(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

Good news on text/driving situation

M

Mike (WA)

Well-known Member
Heard today that the traffic radar folks are adding the cell phone frequencies to the radar frequencies they already detect- so cops will soon be able detect whether a cell phone is being used in the car they home in on. I would imagine that once they are tipped off by the radar gun, they'll physically observe the driver, for further evidence.

Don't know how they will sort out who in the car is guilty if multiple occupants, but about 90% of cars have only one occupant, so should be a big step in the right direction.

I'm usually not keen on further intrusions into our privacy by the guvment, but this one is welcome. Its gettin' dangerous out there!
 
Fines don't seem to deter many people these days because of the current attitude about money. Looks like they should rack up some jail time, even if the jails are crowded.

Sheriff Joe can always put up some more tents. After violators spend some summer months in one of those tents, the repeat rate drops down.
 
That opens another can of worms, hands free devices, and all the new vehicles route cell service into the on board equipment, so you can speak without the handheld device in hand or ear-set on, what do they do with that? Say the phone is resting on the seat, call in progress, but on speaker ?

Don't get me wrong, I dislike being distracted for any reason while driving, I ignore the darned phone, driving these busy 2 lane roads, you had best keep your eye on the road, for the other guy with less respect for distraction.

One farm I helped by driving their tractor trailer, shipping expensive horses, I remember how annoying the phone could be, where are you?, this and that...I knew that if an incident took place, they would check to see if you were on the phone, which if I am correct could be criminal, or at least open the door for personal liability in the event something went wrong, maybe I am incorrect. I told them I will not be taking any calls, it can wait until I arrive or I can pull over safely. Always someone on the other end, legit work related call, just not considering that while it was not for casual conversation, it is still a distraction to the driver responsible for safely shipping their high priced livestock.
 
Back in the early 1970s when the unrealistic 55 mph speed limit was passed CB radios became very popular in a short time. There were moves to outlaw them, but it didn't happen.
In those days people seem to have more common sense.
 
Its all about money, revenue enhancement, oldest game in the book, take ever more of citizens rights away in the name of ''public safety''. Too many of the weak have fallen and continue to fall for this tired ruse.
 
I think the whole thing is made-up. A cell phone transmits and receives even if it is in your pocket, and the signals go EVERYWHERE!

The detector could not tell if the signal was coming from the car it was pointed at, or the car behind it, or the car in the opposite lane, or the car 1/2 mile down the road, or the nearest cell tower!

Here we go with the tired "take away your freedoms" mantra again... Take away your freedoms to be an idiot and put other people's lives at risk. What about THEIR freedoms? Those freedoms you would take away when your distracted driving causes an accident...

Some family values you've got... "Anything goes so long as you don't get caught!" Scream bloody murder, cry about eroding freedoms any time some piece of technology comes along that makes it harder for you to do what 100% of the population agrees is WRONG and DANGEROUS and STUPID.
 
I'm NOT into Big Brother over regulating either

HOWEVER Driving is a Privilege NOT a Right as it involves public safety and the right of other drivers to not be killed when driving due to another persons carelessness or negligence. We kind of have to share the roads ya know.

I'm against doing anything BUT driving while driving which diverts attention or impairment while driving that endangers my life while I'm on public highways, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO DISTRACTIONS OR IMPAIRMENTS SUCH AS:

Drinking while driving
Being stoned or high when driving
Not being physically or mentally capable
Falling asleep when driving
Texting while driving

And I'm sure there are others. I view texting while driving as dangerous to the texter himself and others as much or more then driving drunk or sleepy.

LETS BAN DOING ANYTHING OTHER THEN DRIVING (that diverts attention or impairs a person) WHILE DRIVING LOL

John T, Conservative but still in favor of reasonable safety regulations such as outlawing drunk or impaired or texting while driving. A person has certain rights true (although driving isn't one of them) but his neighbor also has the right not to be killed, and that's a pretty important right in my opinion, certainly more important then texting Id say!!!!!!
 
(quoted from post at 16:15:27 10/08/14) I'm NOT into Big Brother over regulating either

HOWEVER Driving is a Privilege NOT a Right as it involves public safety and the right of other drivers to not be killed when driving due to another persons carelessness or negligence. We kind of have to share the roads ya know.

