New Jersey lawmakers may ban texting while driving

[LiberalNation]

and how will they enforce this. We don't need a nanny state but then if you kill someone in a wreck while on a cell phone you should be charged and punished. Vehicular homicide or something.

New Jersey lawmakers may ban texting while driving - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070326/us_nm/newjersey_texting_dc;_ylt=AvF5E.ioaPi.ZoXVnOJN5FkD W7oF)

[QUOTE]PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - New Jersey drivers who insist on sending text messages on their cell phones or personal digital assistants may find themselves on the wrong side of the law if legislators approve a new bill.

The plan is in response to a recent Nationwide Insurance survey finding that one in five drivers are texting while driving, a figure that rises to about one in three among people aged 18 to 34, said Democratic Assemblyman Paul Moriarty.

"It's extremely dangerous," said Moriarty, one of three sponsors of the bill. "It requires you to completely take your eyes off the road. I see people driving down the street using both their thumbs to send a text message, and I can only imagine they are steering with their knees."

Drivers caught texting would be fined between $100 and $250. Similar measures are being considered by three other states, Moriarty said.

The measure would allow police to pull over any driver found texting while driving, a tougher approach than currently allowed under the state's ban on drivers using a mobile phone on the highway. Under that law police are only allowed to stop drivers if they are also committing another offense.

Critics have asked why the bill does not also seek to outlaw other sources of driver-distraction such as coffee or food, but Moriarty said such a bill would never pass the state legislature.

The bill, introduced last week, has 20 co-sponsors -- both Democrats and Republicans. It is expected to be debated in a committee during May or June and then pass to the full Assembly and the Senate whose leaders have indicated they are in favor, the assemblyman said.

[avatar4321]

more important question, how on earth do you text while driving?

I can barely talk on the phone...

[Hobbit]

The fact that there's a need for such a ban is sad, and I'm in full support of it.

[loosecannon]

This already passed in a larger more important state.

It will lead to technology that allows hands free texting or just talking.

Take the Bus if you wanna text enroute!

[Nuc]

ANYTHING that gets people off the road is a good thing. I wouldn't care if they confiscated their cars for texting or using a cell phone. The number one problem facing the world today is cars, traffic, gridlock, roads etc. Raise the driving age. Give incentives to live near work and walk or ride a bike. Create bike friendly environments. Tax gas to high heaven. Whatever it takes to reduce traffic, it's a good thing.

[Hobbit]

ANYTHING that gets people off the road is a good thing. I wouldn't care if they confiscated their cars for texting or using a cell phone. The number one problem facing the world today is cars, traffic, gridlock, roads etc. Raise the driving age. Give incentives to live near work and walk or ride a bike. Create bike friendly environments. Tax gas to high heaven. Whatever it takes to reduce traffic, it's a good thing.

It's also a direct infringement of our liberties. I live around Atlanta, so I know what kind of problems that traffic can cost, but if you want to reduce the problem, forcing people off the road is not the way to do it.

[avatar4321]

It's also a direct infringement of our liberties. I live around Atlanta, so I know what kind of problems that traffic can cost, but if you want to reduce the problem, forcing people off the road is not the way to do it.

Thing is people don't have a right to drive. I don't really see how it could be an infringement of their liberties. If they can't follow the rules created to govern the road, they dont have the right to be driving.

[LiberalNation]

Still how do you enforce such a law, the cop wouldn't even be able to see you texting on you lap. Unenforcable laws are worthless laws.

[manu1959]

darwin's therory will take care of these folks...oh and anyone they crash into....

[OCA]

Instead of this why doesn't New Jersey work on repealing that ridiculous marriage thing ban the union of mentally defective homosexual lifestyle choice perversionists? Thats the big fish they need to fry.

New Jersey.....where obviously wrong and dangerous lifestyle choices that detrimental to society as a whole are ok with the state.:clap:

[avatar4321]

darwin's therory will take care of these folks...oh and anyone they crash into....

That's the problem. Not that darwins law would take care of them, but that they will take out anyone in their way.

[Little-Acorn]

Why do they need this law? Texting while driving is already covered under "inattentive driving" in most states, is it not?

[shattered]

Texting doesn't require you to take your eyes completely off anything. If you can touch type, you can text while you're doing anything else in the world.

[Little-Acorn]

Driving requires THINKING. And attention. Any attention or brain cells that get devoted to texting, whether touch-typed or not, are taken FROM driving, and you are driving inattentively. Same thing applies to simple talking on a cell phone - what you're saying, and listening to the other guy saying, requires attention. Attention that's taken away from your driving. This earns you a ticket for "inattentive driving". Or a wreck.

The argument that texting, even when touch-typed, doesn't take enough attention from driving to matter, DOESN'T FLY. It will take some attention away.

They say that good drivers make lousy conversationalists. That's because good drivers DON'T take attention away from their driving, to talk (or text). They pay NO attention to the talking (or texting), and so to the guy sitting next to them, they sound like inattentive dweebs. But they drive well.

People who text, don't drive well.

[LiberalNation]

If people cared about our attention level while driving school and work would start later. As tired as I am sometimes I'd think it was worse then texting or talking on a phone.

[shattered]

Driving requires THINKING. And attention. Any attention or brain cells that get devoted to texting, whether touch-typed or not, are taken FROM driving, and you are driving inattentively. Same thing applies to simple talking on a cell phone - what you're saying, and listening to the other guy saying, requires attention. Attention that's taken away from your driving. This earns you a ticket for "inattentive driving". Or a wreck.

The argument that texting, even when touch-typed, doesn't take enough attention from driving to matter, DOESN'T FLY. It will take some attention away.

They say that good drivers make lousy conversationalists. That's because good drivers DON'T take attention away from their driving, to talk (or text). They pay NO attention to the talking (or texting), and so to the guy sitting next to them, they sound like inattentive dweebs. But they drive well.

People who text, don't drive well.


You're loopy. Just admit you don't have the ability to multi-task. It's the person that tries to overcompensate that's the problem - you know - the soccer mom in the SUV driving at 45mph in a 65, in the far right (passing) lane of traffic that's a problem.

I'm not saying there aren't plenty of problem people out there, but they're not the ones you think they are...

[Gaffer]

You're loopy. Just admit you don't have the ability to multi-task. It's the person that tries to overcompensate that's the problem - you know - the soccer mom in the SUV driving at 45mph in a 65, in the far right (passing) lane of traffic that's a problem.

I'm not saying there aren't plenty of problem people out there, but they're not the ones you think they are...

I think she is right about all of it. Texting is like reading the news paper as you drive. Ever see someone doing that? That's scary.

[shattered]

I think she is right about all of it. Texting is like reading the news paper as you drive. Ever see someone doing that? That's scary.

It's exactly like that if you put your phone in your lap. However, otherwise it's no different than changing a radio station while you're driving..and you sure as hell can't tell me you never do that.

[shattered]

Worse yet, are those idiots that think they're being extra careful getting on the freeway with their white-knuckled grip at the 10 and 2 positions, doing 35 fucking miles per hour. That is FAR more of a danger than practically everything else on the road, short of changing your freakin pants, or putting makeup on.

[Gaffer]

Worse yet, are those idiots that think they're being extra careful getting on the freeway with their white-knuckled grip at the 10 and 2 positions, doing 35 fucking miles per hour. That is FAR more of a danger than practically everything else on the road, short of changing your freakin pants, or putting makeup on.

I agree, slow and nervous drivers are dangerous. And I try to avoid changing channels on the radio unless I'm stopped somewhere. But as was stated before. texting as your driving can be a distraction. Your continually taking your eyes of the road to read and to respond. Your driving one handed, usually your left or weak hand. And you may be distracted enough to not use both hands when your in an area where you need both hands. Anything that distracts you when your driving can cause an accident. The person in front of you could suddenly slam on their brakes just as you look down at your latest message. You have just lost your opportunity to stop in time.

I understand slow and overly cautious drivers are aggrevating, but you can always go around them. drivers not paying attention may side swipe you as you go around. Who moved into your blind spot while you were texting?

[LiberalNation]

Who doesn't drive one handed most of the time, really.

