Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 11:49:46 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline


Bureaucrats working for the federal government are taking another step towards controlling every aspect of our lives by moving towards a nationwide ban on "distracted driving" based on one particular accident

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/gadgets/news/distracted-driving-or-distracted-policymaking-why-the-proposed-car-cellphone-ban-is-wrong-6617334

The problem with this is that its a states rights issue, not really something we need the federal government to dictate to us

I have personally had a run in with a girl who was texting while driving, and she was satisfactorily cited and prosecuted using existing state laws. My point is that not every problem has a one-size-fits-all solution, and we dont need to pay bureaucrats at the federal level to run our lives.

Its my opinion that Washington should be given the least amount of money and power possible




_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 11:56:20 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
The following were not factors in this accident: (1) weather; (2) driver qualifications or familiarity with the accident location; (3) alcohol or illicit drug use by any of the four drivers; (4) mechanical condition of the Volvo tractor, the GMC pickup, or either of the two school buses; (5) emergency response; or (6) highway design, work-zone signage, or work-zone policies.
Had the Volvo tractor, the two school buses, and the motorcoach been required to have video event recorders, the events leading up to this accident could have been more definitively assessed.
The use of video event recorder data for managing driver behavior could assist school bus operators in identifying driver performance issues before they lead to accidents.
The absence of a timely brake application, the cellular provider records indicating frequent texting while driving, the temporal proximity of the last incoming text message to the collision, and the witness statement regarding the driver's actions indicate that the GMC pickup driver was most likely distracted from the driving task by a text messaging conversation at or near the time of the accident.
A combination of enforceable state laws, high visibility enforcement, and supporting communication campaigns can reduce the number of accidents caused by drivers distracted by the use of portable electronic devices.
Manufacturers and providers of portable electronic devices known to be frequently used while driving should reduce the potential of these devices to distract drivers by developing features that discourage their use or that limit their nondriving- or nonemergency-related functionality while a vehicle is in operation.
The collision between the lead school bus and the GMC pickup was the result of the bus driver's attention being drawn away from the forward roadway by the motorcoach parked on the shoulder.
Had the driver of the following school bus maintained the recommended minimum distance from the lead school bus, she would have been able to avoid the accident.
The GMC pickup driver was fatigued at the time of the accident due to cumulative sleep debt and acute sleep loss, which could have resulted in impaired cognitive processing or other performance decrements.
The medical condition of the Volvo tractor driver did not cause or contribute to the accident.
The state of Missouri had no effective oversight of the operations of Copeland Bus Services.Â
The Missouri Motor Vehicle Inspection Regulations "School Bus Inspection" section does not adequately delineate the bus systems to be included in an inspection.
The state's current inspection procedures do not allow for the identification of all school bus brake defects included in the Missouri Motor Vehicle Inspection Regulations.
The MVI–2 vehicle inspection form is insufficient because it does not effectively prompt state inspectors to evaluate all of the safety-critical items listed in the Missouri Motor Vehicle Inspection Regulations.
Both the Missouri State Highway Patrol and a state inspection facility conducted inadequate vehicle inspections of buses operated by Copeland Bus Services.
Forward collision warning systems on the two accident buses-and possibly on the GMC pickup-could have prevented the accident or at least mitigated its severity.
The situation of a single occupant having to manually hold open the emergency exit window could delay school bus evacuation.
Components of emergency exit windows, such as protruding latch plates, could cause delays or injuries during school bus evacuation.
The lack of school bus evacuation briefings prior to activity trips may hinder evacuation and pose a risk for all students.


Those were the conclusion, this is NOT an ill thought out plan...

Personally I would like to reach out and zap someone to unconciousness when I see them texting or calling or applyying make up or drinking , or eating, even smoking.
Its just your contention tho that this should just be a states law, why?
DOT is nation wide isnt it?
Drinking while under the influence is a state issue?
IM sure it goes way beyond ONE incident that is being made into a law, please provide cites to prove this?



_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 12:00:23 PM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Its my opinion that Washington should be given the least amount of money and power possible



As a GENERAL rule, I agree with you here.  Although there are exceptions - desegregation laws, and situations such as environmental laws in which allowing states to determine would simply result in states wiping out their own laws to chase smokestacks.


