Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arlington bans texting and driving today.

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

  • Baron Von Crowder
    replied
    Originally posted by 347Mike View Post
    I see everyone doing it. I understand everyone is upset because the government is stripping people from their right to do things but people shouldn't be texting and driving.

    You said it best. People (including women) can't drive for shit. You throw texting into the loop and it makes everything 100 times worse. But I am sure everyone on here is a Mario Andretti and can text, drive, jerk off, and count the 100s in their lap all at the same time.

    You guys act like you can't survive without texting. Everyone acts as if the world is ending and everyday their rights are being taken away. The fact is, the world is evolving, we didn't have texting 20 years ago for it to be a problem. New rules comes new laws.

    I am willing to bet that everyone in here one time or another has sped passed someone and said get off your phone or pay attention to the road. That right there shows you are for this law, you just don't like it because you don't like being told what to do.

    I am sure they can implement this into every state, city and town, and you know what, it isn't going to affect me. So I can care less..
    You are going to be one pissed off bitch when you get a ticket for dialing your phone.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cooter
    replied
    so can I use the navigation on my phone while driving? can I dial a number on it before I raise it to my ear to talk?

    it's JUST texting that's not allowed, right?

    Leave a comment:


  • 347Mike
    replied
    Originally posted by HarrisonTX View Post
    Brother, she swerved because she was a woman, the texting didnt contribute much to her inability to operate a motor vehicle.
    I see everyone doing it. I understand everyone is upset because the government is stripping people from their right to do things but people shouldn't be texting and driving.

    You said it best. People (including women) can't drive for shit. You throw texting into the loop and it makes everything 100 times worse. But I am sure everyone on here is a Mario Andretti and can text, drive, jerk off, and count the 100s in their lap all at the same time.

    You guys act like you can't survive without texting. Everyone acts as if the world is ending and everyday their rights are being taken away. The fact is, the world is evolving, we didn't have texting 20 years ago for it to be a problem. New rules comes new laws.

    I am willing to bet that everyone in here one time or another has sped passed someone and said get off your phone or pay attention to the road. That right there shows you are for this law, you just don't like it because you don't like being told what to do.

    I am sure they can implement this into every state, city and town, and you know what, it isn't going to affect me. So I can care less..

    Leave a comment:


  • Baron Von Crowder
    replied
    I think this is completely stupid, and my bet is that they give out more tickets for TWD than they have accidents in the next few months.



    It sucks to get a ticket, but you can get your text records from your service provider, and prove that you weren't texting at the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • HarrisonTX
    replied
    Originally posted by 347Mike View Post
    Lol I'm all for it. It was just this morning I saw someone swerve into my lane. When I passed, she was on her phone. You are driving why the fuck do you need to text? As for the gps, well you put in the address and leave it.

    I see people daily fucking up the flow of traffic due to texting. I do it and I even have close calls.
    Brother, she swerved because she was a woman, the texting didnt contribute much to her inability to operate a motor vehicle.

    Leave a comment:


  • 347Mike
    replied
    Lol I'm all for it. It was just this morning I saw someone swerve into my lane. When I passed, she was on her phone. You are driving why the fuck do you need to text? As for the gps, well you put in the address and leave it.

    I see people daily fucking up the flow of traffic due to texting. I do it and I even have close calls.

    Leave a comment:


  • HarrisonTX
    replied
    Originally posted by Steve View Post
    It also gives officers another cheap, free entry level way to stop people that can't be proven either way. Just another way for law enforcement to harass people playing the gray area.
    Thought this exactly. "I pulled you over because you were texting, mind if I look in the vehicle? Or, Is that alcohol I smell?"

    Leave a comment:


  • OreoStang
    replied
    Originally posted by Cooter View Post
    I think it's funny that people actually think this is going to deter people from texting and driving
    So true. I don't think people should text amd drive. Not smart but I'm not going to say I haven't done it. We are all guilty of it. Would be nice if they got to the point where u could speak what u wanted to type. And before the smartass comments about just call them sometimes u may not want to hear that persons voice Or it is that person who won't shut up and get off the phone when u need to. But yeah this is a renvue thing

    Leave a comment:


  • 03trubluGT
    replied
    Originally posted by stevo View Post
    The odds are the cop would find the camera and beat the shit out of you for filming him.

    Stevo
    I LOL'd.

    Leave a comment:


  • Geor!
    replied
    Now you're comparing texting to talking to a passenger in your car?

    Let's go ahead and ban birthing as well since toting kids around in cars is distracting to the parents. Now I'm starting to see the light!

    Leave a comment:


  • Broncojohnny
    replied
    Originally posted by 5.0_CJ View Post
    You forgot to address those other two points again. So what you're saying is the victims are just not the "ultimate" victims. You're grouping victims into categories which are more, or less important. So you're deciding which people should have retribution, and which should not? Which people are entitled to compensation, and which are not? Does that sound about right? Do you see how this shit gets out of control?

