It seems like every week, I see something else on the news that reaffirms my decision to move out of California. I’m going to use this thread to list these things as they come up.
Because its bullshit, pointless nanny-statist garbage that is beyond stupid. Oh wait you’re all for crap like that CM, of course you wouldn’t understand or even comprehend it. You need warning labels and the government to tell you what’s bad and what not to do. Don’t touch the stove when you turn it on, it will be hot and you might burn yourself. I’ll petition your government to get that label on your stove so you know.
This is what doesn’t make sense to me - they’re worried about the effects of caffeine on pregnant women so they want to put a warning label on soda but not coffee. Everything I’ve seen and read about caffeine in pregnancy is that consistently ingesting more than 300 mg a day may be harmful. I drink 1-2 cans of Dr. Pepper a day. At 41 mg of caffeine each, that keeps me well under the 300 mg mark. Depending on the coffee, it can contain up to 145 mg of caffeine per cup (possibly more if you like a strong brew.) I never worry about my soda intake but if I happen to have a mug of coffee, I stay away from other caffeine sources during the day. It’s a lot easier to overdo the caffeine drinking coffee than drinking a regular soda.
Because its bullshit, pointless nanny-statist garbage that is beyond stupid. Oh wait you’re all for crap like that CM, of course you wouldn’t understand or even comprehend it. You need warning labels and the government to tell you what’s bad and what not to do. Don’t touch the stove when you turn it on, it will be hot and you might burn yourself. I’ll petition your government to get that label on your stove so you know.
I can see why someone might see it as pointless, I just don’t see how it invokes such a strong reaction to the point that it becomes a solid reason not to live somewhere. Perhaps shaking ones head and sighing, that might be a proportional reaction. That’s why I assumed there was more to it - perhaps the tip of a specific iceberg that I don’t know about.
It’s continually hilarious to me that you see me as the idealogue, particuarly given your rant in the other thread about healthcare in Norway. Gold. Please keep it up.
Because its bullshit, pointless nanny-statist garbage that is beyond stupid. Oh wait you’re all for crap like that CM, of course you wouldn’t understand or even comprehend it. You need warning labels and the government to tell you what’s bad and what not to do. Don’t touch the stove when you turn it on, it will be hot and you might burn yourself. I’ll petition your government to get that label on your stove so you know.
I can see why someone might see it as pointless, I just don’t see how it invokes such a strong reaction to the point that it becomes a solid reason not to live somewhere. Perhaps shaking ones head and sighing, that might be a proportional reaction. That’s why I assumed there was more to it - perhaps the tip of a specific iceberg that I don’t know about.
It’s continually hilarious to me that you see me as the idealogue, particuarly given your rant in the other thread about healthcare in Norway. Gold. Please keep it up.
Just to help highlight your abject stupidity and inability to read I’ll quote the original post and then explain it so you understand.
It seems like every week, I see something else on the news that reaffirms my decision to move out of California. I’m going to use this thread to list these things as they come up.
Notice how he says every week. Now I doubt he’s seeing the same article every week. He also lists it as only Exhibit A. And makes a statement that when other reasons come up he’ll post them. In other words this is the tip of the iceberg. Something which you weren’t able to follow.
Oh and I don’t give a damn about healthcare in Norway. I don’t give a damn about a lot of things in other countries. You know why? They really don’t affect me. As opposed to you who is so happy about John Howard no longer being in power, or about what is going on in the US. And you are an idealogue. The definition of a spine-less cowardly liberal afraid to actually take a position on anything at all unless its anti-americanism that can be wrapped up in and air of “neutrality” that you think is actually fooling anyone.
Because its bullshit, pointless nanny-statist garbage that is beyond stupid. Oh wait you’re all for crap like that CM, of course you wouldn’t understand or even comprehend it. You need warning labels and the government to tell you what’s bad and what not to do. Don’t touch the stove when you turn it on, it will be hot and you might burn yourself. I’ll petition your government to get that label on your stove so you know.
