With all the protections the species is being poisoned (all the dumb ones do something stupid and die)
NTSB released it's recommendation on cell phone use while driving today.
- Thread starter TheForce
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 131
- Views 10K
- Status
With liberty and freedom comes both risk and responsibility on the part of the individual. But it is impossible to regulate all behavior. Not only does it take away individual liberty and freedom, it also takes away personal responsibility and accountability, as well as common sense.
I take great risk with my own life and the lives of others when I ski every weekend flying down a run at 70mph and playing on jibs and jumps. Even when I go that fast, there are still some that go flying by me. Everyone on the mountain knows there is danger of hitting someone or something or having someone else hit them. Even with this risk I have yet to run into another skier or boarder on the mountain as I know, due to personal responsibility, when I can go fast and the conditions (snow conditions, visibility, and the number of people on the slope) that are conducive to specific speeds. I know if I hit someone in front of me it is my fault, no matter how fast I am going as downhill skiers have the right of way. Most of the accidents I see are from beginners going very slow and running into another beginner going slow as both are still learning how to turn.
Because accidents do occur and always will at a ski resort, the mountain takes great care on their own to make it as safe as possible. The last thing I want to see is the government telling all ski resorts how they should regulate skiing and boarding. The worst thing that can happen is for the government making them post speed limits, limits on the size, steepness, and number of jibs (rails, boxes, walls, ex), as well as the size and number of jumps. It is those that actually partake in the events on each particular mountain that have the best knowledge of how things should be on the mountain. It is those that actually pay to ski and board that know their own limits and risks involved in trying knew things, and it is these skier and boarders that are responsible for their own actions.
This applies to driving as well. As a driver I know what distracts me and what doesn't. I also know there are drivers that are easily distracted by many things, including the radio in their car, and I am risking my life getting on the road with them. The last thing I want to do is to give up my freedom to listen to my radio (I know that is not part of this particular proposal, but it is a distraction and can save lives if it is banded) in my car or use my hands free device because others do not know how to use either without being distracted.
I take great risk with my own life and the lives of others when I ski every weekend flying down a run at 70mph and playing on jibs and jumps. Even when I go that fast, there are still some that go flying by me. Everyone on the mountain knows there is danger of hitting someone or something or having someone else hit them. Even with this risk I have yet to run into another skier or boarder on the mountain as I know, due to personal responsibility, when I can go fast and the conditions (snow conditions, visibility, and the number of people on the slope) that are conducive to specific speeds. I know if I hit someone in front of me it is my fault, no matter how fast I am going as downhill skiers have the right of way. Most of the accidents I see are from beginners going very slow and running into another beginner going slow as both are still learning how to turn.
Because accidents do occur and always will at a ski resort, the mountain takes great care on their own to make it as safe as possible. The last thing I want to see is the government telling all ski resorts how they should regulate skiing and boarding. The worst thing that can happen is for the government making them post speed limits, limits on the size, steepness, and number of jibs (rails, boxes, walls, ex), as well as the size and number of jumps. It is those that actually partake in the events on each particular mountain that have the best knowledge of how things should be on the mountain. It is those that actually pay to ski and board that know their own limits and risks involved in trying knew things, and it is these skier and boarders that are responsible for their own actions.
This applies to driving as well. As a driver I know what distracts me and what doesn't. I also know there are drivers that are easily distracted by many things, including the radio in their car, and I am risking my life getting on the road with them. The last thing I want to do is to give up my freedom to listen to my radio (I know that is not part of this particular proposal, but it is a distraction and can save lives if it is banded) in my car or use my hands free device because others do not know how to use either without being distracted.
Last edited:
Actually more protections leads to more dumb acts as people lose the ability to use common sense and understand their own limits. When someone else is telling them what they can and cannot do, they no longer think for themselves or test the limits of their own abilities.With all the protections the species is being poisoned (all the dumb ones do something stupid and die)
Last edited:
Again you are talking about individual liberties.
This act affects more than just YOU. It affects the lives of many others, which means more than your "right" to chat on the phone while driving.
AS I stated before, you never had this so-called choice before 10 years ago. Now you can choose to stop your car and call. Is it SO IMPORTANT that you be able to BS on the phone while driving your car?? I can think of many more important individual rights issues, such as the Patriot Act, where you might spend your time and energy fighting.
