Jun 30, 2008 07:03PM GMTJune 30, 2008 19:03:59
Posted by SAM

Question Stats

145 answers
240 comments
raves +21  
Share This Question

California and Washington ban driving under the influence of cell phones: Is the government controlling our lifestyle?

First of all, I hate Bluetooths and it seems like the government is forcing us to buy one. Second, distraction is distraction. I see no difference holding my cell phone while driving. What is this new law trying to prove? That is safer to drive with two hand instead of one? It seems that most stupid laws begin on the west coast and rapidly spreads like wildfire throughout the nation. Starting tomorrow (July 1) motorists in California and Washington will be forced to refrain from talking on their cell phones while driving, or face a fine. The two West Coast states are the latest to ban blabbing behind the wheel, joining the ranks of others like Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and Utah, which already have similar laws in place.In California's case, the state is also banning 16- and 17-year olds from talking, or sending text messages, on their phones while driving, except on their own property or in an emergency. Adult drivers in California spotted spouting with a cell phone to their ear will be hit with fines of $20 for the first offense and $50 for subsequent tickets, plus additional fees that could more than triple the fine. California is making the hands-free cell phone law a primary offense, meaning a driver can be pulled over if seen talking with a cell phone to their ear. I feel like a hypocrite because I always mentioned to people how I hated bluetooths and the people that use them.
Add Image Add Video
resize

* these fields are required to answer

I agree to the SodaHead TOS and Privacy

Loading Loading...
Top Comment
raves +8   by [Brii Monster]

Answered No. This law saves lives.

its the most intellegent law i have ever heard of. if your hands and your eyes have to be doing something, chances are your brain should be in on it too. your are in control of a rolling death machine, at least make it that little bit safer.
i honestly cant understand why you guys are so up in arms about this. its for your safety! you think the government is passing this law, just to benefit companies who make and distribute wireless headsets? get off the grass guys, you dont have to be on the phone every minute of every day.
this law will save lives. get over yourselves.
view thread
Sort By: Raves | Date 1 2 3 4 ... Next » Last » Comments
  • raves     [-] by Beachluvr~NoPUMA~GObama~28

    Answered No. This law saves lives.

    You have no idea how many near misses I've had with people while they are talking on the phone and haven't had a clue that I was there, until they nearly drove into the side of my car. I've also seen someone flip a car because they were so busy on the phone they didn't notice the curve in the road.
    I can't thnk of anything more terrifying than a 16 or 17 year behind the wheel of a car on the phone or texting. At that age they can't even drive properly and have no idea as to how to react in a bad situation. Because of the massive inexperience of 16 and 17 year drivers the last thing they need to be doing is texting while they are driving. react situation massive inexperience 16 17 year drivers texting driving
  • raves +3   [-] by Spider20

    Answered No. This law saves lives.

    Seen too many near accidents caused by inattentive drivers using cell phones..........I'm for it.....
  • raves +2   [-] by Manda

    Answered Undecided

    I personally have used my cellphone while driving & I manage to still be a safe driver. On the other hand, I have seen people do some stupid crap while blabbing behind the wheel.
  • raves     [-] by Beachluvr~NoPUMA~GObama~28
    The trouble it just take a moments lapse in concentration and mayhem ensues. You probably think it will never happen to you until you are on the receiving end of someone else momentary lapse of concentration
  • raves +2   [-] by Sofia

    Answered No. This law saves lives.

    moderated...
  • raves     [-] by jj

    Answered Undecided

    really??????they did????i should start reading or watching the news... undecided reallythey didi reading watching news
  • raves +2   [-] by Beef

    Answered No. This law saves lives.

    Next to drunks behind the wheel, idiots on cell phones piss me off to no end. If you don't like blue tooth, pull into a parking lot and finish your call. Nothing is that important. I'm to the point the next moron that pulls out in front of me on my motorcycle, swerves from thier lane, or freaking stops in the middle of the road and starts backing up because they are on the phone instead of driving is probably going to end up with my complete, undivided, attention.
  • raves +3   [-] by mstee

    Answered No. This law saves lives.

    dropping a cell phone is a bigger distraction than the bluetooth however if you are consumed in the conversation you will still be distracted.
  • raves     [-] by Leanna

    Answered Yes. The government is forcing us to buy a Bluetooth, otherwise you will be fined!

    that is such a stupid law the government doesnt have a right to tell us wat 2 buy i still drive with my cellphone to my ear and if the cops pull me over i will say that it is an emergency!
  • raves     [-] by fuzzy (as a raccoon) Ken
    ...and when you hit somebody or go through a light?
    Be responsible. Hang up and drive.
  • raves +2 -1 [-] by harrisa

    Answered No. This law saves lives.