I can see why someone might see it as pointless, I just don’t see how it invokes such a strong reaction to the point that it becomes a solid reason not to live somewhere. Perhaps shaking ones head and sighing, that might be a proportional reaction. That’s why I assumed there was more to it - perhaps the tip of a specific iceberg that I don’t know about.
It’s continually hilarious to me that you see me as the idealogue, particuarly given your rant in the other thread about healthcare in Norway. Gold. Please keep it up.
Just to help highlight your abject stupidity and inability to read I’ll quote the original post and then explain it so you understand.
It seems like every week, I see something else on the news that reaffirms my decision to move out of California. I’m going to use this thread to list these things as they come up.
Notice how he says every week. Now I doubt he’s seeing the same article every week. He also lists it as only Exhibit A. And makes a statement that when other reasons come up he’ll post them. In other words this is the tip of the iceberg. Something which you weren’t able to follow.
Oh and I don’t give a damn about healthcare in Norway. I don’t give a damn about a lot of things in other countries. You know why? They really don’t affect me. As opposed to you who is so happy about John Howard no longer being in power, or about what is going on in the US. And you are an idealogue. The definition of a spine-less cowardly liberal afraid to actually take a position on anything at all unless its anti-americanism that can be wrapped up in and air of “neutrality” that you think is actually fooling anyone.
Yeah that’s it, keep going. You’re like a angrier but less verbose Cigar Skunk.
Of course you give a damn, these things make you very angry.
Your last two sentences - you couldn’t really have provided a more perfect example of my point. One of the key features of an idealogue is the inability to see anybody else other than in purely black and white terms. And the inability to have a civil discussion with anyone who you don’t see as an idealogical ally. It’s a nice little self-sustaining cycle. Good luck with it.
EDIT: Forgot the other key feature: preaching to what you see as a/your congregation.
e.g.
Because its bullshit, pointless nanny-statist garbage that is beyond stupid. Oh wait you’re all for crap like that CM, of course you wouldn’t understand or even comprehend it. You need warning labels and the government to tell you what’s bad and what not to do. Don’t touch the stove when you turn it on, it will be hot and you might burn yourself. I’ll petition your government to get that label on your stove so you know.
The stove probably has a sticker on it, warning about that, when you buy it.
Because its bullshit, pointless nanny-statist garbage that is beyond stupid. Oh wait you’re all for crap like that CM, of course you wouldn’t understand or even comprehend it. You need warning labels and the government to tell you what’s bad and what not to do. Don’t touch the stove when you turn it on, it will be hot and you might burn yourself. I’ll petition your government to get that label on your stove so you know.
I can see why someone might see it as pointless, I just don’t see how it invokes such a strong reaction to the point that it becomes a solid reason not to live somewhere. Perhaps shaking ones head and sighing, that might be a proportional reaction. That’s why I assumed there was more to it - perhaps the tip of a specific iceberg that I don’t know about.
It’s continually hilarious to me that you see me as the idealogue, particuarly given your rant in the other thread about healthcare in Norway. Gold. Please keep it up.
Its just sort of a sign of the overall political climate. The same people putting warnings on soda pop are also passing out of control budgets spending money on programs for everything… also..
So, I’d say its just a ‘sign of times’ or zeitgeist of the place…
And its not just soda, everything else already does have a warning label in California. They had some proposition years ago saying everything needed one that was even a minor danger or carcinogen. Well, just about anything in large amounts gives a mouse cancer, so just about everything (and every place, as buildings with certain products or materials in them need it too) have warning signs…
I remember hearing about that. We’ll consider that Exhibit B.
Now CM & Buzzion, if you can’t play nice then I’m going to have to send you both to your rooms without supper.
As for your question, CM, Buzzion pretty much nailed it with “Because its bullshit, pointless nanny-statist garbage that is beyond stupid.” California has SO MANY problems that need real solutions, and they’re wasting valuable legislator time on this kind of garbage? It’s absolutely ridiculous.
