55 Comments

1. POSTED BY ScubaNJ  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:11 am

   This is a joke. I constantly see people (including police) driving and talking on their cell phones. It’s too difficult to enforce. Instead invent a steering wheel that requires two hands to be in contact with it for the car to run.
2. POSTED BY State Street Pete  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:12 am

   This is a good thing and needs to backed up with big fines and the threat of loss of driving privledges. Drivers who text really scare me. People on the phone may react too slowly, but the texters are already through the intersection by the time they even look up to see the red light.
3. POSTED BY Kristen Kemp  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:17 am

   As long as they don’t ban emailing while driving, I’m good.
4. POSTED BY State Street Pete  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:17 am

   LOL – Scuba, next time you’re in a car and you need to make a turn see if you can do it without letting go of the wheel and let us know how that works outs.
5. POSTED BY hs neighbor  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:28 am

   Kristen,
   As long as your good nothing else matters!
6. POSTED BY profwilliams  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:29 am

   After reading all the various articles about the distraction with all cell phone uses (talking, texting, emailing, etc.), I now believe that the fed should require ALL cars to come with, or be retrofitted with a cell phone disabling device.
   Like drunk driving (but worse), the distraction from cell phones is going to KILL far too many people in the coming years.
   Personally, I now turn my ringer OFF when I drive and do not, under any circumstance THINK of using it. There is nothing that important that can’t wait the 5, 10, or 60 mins. I’m driving.
   (And while I don’t want to die from someone texting, I don’t want to live knowing I killed someone while I was texting.)
   Unfortunately, as I’ve stopped, far too many others are starting.
   And mark my words, in the next year or two, there will be a horrific loss of life here in Baristaville from someone using a cell phone.
   DISABLE. THEM. NOW!
   (the prof has stepped down off his soapbox…)
7. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:34 am

   Cars should come equipped with a new safety device that blocks communication signals if the ignition is on. It’s the ONLY way to stop idiots from engaging in this incredibly reckless behavior.
8. POSTED BY CalGal  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:38 am

   I agree with jerseygurl and prof- disabling phones in cars would be a great idea.
   In my last car the navigation system would not allow you to enter in any information while the call was in motion. Makes sense.
9. POSTED BY MellonBrush  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:46 am

   The minutes are expensive, but well worth the convenience of ‘Onstar’. It’s all voice activated and hands free. It’s like talking to a passenger in the car.
10. POSTED BY Nellie  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:51 am

    MellonBrush,
    My friend has such a system in her car and it is indeed like having a passenger present.
    Still, it’s kind of a shame we’re so connected to our cell phones that we can’t relinquish them while we’re driving. I’d rather enjoy the peace and quiet–or listen to music–when I’m driving alone in my car.
11. POSTED BY royal_jelly  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:53 am

    I thought this was already against the law, no? Did I miss something?
12. POSTED BY Right of Center™  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:53 am

    “I agree with jerseygurl and prof- disabling phones in cars would be a great idea.”
    Until there’s an emergency.
    Really? Do we think devices should make our moral decisions for us? How about a shock collar we all wear which zaps us when we do something illegal.
13. POSTED BY irisheyes4717  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:55 am

    I agree with Prof Williams’ comments. If you need to text or have a cellphone conversation, you shouldn’t be driving. I am amazed at the number of drivers here in Baristaville and throughout NJ who are talking on handheld phones or texting. The fines should be increased and points on a license awarded for this type of violation.
14. POSTED BY banana split  |  July 29, 2009 @ 11:59 am

    Texting while driving should be completely outlawed. Zero tolerance. I’m surprised it hasn’t been done already.
    If it’s that important to send a message, PULL OVER before you kill someone.
15. POSTED BY Jim  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:06 pm

    I see plenty of holes in enforcing this proposal. How does one receive training to differentiate texting vs adjusting phone controls which is not addressed by law? Is holding a phone alone a violation of any law? And how are these actions different than adjusting climate controls and radio settings?
    If all these distractions compromise safety, should they not all be violations? How far can laws be enforced in driver distraction … talking to someone in the back seat? gazing at the accident scene? having deep thoughts? Tylenol PM just kicking in?
16. POSTED BY Iceman  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:16 pm

    why do the liberals think enacting another law will cure the problem? We already have a reckless driving law so can’t stop a driver who is texting under this law?
    Laws to change behavior don’t usually have much affect.
17. POSTED BY profwilliams  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:21 pm

