3 ms·

Probably more unpopular, I think it should have worse punishment than DUI. Or maybe both need to get worse punishment equally? Texting and driving to me is th

by axaxs 7y ago

Probably more unpopular, I think it should have worse punishment than DUI. Or maybe both need to get worse punishment equally? Texting and driving to me is the ultimate sign of vanity. A person is knowingly breaking the law, and putting their own desire for instant communication/social media above the lives of others. As in, 'me posting to instagram is more important than whether you live or die'. I'm hoping most don't feel that way, but their behavior says otherwise...

mc32 7y ago
You have a point. At the time they decide to use a device/phone, their faculties are not diminished and yet they decide to do it anyway. Maybe we need one of those corny ‘80s throwback PSAs to shame people into conscientious behavior.
- cronix 7y ago
  You're assuming they made a conscious decision, as in the thought actually crossed their mind that "this might not be a good idea." I'd wager the thought never crossed their distracted mind. They're chasing dopamine rushes. In fact, I doubt many are making conscious decisions to pick up their phone and look at it. It's automatic at this point. They've programmed themselves. Have you ever watched someone sitting alone lately? It's like this nervous tick happens where they get irritated and uncomfortable if they don't check their phone every 5 minutes. There is no attention span. We've programmed it out.
  - shantly 7y ago
    It's amazing how fast we went from "talking on or looking at your cell-phone in public for any length of time, or frequently, is something only self-important dicks do", to the point that we could use such behavior as universally-understood shorthand in fiction for "this character is a self-important dick", to its being totally normal. I'm pretty sure the gap was bridged in about five years. Crazy. I remain skeptical that the switch from "the Internet exists at some physical locations, you must go to one to use the Internet" to "the Internet exists at all physical locations all of the time" was anywhere near being a net (haha) gain for our collective wellbeing.
  - stevenicr 7y ago
    I agree with most of what you are getting at; "They've programmed themselves." - Isn't there evidence that the apps (like fbk and msgr, others) - and phones (apple) have been programmed to create this like - dopamine - want - get - more - behavior (?) Supreme court is now allowing people to sue gun manufacturers when people use their tools improperly (at least in one case) - it won't take a top 10 law firm to copy the tactics deployed there and convince jury's that big tech was taking advantage of lil johnny and lil mary who are not that smart - and they were using the devices and apps as intended - as so they should be liable for the pain, suffering, deaths, etc right? (not a lawyer, but I'd go that route for that kind of ambulance chasing maybe)
btrettel 7y ago
Cyclist here. I've heard multiple other cyclists say things along the lines of "my life is not worth 15 second of your time". Typically in response to drivers making rather bad driving decisions, e.g., passing a cyclist too closely, that often don't actually lead to much time savings. It's the same logic. The benefit is much smaller than the cost, but the cost is typically paid by someone else.
SauciestGNU 7y ago
I think both ought to carry a permanent lifetime ban on owning, operating, and possessing any sort of motor vehicle. You've demonstrated your willingness to kill people through your negligence, you will not have another opportunity to do so.
- t-writescode 7y ago
  Permanent? For touching your cell phone? With no consideration of the circumstances? A mandatory minimum sentence of permanent removal of driving privileges for touching a phone? How do you define touching the phone? Can you imagine some circumstances where that shouldn’t be a permanent removal of driving privileges?
  - SauciestGNU 7y ago
    For distracted/technologically impaired driving, which in my mind is using technology in some empirically-defined unsafe manner. How we would determine that threshold is something we as a society would have to determine, but I would hope that we would use evidence-based processes to make that determination.
    - t-writescode 7y ago
      I just look at laws and how they’re set up now; and I just can’t imagine the legislature actually doing what you want.
      - SauciestGNU 7y ago
        You're in all likelihood correct, but that's the sort of policy I would hope for.

by axaxs 7y ago

mc32 7y ago

You have a point. At the time they decide to use a device/phone, their faculties are not diminished and yet they decide to do it anyway. Maybe we need one of those corny ‘80s throwback PSAs to shame people into conscientious behavior.

cronix 7y ago
You're assuming they made a conscious decision, as in the thought actually crossed their mind that "this might not be a good idea." I'd wager the thought never crossed their distracted mind. They're chasing dopamine rushes. In fact, I doubt many are making conscious decisions to pick up their phone and look at it. It's automatic at this point. They've programmed themselves. Have you ever watched someone sitting alone lately? It's like this nervous tick happens where they get irritated and uncomfortable if they don't check their phone every 5 minutes. There is no attention span. We've programmed it out.
- shantly 7y ago
  It's amazing how fast we went from "talking on or looking at your cell-phone in public for any length of time, or frequently, is something only self-important dicks do", to the point that we could use such behavior as universally-understood shorthand in fiction for "this character is a self-important dick", to its being totally normal. I'm pretty sure the gap was bridged in about five years. Crazy. I remain skeptical that the switch from "the Internet exists at some physical locations, you must go to one to use the Internet" to "the Internet exists at all physical locations all of the time" was anywhere near being a net (haha) gain for our collective wellbeing.
- stevenicr 7y ago
  I agree with most of what you are getting at; "They've programmed themselves." - Isn't there evidence that the apps (like fbk and msgr, others) - and phones (apple) have been programmed to create this like - dopamine - want - get - more - behavior (?) Supreme court is now allowing people to sue gun manufacturers when people use their tools improperly (at least in one case) - it won't take a top 10 law firm to copy the tactics deployed there and convince jury's that big tech was taking advantage of lil johnny and lil mary who are not that smart - and they were using the devices and apps as intended - as so they should be liable for the pain, suffering, deaths, etc right? (not a lawyer, but I'd go that route for that kind of ambulance chasing maybe)

btrettel 7y ago

Cyclist here. I've heard multiple other cyclists say things along the lines of "my life is not worth 15 second of your time". Typically in response to drivers making rather bad driving decisions, e.g., passing a cyclist too closely, that often don't actually lead to much time savings. It's the same logic. The benefit is much smaller than the cost, but the cost is typically paid by someone else.

SauciestGNU 7y ago

I think both ought to carry a permanent lifetime ban on owning, operating, and possessing any sort of motor vehicle. You've demonstrated your willingness to kill people through your negligence, you will not have another opportunity to do so.

t-writescode 7y ago
Permanent? For touching your cell phone? With no consideration of the circumstances? A mandatory minimum sentence of permanent removal of driving privileges for touching a phone? How do you define touching the phone? Can you imagine some circumstances where that shouldn’t be a permanent removal of driving privileges?
- SauciestGNU 7y ago
  For distracted/technologically impaired driving, which in my mind is using technology in some empirically-defined unsafe manner. How we would determine that threshold is something we as a society would have to determine, but I would hope that we would use evidence-based processes to make that determination.
  - t-writescode 7y ago
    I just look at laws and how they’re set up now; and I just can’t imagine the legislature actually doing what you want.
    - SauciestGNU 7y ago
      You're in all likelihood correct, but that's the sort of policy I would hope for.