    I think it should be nationwide. I cringe when I see someone driving with a cell phone plastered to their ear, and they are yelling are carrying on and you can sit next to them at a light and hear all the sordid details of their lives. There is no telling how many accidents are related to cell phones. I cannot talk and drive at the same time. I have to pull over, if I need to use the phone. Some people can and some people can't and some people think they can when actually they cannot. Just a quick call might be okay, but i have ridden along side people who were on the phone constantly, totally engrossed in their conversation as opposed to the road.
  • raves +2   [-] by matty507

    Answered No. This law saves lives.

    Just off the frigging phone and drive.
  • raves +5   [-] by meKrystle (BYOB RSVP STFU)

    Answered Yes. The government is forcing us to buy a Bluetooth, otherwise you will be fined!

    If they were going to make a law, they should have banned total use of the phone altogether...whether you had a stupid ear piece or not. A distraction is a distraction, and people's minds completely disappear from the road the moment they start a conversation on a cell phone.
  • raves +3   [-] by deano

    Answered No. This law saves lives.

    Sometime the law must force responsibility on people.
  • raves +1   [-] by Mike

    Answered Yes. The government is forcing us to buy a Bluetooth, otherwise you will be fined!

    police state
  • raves +2   [-] by pgcsny

    Answered Undecided

    New York state was the first state to go HANDS FREE.... You dont have to buy a blue tooth, or any other device... You can drive or you can talk on your cell phone...
  • raves +3 -1 [-] by Tom

    Answered No. This law saves lives.

    I have 2 cars with bluetooth, I need to get the others upgraded. If I am driving a vehicle without bluetooth, and take a call, if the conversation last longer than 30 seconds, I pull over. It is the prudent thing to do.



    If you are on a cell phone driving slow, weaving, tapping your brakes every 10 feet, I'm pissed. So now it's time for you to be pissed.



    I get in front of you and tap my brakes every few seconds. Some times hard enough to jack my car in front of you. I will do a brake job on your cellphone talking ass in a heart beat. I love looking in the rear view mirror at the horrified expression on your dumb ass cell phone talking face.



    HANG UP AND DRIVE, YOU FREAKIN IDIOT!
  • raves +2   [-] by fuzzy (as a raccoon) Ken
    Tom, You're too subtle for me. What's your point? LOL
  • raves +2   [-] by mk, Supreme Smartass

    Answered No. This law saves lives.

    I think it will help cut down on accidents. You don't have to buy Bluetooth. I have it and like it. When you drive you should have as few distractions as possible.
  • raves +1   [-] by Mr. Nichols

    Answered Undecided

    I think it's a syupid law, but I don't think it is some elaborate conspiracy either.

    What's the difference between talking on the phone and being immersed in conversation with a passenger? I mean really? It's just gay.
  • raves +1   [-] by Chef
    and by 'gay'..you mean to say it is a bad thing...or do I misunderstand your attempt at communication? gay misunderstand attempt communication
  • raves     [-] by Mr. Nichols
    Yeah, I mean it as a bad thing! As in, "that shirt is gay," "that movie was gay." Sorry if you don't like that, but lets be honest here. The term "gay" doesn't only mean that you bang other dudes in the butt.
  • raves     [-] by fuzzy (as a raccoon) Ken
    I just checked with a teenager. Nobody uses "gay" to mean anything but a homosexual anymore. "That was so 2003"!
  • raves +1   [-] by Mr. Nichols
    Oh man. Well shit, since teenagers don't do it anymore, then I guess I should stop. Thanks for telling me. I owe you one!

    Or maybe, it could be that while I don't hate gays, I am surely not "sensitive" to their feelings. Sorry. Just me.
  • raves     [-] by fuzzy (as a raccoon) Ken
    No wonder they call it Flori-DUH.

    flori-duh
  • raves     [-] by Mr. Nichols
    Blah blah blah.
  • raves +1   [-] by matty507
    I dont think being gay is a bad thing. Its more of a sad thing. To think that gays will never live a normal life. Its sad. I still use the word gay. I could care less what teens are doing or not doing. Its not like they have anything to do with anything. Their role is to learn how to act when hair starts growing in places for the first time and how to deal with humpalumps getting bigger. Is that a third eye? Unless of course you are a pedophile and hang around teens.
  • raves     [-] by Mr. Nichols
    Lol, well said!
  • raves     [-] by fuzzy (as a raccoon) Ken
    You obviously don't know any gays. Maybe that's for the better.
    Meanwhile, keep in mind that teens are responsible for much of our vernacular going back in history. Does "groovy" ring a bell? How about "hepcat"?
  • raves     [-] by matty507
    You are right. I don't associate with people whom are abnormal. Like murderers, thieves, rapists, gays, bank robbers, adulterers...etc What does teens creating jargon have anything to do with anything? You are a very puzzling person. So if someone uses the word gay, they are immature? Gay also has meanings such as festive, jolly, brav