    Folks, I would ask that you read some of the latest research in the difference between cell use- hands free OR NOT- and talking to a passenger. I’ll post later when I have more time.
    In a nutshell, a passenger can also see the road and 1) offer help, and, 2) SHUT UP when they see the same driving situation as the driver (i.e. brake lights, pedestrians, etc.), the person on the other end of a cell call keeps talking.) In other words, having a second set of eyes on the road outweighs ANY distraction talking may cause.
    And ROC, are you kidding? How is this different than drunk driving? Again, compare the number of folks who may find themselves drunk and needing to drive vs. those with cell phones.
    And if a choke collar will stop this, I’m all for it.
    Understand, this is THE public safety issue of the day. And when that horrific moment happens, when someone famous gets killed from a texting driver (vs. train conductors and cops driving Corzine texting, which didn’t cause a tipping point, too many folks will discount the validity of the issues– like you.
    But what’s your plan?
    On aside, until a disabling device is law. I’d settle for a $2000 fine.
    Something BIG. Give out a few of them and it may do some good.
    HUGE FINES!!
18. POSTED BY aprilpenny  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:24 pm

    This cell phone law is a joke. It is so rarely enforced that drivers have absolutely no qualms about blatantly talking and driving. Why waste time and money on a texting law…nothing else to do?
19. POSTED BY ViV  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:29 pm

    Absolutely ban texting while driving. Even hands-free cell phone use should be banned, as we now have enough evidence that it’s dangerous. If you need to use the phone, pull over. Driving is (or should be) a serious business. It requires your undivided attention. There are too damn many things now that divert the driver’s attention.
20. POSTED BY Right of Center™  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:31 pm

    “And ROC, are you kidding? How is this different than drunk driving”
    Whether it is or not the same, what you advocate is akin to an automatic Breathalyzer test in the car which you need to pass before you can start it up.
21. POSTED BY Amandala  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:33 pm

    Everyone who thinks it’s a good idea for cars to disable cell phones:
    1. I bet you only think that until the next time you (or your mother, daughter, sister, etc.) is driving late at night and being followed all over the place by some creep. This has happened to me. I had to call the police because I was followed from a gas station by a couple of creepy-looking guys in the middle of the night. Thank goodness I didn’t have to stop to make that call.
    2. I bet you only think that until the next time you’re lost and you need your passenger to make a call to get directions quickly, and there’s nowhere safe to stop for miles because you’re on route 80 headed up the GWB, or something.
22. POSTED BY JoyM  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:39 pm

    I wish this law was enforced! I drive on the NJ Turnpike everyday and have seen people texting on the phones in the fast lane during rush hour! Where are the cops to pull these people over and give them a ticket? Hello, out there!
23. POSTED BY Mauigirl  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:41 pm

    I agree texting while driving is crazy…but so is a lot of the other stuff people do while driving. What about parents who are looking back at their kids in their carseats while driving? What about people who are talking a blue streak with the passenger next to them? And don’t get me started on people who eat and drink sodas or hot coffees while driving. Smoking too. It’s ALL distracting, and actually I believe there is already a law against “distracted driving.” I think this is all going to be very unenforceable. The only way someone gets caught is driving right by a cop who’s actually looking at them, or, sadly, having had an accident as a result of the activity.
24. POSTED BY Jim  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:54 pm

    In-car services like OnStar and GPS navigation require cell tower and satellite reception, so no one from the industry is going to support cell reception blocking devices.
25. POSTED BY profwilliams  |  July 29, 2009 @ 12:58 pm

    Amandala:
    1) You could have driven to a police station or any other well-lit area with people around.
    2)Once again, driving to a safe area
    You can come up with a million reasons why you should be able to talk, text and play cards while driving. Hell, you can come up with a few reasons why driving drunk makes sense (I was the LEAST drunk of my friends, on a dark, dessert highway– cool wind in my hair, warm smell of Colitas…).
    But for every ONE real reason you can give me, I can give you 1000 why they should be disabled.
    Starting with, what the hell did folks do BEFORE cell phones?
    But again, I would settle for a $2000 fine.
26. POSTED BY Peter J. Gargiulo  |  July 29, 2009 @ 1:11 pm