    The reason why your drunk driving comment is completely irrelevant, is you forget that to enter into a decision or contract - legal or otherwise, the law requires you be in a competent frame of mind, and able to understand the consequences. When you are drunk, you are unable to do this. This falls into it's own legal category, much as driving when stoned, or driving without your glasses, or operating equipment, or even walking down the street. All of this is illegal not because driving or walking itself is a dangerous act, but because the individual is not in a competent frame of mind. I could stab your entire family in the face and kill them, but if I can prove I was not in a competent frame of mind (see: insanity) then I can get off scott free.

    The thing a lot of people do not understand is case law and how it's used. And more importantly - how it's exploited. The law itself comes up as a specific defined situation. But, unbeknownst to most voters it carries a more dangerous part to it. Case law generally is used to reference not a specific situation, but the idea - and more importantly - the motivation behind the law. So, the idea of banning texting on cell phones sounds great. However, in case law it would be incorporated to include the motivation behind the law - distraction. The law itself is representing as banning cell phones, but the case law will be used to prosecute against distraction. And, this leaves the door open for people to be prosecuted for talking to someone in the car, looking at a billboard, etc. etc. etc. This is the dangerous slippery slope of judicial interpretation. Ever heard of people protesting "legislating from the bench?" Essentially, a judge cannot 'create' a law himself. But, he can use an existing law of similar mind and 'interpret' to apply via case law. That's how tyranny grows in a free and open society - regulation. You still with me Geof? This is the kind of thought and knowledge required to not be taken advantage of by whimsical regulation. It's pretty easy to just vote for something that "makes you feel good." Ask people from England.
    Every law will be pushed to its absolute maximum logical and sometimes illogical interpretation. That is why you have cases where kids who were sexting are charged with distributing child pornography.

    Leave a comment:


  • mikec
    replied
    I can't wait until they pass the law that would ticket people for picking their noses.

    Leave a comment:


  • Geor!
    replied
    You failed to address one of my posts as well, for the record. Let me respond to this one first, then I'll go and see what you're referring to.

    Originally posted by 5.0_CJ View Post
    You forgot to address those other two points again. So what you're saying is the victims are just not the "ultimate" victims. You're grouping victims into categories which are more, or less important. So you're deciding which people should have retribution, and which should not? Which people are entitled to compensation, and which are not? Does that sound about right? Do you see how this shit gets out of control?
    I'm not sure if I were grouping them according to importance, but with a fat ass who eats McDonald's every day and croaks of a coronary at age 45, the blame lies solely on him/her. Not McDonald's, or their various distributors. Also, could lie on his/her family members too, if you want to get nitpicky. They deserve no retribution. They are entitled to nothing but a life insurance policy, if they had one.

    If someone's texting and not paying attention to the road and winds up killing somebody, the blame lies soley on THEM. Are you telling me that the blame should be on the victim? Sorry, jack, you were just in the wrong place at the wrong time? The family of this victim IS entitled to some form of justice (retribution). They ARE entitled to some sort of compensation, in whatever form it comes in.

    The police POLICING for an activity that could prevent all of that in the first place, should be welcomed and embraced.

    Originally posted by 5.0_CJ
    The reason why your drunk driving comment is completely irrelevant, is you forget that to enter into a decision or contract - legal or otherwise, the law requires you be in a competent frame of mind, and able to understand the consequences. When you are drunk, you are unable to do this. This falls into it's own legal category, much as driving when stoned, or driving without your glasses, or operating equipment, or even walking down the street. All of this is illegal not because driving or walking itself is a dangerous act, but because the individual is not in a competent frame of mind.
    If competency were the issue, then the police would hand down the same sentences for a public intoxication than they would for a DWI, right?



    The bottom line is this, while our ideology, (I'm assuming) for the most part, is essentially same, we disagree on this front and neither one of us will budge from our stance.

    Leave a comment:


  • stevo
    replied
    Originally posted by kbscobravert View Post
    Time to go drive through Arlington with my cell phone in my hand waiting to get pulled over and handed a ticket. "Your Honor if you will watch this short little video clip from my on board Go Pro camera set up you will see the stop was unwarranted"
    The odds are the cop would find the camera and beat the shit out of you for filming him.

    Stevo

    Leave a comment:


  • HarrisonTX
    replied
    Originally posted by The Geofster View Post
    I bet you'd change your opinion if your wife/son/daughter were injured or killed by somebody texting and driving (not saying I've had a relative that has happened to).
    Completely unrelated. Whether I HOPE it works, versus whether I THINK it will work is completely different. I never said I was for or against it. Sure I HOPE it will save lives, even one will be worth it. Do I actually think it will save a life? No.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X