What's worse? SUVs or Cell Phones?



Status
Not open for further replies.
Thu, 6 Feb 2003 20:48:48 +0000 (UTC), <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Jake
Khuon) wrote:

> As it pertains to mobile phones, reading the morning paper, applying makeup, shaving, eating
> food, drinking a beverage, etc while driving, I believe that they are all equally dangerous and
> if they were deemed a factour in the outcome of an accident situation, the driver should be
> charged with a "DWI" (driving while impaired). They were afterall impaired.
>
I'd rate mobile phone sex as most distracting. Cycling one of Vancouver's strolls is an exercise in
invisibility.

I argue that a phone is more distracting than a newspaper. Something like 30% of drivers have
survived getting dressed while driving.

The complicated keypads and small screens make initiating a call a major distraction but a driver
can chose the time when they divert their attention, as with a newspaper or shave - like at a
stop light.

When talking they quit scanning and their brains are otherwise occupied so they don't process the
visual information. Kids, pets and complicated radios would rate a close second. The absolute worst
is the smoking driver losing the end of their cigarette somewhere near their lap.

Nov. 5, 2002 Toronto, Ontario - A recent survey conducted by Goodyear found that a majority of
Canadians believe operating a cell phone while driving is dangerous and should be banned.

According to the Goodyear Safety Survey:

93% of Canadians feel that operating a mobile phone while driving a vehicle impairs a person's
ability to concentrate on driving safely. 97% of those 50 years of age or older, and 98% of those
from Quebec feel this way.

78% of Canadians feel the law should prohibit driving a vehicle while operating a mobile phone, with
those in Quebec (85%) and Atlantic Canada (84%) lead the charge.

Despite these criticisms, a third (33%) of Canadians who drive admit to talking on a mobile phone
while behind the wheel.

In a related survey, more than 62 percent of Minnesota residents say they have witnessed unsafe
driving caused by drivers using cell phones, according to Allina Health System. While 20 percent
said they don't observe a self-imposed ban on using their cell phone while driving or using a
hands-free device, almost all of those polled said they believe it is dangerous to use a phone
while driving.
--
zk
 
"Zoot Katz" wrote in message >
> >
> Wrong newsgroup.
>
> Drivers like that are scumbags whose contents should be emptied back into the gutters from which
> they sprung.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2725329.stm
> --
> zk

Wow that was terrible. Not excuseable as road rage. Here, in Va.the defendant, would be
chargeable for ; felonius assault, attempted murder with a motor vehicle, 2 counts each. I say, I
say that is if the commonwealth attorney took extra interest in the case. Each charge carries 5
to 20 years. In which case, his appolgy, would have been nice, but he would not get probation. Of
course, this assumes a perfect world. But, like the man said; those with the capital, don't get
the punishment. Ciao Len
 
>I'm not saying that mobile phones can present no danger to driver impairment. I'm saying quite the
>opposite. The problem I see is that we are a society who is too quick and spends too much effort on
>fixing the most obvious but we don't spend enough time getting to the root-cause and fixing
>it. We're always looking for the cheapest and quickest short-term solution while neglecting the
> deeper problem and long-term impacts.
>

If you are saying that we need to make serious effort in driver training, driver testing, in short
instilling in drivers the importance and seriousness of the job of operating a motor vehicle, I am
in agreement with you.

But the bottomline is that people, many people do take risks with other peoples lives by drinking,
by talking on the phone when they should be driving and by reading the newspaper.

Common sense says one should avoid any of the above but I think only two out of the three are
actually against the law most places and these days, if its legal, people do it.

I think this is a catch 22 situation. If people had sense and respected the task of driving, then
the need for laws would be minimal. But currently that is not the case and certain obvious
distractions need to be clearly defined as NO NOs.

jon isaacs
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "Claire Petersky" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > I don't think he knew really how easy it would be for me to catch up to him -- I just had to
> > pour it on a bit and was just about to knock a little warning on his trunk when he,
>
> How would you like it if someone knocked a little warning on your bicycle? If you get this ******
> off, take up another form of exercise. BTW: SUV's don't have trunks. Maybe next time a bike runs a
> red light, some motorist should catch up to the bike and give them a physical warning.

Brilliant analogy! If I drove my bike in such a way as to threaten, intimidate, or risk the health
and/or life of an individual then, "yes", that person ought to knock something or other.

