reacts to the event? Ever notice how
the person on the other end of the phone doesn't? When I'm
a passenger speaking to a driver I will often pause mid-sentence
while they merge, change lanes, etc. How often do abrubtly
interrupt the person on the other end to change lanes, etc? How
often do you simply postpone changing lanes, etc. when on the
phone? When was the last time you decided to just cruise past
your exit/turn because the person on the other end was speaking?

I think I'm perfectly capable of doing all the above. I also think
about half the people shouldn't be allowed to drive period.

I believe that the physical restrictions of holding a phone to your
ear while driving is comparable to eating. Also things like changing
the CD, swatting the kids, etc. although these are much shorter
events than a phone conversation.

But the attention factor is fairly unique to phones in that you are
communicating with another person who doesn't share any of
your situational input. It's also a person you are speaking with
that makes it very different than the radio, cd, etc. When was
the last time you simply turned and walked away from someone
you were speaking with in mid-sentence? Either yours or thiers.

-Quick
July 21, 2004 6:55:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <fredp-7816AE.00301920072004@news.east.cox.net>,
fredp@mail.com says...
> In article <MPG.1b666780fd9dfb699896e0@news-server.nyc.rr.com>,
> Louise <none@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <6t1pf0tp997k3munk1cpqur0scmn59f4bd@4ax.com>,
> > rally2xs@att.net says...
> > > Saw an article today - can't find it now - that said NHTSA has a new study
> > > saying hands free cell phone use could even be more dangerous than holding
> > > the
> > > phone. The conclusion was that cell phone usage in cars should be banned
> > > althgether.
> > >
> > > Lessee, people don't want other people to use cell phones in restaurants,
> > > movies, in the health club (there's a sign in mine, anyway), and now not in
> > > cars at all.
> > >
> > > Half the time, the phone isn't useful in: The movie, the mall, in a rural
> > > residence (low power signal), anywhere underground including some lower
> > > store
> > > levels, etc.
> > >
> > > If they ban 'em in cars, I'll let the contract run out and not renew. My
> > > car
> > > is about the only place I really use it.
> > >
> > > Dave Head
> > >
> > I have a pet peeve: cell users do not realize that they do not have to
> > scream into their phones and especially not into their earbud
> > microphones which they are holding in front of their mouths.
> >
> > As a result of THINKING we have to scream, we really do become obnoxious
> > in public places.
> >
> > I think "CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?" is not a function of volume, but of the
> > quality of the connection, whether it is breaking up or not, etc. And
> > screaming really doesn't stop a call from breaking up, we just think it
> > does and so we scream louder.
> >
> > I would love to see a campaign, perhaps endorsed by the cell phone
> > companies themselves, educating people about the fact that they do not
> > need to scream to be heard. There are campaigns that tell people to be
> > polite, but when they really feel they want to be heard, politeness
> > disintegrates; if they understood that screaming doesn't do any good,
> > that would be a very different story.
> >
> > Also, perhaps there could be an active campaign to sell headsets that
> > have amplified microphones.
> >
> > It disturbs me when I am in a public place, take out my cell, and
> > everyone around me starts glaring. But it disturbs me just as much when
WOW - would greatly appreciate your trying it and reporting back.
That's just the kind of thing people don't know about and they feel
forced to scream.

So....what does "whisper mode" mean?

TIA

Louise
July 21, 2004 6:58:41 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <10fqda34qn29m01@news20.forteinc.com>,
sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com says...
> Louise wrote:
>
>
> > I have a pet peeve: cell users do not realize that they do not have to
> > scream into their phones and especially not into their earbud
> > microphones which they are holding in front of their mouths.
> >
> > As a result of THINKING we have to scream, we really do become obnoxious
> > in public places.
> >
> > I think "CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?" is not a function of volume, but of the
> > quality of the connection, whether it is breaking up or not, etc. And
> > screaming really doesn't stop a call from breaking up, we just think it
> > does and so we scream louder.
> >
> > I would love to see a campaign, perhaps endorsed by the cell phone
> > companies themselves, educating people about the fact that they do not
> > need to scream to be heard.
>
>
> Actually, there's a much more effective way to solve the screaming
> problem. Cell phone manufacturers need to incorporate sidetone.
>
> Think about it. When you're on your POTS landline phone, you can
> usually hear your own voice coming back at you from the other end when
> you're speaking. This is sidetone. It has a psychological effect in
> that your brain knows that you can be clearly heard, and can therefore
> regulate your volume so that your voice is at the minimum loudness
> necessary to make your speech audible.
>
> On a cell phone, there is usually no sidetone. People do not hear their
> own voice coming back at them through the earpiece and therefore, the
> mechanism that your brain uses to regulate voice volume is broken. By
> reflex, you start to shout because you are uncertain if you are speaking
> loud enough to be heard at the other end of the line.
>
> The past reasoning for the loss of sidetone is that on a digital cell
> phone network, there's a delay between the time your voice is encoded at
> your end, and the time that your voice is decoded at the other end. As
> a result, you would hear an echo. However, it doesn't seem like there
> would be much of a problem in having handsets emulate sidetone by
> reflecting a bit your speech locally to the earpiece.
>
>
Interesting thought. But, when VZ isn't working too well and its echo
cancellers have lost their minds, I lose my mind. When I hear my voice
echoed in the earpiece because of VZ malfunction, it drives me crazy.
Is it just that I'm not used to it or is that different from a
"sidetone"?

