Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arlington bans texting and driving today.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DON SVO
    replied
    Originally posted by 5.0_CJ View Post
    That's the reason most people get rid of glocks for carry. Ever considered a 1911? They are quite thin.
    The Kahr is plenty slender

    Leave a comment:


  • CJ
    replied
    Originally posted by The Geofster View Post
    So people are arrested for vehicular manslaughter for texting and driving every day. Point. But I guess you're all for those poor bastards just going ahead and dying, rather than trying to do something proactively to help eliminate that risk? Tell me otherwise, because your statements so far say "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out."
    You're reasoning is maybe it will do something, maybe it won't. You can see from the majority of posts in this thread - it's seems to be a consensus this is not going to be enforceable. You're theorizing that it might do something. I am presenting factual evidence, and reasoning that what it will do without question is impose further regulation on our lives, and now our personal property (our cars interior) is under police scrutiny. I am not willing to throw my liberties out the window on a theory that it might do something.

    Originally posted by The Geofster View Post
    Let's eliminate all speed limits.
    Let's eliminate all traffic signs and lights.
    All of these are enforceable, poor point. This has nothing to do with this discussion, again you're bringing in completely unrelated things in an attempt to prove a point because the actual subject here doesn't work for you.


    Originally posted by The Geofster View Post
    Anything else you'd wish to see in your utopia?
    Geof, if you haven't noticed, you're the one trying to enforce your utopia on the population with additional regulations to make you feel better. Regulations that will absolutely do jack shit to curb texting while driving, and now give the police the legal means to scrutinize what you are doing in your own vehicle. You have really proposed no good solid points in these arguments, the truth is you just want to vote for it because it makes you feel better, actual results have no place in your "utopia."

    Originally posted by The Geofster View Post
    Maybe I misunderstood you, but it seemed to me as if you were saying that the only reason police enforce DWIs so harshly is because those people are incompetent; those people are INCAPABLE of making a decision (which is complete horseshit, by the way). It would only make sense to compare public intoxication to DWI, and the night and day difference of the penalties then, wouldn't it? Competency has nothing to do with it. It's the mortality factor. If competency were the factor, they'd have to pull over and arrest every Asian broad behind the wheel.
    You're correct, you misunderstood me. You just attempted to make the point that someone who is drunk is capable of making a competent decision. The law says they are not, the law - look it up. That's about the dumbest thing I've heard yet. And don't bring racism into this.
    Last edited by CJ; 09-15-2011, 08:55 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Geor!
    replied
    Originally posted by Ratt View Post
    Maybe they should just outlaw stupid.
    I would be in prison for life. Shit, I might even get the needle.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ratt
    replied
    Maybe they should just outlaw stupid.

    Leave a comment:


  • Geor!
    replied
    Originally posted by 5.0_CJ View Post
    It seems like you're so damn far off reality you're creating your own arguments for sport. You seem to have completely missed my first point. You basically started off with "I'm not sure what I'm saying..." And then fabricated 2 other examples completely unrelated to what we're talking about. Then, you start off on a rant regarding blaming the individual for texting while driving. THAT IS MY POINT you literally showed with your own reasoning what I'm trying to explain to you. The difference between someone who is drinking and driving, and someone who is texting is one of them is legally competent to make the decision. YES they are liable. You do realize that none of what you just proposed has ANYTHING to do with the law we're arguing? People are prosecuted from vehicular manslaughter EVERY DAY for texting while driving.

    And then this gem:


    What are you even talking about Geof? You can't just fabricate your own statements, and then argue against them in an attempt to validate a point. You completely missed what I'm explaining. The argument was in relation to someone who is competent vs. someone who is not. And your argument to this is to compare two incompetent people?
    So people are arrested for vehicular manslaughter for texting and driving every day. Point. But I guess you're all for those poor bastards just going ahead and dying, rather than trying to do something proactively to help eliminate that risk? Tell me otherwise, because your statements so far say "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out."

    Let's eliminate all speed limits.
    Let's eliminate all traffic signs and lights.

    Anything else you'd wish to see in your utopia?

    Maybe I misunderstood you, but it seemed to me as if you were saying that the only reason police enforce DWIs so harshly is because those people are incompetent; those people are INCAPABLE of making a decision (which is complete horseshit, by the way). It would only make sense to compare public intoxication to DWI, and the night and day difference of the penalties then, wouldn't it? Competency has nothing to do with it. It's the mortality factor. If competency were the factor, they'd have to pull over and arrest every Asian broad behind the wheel.

    Leave a comment:


  • SS Junk
    replied
    Originally posted by Steve View Post
    According to the news, you don't have to show them your phone, so how can they prove it? lol.
    Easy. Those who text and drive are completely oblivious to their surroundings. It's not hard to spot morons continuously looking down and weaving all over the road. Another dead giveaway are those who creep to a stop when at a traffic light or don't go after a light turns green.
    Last edited by SS Junk; 09-15-2011, 09:01 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • bcoop
    replied
    Originally posted by 347Mike View Post
    I am hardly worried about you if you are texting and driving and slam into the rear of me.
    Actually you are, or you wouldn't agree with this bullshit money grab law

    Leave a comment:


  • Baron Von Crowder
    replied
    Originally posted by 347Mike View Post
    I am hardly worried about you if you are texting and driving and slam into the rear of me.
    Explain the law requiring you to wear a seat belt in the car, Mexadamus.

    Leave a comment:


  • 347Mike
    replied
    Originally posted by bcoop View Post
    I don't need laws to protect my from myself. Maybe the weak minded do, and apparently there are far more of them, than there are of me.
    I am hardly worried about you if you are texting and driving and slam into the rear of me.

    Leave a comment:


  • unkoricky
    replied
    I've seen dumb people drive slow or swerve while texting..

    BUT this is gonna be dumb, what if you are:


    using your phone as an mp3 player and switching songs ?
    checking email?
    navigation?
    internet?
    in the motion of dialing someone / answering a phone call?

    "excuse me sir, i pulled you over because i saw you lift up your phone"

    - "but officer i'm using my navigation because im not familiar with this area"

    "Nope... sorry, you are wrong, i am right, shut up, here is your ticket."

    Originally posted by lincolnboy View Post
    How many people on here are on their phones when driving through a school zone. Have any of yous guy seen others on their phone while going though a school zone.
    I agree with the talking on the phone going through the school zone law. You might not be paying attention while talking on the phone and accidently hit a kid.
    (i have no kids by the way... for you people who think this law isnt okay because i'm thinking like a parent)

    Leave a comment:


  • lincolnboy
    replied
    How many people on here are on their phones when driving through a school zone. Have any of yous guy seen others on their phone while going though a school zone. This law will do nothing. Arlington passed a law about leaving your car running while noone is in it. I've seen people leave their car running while they run inside a store. Some laws are stupid, pointless means of getting revenue.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cooter
    replied
    I make my living with my phone... I'm usually "emailing", not texting.

    But I don't have to look at my phone to text/email. (thank you swype!)

    Leave a comment:


  • 01vnms4v
    replied
    Riddle me this ....

    Those here that text and drive, why is is so important to reply to that text while driving??

    You mean to tell me that you replying to that text is SO IMPORTANT, that it could not wait 5mins or so for you to stop or wait till you got where you needed to be?

    It just amazes me that people are more worried about there damm phone than driving these days, and then people bitch about a law that is suppose to save lives

    Leave a comment:


  • Cooter
    replied
    Originally posted by stevo View Post
    I would venture a guess that rubbernecking causes more accidents than texting, so lets get together and pass a bill that outlaws rubbernecking.


    Stevo
    I'd vote for the fucking death penalty for rubbernecking

    Leave a comment:


  • krazy kris
    replied
    Originally posted by skidmark View Post
    okay... That's just some skill!
    no shit thats a badass mofo

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X