stusi
|
posted on November 16, 2001 06:14:31 PM new
Over the last few months, I have been cut off while driving on the local highways at least once every week. I am talking about another vehicle turning in front of my car at high speed within about 1-2 feet. Each time except one it was an SUV. Every time the driver was on a hand-held cell phone. The combination of drivers inexperienced with handling large trucks, driving with one hand on the wheel, and being distracted by phone conversations is lethal. Several past posts have mentioned states outlawing hand-held phones, but this trend makes it a priority IMHO.
|
plsmith
|
posted on November 16, 2001 08:15:02 PM new
I wouldn't stop there, Stusi. I want all except emergency vehicles banned from every thoroughfare in the country. I want our highways, bridges and clover-leafs opened up to bicyclists, skateboarders, those in wheelchairs, rollerbladers, and that occasional neighborhood genius who fashions a conveyance out of a lawnchair, a bit of sailcloth and some baby buggy tires. I want a pedestrians-only lane, too...
|
krs
|
posted on November 16, 2001 09:08:07 PM new
SUV = Large truck?
|
stusi
|
posted on November 17, 2001 07:02:15 AM new
plsmith- Requiring that phones be in hands-free cradles is not such an obtrusive infringement on our civil rights. Your response was funny but I really don't see the point. There is no question but that one's reaction time is diminished by being engaged in a heated discussion and/or driving with one hand unavailable to quickly steer to avoid a collision. A better analogy would be allowing tractor drivers to read a book while driving on the highway.
krs- Perhaps they are not "big rigs" to you or me, but a 5' tall, 95 lb. woman might understandably have a difficult time with a 3 ton Ford Excursion, power steering aside. They have a high center of gravity, long braking distances and their accident avoidance ability is almost nil.
|
hjw
|
posted on November 17, 2001 07:42:25 AM new
I'm just driving a small volkswagen and SUV's scare the hell out of me, especially when drivers are on the phone with the radio blasting and a car full of kids fighting in the back seat.
With that much distraction, nobody can pay the attention necessary to drive safely. I agree with you Stuzi that this is a very serious problem. Maybe if the phones cannot be eliminated, a drivers education course should be required to encourage use of the phones only when the vehicle is off road.
BTW and off topic...I just wonder why anyone needs a vehicle such as an SUV to drive to the grocery store? I've never seen one driving through rough terrain, across streams or up a mountain. Usually this very large vehicle is transporting one individual less that 5 miles from their home.
Helen
|
plsmith
|
posted on November 17, 2001 01:52:27 PM new
Stusi, you've been at this board too long; I was serious.
|
stusi
|
posted on November 17, 2001 02:55:43 PM new
hjw- Helen, the thing about SUV's is that bigger is better for one's ego. Very few people really need a vehicle that large. Perhaps to carry a fleet of motorized lawnchairs to the lawnchair track!
plsmith- see above
|
plsmith
|
posted on November 17, 2001 03:18:21 PM new
Lawnchair Races! 
http://www.varac.ca/Festival/LawnchairGCRs.html
|
hcross
|
posted on November 17, 2001 03:30:23 PM new
I am so tired of people complaining about people who drive suv's. I bought one in Feb. I drive a lot and most of it is on backroads between Oklahoma and Texas. The roads are rough and you have to worry about snow and ice, the roads are not graded because they are so far out. I also haul tons of junk from auctions and all the other places I go. I used to have a pickup but got tired of worrying about the stuff in the back. I would not be caught dead in a station wagon. I get about 25 miles to the gallon in my Escape, better than other cars I have had. (Apparently, the mpg is what most people complain about) In short, it is our money and we worked hard for what we have, if I wanted to drive a Model T up and down the road that is no ones business but mine.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on November 17, 2001 03:32:32 PM new
"I've never seen one driving through rough terrain, across streams or up a mountain."
That's funny Helen.
|
hjw
|
posted on November 17, 2001 03:40:23 PM new
Kraftdinner
HaHaHa...I did see an SUV which had been driven over the road divider where it was stuck. The woman driver was standing in the middle of the road waiting for the tow truck. Apparently they handle rough roads, mountains and streams better.
Helen
ed. to add mountains and streams 
[ edited by hjw on Nov 17, 2001 03:48 PM ]
|
hjw
|
posted on November 17, 2001 03:58:36 PM new
The cell phone industry is of course, in favor of education rather than legislation. They raise some interesting questions.
For example, "If you ban cell phone use -- ironically a device that could potentially save your life -- where does it end?" she said. "Do you ban smoking? Ban drive-throughs because of eating?"
On the other hand, the insurance industry is in favor of complete banning....
"Mantill Williams, AAA spokesman, is opposed to all cell phone use. Williams said that "we strongly recommend, regardless of law" that people should not talk on the phone and drive at the same time.
