If there wasn't such a law, anybody could get out of a DUI by stopping at a red light. Now that would be stupid.
Just follow the law
If only it was that easy. The law is massively comlpex and almost impossible precisely because it makes no sense.
Most laws are ridiculously complex; they're written by lawyers, who make a living off the ridiculous complexity of laws. Doesn't mean that all of them are unjust or unnecessary.
Personally, I don't see a need for a texting-specific law, as most states already cover the behavior via Careless and Imprudent Driving laws. To that end, yes, it's redundant legislation.
There is no logical difference between a satnav and a satnav app on a phone.
I would agree, if not for the fact that it is trivial to switch between a nav app and a texting app.
On the whole I find drivers to be one of the most whiny, entitled groups. I'm all for finding people who text while actually driving and nailing to the wall by their bollocks. Likewise with drunk drivers who by their own selfishness endanger others. I'm even for hefty fines for those wankers who park illegally out of some sense of entitlement and block the free flow of traffic.
But ticketing people who use a satnav app while parked is moronic.
If they're parked on a public thoroughfare and impeding the flow of traffic, they deserve to be ticketed.
I'm at a bit of a loss; is it really such an inordinate hassle to wait 10 more seconds and pull into a parking lot before playing with your toys? I never found it to be so.
Parked on the side of a street I can sort of understand, but parked in their own (presumably private) driveway?
That isn't a public road, so how do the DUI laws apply? As far as I know, you don't even need to have a driver's license, insurance, or vehicle registration if the car isn't operated on public roads. You should be able to drive as drunk as you want to if the vehicle stays on your own property...
Sitting behind the wheel, keys in the ignition. The idea is, basically, that you could at any time start the vehicle and pull onto a public street, so thus you're driving drunk.
I agree that it's stupid and violates the spirit of the law, but on the other hand, the reason they made it that way is because drunks used to run from the cops, slam up their driveways, and claim they'd been sitting there the whole time. Again, stupid.
I do know a guy who got out of such a ticket by immediately chucking his keys into the neighbors lawn (out of reach), before the cops got on scene. Boy, were they pissed!
I do hope though that they don't over-do that to the point that people start playing bumper cars at the traffic light to prove that they weren't hesitating.
Or, you know... they could just not text while behind the wheel.
You're only driving in the sense of some weird legal interpretation.
So, you admit, then, that in a legal sense you're still driving. Why the argument, then? Just follow the law and wait until you're not driving.
If you're in a car, stopped at a red light, there is absoloutely no harm in checking a stanav system that happens to be on a phone as opposed to standalone.
I would agree, if not for the fact that it is trivial to switch between a nav app and a texting app. Of course, if you really were just using the satnav you should be able to fight the ticket in court by pulling your own phone records. "Should" being the operative word (all depends on the judge).
If one doesn't want to use the CLI there is simply no rational reason for them to install Crunchbang or SLackware.
Yea, and if OP had said that I wouldn't have felt the need to disagree.
But he didn't. he said:
no modern Linux distro ever requires you to see a CLI,
Which is a patently untrue statement, evidenced by the existence of modern versions of Crunchbang and Slackware. User preference has nothing to do with it.
I think my idea does have a chance of being enacted. There have been historical examples of nations falling apart under too much internal strain; a very recent example is the Soviet Union which collapsed and broke apart only about 20 years ago.
Not willingly and 'amicably,' though. Such an event occurs, it will be a blood-soaked hell, mark my words.
I often see police officers typing on their laptops or talking on their cell phones while driving (and not 'driving at a red light'). Surely some enterprising victim wouldn't be too challenged to get pictures of Officer Myers or some of his colleagues doing the same. The law for us is the same law as for them, isn't it? At least theoretically?
Hells yea, do it! Hell, go for broke and petition your city to have interlocks installed, so the computer is non-operational while the vehicle is not in park.
amazing how driving flips a switch in a lot of peoples head. the tolerance for 1 second delays (which can easily be made up by the next light) goes to zero, and they get mad at the slightest things.
