Connecticut Cellphone Ban -- Letter to Gov. Rell

Osmo R wrote:
>
> Notan wrote:
> > Osmo R wrote:
>
> > > Well some (most?) people do not prepare the headset before they
> > > start driving. Instead when someone calls they start looking the
> > > phone, the headset, clear the cord of knots, plug the headset
> > > to the phone and then answer (If they are still alive).
> >
> > Cites?
>
> That is just what I have observed on the comments of those who
> criticize the ban here (in Finland). That is also the natural
> behavior if one really does not expect calls.
>

Why would you even have a cell phone, if you didn't expect
to make or receive calls? <g>

Notan

---

› See More: Connecticut Cellphone Ban -- Letter to Gov. Rell

What is the penalty in Finland for using a cell phone in a car? Is it legal
to use the cell phone in hands-free mode?


"Osmo R" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Notan wrote:
>> Osmo R wrote:
>
>> > Well some (most?) people do not prepare the headset before they
>> > start driving. Instead when someone calls they start looking the
>> > phone, the headset, clear the cord of knots, plug the headset
>> > to the phone and then answer (If they are still alive).
>>
>> Cites?
>
> That is just what I have observed on the comments of those who
> criticize the ban here (in Finland). That is also the natural
> behavior if one really does not expect calls.
>
> Osmo
>

Mij Adyaw wrote:
> What is the penalty in Finland for using a cell phone in a car? Is it legal
> to use the cell phone in hands-free mode?

The penalty is a small fine - at the beginning cops only
warned people but that did nto work so well so they started
issuing tickets. It is legal to use a phone if you do not have the
phone in your hand. The idea is that people would use a hands free
device but it is equally legal to use a separate handset connected
to the phone. This really was for professional drivers and not
intended as a loophole.

Osmo

"Notan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Interpage Network Services Inc." wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure if it has been mentioned here or not yet (a cursory glance
>> at
>> the recent threads didn't turn up anything), but Thursday eve two weeks
>> ago,
>> 6/2/2005, the CT State Senate voted in favor of a ban on the use of
>> cellphones while driving unless a headset is worn.
>>
>> It has been reported that Gov. Rell plans to sign the (IMO) ill-conceived
>> bill and make CT the second (or third, depending on how you look at NJ's
>> law) state to enact this sort of silly, heavy-handed, and paternalistic
>> legislation which will likely result in more severe distractions (and
>> thus
>> potentially more harmful accidents) than the "problem" which it attempts
>> to
>> cure.
>>
>> <snip>
>
> Would you mind explaining why using headsets "will likely result in more
> severe distractions (and thus potentially more harmful accidents) than
> the 'problem' which it attempts to cure?"
>
> Personally, I like having two hands available to drive.

Nolan, a law that does not take into account the range of distractions that
occur is an unfair law. If the law doesn't address things like two-Radios
(law and emergency services as well as dispatchers for ytility companies and
others), CB Radio (LOTS of Truckers and a lot of other motorists), Putting
on makeup (a LOT of women), shaving (mostly men in this group), changing the
radio station, the CD, looking through the CD's to find another one, eating
(drive through MCDonalds is great for promoting this for on the go
motorists), and a whole myriad of things that occur when there are also
passengers, and a lot of other things that I didn't mention then it is an
unfair law. There are already plenty of laws concerning driving on the bookx
of every state that this doesn't need to be added. And of that "plenty"
there are whol lot of REALLY STUPID laws.

Things like this are often a do-gooders knee-jerk reaction to something that
isn't a problem at all but a perceived problem by some special interest
group.

"Notan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> OK, a few <not so> hypothetical situations...
>
> You've got one hand on the wheel... If you're holding the cell phone
> with the other hand, how do you operate your directionals?

My directionals are on the steering column easily reached by a finger while
continuing to steer the car.

> You've got both hands on the wheel, and you're using your shoulder
> to keep your phone against your ear... How do you turn to see if
> there's any other cars, before changing lanes?

My phone, neck, ear, shoulder don't work with the new small itty bitty
phones that are out. So it isn't a problem.

> Etc., etc., etc.

It's stupid for some legislator to assume that I NEED 2 hands to drive. What
about the amputee, he/she only has one arm. This is a stupid law and a
stupid thread.
>
> Notan

"Garner Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:160620051218144253%[email protected]...