    Driving while texting, talking (hands-free or not), or anything else, is dangerous. If you think otherwise, you’re in for a horrible surprise one day.
27. POSTED BY yourmother  |  July 29, 2009 @ 1:16 pm

    I remember back when cell phones were first made cheap enough to allow for more than just a few to use them. During AM shows (it was Z100 on the way to work in those days – woke me up) the DJ would actually address whether or not someone had pulled over to make a call. I don’t hear that very often any more.
    Has anyone else tried the NYT “game” about texting while driving? Try it: http://tinyurl.com/lc9xql
    I’ll admit to making quick calls at red lights and then ending them while in motion. But I would never trust myself to gab while driving. Much like the Prof said, hurting my kids would be horrific – and even more guilt inducing would be harming someone else with my irresponsible actions.
    Since I blocked texts from my phone due to spam, I can’t speak to the real life effects…but I failed that game big time.
28. POSTED BY PAZ  |  July 29, 2009 @ 1:18 pm

    Listening to the radio, daydreaming or looking at that cool car in the next lane that you can’t afford, all these should be banned. As a matter of fact, driving in NJ should be banned! We are homo sapiens, we do stupid human tricks day in and day out. If you are all Gods please post! We are in crisis…Let us know what to do about our one notch above Erectus status..Help!
29. POSTED BY Pork Roll  |  July 29, 2009 @ 1:22 pm

    I think they should ban driving while driving, so that people can focus on everything else they are doing behind the wheel.
30. POSTED BY Spot The Looney  |  July 29, 2009 @ 1:38 pm

    So many drivers hold their damn cell phones as if they’re Star Trek communicators and that should make it acceptable. Yes, block the signals while the vehicle is in motion. Oh, and if you’re lost on a highway, you should get off on an exit ramp anyway. Why endanger yourselves or other drivers?
31. POSTED BY complainerpuss  |  July 29, 2009 @ 1:41 pm

    I take DeCamp to work each day, so I get a bird’s eye view of drivers stuck in traffic doing some of the darndest things. In the past week alone, I’ve seen drivers shaving, painting their fingernails, playing brickbreaker on their Blackberry, reading The New York Times, and yes, even masturbating. I believe each of these activities should be banned while driving. Unless, of course, you were able to do all five at the same time. In that case, a medal or some sort of cash prize would be in order.
32. POSTED BY MellonBrush  |  July 29, 2009 @ 1:51 pm

    Dangerous or not, ‘hands-free’ devices will never be banned.
    I’ll continue to use mine judiciously when I’m driving in situations where the miniscule distraction it presents will not jeopardize my or anyone else’s saftey.
33. POSTED BY Amandala  |  July 29, 2009 @ 2:06 pm

    When you’re driving on a highway for hours and hours, talking to someone – whether it’s the passenger in the car or it’s a cell phone on speaker in the center console – definitely helps keep you engaged and keep you from succumbing to road hypnosis.
    There are situations – that’s one of them – that are why I reject blanket statements like “talking on a hands-free is just as dangerous as talking on a handheld cell phone”.
34. POSTED BY Conan  |  July 29, 2009 @ 2:17 pm

    “How about a shock collar we all wear which zaps us when we do something illegal.”
    We already developed that collar, ROC, but we were not able to test it on animals because of the PETA people, nor were we allowed to test it with stunt drivers because of prohibitive insurance costs. We had agreement with GM to install kill switches and cellphone signal blockers in all their cars, but — during the bankruptcy period — the head lobbyist from T-Mobile (you’ve seen her on TV?) convinced GM’s board (in what was termed a special session) not to go forward with the program. We appealed to OSHA but they were all out to lunch and, apparently, still are. Current plans are to get on the President’s Beer Calendar and discuss many more copmprehensive and expensive ways of banning this frightening behavior.
35. POSTED BY kyle41181  |  July 29, 2009 @ 2:26 pm