Why can't you just wait a few seconds to send that text? Why is the onus always on everyone else to acquiesce to your idiotic, piss-poor behavior?
Just pull the fuck over, if the message is so important it has to be sent/read immediately.
Seriously, is that so hard? Put your signal on, slow down, then rotate your steering wheel in the direction of whatever parking lot you're pulling into. Problem solved: You can play with your toys without breaking any laws, and other drivers and pedestrians don't have to worry about you being a danger to them.
If he sees someone texting while actually driving (sitting there forever and a day with your foot on the brake wondering if the light is broken is not driving), I'm all for him issuing a ticket.
OK, how about this then: wait until the light turns green and immediately pull them over for obstructing traffic?
When you're behind the wheel, on a public street,
you
are
driving.
The particular state of your vehicle at the moment is of no consequence.
I have a manual transmission. when I'm stopped, it is not in drive. does it sound like this cop cares about that distinction?
No cop does, and for damn good reason.
"Hey, I saw you weaving like a madman, and holy Jesus, you reek like a brewery! That's it, get out, you're under ar- oh, wait, you put it in neutral; guess that means you're not actually driving drunk. Sorry to bother you!"
Not a world I'd want to drive in.
FYI, the distinction is typically considered to be whether or not the keys are within reach of the driver. I've known people to get DWI's while sitting, parked, in their own driveways, by virtue of the fact they had keys in the ignition.
No operating system will enjoy mainstream adoption these days if mucking about in a CLI is ever a necessity. Sad but true.
Agreed. But since this isn't 2005,
Yea, no shit, Sherlock.
Gotta love how some people just can't help but make unsolicited, unnecessary smart-ass remarks in every response. Guess the conversation up to this point wasn't adversarial enough for ya, huh? Kriminy...
and no modern Linux distro ever requires you to see a CLI, much less use one, that's not really an issue.
Uh, you do realize there are more distros out there than Ubuntu-based ones, right? Go try to install (and use) Crunchbang or Slackware without touching the console if you want to know how wrong you are.
It's fuckin' pandemic, bro - WSJ, HuffPo, Yahoo, you name it.
I've discovered that pretty much every news site w/ comments is a barren intellectual wasteland, with Slashdot as the rare exception. Probably explains why I come here more often or not - I mean, sure, this community has its share of morons saying stupid shit (I contribute to that pool myself on a fairly regular basis), but overall I don't get that "Kunta Kinte stumbling into a Klan rally" vibe like I do from other sites.
Isn't it obvious? There are idiots everywhere, i.e. if there's such a thing as a "backward region," the term applies to anywhere and everywhere humans exist.
Otherwise I pretty much agree, with a caveat:
it would be better I think if we all amicably decided to break up and go our separate ways instead of constantly arguing over the same issues.
We don't need to 'break up,' but rather go back to the loosely affiliated union with a weak federal government and strong emphasis on states rights as the founders intended. No more of this "Commerce Clause gives us (feds) blanket authority to do whatever-the-fuck-we-want" bullshit.
Why risk polluting my system with malware when I can just wait the week or two it will be til Valve chucks [insert title here] in the $2.99 Bargain Bin?
Slashdot Mirror
Why the argument, then?
Because the law is stupid? That's why.
You disagreeing with it doesn't make it stupid.
If there wasn't such a law, anybody could get out of a DUI by stopping at a red light. Now that would be stupid.
Just follow the law
If only it was that easy. The law is massively comlpex and almost impossible precisely because it makes no sense.
Most laws are ridiculously complex; they're written by lawyers, who make a living off the ridiculous complexity of laws. Doesn't mean that all of them are unjust or unnecessary.
Personally, I don't see a need for a texting-specific law, as most states already cover the behavior via Careless and Imprudent Driving laws. To that end, yes, it's redundant legislation.
There is no logical difference between a satnav and a satnav app on a phone.
I would agree, if not for the fact that it is trivial to switch between a nav app and a texting app.
On the whole I find drivers to be one of the most whiny, entitled groups. I'm all for finding people who text while actually driving and nailing to the wall by their bollocks. Likewise with drunk drivers who by their own selfishness endanger others. I'm even for hefty fines for those wankers who park illegally out of some sense of entitlement and block the free flow of traffic.
But ticketing people who use a satnav app while parked is moronic.
If they're parked on a public thoroughfare and impeding the flow of traffic, they deserve to be ticketed.
I'm at a bit of a loss; is it really such an inordinate hassle to wait 10 more seconds and pull into a parking lot before playing with your toys? I never found it to be so.
Which matters how?
As to mass adoption, it doesn't.
As to the blatantly untrue statements made in the post I responded to, it matters greatly.
I think the feds aren't going to give up their power and funding without a fight.
So what if I was checking my Garmin GPS for directions. How is that functionally different then checking a phone?
It's really not, IMO.
Are stand-alone GPS systems now illegal to operate in a car?
RTFS.
Parked on the side of a street I can sort of understand, but parked in their own (presumably private) driveway?
That isn't a public road, so how do the DUI laws apply? As far as I know, you don't even need to have a driver's license, insurance, or vehicle registration if the car isn't operated on public roads. You should be able to drive as drunk as you want to if the vehicle stays on your own property...
Sitting behind the wheel, keys in the ignition. The idea is, basically, that you could at any time start the vehicle and pull onto a public street, so thus you're driving drunk.
I agree that it's stupid and violates the spirit of the law, but on the other hand, the reason they made it that way is because drunks used to run from the cops, slam up their driveways, and claim they'd been sitting there the whole time. Again, stupid.
I do know a guy who got out of such a ticket by immediately chucking his keys into the neighbors lawn (out of reach), before the cops got on scene. Boy, were they pissed!
I do hope though that they don't over-do that to the point that people start playing bumper cars at the traffic light to prove that they weren't hesitating.
Or, you know... they could just not text while behind the wheel.
You're only driving in the sense of some weird legal interpretation.
So, you admit, then, that in a legal sense you're still driving. Why the argument, then? Just follow the law and wait until you're not driving.
If you're in a car, stopped at a red light, there is absoloutely no harm in checking a stanav system that happens to be on a phone as opposed to standalone.
I would agree, if not for the fact that it is trivial to switch between a nav app and a texting app. Of course, if you really were just using the satnav you should be able to fight the ticket in court by pulling your own phone records. "Should" being the operative word (all depends on the judge).
I get a phone call, Pull to the side of the road on a public street, and take tall call. Am I still driving?
Is it a legal place to park, stop, or stand?
If so, then no, you're golden (I recommend putting it in park for safety's sake). If not, then yes, you're obstructing the flow of traffic.
A tie?
... made of rope?
What kind of jobs have you been applying for?
If one doesn't want to use the CLI there is simply no rational reason for them to install Crunchbang or SLackware.
Yea, and if OP had said that I wouldn't have felt the need to disagree.
But he didn't. he said:
no modern Linux distro ever requires you to see a CLI,
Which is a patently untrue statement, evidenced by the existence of modern versions of Crunchbang and Slackware. User preference has nothing to do with it.
I think my idea does have a chance of being enacted. There have been historical examples of nations falling apart under too much internal strain; a very recent example is the Soviet Union which collapsed and broke apart only about 20 years ago.
Not willingly and 'amicably,' though. Such an event occurs, it will be a blood-soaked hell, mark my words.
I often see police officers typing on their laptops or talking on their cell phones while driving (and not 'driving at a red light'). Surely some enterprising victim wouldn't be too challenged to get pictures of Officer Myers or some of his colleagues doing the same. The law for us is the same law as for them, isn't it? At least theoretically?
Hells yea, do it! Hell, go for broke and petition your city to have interlocks installed, so the computer is non-operational while the vehicle is not in park.
Good for the gander, good for the goose.
Cop admits car is sitting still at a red light. Person claims to have put car in park while at red light.
Person would likely then be cited for A) contempt (judges don't like smart-asses), and/or B) obstructing the flow of traffic/illegal parking.