And no, that wasn’t the reason I moved. There was no “single” reason that I moved, except perhaps that I wanted to spend less money on simply existing (which happens to be a very expensive thing to do in California).
illegal for any driver to use a handheld phone except during emergencies
More than 1.4 million workers in California will benefit from an increase in the minimum wage. The new $8-per-hour wage is the second-highest in the nation, tied with Massachusetts.
a new law that allows redemption of gift cards for cash if the balance is less than $10.
etc…
“We are California. We know what’s best for you. TRUST US.”
As much as there is to love about California, I really am glad I left.
No fucking way should people be driving towards me while speaking on their handheld mobile.
What’s the difference between that and using a handsfree? Seriously - if you can’t handle driving while using a handheld, you sure as hell shouldn’t be using a handsfree either. You probably shouldn’t even be carrying passengers that you might want to converse with if your attention is diverted that easily.
Stupid people are stupid people, and no law will make them smarter. They will ALWAYS do stupid things - that’s the nature of being a stupid person. This law will have little effect other than to drive up the revenue stream generated by the California Highway Patrol.
It’s just another nanny law in the ultimate nanny state.
Must.be.satire. Gottabe. Just gotta.
Not sure exactly what you’re referring to, but nope - everything in my post was completely serious.
No fucking way should people be driving towards me while speaking on their handheld mobile.
What’s the difference between that and using a handsfree? Seriously - if you can’t handle driving while using a handheld, you sure as hell shouldn’t be using a handsfree either. You probably shouldn’t even be carrying passengers that you might want to converse with if your attention is diverted that easily.
It’s pretty different really. You have 2 hands to drive with, if you use a hand held then you only have one hand to drive with properly, you are basically reducing your ability to steer by 50%. If you have a stick then it also reduces your ability to change gear, unless you have your phone in your left hand, in which case you have to let go of your wheel to change gear.
With a hands free you still have both hands available to you to steer and do other driving related tasks etc. They may not be glued to the wheel the whole time but they shouldn’t be doing anything else which would impair your ability to grab the wheel with both hands quickly if required.
I certainly support a ban on using a hand held phone while driving.
I’ve heard the argument that a hands free is as dangerous because a person is distracted while talking and is not paying as much attention to the task of driving as they otherwise would. To that I answered “bullshit, if that were the case you must ban talking to passengers” though the come back to that was that a passenger is also experiencing the journey and would know not to talk at a troublesome driving situation.
That argument I find to be complete shite. If you have both hands available to steer then you can talk, sing along to the radio or make faces at oncoming traffic for all I care.
But there is a big difference between a hand held phone and a hands free phone when driving.
It’s pretty different really. You have 2 hands to drive with, if you use a hand held then you only have one hand to drive with properly, you are basically reducing your ability to steer by 50%. If you have a stick then it also reduces your ability to change gear, unless you have your phone in your left hand, in which case you have to let go of your wheel to change gear.
With a hands free you still have both hands available to you to steer and do other driving related tasks etc. They may not be glued to the wheel the whole time but they shouldn’t be doing anything else which would impair your ability to grab the wheel with both hands quickly if required.
I drove a stick as my daily driver for 10+ years, with a cellphone. There were occasionally times I’d have to set the phone down to negotiate a curve/turn while shifting, but generally speaking, it can be done fairly easily if you’re even the slightest bit responsible about how you drive while on the phone. For me, this argument just doesn’t hold up. I can see the logic, but it’s just not a good enough reason for me to approve of this law.
If people can’t be trusted to be responsible enough to set the phone down or hold off on making that call for a few minutes until they can do it safely, then they shouldn’t be issued a license to operate a two ton mass of steel and glass barreling down the road at 70mph.
Why should I have to put up with idiots who risk my safety?
You risk your “safety” every time you get in the car. Shit happens. If you’re not willing to accept that, you should stay locked up in your house all the time, praying that an airplane doesn’t fall on it.
Seriously - life is dangerous. From the moment you get up in the morning, you’re making decisions that could result in injury or death.
The vast majority of people out there can deal with talking on their phones while driving. The proof of this is in the fact that we’ve had cellphones for 15+ years and most of us are still around to discuss it. This is a nanny law, plain and simple.