Robin Hubert
 
"Zoot Katz" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...>
> Drivers like that are scumbags whose contents should be emptied back into the gutters from which
> they sprung.

There are bad drivers, no question. However, not an excuse for us bicyclist to make a situation
worse by banging on the trunk of a car. In fact, if a bicyclist ever started to pound on the trunk
of a car, the driver has every right to pound on the bicyclist as far as I am concerned.

I am beginning to understand why bicyclist get so little respect going by the postings here.
 
"Robin Hubert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Brilliant analogy! If I drove my bike in such a way as to threaten, intimidate, or risk the health
> and/or life of an individual then, "yes", that person ought to knock something or other.

1) You are assuming he/she did this on purpose. You don't know that. In fact, I doubt if they did it
on purpose at all, probably just bad judgment on part of the driver. Look, it's part of the
danger of riding a bike on the road that we are going to get close calls. If you get so warped
and bent out of shape each time it happens, get a new form of exercise.

2) Running red lights, not stopping at stop signs, riding on the sidewalk etc. can be threatening,
intimidating behavior that can risk the health of others. So should they have the right to pound
on your bicycle for a while? Say if you riding on a bike-walk path and you come too close to a
pederstarian or their dog... should they just assume you are harassing them..... so they can run
up to your bicycle and start pounding on it?

Robin, if you get this warped out of close calls, take up a new form of exercise. If everytime we
had a close call with a car and started pounding on their trunks... you know what would happen....

Get control of yourself. Accept the risk of bicycling. I do and that is why I enjoy it so much.
 
"len" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> Wow that was terrible. Not excuseable as road rage. Here, in Va.the defendant, would be chargeable
> for ; felonius assault, attempted murder
with
> a motor vehicle, 2 counts each.

And you can cite examples of this right???

Don't play Perry Mason......
 
Fri, 07 Feb 2003 01:07:29 GMT, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In fact, if a bicyclist ever started to pound on the trunk of a car, the driver has every right to
>pound on the bicyclist as far as I am concerned.

And as far as the law is concerned they'd have every reason to get themselves arrested for assault.

Thing is they're chickenshit fluffy lumps who won't get out of their cars and so use their cars
as weapons.

The most popular weapons used by aggressive drivers are firearms and motor vehicles. In 37 percent
of the cases a firearm was used; in 35 percent the weapon was the vehicle itself.

They're scumbags.
--
zk
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "len" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Wow that was terrible. Not excuseable as road rage. Here, in Va.the defendant, would be
> > chargeable for ; felonius assault, attempted murder
> with
> > a motor vehicle, 2 counts each.
>
> And you can cite examples of this right???
>
> Don't play Perry Mason.....

You can kiss my Perry Mason . No ,I can't cite exact examples. As far as I know nobody has
intentionaly backed over a man and and his daughter. But , I do know how to read, which, I doubt
about you. I know the laws in my state. Let me see, your defending the right of somebody to back
their vehicle over somebody, because they complained they were passing too close. Get help soon.
 
[email protected] wrote:
>
> There are bad drivers, no question. However, not an excuse for us bicyclist to make a situation
> worse by banging on the trunk of a car. In fact, if a bicyclist ever started to pound on the trunk
> of a car, the driver has every right to pound on the bicyclist as far as I am concerned.

So you feel that hitting the sheet metal which is more than five feet away from the driver, causing
him no risk nor harm, is equivalent to hitting the vehicle operator himself?

Sorry, I don't buy that at all. I've slapped the rear fender of a car that was backing out of a
parking place as I walked by. (It was either that or jump out of the way to save being hit.) I
thought it was a useful lesson for the incompetent driver. Likewise, I've slapped the front fender
of a car that passed me too closely while I cycled. Another lesson.

Nobody would ever charge me for battery in those cases, and nobody should consider those slaps to be
equivalent to an attack.

--
Frank Krygowski [email protected]
 
>In fact, if a bicyclist ever started to pound on the trunk of a car, the driver has every right to
>pound on the bicyclist as far as I am concerned.

Depends on the circumstances. I've kicked a door or two when the car was way too close, I've yelled
at cars to get the driver's attention when they were about to do something incredibly stupid, and
I've slapped a mirror or two when required.

