Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
Results 31 to 34 of 34

Thread: Distracted Driving in Ontario

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Near Palm Springs, California


    Quote Originally Posted by K4BWG View Post
    I completely disagree. There is plenty of evidence to show that operating half duplex with a microphone is less distracting than full duplex with a receiver to your ear.
    Citation(s) please?

    I will, assuming that your address on QRZ.COM is good, send you, by USPS, a shiny penny for each one you give that has incontrovertible evidence that proves your point.

    Note: A two-percent delta in a lot of fifty samples is not "incontrovertible".
    Exposing the uninformed and arrogant since 1956.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Pembine, WI USA / en65ao


    The only other group to obtain an extension are commercial, public transit, and public function drivers.

    Law enforcement are neither public transit or public function drivers. The key word is "drivers" Handheld devices can not be used while driving. Only a smart attorney would pickup on the (apparent) misprint.
    I Support: Truckers & Farmers & CW Operators.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Champaign, Illinois


    If you look at this article at the included link, it says the data is from 1995-1999. Yes, cell phones were much less frequent in those days. If you could find current data, the distraction of cell phones will be extremely obvious.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Lexington, SC USA


    Quote Originally Posted by K2NCC View Post
    Although I appreciate the ability to operate my radio while driving, I think they can be just as distracting as a cell-phone.

    Other than emergencies, which hardly need permission, rigs are just as complicated as a mobile phone and I think shouldn't be exempt. You have to look further away than your phone, have a DTMF on the mic, have at least as many buttons to push, and although ham radio doesn't require putting up the mic to your ear, the volume can be just as distracting as any stereo in the car.

    There's plenty to compare that a radio is no safer than a cell-phone, so why do we ask for exceptions to the rule? As a whole, we're certainly no better than any cell-phone user while driving.

    (Besides, do you REALLY need to operate your radio any more than you do your phone while driving?)

    Well, the police DON'T use bluetooth, they primarily use hand mic communications, or a VDT (video display (computer) terminal.

    They have (I should say WE since I am a retired cop..) proven that two way comms can be accomplished SAFELY under extreme conditions. The average cell phone user has proven that they CANNOT operate a phone safely under the safest conditions. In the past five years, I have personallly been hit WHILE STOPPED IN TRAFFIC by cell phone users who apparently had their head and cell phone inside a bodily oriface NOT designed as a receptacle for heads or cell phones.

    I have never been hit by ANYONE using a microphone based comm system, nor did I EVER investigate any accident that involved a microphone using distracted driver. I assure you, I was in a Traffic Division in a metropolitan police force, and over 13 years, I wrote many thousands of reports, not ONE involving a microphone or radio as a factor.

    I used hand mic communications on motorcycles at pursuit speeds well in excess of 130 mph, many times and none of the men on my department had any problems with them either.

    What I'm trying to say is cellphones and their users are NOT SAFE AT ANY SPEED, to borrow a phrase from Ralph Nader ...
    John T. McF. Mood, Sr.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts