Governator bans texting while driving in Calif.

I have to look at the keys while I text, and sometimes I have to use both hands -- mostly because I got my first QWERTY phone in June and I'm still not used to it.

In Washington, they passed a hands-free-only law and a no-texting law that started in the past nine months. I have a non-bluetooth headset that I use 24-7 when I'm at home, too, so that part's no problem for me. As for the texting -- I usually only text in the car when I'm stopped at a light or something similar.

 

I agree with that, which is why I said "I'll never say it's the safest thing. ..." But, and think of me however you like because I probably couldn't care less, I'll continue to text while I drive, just like many people will continue to eat while they drive and others will apply make-up when they drive or others will discipline their children or fight with their significant others while driving and others will scan the radio when they drive.

If you're not only driving while driving, you're not being the "safest" driver possible. The trick is, to me, don't go outside your comfort level. It's like keeping to the right lane on the highway when you start driving. Eventually, when you feel comfortable, you begin to pass people. For me, I wanted to limit my cell phone usage while I was driving, but after a while, I got used to it. Now I don't feel like it's a danger to me. And if I thought it was a danger to me -- and others around me -- I wouldn't do it. Which is why I don't do it at certain situations.

 

The point is ... there are a ton of accidents because people get "distracted" behind the wheel, and nobody's banning all those other behaviors that play a role, too. Like eating, like fiddling with the radio, putting on makeup, turning around to yell at your kids, etc.

Distractions are a part of driving. If that's a problem for some people, THEY need to a) improve their driving skills; b) eliminate those distractions on their own; or c) stop driving. Trying to ban every distraction is like Homeland Security trying to make us 100 percent safe. It ain't gonna happen. Deal with it.

And sorry, BTE, just because Baby Boomers still trying to figure out this technology thing can't operate a cell phone without diverting their full attention to it doesn't mean the rest of us have that problem. Or that we don't have our priorities straight when we're behind the wheel.

 

Questions: Were you for or against the banning of smoking even outdoors at that university? Do you favor raising insurance premiums on smokers?

 

I just don't get this "some small percentage of the world can't do it, so let's ban it for everyone."

I know drivers who can't parallel park. I know drivers who can't turn left without a light safely. I know drivers who can't park in one spot.

Ban all that.

 

Against the outdoors banning, but can't say I don't enjoy being in a smoke-free state.

Not totally against raising insurance premiums, though; smokers clearly have more health problems than nonsmokers.

 

None of those can result in a catastrophic car wreck.

 

Then you're not being consistent in your argument. Why not raise premiums for those who skydive, drink or eat unhealthy food?

 

From my experiences, I don't think it's such a small percentage.

 

Dickens, I was offering other examples. Eating, dealing with kids, radio...all those had already been thrown out there.

Fact is, banning for all because of idiots, when those throwing the stones are doing things just as dangerous every day, is stupid.

 

Inability to turn left without a light safely can certainly result in an accident.

 

This isn't just about the baby boomers, buckweaver. Part of the problem is the people who do this the most are teenagers who are just learning to drive.

And most of those examples you cited are just as unsafe and foolish as texting while driving.

It comes back to the point I keep trying to make with mike. Just because you think you have it under control doesn't mean you really do.