_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 12:08:00 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

Yes, of course there are exceptions Steven

Unfortunately though, once the federal government seizes control for this issue or that it is rarely if ever relinquished back to the states

And over time  the severity of the reasons for such power grabs have become less and less worthy, and the methods used can be described as insidious


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 12:08:46 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
I also think you should actually read what the reccomentdations were to national, state, city and other "agency recommendations were
here Ill give you the full report so you dont have an excuse. http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/2011/gray_summit_mo/index.html

I think you are batting a 2

Highway Accident Report: Gray Summit, MO: Collision Involving Two School Buses, a Bobtail and a Passenger Vehicle, August 5, 2010

On December 13, 2011, the NTSB Board will meet to discuss the Highway Accident Report related to the collision involving two school buses, a bobtail, and a passenger vehicle which occured on August 5, 2010 in Gray Summit, MO.

Webcast

NTSB public events are also streamed live via webcast. Webcasts are archived for a period of three months from the time of the meeting. Webcast archives are generally available by the end of the event day for public Meetings, and by the end of the next day for Technical conferences.

Synopsis
This is a synopsis from the Safety Board's report and does not include the Board's rationale for the conclusions, probable cause, and safety recommendations. Safety Board staff is currently making final revisions to the report from which the attached conclusions and safety recommendations have been extracted. The final report and pertinent safety recommendation letters will be distributed to recommendation recipients as soon as possible. The attached information is subject to further review and editing.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On Thursday morning, August 5, 2010, in Gray Summit, Missouri, traffic slowed in the approach to an active work zone on eastbound Interstate 44 (I-44), as motor vehicles merged from the closed left lane to the right lane. A 2007 Volvo truck-tractor with no trailer was traveling eastbound in the right lane and had slowed or stopped behind traffic. About 10:11 a.m. central daylight time, a 2007 GMC Sierra extended cab pickup truck merged from the left to the right lane and struck the rear of the Volvo tractor. This collision was the first in a series of three.

A convoy of two school buses from St. James High School, St. James, Missouri, was traveling eastbound in the right lane of I-44, approaching the slowed traffic and the collision ahead. Their destination was the Six Flags St. Louis amusement park in Eurkea, Missouri. The lead bus was a 71-passenger school bus, occupied by 23 passengers. Following closely behind the lead bus was a 72-passenger school bus, occupied by 31 passengers. Seconds after the lead bus passed a motorcoach that had pulled over and stopped on the shoulder, it struck the rear of the GMC pickup. This collision-the second in the series-pushed the pickup forward, overturning it onto the back of the Volvo tractor. The front of the lead bus was ramped upward, as it came to rest on top of the GMC pickup and the Volvo tractor. Moments later, the following school bus struck the right rear of the lead bus.

As a result of this accident sequence, the driver of the GMC pickup and one passenger seated in the rear of the lead school bus were killed. A total of 35 passengers from both buses, the 2 bus drivers, and the driver of the Volvo tractor received injuries ranging from minor to serious. Eighteen people were uninjured

CONCLUSIONS

The following were not factors in this accident: (1) weather; (2) driver qualifications or familiarity with the accident location; (3) alcohol or illicit drug use by any of the four drivers; (4) mechanical condition of the Volvo tractor, the GMC pickup, or either of the two school buses; (5) emergency response; or (6) highway design, work-zone signage, or work-zone policies.
Had the Volvo tractor, the two school buses, and the motorcoach been required to have video event recorders, the events leading up to this accident could have been more definitively assessed.
The use of video event recorder data for managing driver behavior could assist school bus operators in identifying driver performance issues before they lead to accidents.
The absence of a timely brake application, the cellular provider records indicating frequent texting while driving, the temporal proximity of the last incoming text message to the collision, and the witness statement regarding the driver's actions indicate that the GMC pickup driver was most likely distracted from the driving task by a text messaging conversation at or near the time of the accident.
A combination of enforceable state laws, high visibility enforcement, and supporting communication campaigns can reduce the number of accidents caused by drivers distracted by the use of portable electronic devices.
Manufacturers and providers of portable electronic devices known to be frequently used while driving should reduce the potential of these devices to distract drivers by developing features that discourage their use or that limit their nondriving- or nonemergency-related functionality while a vehicle is in operation.
The collision between the lead school bus and the GMC pickup was the result of the bus driver's attention being drawn away from the forward roadway by the motorcoach parked on the shoulder.
Had the driver of the following school bus maintained the recommended minimum distance from the lead school bus, she would have been able to avoid the accident.
The GMC pickup driver was fatigued at the time of the accident due to cumulative sleep debt and acute sleep loss, which could have resulted in impaired cognitive processing or other performance decrements.
The medical condition of the Volvo tractor driver did not cause or contribute to the accident.
The state of Missouri had no effective oversight of the operations of Copeland Bus Services.Â
The Missouri Motor Vehicle Inspection Regulations "School Bus Inspection" section does not adequately delineate the bus systems to be included in an inspection.
The state's current inspection procedures do not allow for the identification of all school bus brake defects included in the Missouri Motor Vehicle Inspection Regulations.
The MVI–2 vehicle inspection form is insufficient because it does not effectively prompt state inspectors to evaluate all of the safety-critical items listed in the Missouri Motor Vehicle Inspection Regulations.
Both the Missouri State Highway Patrol and a state inspection facility conducted inadequate vehicle inspections of buses operated by Copeland Bus Services.
Forward collision warning systems on the two accident buses-and possibly on the GMC pickup-could have prevented the accident or at least mitigated its severity.
The situation of a single occupant having to manually hold open the emergency exit window could delay school bus evacuation.
Components of emergency exit windows, such as protruding latch plates, could cause delays or injuries during school bus evacuation.
The lack of school bus evacuation briefings prior to activity trips may hinder evacuation and pose a risk for all students.
PROBABLE CAUSE