This is a new technology, no one knew how it would affect lives while driving or maybe they would have banned their use in cars from the beginning. This is a case of the evolution of a NEW product and finding out it's not always safe. Cigarette, anoyone???
Last edited:
I applaud DodgerKing! Phones in cars have been around longer than 10 years! Does anyone remember the 1970s?? CB radio was very big then!Was there a big increase in auto accidents?? I didn't hear of any.Did anyone make a big issue of it? NOPE.Again!! i have no problem with safety but this country has gone safety nuts!!.If this trend continues then the day will come when your whole daily life will be controlled!All in the name of safety and protection.ID rather be free and deal with the daily risks we all encounter instead of haveing every thing i do being controlled and monitored.
I am talking about everyone's liberty.
Every thing affects more than just the indivual which is the justification that is used to limit the rights of others in the name of safety. For example, not allowing kids to eat peanuts at school whom are not allergic to peanuts limits the rights of those students in the name of safety for a small minority of students whom maybe allergic.
Why does it matter how long something has been around?
Regardless if something is new or been around 1,000 years, restriction is a limit of liberty.
All individual liberty affects others. It should not be a matter of how old a particular piece of technology is or how minor the law is. Any act that limits the rights of others in the name of protection is a matter of liberty vs safety. You may not think this is all that big of a deal, that is fine. But when you state that passing some new regulatory law saves lives and therefor you are all for it. You do need to ask yourself if this same view applies to everything. If not, where do you draw the line? Even though something may be minor all of these thousands of minor acts added together equals something big.
One other thing i will say that i dont think has come up! Education.You can give safety a big boast by updating drivers ed!I bet driving school hasn't really changed that much since the days i went.Teach people in driving school the safe way to use a cell phone in a car.I would bet that many who drive dont even know they are causing a problem with there cell phone,radio,gps,etc
I find it interesting that some of you will strongly share you opinions against a ban on cell phone use while driving, but haven't shared anything in the thread about Carrier IQ. Could it be that your judgment has been clouded by the your dislike of our government, so fearful of any new safety regulatory laws? I suspect this might be so. If I am wrong name a few recent regulatory laws that have been passed in the last 5 or so years that has effected you in some way you are in favor of.
I wouldn't make assumptions of the views on those based on them not participating in a thread. The same can be said of SOPA. In case you are wondering if I hold the same standards on SOPA: Overkill on Internet piracy
I chose to participate at SonicBabble instead because I felt it was a better forum to do so.
As far as carrier IQ directly. As long as it is kept in the private industry and used for marking only, I have no problem with it. Private companies have no power and cannot force you nor take away your liberties by themselves. The only entity that can do that is the government, as ONLY the government can make and enforce laws. If the government then uses data and uses it in a way to limit liberty, then it is just as bad as this.
The same is the case for the ski resort example I used. If each individual resorts sets up their own rules and regulations for safety, then individuals can choose to use that resort or another one based on these variables and others. The resorts can then optimize everything based on what is best for that particular resort. If the government gets involved and starts creating standards and regulations on all resorts, then choices and options become limited, and it is here where I have a problem
Last edited:
Answer my question. Can you name a few recent regulatory laws that have been passed in the last 5 or so years that has effected you in some way you are in favor of?
How do I answer that? Because there isn't.
I guess I can say in general it is because I choose freedom of choice and liberty over all else, including my own personal likes and dislikes. Because I think we are way overly regulated as it is.
I believe the reason I'm so vocal on this issue here is this slogan!! To much control and not enough common sense.I feel that as a society these days the solution for fixing all the worlds problems is spend more$$$ and more laws and regulation.
Last edited:
Only those that fit within the Constitution, and none that limits the liberties of others.
.
Last edited:
In some form or fashion that's what safety regulatory laws do. I go on a case by case basis. Not all are good and not all are bad. We can agree to disgree.
DK, I thankyou for your honesty. I do enjoy many of your postings and threads. This one not so much. LOL
I am done with this thread unless someone has a question or comment directed toward me.Take Care,
Frank
I would have no problem with most of what they want to regulate with a cell phone but at least give me an option instead of taking away my right to talk while driving in a car.Including hands Free in the law would totally take away my rights to chat while driving!This is what pisses me off the most.PS its great that we still live in a country that we can agree to disagree
- Status