    I agree with the professor about “HUGE FINES” and I disagree that the Govt should be putting devices in cars to eliminate cell phone usage.
    The easiest solution would be for the state to send a copy of the ticket to the insurance company of the driver. The insurance companies should impose huge penalties(by state mandate) for these drivers to pay higher premiums for the cost of the accidents caused by any type of cell phone use.
    The Gov’t is in place to protect our rights not take them away. The car belongs to the individual not some bureaucratic lawmakers. The individual is at fault not the car! DUH…….
36. POSTED BY Pork Roll  |  July 29, 2009 @ 2:29 pm

    why I reject blanket statements like “talking on a hands-free is just as dangerous as talking on a handheld cell phone”.
    It’s not merely a “blanket statement” but one backed up by scientific study. In fact, there was a very recent article in the New York Times that explored this, and the consensus of opinion among those who have studied this issue is that hands-free phones are just as dangerous if not more so than hand-held phones.
    The problem is not that you don’t have both hands on the wheel. The problem is that you don’t have all your attention devoted to operating your moving vehicle, which does impair your ability to quickly sense and respond to sudden changes in the surrounding environment. Despite what some may claim to be their ability to “multi-task”, scientific studies have found that humans can really only concentrate on one thing at a time.
37. POSTED BY kyle41181  |  July 29, 2009 @ 2:32 pm

    Quick Add-on point,
    DUI’s come with stiff penalties to the individual not the car. Only in extreme cases, are cars equipped with alcohol detection starter devices.
    The same should apply here. Suspension of privileges for first timers, leading to complete termination of driving privileges for repeat offenders. This will seriously deter the younger generations since their parents are usually footing the bill. That only leaves the Moron adults with little common sense!
38. POSTED BY Right of Center™  |  July 29, 2009 @ 2:33 pm

    Then, Pork, All but single occupancy vehicles should be banned, right? Or at least all cabin conversation prohibited?
39. POSTED BY lan  |  July 29, 2009 @ 2:35 pm

    “Instead invent a steering wheel that requires two hands to be in contact with it for the car to run.”
    How will shifting gears with my nose make me a safer driver?
40. POSTED BY Pork Roll  |  July 29, 2009 @ 3:06 pm

    No, ROC. As the prof pointed out above, someone in the same vehicle is likely to adjust their conversation based on what’s happening outside the vehicle, as well as the driver’s pauses in conversation as the driver focuses on the act of driving, and may very well serve as a second set of eyes or ears to the driver.
    A person on the other end of the phone conversation, however, assumes they have the undivided attention of the driver, requiring the driver to focus more attention to the conversation, and away from driving.
41. POSTED BY Jim  |  July 29, 2009 @ 3:09 pm

    Instead invent a steering wheel that requires two hands to be in contact with it for the car to run.
    … said the person who has never owned or operated a manual transmission car.
42. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  July 29, 2009 @ 3:19 pm

    Studies have actually been done – statistically, safety improves slightly with another passenger in the front seat. Presumably because that person also pays attention to road conditions, helps navigate, reads signs, etc. When guys driving large rigs think it’s okay to text while they drive, there is clearly a huge problem.
43. POSTED BY ScubaNJ  |  July 29, 2009 @ 3:27 pm

    “LOL – Scuba, next time you’re in a car and you need to make a turn see if you can do it without letting go of the wheel and let us know how that works outs.”
    …invent a steering wheel that requires two hands to be in contact with it for the car to run Except when the wheel is turned more than XX degrees in either direction.;)
44. POSTED BY Kay  |  July 29, 2009 @ 3:28 pm

    As much as I hate the idea of a Nanny state, you all know how I feel about bad drivers. If you don’t want Nanny doing it, I’ll be happy to deliver zaps to these people!
    While we’re at it, we need cars that will automatically stop at a stop sign (since it seems only to be a suggestion these days), and make a left turn at an actual 45 degree angle instead of veering into the opposing lane to make a left turn that is more like a backslash. Watch out for a woman in a black Honda Accord and a man in a red Honda hatchback who frequent the nabe near the hospital at around 8AM. I believe they are in a hurry to get to the Bay St. train station. Red guy takes different routes but always cuts the left turn and drives like it’s Le Mans. Cars should also prevent people from changing lanes in the middle of an intersection, and tailgating.
    Yesterday a woman was driving along with something that looked like the National Enquirer in her lap, propped up against the wheel. I could see her reading it while drifting along.
    (((sigh)))
45. POSTED BY Jim  |  July 29, 2009 @ 3:39 pm

    The future of the steering wheel is already here. Both hands are always on the wheel, or if adjusting a knob, driver’s eyes never leave line of sight ahead. The cost? Around $50,000.
46. POSTED BY MellonBrush  |  July 29, 2009 @ 3:40 pm