The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the initial Gray Summit collision was distraction, likely due to a text messaging conversation being conducted by the GMC pickup driver, which resulted in his failure to notice and react to a Volvo tractor that had slowed or stopped in response to a queue that had developed in a work zone. The second collision, between the lead school bus and the GMC pickup, was the result of the bus driver's inattention to the forward roadway, due to excessive focus on a motorcoach parked on the shoulder of the road. The final collision was due to the driver of the following school bus not maintaining the recommended minimum distance from the lead school bus in the seconds preceding the accident. Contributing to the severity of the accident was the lack of forward collision warning systems on the two school buses.

RECOMMENDATIONS

As a result of its investigation of this accident, the National Transportation Safety Board makes the following recommendations.

New Recommendations

To the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:

Modify Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 217 to require that all emergency exits on school buses be easily opened and remain open during an emergency evacuation. (H-11-XX)
Modify Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 217 or the corresponding laboratory test procedure to eliminate the potential for objects such as latch plates to protrude into the emergency exit window opening space even when that protrusion still allows the exit window to meet the opening size requirements. (H-11-XX)
To cover the interim period until Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 217 is modified as specified in Safety Recommendations 1 and 2 above, provide the states with guidance on how to minimize potential evacuation delays that could be caused by protruding latch mechanisms on emergency exit windows and by exit windows that require additional manual assistance to remain open during egress. (H-11-XX)
To the 50 states and the District of Columbia:

(1) Ban the nonemergency use of portable electronic devices (other than those designed to support the driving task) for all drivers; (2) use the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration model of high visibility enforcement to support these bans; and (3) implement targeted communication campaigns to inform motorists of the new law and enforcement, and to warn them of the dangers associated with the nonemergency use of portable electronic devices while driving. (H-11-XX)
To the state of Missouri (addressed to the Governor):

Revise state regulations to require a periodic safety review of motor carrier operations for those carriers involved in pupil transportation. (H-11-XX)
Modify the Missouri Motor Vehicle Inspection Regulations so that all inspection areas and procedures that apply to school buses are contained within the "School Bus Inspection" section. (H-11-XX)
Modify your school bus inspection procedures so that all brake defects specified in the Missouri Motor Vehicle Inspection Regulations can be identified during biannual inspections. (H-11-XX)
Revise your MVI–2 vehicle inspection form so that it lists all items to be inspected, as required by the Missouri Motor Vehicle Inspection Regulations; and include on the form a means of succinctly describing whether each of those items passes inspection. (H-11-XX)
Audit your vehicle inspection program to ensure that inspections conform to requirements of the Missouri Motor Vehicle Inspection Regulations. (H-11-XX)
Revise your bus evacuation regulations to require that pupils traveling to an activity or on a field trip in a school bus or a school-chartered bus be instructed in safe riding practices and on the location and operation of emergency exits prior to starting the trip. (H-11-XX)
To the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education:

