Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Complain or gush all you like - this is the place to do it.
User avatar
Rorschach
The Immoral Immortal
Posts: 17767
Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 7:35 am
Gender: Male
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by Rorschach » Tue Dec 09, 2008 5:21 pm

You have a radio that switches itself on and off, and changes channels independently?
It wasn't an argument, Thorsman, more of an example of what a grey area this is. I can drive and speak at the same time. Hell, on a good day I can walk and chew gum at the same time. The problem is when I don't have both hands to do it. This is why hands-free conversations are legal.
As it happens, I grudgingly suppose that the line has to be drawn somewhere and while I'm sure I'd be bitching too if some policeman pulled me up for this, rather than catching criminals, I couldn't complain too vehemently.

Good luck with your test. Remember we drive on the left here. ;)
To Let

User avatar
collegestudent22
Redshirt
Posts: 6886
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 10:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by collegestudent22 » Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:35 pm

Thorsman wrote:I got the "four times more likely" statistic from my study materials provided by the British School of Motoring
It's got nothing to do with a "nanny state"
Yes, let us all trust the government to not make up or fudge statistics to back up their laws.
Frédéric Bastiat wrote:And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works.
Count Axel Oxenstierna wrote:Dost thou not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?

User avatar
StruckingFuggle
Redshirt
Posts: 22166
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 6:18 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Austin / San Marcos, Tx

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by StruckingFuggle » Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:15 pm

collegestudent22 wrote:Yes, let us all trust the government to not make up or fudge statistics to back up their laws.
But let's trust you to do so, eh?
"He who lives by the sword dies by my arrow."

"In your histories, there are continual justifications for all manner of hellish actions. Claims of nobility and heritage and honor to cover up every bit of genocide, assassination, and massacre. At least the Horde is honest in their naked lust for power."

User avatar
collegestudent22
Redshirt
Posts: 6886
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 10:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by collegestudent22 » Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:20 pm

Did I have a statistic here? No. I am just pointing out that statistics, even when not made up, are easily usable for your side and the other side. The same statistics. I don't believe the government is giving the whole picture. Arguing against the classification of your government as a "nanny state" by using your government's statistics? Not very solid.
Frédéric Bastiat wrote:And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works.
Count Axel Oxenstierna wrote:Dost thou not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?

User avatar
StruckingFuggle
Redshirt
Posts: 22166
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 6:18 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Austin / San Marcos, Tx

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by StruckingFuggle » Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:29 pm

Nor is arguing a statistical argument with no statistics and even not much in the way of apparent thought in the matter and an obvious bias that you're seeming to be looking more to support than examine.
"He who lives by the sword dies by my arrow."

"In your histories, there are continual justifications for all manner of hellish actions. Claims of nobility and heritage and honor to cover up every bit of genocide, assassination, and massacre. At least the Horde is honest in their naked lust for power."

User avatar
Deacon
Shining Adonis
Posts: 44248
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 3:00 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Lakehills, TX

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by Deacon » Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:44 pm

Thorsman wrote:I got the "four times more likely" statistic from my study materials provided by the British School of Motoring
Which is totally objective and unbiased, unlikely to take whatever the most alarming study it can find and applying the most alarming interpretation of it, as it's nothing to do with the same nanny that's sitting in the back seat telling you all the rules all the time.
Rorschach wrote:It wasn't an argument, Thorsman, more of an example of what a grey area this is.
It's a grey area plagued by myths and misconceptions, and the state imposing such controls are based purely on this baseless conjecture.
The problem is when I don't have both hands to do it. This is why hands-free conversations are legal.
Actually, that's NOT the problem, as we've hashed repeatedly in SPPACE. IF someone is going to have significantly reduced reaction times while talking on the phone, it is because they are engrossed in the conversation, not because they've got only one hand on the steering wheel. The feet (gas and brake--and clutch, I guess, if you've got a manual, which is a tiny minority in the US while I know the opposite is true in Europe) do not care how many hands are on the wheel. Many people (especially those of us who are indeed used to driving cars with manual transmissions) drive with one hand on the wheel regardless. The one hand on the wheel argument is a fallacy, but people are willing to believe it, and municipalities are willing to legislate it, and THAT is why hands-free conversations are legal. It's ignorant bullshit, unfortunately.
The follies which a man regrets the most in his life are those which he didn't commit when he had the opportunity. - Helen Rowland, A Guide to Men, 1922

User avatar
collegestudent22
Redshirt
Posts: 6886
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 10:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by collegestudent22 » Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:47 pm

StruckingFuggle wrote:Nor is arguing a statistical argument
Since I wasn't arguing anything more than "That statistic isn't really valid." I don't see where I argued the point. The argument I was making was this..
Deacon wrote:Which is totally objective and unbiased, unlikely to take whatever the most alarming study it can find and applying the most alarming interpretation of it, as it's nothing to do with the same nanny that's sitting in the back seat telling you all the rules all the time.
Frédéric Bastiat wrote:And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works.
Count Axel Oxenstierna wrote:Dost thou not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed?