"We have to be clear that going from a handheld device to a hands-free device does not eliminate the danger of talking on the phone while driving," Williams said.
|
stusi
|
posted on November 17, 2001 04:04:11 PM new
hcross- I really don't think anyone is suggesting that there are not people for whom an SUV is the right vehicle. The Ford Escape happens to be a good value. It is also one of the smallest SUV's on the market. There are unfortunately, however, many drivers who choose vehicles that are much larger than they need or can safely handle.
hjw- you are right of course that there are very few SUVers who drive off road intentionally. Aside from the recent tire failure problem, these vehicles are inherently much less safe than cars because of the higher center of gravity. Coupled with a driver who is inexperienced at driving a truck, the chance of an accident is much greater than with a car. Add a hand-held cell phone and it is "an accident waiting to happen"!
|
bunnicula
|
posted on November 17, 2001 04:08:39 PM new
Can anyone tell me why on earth a person *needs* to be talking on their cell phone while driving? Or why, if such a need is all-powerful, they can't use an easily-affordable headset attachment?
I have narrowly escaped death several times in the past month at the hands of drivers talking on their phones when they should be paying attention to what they are doing.
I have a cell phone. Somehow I manage to drive without having to use it while the car is in motion. And I fully support legislation against the use of them while driving. It's not an infringement of civil rights--just common sense.
|
stusi
|
posted on November 17, 2001 04:14:50 PM new
Talking on the phone is distracting enough but I am personally not in favor of banning cell phone use in cars. Not being able to use both hands in an emergency is quite another problem, so I do agree with laws requiring hands-free devices.
|
hcross
|
posted on November 17, 2001 04:30:05 PM new
Stusi,truckers and farmers are the only people who drive down the roads I do. I am tailgated by a trucker nearly everytime I make the trip. I have been run off the road three times in the last year and a half. I am brightlighted by every second or third card I meet ( I haven't yet figured out if this is because my car is new and the lights are brighter or because my car sits higher and they think my brights are on). I don't think it matters where you are or what someone is driving, there are always going to be those who have more important things to do than drive.
[ edited by hcross on Nov 17, 2001 04:31 PM ]
|
stusi
|
posted on November 17, 2001 04:37:01 PM new
It is a combination of the height of the vehicle and the fact that the new halogen beams are much brighter. Sounds like it's time for you to get a Hummer with front and rear mounted machine gun turrets!
|
snowyegret
|
posted on November 17, 2001 05:52:51 PM new
Bunnicula, here's a reason why someone needs to be on the cell phone while driving:
I'm on transport call, and I'm getting the report while driving in to the hospital. Time can be vital, and that phone call might save us 20 minutes.
And I drive a SUV--if you count a Samurai as a SUV. It's been offroad a bit.
You have the right to an informed opinion
-Harlan Ellison
|
hcross
|
posted on November 17, 2001 06:16:11 PM new
lol stusi, that was just what I told my husband a couple of weeks ago.
|
bunnicula
|
posted on November 17, 2001 10:24:53 PM new
Snowyegret: There is a great difference between ambulance driver's, et al using a radio or cell phone while on a run and people who are schmoozing with friends or trying to negotiate business deals for minutes (or the entire drive) at a time, driving with one hand on the wheel and only part of their attention on the road/traffic.
|
krs
|
posted on November 17, 2001 11:50:47 PM new
There needs to be a set of laws which require everyone to pay attention. It hasn't a thing to do with telephones as there are many possible distractions. Congress needs to form a focus group to determine what attentions should be addressed.
|
plsmith
|
posted on November 18, 2001 12:37:12 AM new
And I suppose you were paying attention when J. Edgar Hoover
came back from the dead:
|
DeSquirrel
|
posted on November 18, 2001 08:50:19 AM new
Hmmm, Hoover WAS ALLEGED to be a closet queen, finally the evidence!
Seriously, NOBODY needs an SUV bigger than a CRV or Escape unless you're a construction gang. Didn't Consumer reports test a bunch of them and none were able to make it up a snowy hill because they come with road tires so they don't drive you deaf on paved roads.
The typical 6500lb SUV carries a woman and a baby. The most hysterical thing in the world is to hang out in a parking lot and watch said woman try to park it. Turn into space, hit the brakes, body lurches forward on the springs. Back up, hit the brakes, body lurches backward on the springs. Repeat 4 times.
States should require special licenses (like motorcycles) for these things and they should be taxed (registered) as commercial vehicles. Lastly they should be forced to meet the crash and smog standard for CARS since that is how they are being used.
|
saabsister
|
posted on November 18, 2001 09:04:52 AM new
My husband and I buy new cars and then drive them until they're not worth repairing anymore. Presently we have a '91 Saab hatchback and a '95 Jeep Cherokee. I like the way the Saab handles and I like the visibility from the Jeep (but I only need the visiblity because of all the other SUVs on the road.) I live 3/4 of a mile from a paved road - down a series of steep hills and curves. My husband bought the Jeep while he was working and had a twenty mile commute. His old Subaru was too low to the ground to get out of here during deep snows and the old VW could only make it with chains. We don't know what our next car will be but it won't be another SUV. But it'll probably have to be four-wheel or all-wheel drive.
|
stusi
|
posted on November 18, 2001 10:31:35 AM new
krs- Considering your well established political leanings(many of which I share), it is quite surprising to hear you say that there should be a set of laws requiring people to pay attention to their driving! Isn't that rather Ashcroft-like? The fact that there are many possible distractions-cd players, cigarette lighters, a/c/heating controls, and screaming kids in the back seat among them-doesn't mean that a hand-held phone is not perhaps the most dangerous of all, and therefore should not get our priority attention. A congressional focus group-isn't that an unnecessary expenditure considering that many states are already requiring hands-free phone cradles?
|