Incorporate into school bus driver training the risk of driver inattention, the need for proper scanning behavior, and the necessity of keeping a safe following distance. (H-11-XX)
To CTIA–The Wireless Association and the Consumer Electronics Association:

Encourage the development of technology features that disable the functions of portable electronic devices within reach of the driver when a vehicle is in motion; these technology features should include the ability to permit emergency use of the device while the vehicle is in motion and have the capability of identifying occupant seating position so as not to interfere with use of the device by passengers. (H-11-XX)
To the National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services, the National Association for Pupil Transportation, and the National School Transportation Association:

Inform your members of the circumstances and events that contributed to the Gray Summit accident; discuss solutions for the driver, pretrip evacuation briefings, and vehicle, inspection, and technological issues presented in the report; and urge the implementation of these solutions among your members. (H-11-XX)
Previously Issued Recommendations Reiterated and Reclassified in This Report

As a result of its investigation, the National Transportation Safety Board reiterates and reclassifies the following safety recommendations:

To the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration:

Require all heavy commercial vehicles to be equipped with video event recorders that capture data in connection with the driver and the outside environment and roadway in the event of a crash or sudden deceleration event. The device should create recordings that are easily accessible for review when conducting efficiency testing and systemwide performance-monitoring programs. (H-10-10)
Require motor carriers to review and use video event recorder information in conjunction with other performance data to verify that driver actions are in accordance with company and regulatory rules and procedures essential to safety. (H-10-11)
Safety Recommendations H-10-10 and -11 are classified “Open-Unacceptable Response” in section 2.3, “Video Event Recorders,” of this report.

To the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:

Complete rulemaking on adaptive cruise control and collision warning system performance standards for new passenger cars. At a minimum, these standards should address obstacle detection distance, timing of alerts, and human factors guidelines, such as the mode and type of warning. (H-01-8)
Determine whether equipping commercial vehicles with collision warning systems with active braking and electronic stability control systems will reduce commercial vehicle accidents. If these technologies are determined to be effective in reducing accidents, require their use on commercial vehicles. (H-08-15)
Safety Recommendations H-01-8 and H-08-15 are classified “Open-Unacceptable Response” in section 2.6.2, “Forward Collision Avoidance Systems,” of this report.

Previously Issued Recommendations Reiterated in This Report

The National Transportation Safety Board reiterates the following previously issued recommendations.

To the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration:

Develop a comprehensive medical oversight program for interstate commercial drivers that contains the following program elements: the review process prevents, or identifies and corrects, the inappropriate issuance of medical certification. (H-01-21)
Develop a comprehensive medical oversight program for interstate commercial drivers that contains the following program elements: mechanisms for reporting medical conditions to the medical certification and reviewing authority and for evaluating these conditions between medical certification exams are in place; individuals, health care providers, and employers are aware of these mechanisms. (H-01-24)
To the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:

Complete rulemaking on adaptive cruise control and collision warning system performance standards for new commercial vehicles. At a minimum, these standards should address obstacle detection distance, timing of alerts, and human factors guidelines, such as the mode and type of warning. (H-01-6)
After promulgating performance standards for collision warning systems for commercial vehicles, require that all new commercial vehicles be equipped with a collision warning system. (H-01-7)
To the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators:

Urge your member states to develop a comprehensive medical oversight program for intrastate commercial drivers that contains the following program elements: Individuals performing medical examinations for drivers are qualified to do so and are educated about occupational issues for drivers; a tracking mechanism is established that ensures that every prior application by an individual for medical certification is recorded and reviewed; medical certification regulations are updated periodically to permit trained examiners to clearly determine whether drivers with common medical conditions should be issued a medical certificate; individuals performing examinations have specific guidance and a readily identifiable source of information for questions on such examinations; the review process prevents, or identifies and corrects, the inappropriate issuance of medical certification; enforcement authorities can identify invalid medical certification during safety inspections and routine stops; enforcement authorities can prevent an uncertified driver from driving until an appropriate medical examination takes place; mechanisms for reporting medical conditions to the medical certification and reviewing authority and for evaluating these conditions between medical certification exams are in place; individuals, health care providers, and employers are aware of these mechanisms. (H-01-26)

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 12:24:34 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
The concept being lost here is that we (as a society) used to favor more local government rather than the distant federal beaurocracy because it is easier for the People to infuience. We used to favor the People having influence over the government but given current insanity levels, it might not be such a good idea anymore.