User avatar
Rorschach
The Immoral Immortal
Posts: 17767
Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 7:35 am
Gender: Male
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by Rorschach » Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:53 pm

Deacon wrote:
The problem is when I don't have both hands to do it. This is why hands-free conversations are legal.
Actually, that's NOT the problem, as we've hashed repeatedly in SPPACE. IF someone is going to have significantly reduced reaction times while talking on the phone, it is because they are engrossed in the conversation, not because they've got only one hand on the steering wheel. The feet (gas and brake--and clutch, I guess, if you've got a manual, which is a tiny minority in the US while I know the opposite is true in Europe) do not care how many hands are on the wheel. Many people (especially those of us who are indeed used to driving cars with manual transmissions) drive with one hand on the wheel regardless. The one hand on the wheel argument is a fallacy, but people are willing to believe it, and municipalities are willing to legislate it, and THAT is why hands-free conversations are legal. It's ignorant bullshit, unfortunately.
Yes. I'd agree with that. I'm perfectly comfortable driving with one hand on the wheel. My concern was with what the other hand is doing. If I'm using it to fiddle with the radio, smoke, or do something that draws my eyes or attention from the road then I finds that more distracting than having a hands-free conversation, be that with a person in the car or on a hands-free set (which I don't have).
To Let

User avatar
Deacon
Shining Adonis
Posts: 44248
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 3:00 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Lakehills, TX

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by Deacon » Tue Dec 09, 2008 8:18 pm

Yes, all those things are more distracting than holding a handset against your ear.
The follies which a man regrets the most in his life are those which he didn't commit when he had the opportunity. - Helen Rowland, A Guide to Men, 1922

User avatar
Arc Orion
Redshirt
Posts: 11967
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 7:27 am
Real Name: Christopher
Gender: Male
Location: Tacoma, WA

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by Arc Orion » Tue Dec 09, 2008 8:23 pm

Rorschach wrote:Yes. I'd agree with that. I'm perfectly comfortable driving with one hand on the wheel. My concern was with what the other hand is doing.
You shouldn't be doing that sort of thing in public, anyway!
I need fewer water.

User avatar
Rorschach
The Immoral Immortal
Posts: 17767
Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 7:35 am
Gender: Male
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by Rorschach » Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:03 pm

It's my very own four stroke engine.
To Let

User avatar
Thorsman
Redshirt
Posts: 700
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 5:34 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Birmingham, West Midlands, England, UK

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by Thorsman » Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:43 am

Deacon, the statistic is perfectly valid. After all, the BSM are trying to teach people how to drive and not get themselves in a wreck or, worse yet, killed. Again, it's got nothing to do with this "nanny state" you keep rabbiting on about - if you were really that concerned about such a "nanny state," you'd be actively protesting Texas' own traffic laws. Heck, you made an appearance at a San Antonio City Council meeting for some other issue for concerned about, so why not protest the cell phone laws at your state legislature instead of ranting here about "ZOMG, infringement on my rights!"?

Anyhow, the fact remains that if your concentration is diverted from driving long enough, for example having a conversation on a cell phone (which DOES require concentration of its own, even if it's on a hands-free cell phone), then you're more likely to get into an accident. Why not just pull over to have the conversation and then continue driving afterward? It only takes a few minutes at most to have the conversation, and then you're back on the road and can devote your full attention to it. What's so wrong with a bit of road courtesy and safety?

