North Carolina is working on a "Distracted Driving" Bill

Why don't we just ban DRIVING completely?

Some of you would argue with an echo.

 

what they need to do is enclose the "pilot" or driving position in a car in a plexiglass
booth that allows the driver to see out, but no one could see in (like in some city buses).
The only items allowed in the drivers compartment would be the steering wheel and the key. Maybe an a/c vent. The only display on the dash would be a speedometer and a screen for the backup camera. I would be soundproof with the exception of speaker from an outside microphone, so the driver could hear sirens from emergency vehicles.

everyone else in the car would be free to use whatever electronic or analog device they want, and they could crank up the radio. This way the driver can concentrate on driving.

At least this is what it seems is wanted here.

 

*I* didn't "author at least two threads about it!" I started ONE and responded to another--started by someone else.
And despite your assertions as the level of concern shown, *I* am also concerned about it; after all, I drive in my job, and I see it all the time. And WHAT do I see on these trips? Blithering idiots with what........? A cell phone stuck to 'em, and "stuck" in other impolite places. They drive slowly in a 70 zone, neglect to start at the traffic light, look down while dialing ..................what? Their stupid cell phone, that's what!!!! They weave and wobble in traffic. They wear HEADPHONES, fer Heaven's sake, that cover BOTH ears. How STOOOOOPID is THAT? Funny thing. in 53 years of driving, I have NEVER seen someone using a MIKE do ANY of those things! NEVER. So IF something should be restricted, it stands to reason it should be the thing that RISES to the level of distraction necessary for action. The two way radio, factually, and historically, does NO SUCH THING.

According to your premise, and if it were followed to the letter, then we would have to just ban DRIVING! That would cure it, right? I'm sure you wouldn't like that. I wouldn't. So we would have to determine the LEVEL of distraction, how one particular activity affects driving and go from there. If we could assign a "scale" of distraction, given we want to drive cars, then we'd have to look at each distraction (adjusting the FM, turning down the A/C, shushing the kids, LISTENING to the news, using a mobile radio, then a cell phone. IT has been done before, btw, and out of the studied distractions, a mobile radio (ham, etc) came out very near the Broadcast radio (listening).

What I am "prioritizing" is...............using common sense and restricting the 90-ish % that IS causing driving distracted.

Anyway, despite your objections, it now is in the hands of the Wireless Bureau. Two way radio does NOT need 'managing' by the states!

 

Correct. However, driving a lethal vehicle should be 'managed' by the states, including what you should (and shouldn't) be allowed to do while operating a lethal vehicle. Safety should ALWAYS take precedence over ragchewing.

! <-- matching exclamation mark added, for matching emotional effect.

 

As you have unfortunately discovered, there are a number of forum participants who never made it to civics class.

 

So TRUE and on point.
When did driving a vehicle become second to pointless texting, juggling a redneck guzzler, shoulder holding a cell phone while trying to flip the ash off a cigarette and assuming everyone else will look out for you in traffic.
A vehicle is not the COUCH IN YOUR living room of your home...…… guess it all started with the 14 cup holders and 10 inch displays, the heated seats with massage capability that the manufactures thought everyone needed...……. Drive within the laws, drive within the rules of the road, and most of all remember that there is an INVOLENTARY MANSLAUGHTER CHARGE IF YOU KILL SOMEONE WITH YOUR VEHICLE...….
I am all in on supporting an all inclusive distracted driving law...…… way to many people have died due to distracted driving and the penalties should be significant, not just a 50 dollar fine...

 

THX, a lot of folks here do not accept facts and reality. They just make it up. If you kill someone and charged with distracted driving , 10 years in jail.. Hams are not entitled to anything.

 

Whats next?................. tearing down Henry Fords statues?

 

Why not, he has killed more people than General Lee did.

 

Calm down, guys; no need to blow a gasket! It is in the hands of the FCC Wireless Bureau! They will decide who governs amateur radio--just as they did during the "scanner law" issue. After all, a number of states have apparently agreed that exemption is in order. So why get all "oooly owly"? (A word that my wife's family used) Ultimately, THEY will determine if a state has any authority to restrict, ticket, ban, punish licensed amateurs for doing what we've done under FEDERAL LAW for 70 years. Its all good!

 

Lets let people drink alcohol, smoke dope, take pills, send text, or whatever they want to do while driving. Will thin the population out and get rid of a lot of stupid people.

 

Wow. Just... WOW.
OTOH, everyone's safety should take precedence above a ham's ragchewing. You want the opposite, and that's just wrong thinking.

 

No, It does NOT. And what I want has nothing to do with it. It has to do with 1) the premise that there certain things that adversely affect driving; that is true. The mere use of a microphone, in and of itself, is NOT one of them. 2) It has to do with governance; who actually has the authority to ban, restrict, regulate, enforce two way radio. 3) It has been the the sole authority of FCC under Title 47, Part 97, US code, and states have never been allowed to 'govern' two way radio. 4) It has never yet been shown that minor distractions, such as adjusting the A/C, changing the FM radio, adjusting a mirror, OR talking on a microphone has EVER had but a miniscule effect on driving. I keep ASKING people to bring forth all this "evidence" that the use of a two way radio, commercial or otherwise, that said use even rises to 1/10th that of the effect on driving that the cell phone does. All I get is, generalities, postulating, presuming, but NO evidence that shows that two way radio is even anywhere NEAR that of the cell phone that is the actual culprit. The FACTS ARE, "peoples' safety" is NOT affected by the use of a two way radio. Period. End of story. Sheer numbers (two way users vs. cell phone) will prove it alone. Everything is in FAVOR of the two way radio and AGAINST the cell phone.

Perhaps, judging by the adverse comments I read here, we are now so caught up in this "social media" frenzy, like lemmings rushing over a cliff, somehow, even as licensed amateurs, we are part of that throng, too. We are MORE attached to the cell phone "teat" than we realize, and somebody ELSE must also be punished, too. .........Even if that device that has no "guilt" must somehow share that blame.

Americans have been "groomed" to submit, tho we were unaware, for years. Submit to the "nanny state". Do what your "superiors" TELL you to do. I am not one of those willling to go to the shears like willing sheep, especially when is something that is not the problem. I fight against those things I believe are fundamentally WRONG. And states' superceding FCC's authority is not the correct approach in this case. It is NOT up to me. It is now up to the Wireless Bureau where, in conjunction and advice of Laura Smith it now resides. I believe, as in the case of the states that have already done so, FCC is not going to stand for states trying to "regulate" amateur radio, or ticket licensed amateurs for what they have done under the law for 70 years (the mere use of a microphone). We shall see, won't we?

 

^ ^ ^ He still doesn't get it or, he does... and is living in denial. ^ ^ ^
Many words, some in ALL CAPS doesn't make his argument valid.

 

And you seem to HAVE none. Opinions don't count. No evidence that a two way radio is even near the distraction of a cell phone. Nada, Nyet. Nicht. Nein! If you DID, you'd have already posted it. But we both know there IS none. And until there IS such evidence, I will remain adamant: there is NO valid reason to "punish" amateur radio for the guilt of others. Its up to the Wireless Bureau.