But that still doesn't make federal control any more desirable.

And to make texting the issue is typical federal lunacy. Were the two school bus drivers texting ? They're the ones who most likely caused the deaths. A pickup rearends a truck. Well, the idiot deserves a smashed pickup, bump on the head and for his insurance to go up. Not to die.

Getting sandwiched in between large objects caused his death. What's more how did he get to hit the truck in the first place ? Obviously he was going faster than the truck. Well then so were the school buses, which are higher up than pickup trucks usually, so why the hell didn't the "professional" driver of the first school bus see anything ?

If weather wasn't a factor in that, what was ? Blindness or something ? People with brains know the bigger the thing you are driving usually the longer it takes to stop, so appropriate following distance is longer. And by that I mean longer than one carlength per ten MPH, not longer than the widely accepted standard of three inches per one hundred MPH.

I swear, seatbelts and airbags should be illegal. Ther should be spikes sticking out of the dashboard to impale the driver if he hits something. People would learn to drive pretty quick then.

T^T

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 12:39:34 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
FR

Im tossed up on whether its a state or Federal issue, but ALL forms of distracted driving should be restricted. Possibly something akin to speed laws, with Federal guidelines for type of road. Eg hands free cell use limited to highways where speed limits are increased to 75.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 12:47:16 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

Is it okay if I chew gum while I drive, or should that be a federal crime


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 12:49:37 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Is it okay if I chew gum while I drive, or should that be a federal crime



Depends on whether your a leftist or a righty. Rightys are able to do both at the same time, leftists can barely accomplish one at a time. Admittedly difficult to enforce. Perhaps a law where you cant chew gum while you drive a hybrid or electric car.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 12:50:33 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline



_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 12:51:15 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Rightists are unable to drive, not having enough fact and backround to pass the driving test.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 12:51:28 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
No no no, that is insufficient kneejerk reactionism. We need federal inspection stations every five hundred feet to ensure compliance, and no eating, sipping a drink, smoking, changing radio stations. But then we need federal regulations to ensure that new cars prevent the possibility. Over one MPH the radio station won't change, the cellphone shuts down, smoke detectors will shut down the engine. Then we can lay off the 1,000,000 officers employed at the inspection stations, that is after we mandate the melting down of all vehicles that do not meet or have not been retrofitted to meet the new standards.

It's all for our own good you see.

T^T

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 1:01:05 PM   
DOM68005


Posts: 6069
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Nebraska
Status: offline
quote:

Sanity said
Its my opinion that Washington should be given the least amount of money and power possible.

I find you excessively generous to those who never heard nor understood the term fiduciary responsibility

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 1:11:14 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
I can't find it in that wall of text, but the NTSB does see distracted driving legislation as an issue for the states:

Dec. 13, 2011

The National Transportation Safety Board today urged all U.S. states to ban drivers from using electronic devices while driving, including for text messaging.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 1:14:32 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DOM68005

quote:

Sanity said
Its my opinion that Washington should be given the least amount of money and power possible.

I find you excessively generous to those who never heard nor understood the term fiduciary responsibility



_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to DOM68005)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 2:34:54 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
To the 50 states and the District of Columbia:

(1) Ban the nonemergency use of portable electronic devices (other than those designed to support the driving task) for all drivers; (2) use the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration model of high visibility enforcement to support these bans; and (3) implement targeted communication campaigns to inform motorists of the new law and enforcement, and to warn them of the dangers associated with the nonemergency use of portable electronic devices while driving. (H-11-XX)


Dont know what the bitch is about. Seems they are recommending it to the states to make as law.... not the federal government

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 2:38:58 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Im guessing that is why anything Ive posted hasnt been refuted.
A knee jerk post with facts that dont bear out the original assertion?

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 2:40:40 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

Selective listening and all that.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 2:49:28 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
are emoticons seen as off topic now?
if not


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? - 12/26/2011 3:04:11 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

No, you are  ignored because you failed to understand the topic

From the OP:

quote:

Bureaucrats working for the federal government are taking another step towards controlling every aspect of our lives...


Espousing controls is a step, not the end product. The feds consistently impose various demands on the states, this example here is just one small point in the overall debate

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Im guessing that is why anything Ive posted hasnt been refuted.
A knee jerk post with facts that dont bear out the original assertion?


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Distracted Driving or Distracted Policymaking? Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094