    How many of you folks have driven a car and got lost in a train of thought or had an engrossing conversation with a passenger only to emerge from their thought/conversation with no clear recollection of their driving the past several miles.
    This phenomena happens to everyone who drives. Some of us call it the ‘automatic pilot’ phenomena. What do these ‘scientific studies’ make of this? They probably can’t factor it in since it’s not a measurable variable.
    The human being can clearly drive and do other things at the same time and anyone who thinks otherwise is wrong, wrong, wrong.
47. POSTED BY jerseygurl  |  July 29, 2009 @ 4:24 pm

    MB, it is obvious you have never been in a car with my mother at the wheel.
48. POSTED BY yourmother  |  July 30, 2009 @ 8:32 am

    Mellon,
    That’s true, but texting requires eyes, hand(s), and mind on something other than driving.
    If someone is talking to a passenger AND looking at them, I doubt you’d emerge gently.
    And as I feel about driving drunk, if you’re driving it in a vacuum where you can’t hurt anyone else, go for it. If there is a chance you’re going to take someone else’s pursuit of happiness away, just don’t do it.
    One person’s right to check their very important email doesn’t trump someone else’s right to get to a destination safely.
49. POSTED BY mrx5000  |  July 30, 2009 @ 9:14 am

    “I agree with jerseygurl and prof- disabling phones in cars would be a great idea.”
    Until there’s an emergency.
    If there’s an emergency maybe you could PULL OVER (and in ROCs case turn Sean Hannity down) and make a call.
    Does that tread on your civil liberties too much?
50. POSTED BY royal_jelly  |  July 30, 2009 @ 9:16 am

    When you’re behind the wheel of a car, 100% of your attention should be spent on driving. Why is this concept so hard to grasp?
51. POSTED BY MellonBrush  |  July 30, 2009 @ 9:43 am

    Of course 100% of your attention should be devoted to driving while behind the wheel.
    The concept is easy to grasp. The reality, however, is that this level of attention, short of Nascar drivers, is – in all practicality – impossible to achieve. There are too many distractions which will always prevent a sustained level of this kind of attention.
    NFL linebackers can sustain this kind of attention just before the ball is snapped. Surgeons while performing their craft. Space shuttle astronauts – sure. Your average citizen behind the wheel – no way. I think about 75% is a pretty good level for Mr. and Mrs. suburbia in their Volvo on the way to Whole Foods to buy some fresh Salmon and artichoke hearts…
52. POSTED BY MellonBrush  |  July 30, 2009 @ 1:39 pm

    No disprespect intended for the ‘Suburbia’ family. They are very nice people.
    I used to drive for a living – photo route driving. I had a routes in Colorado along the front range that spanned Pueblo all the way up to Cheyenne, Wyoming and into the mountains as far as Estes Park. I often drove several hundred miles in a day, making as many as 40 stops along my route. I never got a single ticket or had one accident. The vehicle was outfitted with a tachometer and I had to explain any irregularities such as speed in excess of 65 mph or stops in excess of 10 minutes to my supervisor. I hated that damn machine.
    I often picked up hitchhikers on I25 to help keep me awake and alert. When I got really tired I took power naps in the vehicle, a Checker Marathon with the back seat removed to make room for all the photofinishing bags I collected along the way.
    I got paid $4.00/ hour and this was the best job I ever had.
53. POSTED BY Sandy  |  July 30, 2009 @ 4:14 pm

    Checker Marathon? I finally found someone that remembers them ! Do you recall the area dealer?
    Morris Avenue in Union, just before the RT 22 Overpass.
    I had a friend in High School whose folks actually bought one! It was the Ststion Wagon version. If a person had one, everyone knew it.
    Take off the body, ya know underneath it was a Chevrolet Impala, 282 Cu In V-8 and powerglide.
54. POSTED BY MellonBrush  |  July 30, 2009 @ 5:27 pm

    Phototron owned a fleet of about 10 white Checkers. They were tanks. It would take a missle to damage one. They were purchased from a local Denver dealer. I loved driving them.
    Once as I was getting out at a stop and closed my door, an elderly gent asked me to please open and close it one more time as he hadn’t heard such a substantial ‘door closing’ sound from an automobile in many years. I was happy to oblige him. With the back seat removed I could fit about 50 large bags of undeveloped film, mostly from Safeways, back there.
55. POSTED BY appletony  |  July 30, 2009 @ 9:48 pm

    Looks like you can get a Checker for about $ ten grand.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.