Louise
July 21, 2004 7:19:54 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <6t1pf0tp997k3munk1cpqur0scmn59f4bd@4ax.com>,
rally2xs@att.net says...
> Saw an article today - can't find it now - that said NHTSA has a new study
> saying hands free cell phone use could even be more dangerous than holding the
> phone. The conclusion was that cell phone usage in cars should be banned
> althgether.
>
> Lessee, people don't want other people to use cell phones in restaurants,
> movies, in the health club (there's a sign in mine, anyway), and now not in
> cars at all.
>
> Half the time, the phone isn't useful in: The movie, the mall, in a rural
> residence (low power signal), anywhere underground including some lower store
> levels, etc.
>
> If they ban 'em in cars, I'll let the contract run out and not renew. My car
> is about the only place I really use it.
>
> Dave Head
>
Having gotten so many positive responses to my posting, I just sent the
following email to customer support. What if we all did it?

"This is really a request/suggestion.

As I'm sure you know, there is a lot of anger and resentment toward
cellphone users because they are loud in public places such as buses,
trains, Starbucks etc. I do not believe that all these people are
simply rude and irresponsible. Rather, I believe that they believe they
cannot be heard and therefore, they scream, intruding upon those around
them.

I would like to suggest that VZ engage in an educational campaign for
their subscribers, making them aware that, generally speaking, screaming
does not improve reception and in no way compensates for a "bad
connection".

I just discovered that some Samsungs actually have something called
"whisper mode" - but most people don't even know it exists. If they
don't know about it, they wont use it, and they will continue to be rude
because they believe they have no other choice.

The same thing applies to many of the good headsets. They have noise
cancelling microphones that screen out extraneous noise very well - but
the users don't realize it and think they have to scream above the noise
they hear, for the other party to hear them; patently false.

So, I'm suggesting that rather than a public campaign to teach "good
manners", how about alerting users to the fact that under most
circumstances, with most phones and most headsets, LOUD is really not
necessary. I believe if this were understood, good manners would
automatically be employed in most situations.

And on a similar note, it would be great if VZ would try to offer phones
and headsets that have amplified microphones - and advertise it - teach
the user how to use the amplification when they purchase the headset or
phone.

Thanks for thinking about this."
Anonymous
July 22, 2004 12:30:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Great post Dave!

It really just boils down to some can multitask and others can't. A
person has to assign the highest priority to piloting the vehicle and
then if there is brain capacity left over, then talk on the cell
phone, swat the kids, change stations/ cd or what ever. Also
interesting are people that put on makeup or shave while driving.
Maybe passengers should be banned while the NHTSA is at it. Guess
it's time to put a dark tint on all windows but the windshield.