I'm against doing anything BUT driving while driving which diverts attention or impairment while driving that endangers my life while I'm on public highways, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO DISTRACTIONS OR IMPAIRMENTS SUCH AS:

Drinking while driving
Being stoned or high when driving
Not being physically or mentally capable
Falling asleep when driving
Texting while driving

And I'm sure there are others. I view texting while driving as dangerous to the texter himself and others as much or more then driving drunk or sleepy.

LETS BAN DOING ANYTHING OTHER THEN DRIVING (that diverts attention or impairs a person) WHILE DRIVING LOL

John T, Conservative but still in favor of reasonable safety regulations such as outlawing drunk or impaired or texting while driving. A person has certain rights true (although driving isn't one of them) but his neighbor also has the right not to be killed, and that's a pretty important right in my opinion, certainly more important then texting Id say!!!!!!
Click to expand...
n the development stage:
http://hamptonroads.com/2014/09/new-device-works-catch-texting-drivers
 
I drive a lot for my living. when i see people on there cell phone I wave at them. its crazy how many of them will remove there hands from the steering wheel and wave back. Bob
 
Explain in more detail. Seems like more of the same tired old "us against them". Are you saying that we should have no laws?
 
I'm not real big on the idea of people texting while driving. I'm not so hard on those just talking, especially since i can see zero difference between talking with or without a "hands free" device. If having the hands free is so danged important, then when do we outlaw drinking a coffee or munching on a gut bomb? And as far as distracted, I can't think of much more distracting than a set of parents with 5 screaming, puking kids in the back seats, and a lot of us have done that job! Are we going to outlaw kids fighting and screaming? I hope so! :lol:

You want to know who I'd like to see stopped and ticketed? The folks that have the stupid DOG riding in their lap with his head out the window, the people scratching their lotto tickets while driving and the people doing the ghetto slouch with the music so loud it shakes windows 300 feet away!
 
People could study Germanys laws. You can drive 150 mph, but you can't be eating, drinking or talking on the phone, road rage carries a sever fine, the left lane is for passing only, not driving several miles while people have to pass you on the right.
Even though they have high speed limits their accident rate per capita is less than the USA.
 
Two of my sisters have cars that have blue tooths built in. Their cells phones ring across the radio, they press a button in the steering wheel that answers with a quick glance, a microphone picks up their voices as they drive, and the caller's voice comes over their radios. What laws are being broken? Their cars were equipped with those setups no doubt following federal guidelines. Let their radios be radar detectored. They'll have their days in court, should an over zealous...

Mark
 
I don't text and drive. I think it's a really, really bad idea.
But I hope some smart fellow will invent a little transmitter that will foil the trooper's snooper.
Fight electronic surveillence with electronic chatter.
 
hughb,

You know I never said we should have no laws and wherever you get this ''us against them''? What does that mean? Do you think the government is your friend?, do you think politicians across the land are passing bills wholesale to protect you and yours? Believe what you want and keep drinking the koolaid, if must have gone down well all these years.
 
I spent 38 years on the road. Saw lots of people that I wanted to pull over and slap.Got hit by one guy. That begged me not to report him,since this was his third wreck of the day. I couldn't make the call fast enough.
 
I asked you to explain in more detail. give us facts. You think there is a great conspiracy out there. give us proof. some of what you say is fact but a lot of it is just political tripe. Details. document the facts. Then I might buy into your theory.
 
I never said there was a great conspiracy out there, it is no conspiracy because the powers that be don't need a conspiracy to continue stripping us of our rights because they know they can count on people like you who vote for so called ''security'' and ''entitlements'' and are willing to barter away your freedom for crumbs and lick the masters hand begging for more.
 
So that is how you make your point? I thought you could make valid points to back up your argument.
Bluster and name calling proves nothing. Have a nice night.
 
I'm just wondering who is regulating all those police officers out there with the computers in their cars who are punching in tag numbers as they drive, and having to read the info on the screen?

We had a similar discussion awhile back in regard to things people do that take their attention off the road when they are driving. That said, my question is are those texting any more dangerous than the ones changing cloths, putting on makeup, reading the paper, shaving......or all those cops out there using their computers while driving?

The only difference is that the cops don't have anyone telling them, or even challenging them in court, that I have ever heard about, for doing basically the same thing they are being asked to stop other people for doing. Just doesn't seem right to me......
 