The smart money, BTW, is on not being a selfish fucktard in the first place.
amazing how driving flips a switch in a lot of peoples head.
the tolerance for 1 second delays (which can easily be made
up by the next light) goes to zero, and they get mad at the
slightest things.
Why can't you just wait a few seconds to send that text? Why is the onus always on everyone else to acquiesce to your idiotic, piss-poor behavior?
Just pull the fuck over, if the message is so important it has to be sent/read immediately.
I live in Kentucky (the good part), according to http://www.distraction.gov/content/get-the-facts/state-laws.html we have the same laws on the books as georgia. I wonder if that mean that if I have to do something with my phone GPS I could get a ticket?
Just pull over then.
Seriously, is that so hard? Put your signal on, slow down, then rotate your steering wheel in the direction of whatever parking lot you're pulling into. Problem solved: You can play with your toys without breaking any laws, and other drivers and pedestrians don't have to worry about you being a danger to them.
You're not legally driving if your car is in park.
True, but also true is that in many places, putting a vehicle in park on a public thoroughfare is against the law.
Watch your ass.
If he sees someone texting while actually driving (sitting there forever and a day with your foot on the brake wondering if the light is broken is not driving), I'm all for him issuing a ticket.
OK, how about this then: wait until the light turns green and immediately pull them over for obstructing traffic?
When you're behind the wheel, on a public street,
you
are
driving.
The particular state of your vehicle at the moment is of no consequence.
I have a manual transmission. when I'm stopped, it is not in drive. does it sound like this cop cares about that distinction?
No cop does, and for damn good reason.
"Hey, I saw you weaving like a madman, and holy Jesus, you reek like a brewery! That's it, get out, you're under ar- oh, wait, you put it in neutral; guess that means you're not actually driving drunk. Sorry to bother you!"
Not a world I'd want to drive in.
FYI, the distinction is typically considered to be whether or not the keys are within reach of the driver. I've known people to get DWI's while sitting, parked, in their own driveways, by virtue of the fact they had keys in the ignition.
Finally! I've been looking for a nearly $500 wedge to prop the short leg of my dinner table up with!
No operating system will enjoy mainstream adoption these days if mucking about in a CLI is ever a necessity. Sad but true.
Agreed. But since this isn't 2005,
Yea, no shit, Sherlock.
Gotta love how some people just can't help but make unsolicited, unnecessary smart-ass remarks in every response. Guess the conversation up to this point wasn't adversarial enough for ya, huh? Kriminy...
and no modern Linux distro ever requires you to see a CLI, much less use one, that's not really an issue.
Uh, you do realize there are more distros out there than Ubuntu-based ones, right? Go try to install (and use) Crunchbang or Slackware without touching the console if you want to know how wrong you are.
Oh no, I'm not nearly that clever :)
It's fuckin' pandemic, bro - WSJ, HuffPo, Yahoo, you name it.
I've discovered that pretty much every news site w/ comments is a barren intellectual wasteland, with Slashdot as the rare exception. Probably explains why I come here more often or not - I mean, sure, this community has its share of morons saying stupid shit (I contribute to that pool myself on a fairly regular basis), but overall I don't get that "Kunta Kinte stumbling into a Klan rally" vibe like I do from other sites.
It didn't work 200+ years ago; we're an older, more mature nation now, so it might be worth another shot.
On the other hand, neither of our ideas have a chance of being enacted; a snowball in Hell would fair better.
What are you talking about?
Isn't it obvious? There are idiots everywhere, i.e. if there's such a thing as a "backward region," the term applies to anywhere and everywhere humans exist.
Otherwise I pretty much agree, with a caveat:
it would be better I think if we all amicably decided to break up and go our separate ways instead of constantly arguing over the same issues.
We don't need to 'break up,' but rather go back to the loosely affiliated union with a weak federal government and strong emphasis on states rights as the founders intended. No more of this "Commerce Clause gives us (feds) blanket authority to do whatever-the-fuck-we-want" bullshit.
My thoughts exactly.
Why risk polluting my system with malware when I can just wait the week or two it will be til Valve chucks [insert title here] in the $2.99 Bargain Bin?