Sigh

Teddy

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 21:32:20 GMT, Dave Head <rally2xs@att.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 10:55:11 -0400, Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Dave Head wrote:
>>
>>> Saw an article today - can't find it now - that said NHTSA has a new study
>>> saying hands free cell phone use could even be more dangerous than holding the
>>> phone. The conclusion was that cell phone usage in cars should be banned
>>> althgether.
>>
>>> Lessee, people don't want other people to use cell phones in restaurants,
>>> movies, in the health club (there's a sign in mine, anyway), and now not in
>>> cars at all.
>>
>>I can understand cars. And who knows, maybe it is true that cell phones
>>are dangerous while driving even with a hands free.
>
>Well, sure it is - 'cuz driving itself is dangerous. But is it more or less
>dangerous than talking to a passenger, tuning the radio, changing a CD,
>swatting the kids, etc? Or, is it just a new thing, a subject of some
>jealousy / status / whatever?
>
>I think people are attacking cell phones in cars for several reasons. But the
>best one is probably that you can see when people are using them. You can't
>necessarily tell that the reason the dork in front of you is weaving all over
>the road is 'cuz he's busy trying to find the best rap station in the area, or
>is busy knocking the kids up side the head for their latest silliness, or a lot
>of other things. But you can see if he's on a cell phone.
>
>>Okay fine, lets ban communication devices in cars.
>
>Whole boatload of negative unintended consequences.
>
>And don't forget talking to passengers. Go out to one of those kinky websites,
>purchase one of those inflatable gags, stick it in and pump it up before
>getting behind the wheel, and don't take it out 'til U get there. No blabbing
>at anyone, anytime, while driving. <G>
>
>>Now, what exactly are police departments going to do?
>
>They'll be exempt, of course.
>
>>A police officer
>>must juggle not only a police radio (which is decidedly not hands-free),
>>but many have to look at a laptop, too.
>
>That shouldn't be allowed even if they are cops.
>
>>All while driving a moving
>>bomb-on-wheels if they happen to be in a Ford Crown Victoria (see
>>http://www.autosafety.org/article.php?scid=&did=357 ).
>
>Uh-huh.
>>
>>And *this* is not dangerous?
>
>Yes it is.
>
>>It's a little harder for a police officer
>>to be above the law if genuine safety issues are raised.
>
>They'll do it anyway... Speeding down the road like a bat out of hell - 90+ mph
>- is also a safety issue, but they do it all the time, no emergency even in the
>same time zone, and just because they can.
>
>Dave Head
Anonymous
July 22, 2004 12:33:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

noway@no!spam.org (Theodore J Bear) wrote in
news:40fed02c.1005255@news.velocitus.net:

> Guess it's time to put a dark tint on all windows but the
> windshield.

If it's dark enough to serve the purpose I'm guessing you have in
mind, it's probably already illegal.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@visi.com
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 5:16:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:30:34 GMT, noway@no!spam.org (Theodore J Bear) wrote:

>Great post Dave!

Thanks.

>It really just boils down to some can multitask and others can't.

Yeah, and you can go from a "can't" to a "can" with a little practice and
concentration.

>A
>person has to assign the highest priority to piloting the vehicle and
>then if there is brain capacity left over, then talk on the cell
>phone, swat the kids, change stations/ cd or what ever.

Yep.

> Also
>interesting are people that put on makeup or shave while driving.

Doubt that's very intense - should be fairly doable, except for looking in the
mirror with the makeup thing. Shaving - I can do a decent job without looking,
then do the touch-up when I finally stop. Probably have done this maybe once
total.

>Maybe passengers should be banned while the NHTSA is at it.

Hell, they keep trying to get everyone to have 3 people in the car, minimum,
so's you can use the "HOV Lane". Just don't talk to 'em, I guess.

>Guess
>it's time to put a dark tint on all windows but the windshield.

Yep.

Dave Head

>Sigh
>
>Teddy
>
>On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 21:32:20 GMT, Dave Head <rally2xs@att.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 10:55:11 -0400, Isaiah Beard <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Dave Head wrote:
>>>
>>>> Saw an article today - can't find it now - that said NHTSA has a new study
>>>> saying hands free cell phone use could even be more dangerous than holding the
>>>> phone. The conclusion was that cell phone usage in cars should be banned
>>>> althgether.
>>>
>>>> Lessee, people don't want other people to use cell phones in restaurants,
>>>> movies, in the health club (there's a sign in mine, anyway), and now not in
>>>> cars at all.
>>>
>>>I can understand cars. And who knows, maybe it is true that cell phones
>>>are dangerous while driving even with a hands free.
>>
>>Well, sure it is - 'cuz driving itself is dangerous. But is it more or less
>>dangerous than talking to a passenger, tuning the radio, changing a CD,
>>swatting the kids, etc? Or, is it just a new thing, a subject of some
>>jealousy / status / whatever?
>>
>>I think people are attacking cell phones in cars for several reasons. But the
>>best one is probably that you can see when people are using them. You can't
>>necessarily tell that the reason the dork in front of you is weaving all over
>>the road is 'cuz he's busy trying to find the best rap station in the area, or
>>is busy knocking the kids up side the head for their latest silliness, or a lot
>>of other things. But you can see if he's on a cell phone.
>>
>>>Okay fine, lets ban communication devices in cars.
>>
>>Whole boatload of negative unintended consequences.
>>
>>And don't forget talking to passengers. Go out to one of those kinky websites,
>>purchase one of those inflatable gags, stick it in and pump it up before
>>getting behind the wheel, and don't take it out 'til U get there. No blabbing
>>at anyone, anytime, while driving. <G>
>>
>>>Now, what exactly are police departments going to do?
>>
>>They'll be exempt, of course.
>>
>>>A police officer
>>>must juggle not only a police radio (which is decidedly not hands-free),
>>>but many have to look at a laptop, too.
>>
>>That shouldn't be allowed even if they are cops.
>>
>>>All while driving a moving
>>>bomb-on-wheels if they happen to be in a Ford Crown Victoria (see
>>>http://www.autosafety.org/article.php?scid=&did=357 ).
>>
>>Uh-huh.
>>>
>>>And *this* is not dangerous?
>>
>>Yes it is.
>>
>>>It's a little harder for a police officer
>>>to be above the law if genuine safety issues are raised.
>>
>>They'll do it anyway... Speeding down the road like a bat out of hell - 90+ mph
>>- is also a safety issue, but they do it all the time, no emergency even in the
>>same time zone, and just because they can.
>>
>>Dave Head
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 5:16:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Dave Head <rally2xs@att.net> wrote:

> Yeah, and you can go from a "can't" to a "can" with a little practice and
> concentration.

Some people can't. Got ADHD or ADD? Try focusing on more than one task
at a time. (I don't have either, but I know people who do.)

I do, however, think the blanket ban on all cellular use is stupid.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 5:16:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:08:56 -0500, Steven J Sobol
<sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

>> Yeah, and you can go from a "can't" to a "can" with a little practice and
>> concentration.
>
>Some people can't. Got ADHD or ADD? Try focusing on more than one task
>at a time. (I don't have either, but I know people who do.)

And some people simply get far too wrapped up in their phone calls for
them to ever talk safely while driving. Those types just need to
leave the phone off or on silent.

And I saw a nice new distraction today coming soon to a driver near
you; dash mounted CD/DVD players with flip out screens. If mounted in
place of the standard stereo, the screen is in clear view of the
driver. I don't know how they can legally dash mount those things.
Anonymous
July 23, 2004 5:05:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 02:55:21 GMT, Louise wrote:

> So....what does "whisper mode" mean?
>
> TIA
>
> Louise

Whisper mode is a setting that makes the phone's microphone more sensitive
so it picks up weaker sounds. Downside is that it makes using the phone in
very noisy areas difficult. Not all phones have it. Many Samsungs do.
Anonymous
July 26, 2004 6:58:12 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 22:17:19 -0400, The Ghost of General Lee
<ghost@general.lee> chose to add this to the great equation of life, the
universe, and everything:

>And I saw a nice new distraction today coming soon to a driver near
>you; dash mounted CD/DVD players with flip out screens. If mounted in
>place of the standard stereo, the screen is in clear view of the
>driver. I don't know how they can legally dash mount those things.

Heh, a few months ago I caught myself trying to watch the movie playing on
the ceiling-mounted screen of an SUV I happened to be following. I quit
when I realized how stupid I was being. But it led me to believe that those
things should be put on seat backs, not ceilings.

--
David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
Remove the naughty bit from my address to reply
Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
"Evil things have plans. They have things to do." - Anya
Anonymous
July 26, 2004 3:41:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

The in-dash DVD units are equipped with a lead that "must" be connected to
the emergency brake switch before they will display a picture. There are
now models with navigation systems built in... how distracting is that?

All research indicates that cell phone use in vehicles is quite a bit down
the list of accident causes. Of course, NHTSA has never let the facts cloud
their vision in the past...

PoD

P.S. - my spell-check wanted to correct NHTSA to NUTS...



"David S" <dwstreeter@spamisnaughty.att.net> wrote in message
news:jrh7g05o46vkbesqlcpdr44e2hgfpljph3@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 22:17:19 -0400, The Ghost of General Lee
> <ghost@general.lee> chose to add this to the great equation of life, the
> universe, and everything:
>
> >And I saw a nice new distraction today coming soon to a driver near
> >you; dash mounted CD/DVD players with flip out screens. If mounted in
> >place of the standard stereo, the screen is in clear view of the
> >driver. I don't know how they can legally dash mount those things.
>
> Heh, a few months ago I caught myself trying to watch the movie playing on
> the ceiling-mounted screen of an SUV I happened to be following. I quit
> when I realized how stupid I was being. But it led me to believe that
those
> things should be put on seat backs, not ceilings.
>
> --
> David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
> http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
> Remove the naughty bit from my address to reply
> Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
> "Evil things have plans. They have things to do." - Anya
>
!