[shattered]

I agree, slow and nervous drivers are dangerous. And I try to avoid changing channels on the radio unless I'm stopped somewhere. But as was stated before. texting as your driving can be a distraction. Your continually taking your eyes of the road to read and to respond. Your driving one handed, usually your left or weak hand. And you may be distracted enough to not use both hands when your in an area where you need both hands. Anything that distracts you when your driving can cause an accident. The person in front of you could suddenly slam on their brakes just as you look down at your latest message. You have just lost your opportunity to stop in time.

I understand slow and overly cautious drivers are aggrevating, but you can always go around them. drivers not paying attention may side swipe you as you go around. Who moved into your blind spot while you were texting?

Again, why are you looking "down"? A quick lift of your hand, and a glance takes care of reading.. You respond with the same hand you read with, while your left hand (yes, my STRONGER hand - I'm left handed) is on the wheel. You also stay IN the far right lane of traffic where all the slow people are if you have to text while driving.

I'm not saying it's done constantly. I'm saying it CAN be done safely. You also seem to think people are too stupid to take driving conditions in to consideration before starting. I dunno where you live, but where *I* live, we have some of the most suck ass driving conditions in the world.

The typical work day starts earlier and ends later now. You do what you need to do.

[Little-Acorn]

As I said before, in that situation ANY attention given to texting, is attention taken away from driving. If you could theoretically do texting without taking any attention from driving, then you wouldn't even know you were texting.

Texting isn't a one-time, two-second diversion like changing a radio station. It goes on for a minute or more. During that time, you are NOT paying full attention to driving.

Boastful statements about "multi-tasking" simply admit to the existence of the problem. Multi-tasking computers do it the same way humans do: by paying attention to this task for a period of time, then to that task for the next period, then the next for a period, etc. In the computer's case, that's OK, because the other tasks can freeze without progress or attention while the computer is doing the present task. Driving CANNOT freeze with no (or reduced) attention during those periods, however, no matter how many people insist they can do it.

One of the reasons we have speed limits on roads, is because we are using ALL the brain capacity available for driving, when we hit that limit. Going faster makes us eventually miss something important, or not react to it in the more-limited time available. Diverting attention in ANY amount to texting, has exactly the same effect. It doesn't produce an instant crash, any more than speeding produces one. But it increases the likelihood that, when a tight situation finally occurs, we won't be devoting enough attention to react properly or quickly enough. You might text for months or years without having a crash. But you will have one sooner while texting, than if you never text. And a thousand drivers texting, will have more crashes than a thousand drivers not texting... even if a number of the texting ones don't crash.

If you change radio stations every three seconds, for many minutes at a time, day after day while driving, that will also produce a crash sooner, and for the same reason.

Bottom line: You can't text while driving, without diverting some of your attention to the texting task. And since texting goes on for up to a minute or more, you materially increase your chances of being unable to adequately respond to a tight situation, should one occur when you're texting.

Our laws are set up for UNDISTRACTED drivers. How do you measure whether the amount of distraction caused by texting, is "still safe enough"? Since you didn't have an accident THIS time, therefore it's safe for the next 1,000 times too?

I suggest not.

BTW, it's not a question of what you do with your hands. It's a question of what you do with your attention. The idea that a "hands-free cell phone" device makes driving while phoning safe, is false. Makes a lot of money for accessory companies, though, who get to sell millions of (useless) voice-activated mikes and headsets to a gullible public. And it makes politicians feel good, when they make laws banning all but hands-free phone devices. They can claim they've "done something" about the problem of drivers distracted by cell phone usage. But in fact, they're actually ENCOURAGING dangerous behavior, by implying that hands-free phoning while driving is "safe", when it's not.

[mrg666]

Texting doesn't require you to take your eyes completely off anything. If you can touch type, you can text while you're doing anything else in the world.

thats riddiculous !
when your driving your driving not txting or doing anything else remember not only the culprit but other peoples lives are at risk old folk , kids , how would any one here feel if they lost a loved one or friend and the driver had been using some gadget when it happened .
id be pissed
im in the uk its been banned here a while but the law was ignored {spot fine}
so they just made it auto 3 points and a fixed penalty fine
next year they are looking at introducing a smoking ban as well but thats another debate