It’s pretty different really. You have 2 hands to drive with, if you use a hand held then you only have one hand to drive with properly, you are basically reducing your ability to steer by 50%. If you have a stick then it also reduces your ability to change gear, unless you have your phone in your left hand, in which case you have to let go of your wheel to change gear.
With a hands free you still have both hands available to you to steer and do other driving related tasks etc. They may not be glued to the wheel the whole time but they shouldn’t be doing anything else which would impair your ability to grab the wheel with both hands quickly if required.
I drove a stick as my daily driver for 10+ years, with a cellphone. There were occasionally times I’d have to set the phone down to negotiate a curve/turn while shifting, but generally speaking, it can be done fairly easily if you’re even the slightest bit responsible about how you drive while on the phone. For me, this argument just doesn’t hold up. I can see the logic, but it’s just not a good enough reason for me to approve of this law.
If people can’t be trusted to be responsible enough to set the phone down or hold off on making that call for a few minutes until they can do it safely, then they shouldn’t be issued a license to operate a two ton mass of steel and glass barreling down the road at 70mph.
I’ve only ever driven stick shifts, both right and left hand drive ones and in my experience, talking on the phone significantly affects my ability to turn and shift effectively, not to mention various other driving tasks such as using turn signals/indicators, high /dipped beams etc.
I’m sure I could do all of these things but if the phone is in my right hand, I have to move my left hand all the way to the other side of the wheel to use my turn signals. Maybe that’s why nobody on the road when I’m going to and from work uses turn signals when they change lanes I guess, and you know what, that makes them more dangerous as drivers than those of us who do.
I saw stats on the percentage of car accidents that happened while the user was on a cell phone vs when they were not, from the UK when they put such a ban into place a few years back (99% of UK cars at the time would have been sticks) and you’d probably be surprised at how many of the crashes were while the user was on the phone.
correlation / causation aside, it is clear that you are a less safe driver when talking on a hand held phone than you are on a hands free phone and I’d be surprised if 80% of US states don’t have laws like this one in 10 years time.
EDIT: Looked for them but couldn’t find them. This law was about 7 years ago so probably lost now.
Agreed again Tripper. I was in the UK when the law was passed and followed the discussion reasonably closely.
Sure, I risk my safety driving a car, but I’m comfortable in the knowledge that I’m a reasonable driver and therefore if I am involved in an accident it’s more likely to be the result of someone else doing something dumb. We can’t stop people doing unforseeable dumb shit. But if you cause an accident because you were talking on a handheld phone while driving, that is forseeable. It’s not as though the law stops people talking on phones in a car, they just need to be hands-free.
Would it be ok for people to be allowed to drive on the wrong side of the road every so often too? Why should you only be able to drive on one side? Imagine how much less congestion there would be?! Surely people would be sensible enough to ensure they do it safely?
I’m sure I could do all of these things but if the phone is in my right hand, I have to move my left hand all the way to the other side of the wheel to use my turn signals. Maybe that’s why…
Or you could set the phone down, as I said that I did when necessary. It’s not rocket science. Again, it comes down to responsibility, and if you can’t trust people to have enough responsibility to drive while using the phone, then you shouldn’t let them operate a motor vehicle at all.
it is clear that you are a less safe driver when talking on a hand held phone than you are on a hands free phone
No, it’s not. I’m equally safe regardless of which mechanism I’m using. This has been proven over the last 14 years - zero accidents while on the phone, and one while not on the phone. Clearly, I’m a much better driver while on the phone…
if you cause an accident because you were talking on a handheld phone while driving
That’s just it - you’re not causing an accident because you were talking on a handheld phone while driving, you causing an accident because you’re an idiot that can’t do two fairly mundane things at the same time, and you’re probably going to be causing accidents no matter what you’re doing or not doing, and shouldn’t have a driver license at all. Edit: If you can’t talk on the phone while driving, you shouldn’t tune the radio, adjust the heater or do anything else at all that isn’t directly related to maintaining control of your vehicle. You should then drive directly to your local Department of Motor Vehicles office and surrender your license.