*commence hailstorm of "you're willing to give up your freedom too easily," "your statistics are still bogus," or other such rubbish excuses as to why people simply can't be bothered to just pull over to make a cell phone call, even if it's only for a minute or so*
Image

User avatar
Deacon
Shining Adonis
Posts: 44248
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 3:00 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Lakehills, TX

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by Deacon » Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:52 am

Thorsman wrote:CS22, Deacon, the statistic is perfectly valid. After all, the BSM are trying to teach people how to drive and not get themselves in a wreck or, worse yet, killed.
WTF does the latter have to do with the former? Good intentions never made a statistic more or less valid.
Again, it's got nothing to do with this "nanny state" you keep rabbiting on about - if you were really that concerned about such a "nanny state," you'd be actively protesting Texas' own traffic laws. Heck, you made an appearance at a San Antonio City Council meeting for some other issue for concerned about, so why not protest the cell phone laws at your state legislature instead of ranting here about "ZOMG, infringement on my rights!"?
The subject of this rant occurred in California. Texas has no such law. I did, though, both write in and call in to protest the imposition of a recent city ordinance making it illegal to hold a cell phone while driving through a school zone (without regard to whether there are children anywhere near, whether the crossing guard has managed to doze off in the middle of the street, how slow you're going, or if you're even moving at all). It was, of course, to no avail, because most people have bought into both the "for the children" fallacy and the myth that it's safer with a hands-free set. There was no problem with kids being injured by cell phones, but they decided to once again solve a problem that didn't exist by imposing fees on people who haven't hurt anyone. Besides, none of that is required for me to discuss it here. I'm not sure why you'd even suggest that, to be honest.

Can't be bothered, can't be bothered, blah blah blah blah. If you're really so fucking patient, then you should never drive above 20mph, because the faster you go, the more ground you cover every second, which makes it more difficult to avoid an accident, and going slowly reduces the likelihood of death as a result. After all, most accidents occur over 100mph. Why can't you be bothered to simply drive very slowly, since "safety" in a worst-case scenario is the one and only priority, and reasonableness need not be involved. Actually, if you were SO patient as you claim, you really shouldn't even be driving in the first place. You're killing the earth. KILLING HER, sir.
The follies which a man regrets the most in his life are those which he didn't commit when he had the opportunity. - Helen Rowland, A Guide to Men, 1922

User avatar
Rorschach
The Immoral Immortal
Posts: 17767
Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 7:35 am
Gender: Male
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by Rorschach » Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:26 am

Lucksi wrote: Oh, hey, here is one about lasting longer.
Way to hammer home the joke. Honestly, subtlety is wasted on you people.
Couldn't quietly and mysteriously just 'disappear' a few of our Yiddish friends, could you?
Oh no, it's all bells and whistles and pooing on each others' chests with you lot.
To Let

User avatar
Thorsman
Redshirt
Posts: 700
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 5:34 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Birmingham, West Midlands, England, UK

Re: Guess who got her first traffic ticket!

Post by Thorsman » Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:31 pm

Deacon wrote:Can't be bothered, can't be bothered, blah blah blah blah. If you're really so fucking patient, then you should never drive above 20mph, because the faster you go, the more ground you cover every second, which makes it more difficult to avoid an accident, and going slowly reduces the likelihood of death as a result. After all, most accidents occur over 100mph. Why can't you be bothered to simply drive very slowly, since "safety" in a worst-case scenario is the one and only priority, and reasonableness need not be involved. Actually, if you were SO patient as you claim, you really shouldn't even be driving in the first place. You're killing the earth. KILLING HER, sir.
OK Deacon, your slippery slope has slipped far enough (no Freudian slip jokes, please, folks). Pulling off the road or the highway for a few minutes to chat on a cell phone isn't a very extreme thing to ask in terms of a safety measure, and it certainly has fuck all to do with the above extremes you're mentioning. Even on a hands-free you're still engaging in a conversation that requires you to fiddle with cell phone buttons and focus some of your attention on the conversation. Yes, there are more dangerous things you could be doing, as Rorschach has skillfully highlighted, but why introduce an unnecessary danger in the first instance?

As for your argument about keeping a car's speed at a slow crawl, you and I both know that speed limits according to what type of road you're on exist for a reason - certain maximum speeds are safe on certain types of roads. When I was driving around with my wife visiting friends and family in Arizona last week, I kept my speed just a couple miles per hour below the posted speed limit so I could keep reasonable control of the car lest I need to change direction, slow down, or stop along the highway/road (again, depending on where I was). I didn't feel the need to speed in order to "assert my freedom" because I much preferred to assert my wife's and my mutual desire to not get splattered along the I-10.

All in all reasonable and safe driving doesn't require much patience, but then again, one might perceive that it requires the patience of a proverbial saint if one's attention span is short enough. Heck, people have asserted as much about the general attention span of generations from Generation X onward.
Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Common Crawl (Research) and 0 guests