These aren't things I do regularly, I only had to yell once and kick one door in the last year of
riding. That's pretty restrained as far as I'm concerned, I am not looking for trouble, just my
piece of the road.

But why even debate this with an anonymous troll who probably has not got the slightest conception
of how to operate a bicycle in an urban traffic mix. It's a complete waste of time.

If Claire (an experienced urban rider and all around mild mannered person) said the cager needed a
slap then they probably did.

--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________ ------------------"Buddy Holly,
the Texas Elvis"------------------
__________306.350.357.38>>[email protected]__________
 
[email protected] wrote:

> Let me see, your defending the right of somebody to back their vehicle over somebody, because they
> complained they were passing too close. Get help soon.

Yes, but he "had not realised there was a child in the trailer". That makes it okay; adults are
fair game.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Let sleeping dogs lie. -- Charles Dickens
 
"Benjamin Lewis" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> > Let me see, your defending the right of somebody to back their vehicle over somebody, because
> > they complained they were passing too close. Get help soon.
>
> Yes, but he "had not realised there was a child in the trailer". That makes it okay; adults are
> fair game.
>
> --
> Benjamin Lewis
>
> Let sleeping dogs lie. -- Charles Dickens

Oh yeah, one other thing, here if convicted of using a motor vehicle in a felony, his license would
be revoked for 10 years, Then he would have to ride a bike. cest la guerre.
 
"Frank Krygowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote: So you feel that hitting the sheet metal which is more than five
> feet away from the driver, causing him no risk nor harm, is equivalent to hitting the vehicle
> operator himself?
>
> Sorry, I don't buy that at all. I've slapped the rear fender of a car that was backing out of a
> parking place as I walked by. (It was either that or jump out of the way to save being hit.) I
> thought it was a useful lesson for the incompetent driver. Likewise, I've slapped the front fender
> of a car that passed me too closely while I cycled. Another lesson.

Front fenders are the appropriate place to place a firm hand when necessary. When I was off at
college, my ride home took me down a road where motorists would line up in the bike lane to turn
right. The problem was always the worst when the new students would arrive in the fall. All it
took was one or two days squeezing between the stopped cars and the curb, placing my hand on each
car for "balance" to get the point across. After the first week, they rarely encroached on the
bike lane.....

-Buck
 
<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "Zoot Katz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...>
> > Drivers like that are scumbags whose contents should be emptied back into the gutters from which
> > they sprung.
>
> There are bad drivers, no question. However, not an excuse for us
bicyclist
> to make a situation worse by banging on the trunk of a car. In fact, if a bicyclist ever started
> to pound on the trunk of a car, the driver has
every
> right to pound on the bicyclist as far as I am concerned.

Oh, yeah, then you get your ass kicked by a pumped up cyclist. I have a friend who put their bike
through the windshield of some asshole. Guess what. He never suffered for it. And I'd be willing to
bet the idiot never messed with a cyclist again.

>
> I am beginning to understand why bicyclist get so little respect going by the postings here.

You don't get respect by being a coward.

Robin Hubert
 
"Zoot Katz" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Fri, 07 Feb 2003 01:07:29 GMT, <[email protected]>,
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >In fact, if a bicyclist ever started to pound on the trunk of a car, the driver has
every
> >right to pound on the bicyclist as far as I am concerned.
>
> And as far as the law is concerned they'd have every reason to get themselves arrested for
> assault.

And so would the bicyclist for pounding on the car. It goes both ways. Amazing that some of you guys
expect to be treated like traffic but don't want to act like traffic.
 
"Robin Hubert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Oh, yeah, then you get your ass kicked by a pumped up cyclist. I have a friend who put their bike
> through the windshield of some asshole. Guess what. He never suffered for it. And I'd be willing
> to bet the idiot
never
> messed with a cyclist again.

I have reasons to doubt your story. You are disgrace to the bicycling community and an obvious troll
or kook. PLONK!!!!
 
"Eric S. Sande" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> Depends on the circumstances. I've kicked a door or two when the car was way too close, I've
> yelled at cars to get the driver's attention when they were about to do something incredibly
> stupid, and I've slapped a mirror or two when required..

You really shouldn't be on the road. And yes, I ride my bike several thousand miles a year.

not of all of us are kooks.....It's people like you who give us such a bad name.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.