My initial reaction was "nonsense!". Then I read the post by JMOR and I have to retract a bit. It sounds like a small, privately-held company looking to create some buzz in preparation for its IPO. Although it's certainly possible to make a device that will pinpoint the source of cell phone transmissions, that doesn't mean it would work in the real world, let alone be admissible in court.

Detecting active cell phones in traffic might be possible. Although it's true that phones are constantly talking back and forth with the cell towers, these are intermittent, low power transmissions. The nature of the transmissions is different when a voice call is active, and I think it would be feasible to identify a car where there's a voice call in progress. But detecting a text message is a whole 'nuther thing: The transmission is quite brief, only a millisecond or two. Any device detecting a text would have to be already homed in on the car at the instant the texter hit "send".
 
(quoted from post at 19:05:26 10/08/14) People could study Germanys laws. You can drive 150 mph, but you can't be eating, drinking or talking on the phone, road rage carries a sever fine, the left lane is for passing only, not driving several miles while people have to pass you on the right.
Even though they have high speed limits their accident rate per capita is less than the USA.
Click to expand...

They also have extremely heavy fines and mandatory jail time for breaking the laws over there according to an article I read. Think something like 20 years for 1st offense DWI.
 
(quoted from post at 23:07:37 10/08/14) I'm just wondering who is regulating all those police officers out there with the computers in their cars who are punching in tag numbers as they drive, and having to read the info on the screen?

We had a similar discussion awhile back in regard to things people do that take their attention off the road when they are driving. That said, my question is are those texting any more dangerous than the ones changing cloths, putting on makeup, reading the paper, shaving......or all those cops out there using their computers while driving?

The only difference is that the cops don't have anyone telling them, or even challenging them in court, that I have ever heard about, for doing basically the same thing they are being asked to stop other people for doing. Just doesn't seem right to me......
Click to expand...

Regulating them? Well, their state laws regulate them of course. More to the point, I know on my old job people lost thousands of dollars in money, got to work the desk and never drive a Troop car for years, got fired, spent years in court, stuff like that. In my experience, when I got a complaint over the radio I usually pulled over and wrote down the info if it was at all complex. We didn't have much in the way of computers, a lap top is all. Darn sure you couldn't read it going don the road and not crash. You didn't "punch in tag numbers", you called them in via radio. I retired about 5 years ago, maybe it's all changed, but other than plate readers (again, no punching in of numbers) I haven't seen that much change.

I do agree that police should be obeying the law. Nothing get's me more PO'd than seeing some young buck going down the road in plain sight yakking away on his cell phone, laughing away. You know it's not and emergency call, which is supposed to be the only time they can do that. I suggest you do as I've done and get the police car plate number, place and time and call their supervisor. Let him know how bad it looks.
 
(quoted from post at 20:05:13 10/08/14) I think the whole thing is made-up. A cell phone transmits and receives even if it is in your pocket, and the signals go EVERYWHERE!

The detector could not tell if the signal was coming from the car it was pointed at, or the car behind it, or the car in the opposite lane, or the car 1/2 mile down the road, or the nearest cell tower!
Click to expand...

Agreed. Last I knew text messages were sent in the packets that the phones use to id themselves and connect to the nearby towers - that's why they're limited to 160 characters. This communication between phone and towers goes on constantly.
 
Mr. LAA,
I'm not going to get into the disagreement you are having with H...b, there is people in this country that believe everything the gov. tells them that they are soo brainwashed they wouldn't know the truth when they see it.
My email is open if you wish further correspondence,keep up the faith.
 
(quoted from post at 11:32:28 10/08/14) Back in the early 1970s when the unrealistic 55 mph speed limit was passed CB radios became very popular in a short time. There were moves to outlaw them, but it didn't happen.
In those days people seem to have more common sense.
Click to expand...

I don't know what the difference is between talking on cells & CBs BUT I drove truck for over 30 years and talked pretty much all the time when running with another truck; even on slick roads at night and never had a 'lapse' like I got when I tried driving and talking on the cell - must be some kind of radiation coming from them that numbs my brain OR I'm just too d----d old to 'multi-task! :roll: So, I just pull over if I need to use it. 8)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top