> You've never driven in New England, have you? <grin>

Or Texas

> As with the turn signals, a turn of the head will give away your
> strategy, and the other drivers will accelerate to block your lane
> change. You must give no indications to the other drivers of your
> intent.
>
> (I kid, I kid.)

I don't - In Texas a turn signal tells the other drivers to rush up
alongside of you, effectivly blocking your change of lane, so they can ask
you what you want?

> Here's a post from James Atkinson that I found a while back, that may
> help shed some light on the subject:
>
>
> Massachusetts Driving Rules:
>
> 1. A right lane construction closure is just a game to see how
> many people can cut in line by passing you on the right as you
> sit in the left lane waiting for the same drivers to squeeze
> their way back in before hitting the orange construction
> barrels.

Texas - Driveers have never been introduced to the term "Merge". They often
will attempt to drive in 2 lanes when approaching such obstacles to prevent
anyone behind them from getthng to the obstruction before you.

> 2. Turn signals will give away your next move. A real
> Massachusetts driver never uses them. Use of them in Boston may
> be illegal.

Texas - see above!

> 3. Under no circumstances should you leave a safe distance
> between you and the car in front of you, or the space will be
> filled in by somebody else putting you in an even more dangerous
> situation.

Texas - isn't 4 inches off the back of the car in front of you what it's
supposed to be??

> 4. Crossing two or more lanes in a single lane-change is
> considered "going with the flow."

Texas - When getting on a freeway, multiple (count them for the particular
Fwy) lane changed to immediatly get into the LEFT most lane is why traffic
approaching an onramp is usually really backed up.

> 5. The faster you drive through a red light, the smaller the
> chance you have of getting hit.

Texas - When a light changes from Red to Green ALWAYS count to 20 before
moving into the lane to allow for the above. This typically will allow the
first 2 or 3 cars through each change of light.

> 6. Never get in the way of an older car that needs extensive
> bodywork. Massachusetts is a no-fault insurance states and the
> other driver has nothing to lose.

Texas - Older?? Most cars look like this - regardless of age.

> 7. Braking is to be done as hard and late as possible to ensure
> that your ABS kicks in, giving a nice, relaxing foot massage as
> the brake pedal pulsates. For those of you without ABS, it's a
> chance to stretch your legs.

Texas - Full throtle and full brake are the two modes.

> 10. Never pass on the left when you can pass on the right.

Texas - isn't that what the shoulder is for? Never mind that you barely
missed the car changing the tire (what;s he doing on the road anyway).

> 11. Speed limits are arbitrary figures, given only as
> suggestions and are apparently not enforceable during rush hour.

Texas - Full throtle, remember above, allows the car to set it's own speed.

> 14. Always slow down and rubberneck when you see an accident or
> even if someone is just changing a tire.

Texas - even tickets require you to slow to 10 mph to gawk at the "criminal"
that got caught to distract the cop so that you can then go full throtle
again.

> 15. Throwing litter on the roads adds variety to the landscape
> and gives Adopt-a-Highway Crews something to clean up.

Texas - not to mention beer cans so that the homeless have some form of
income recycleing aluminium and keeps the driver from having an "Open
Container" in his car - kinda makes me wonder how people with stationwagons
haul their recyclable aluminium to the place to sell it?

"Jeff P" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>I usually will grab the wheel with both hands while I am steering around a
>corner, but I usually don't make phone calls when I'm going around a corner
>either.

Using the proper speed for the corner doesn't require 2 hands either.

Basically when driving, steering, drinking a beer, talking on the phone and
shifting my 5 speed Saleen Mustang, I don't have anyone close enough behind
me to cause a problem.

"Notan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> I never said "both hands on the wheel."

Then what is the issue?

Cell phones are not a distraction more so than LOTS of other things. In fact
recent studies have shown that cell phone users are typical more aware of
their driving because they don't have a lot of the other distractions I have
never changed a CD (or looked for one in the case) while talking on the
phone.

Per John S.:
>> As with the turn signals, a turn of the head will give away your
>> strategy,

The few times I drove in Puerto Rico, using a turn signal seemed to intimidate
people. "Geeze, look at that guy flashing his parking lights on one side of
the car.... no telling *what* he'll do next.". Once I'd use it in traffic,
people would give me a wide berth for awhile.

Down there, eye contact seemed tb the key.
--
PeteCresswell