take out the am/fm radios and cd players to...

Dear Extremists,

I only read about cell phones.

Exactly! And unenforcable. There's nothing wrong with using Bluetooth, which is about as distracting as singing along to the radio.

commonsense, here is the first sentence from the article: "The government's transportation safety experts recommended Tuesday to ban all American drivers from using portable electronic devices — including cell phones, even if you use a hands-free device." I do believe that would include anything that can be removed such as the CB or two-way raido.

But who's to say what "distracted" driving is? Plenty of people could be distracted by eating, putting on makeup, their screaming child in the backseat, the song they are rocking out to on the radio, even THINKING about things can be distracting...and the list goes on. There is no way to police this. It opens the doors to a whole lot of negative things.

Lovely. So if NTSB is taken seriously, parents can't get calls from kids stranded at school, people can't call for directions if lost, doctors can't receive emergency summons, you can't call 911 to report that car following you, etc. PC Schmucks.

It's easy to stop the cell use and texting while driving. The providers already have the capability since gps's are in all cell phones to stop transmissions while above a certain speed. They just don't do it because they loose money

I remember it saying:

Besides calling for government action, the NTSB also urged consumer electronics manufacturers to figure out a way to "disable the functions of portable electronic devices within reach of the driver when a vehicle is in motion."

Portable electronic device: cell phone, ipod, cd player, handheld gaming platform, radios... There are a lot of portable electronic devices that would have to be banned.

All these experts are going to be replaced in a year after the 2012 election. But they had to push that report and request for new legislation and more power and intrusion by government into your life before their time is up.

You are not emotional while listening to the radio - but talking to your boss/partner/mother - that is another story. People become emotionally distracted. Almost every time I see someone driving in a dangerous manner are either drunk, elderly or on the phone - 95% of the time they are on the phone.

Might as well take out the speed odometer too! oh yea and all the dummy lights. Good old U S A land of the free and home of the f---ed.

Wake up

The FM radio isn't the problem. There have been radios in cars for decades, but the radios today require you to look at them to tune or adjust them. The old radios were push button and simple to adjust, the new ones are to complex for that. Also the loud bass boomers have to go. There is no way to know or hear a siren with those things on.

CB's should be treated just like a cellphone, but I disagree with hands free devices. This isn't a problem for me, but I won't use them.

I can listen to my radio with a light volume level and drive, but won't answer the phone while driving. My mind is on the road, sometimes I don't hear the music even with the radio on low enough so I can hear it. In my opinion and experience the radio or CD isn't the big problem.

What about all of the police and state troopers who blow you off of the road, yes, greatly exceeding the speed limit, with no lights or sirens on while talking on their phones.

What about passengers using a cell phone. Will phones be equipped with some type of device to differentiate between the driver and passengers???

This is a double-edged sword. When passing new laws, the law-makers and enforcers must be held to the same standard. What is good for the goose is also good for the gander.

With all of the technology available today, why can't they install a device in each car that scrambles any mobile device receiver as long as the car is moving. Just pull over and stop if you need to make or receive a call.

How about the government stay out of our lives and do what they are supposed to do.

what about a GPS?, they are distracting. Yes, those gauges and lights need to go as well. You can not pass a law to stop people from doing anything stupid while they are driving, because they will find a way.

i agree with no texting while driving, and no talking on the phone while driving. but if you have a bluetooth then you should be able to use that. years ago we was stoped in traffic and go slammed from behind and sandwiched inbetween a uhaul type truck and a big ass work van. the guy in his company vehical was talking on his cell phone to his BOSS when he hit us. Guy even admitted to the cops he was on his cell phone. people like that should have there right to drive taken away for so many months or a scrambler should be installed in there vehical so they cant use there cell phone. luckily we only walked away with a totaled car, and EXTREMELY horrible back problems that still affect us 6 yrs later. But banning cell phones all together is insane. just require a bluetooth and if someone causes an accident punish them with more than a little ticket. accidents happen with or without cell phones..maybe they should stop letting people over the age of 70 drive cars around...

While I understand what they're trying to do.. and I agree that texting and physically being on your phone is a distraction, I don't understand the deal with the hands free devices. How would talking on your phone with a hands free device be any more distracting than talking to a passenger in your car or listening to the radio? Are we going to ban talking in the car, as well?

I agree with coming down harder on those who are causing accidents because of texting or screwing around with their phone. But the rest is pretty silly and likely unncessary.

So in the name of safety some of you are willing to give up your freedom of talking on the phone while seating in the back seat of a car?

Because if the car is going 50 mph, it is going 50 in all the seats in the car.

Imagine how stupid you have to be to say that is should be illegal at best or impossible at worst to talk on your cell phone in the back seat of a car.

Commonsense read the first paragraph:

The government's transportation safety experts recommended Tuesday to ban all American drivers from using portable electronic devices — including cell phones, even if you use a hands-free device.

Cut to the chase ban driving... It's really the only responsible thing to do and if it saves even one life it's worth it. Anything less than banning driving is people who don't care about other people.

With all of the technology available today, why can't they install a device in each car that scrambles any mobile device receiver as long as the car is moving. Just pull over and stop if you need to make or receive a call.

Absolutely not! You go ahead and pull over on the Interstate, as long as we're talking about "safety." How about banning in-person conversation with passengers? "Shhh hang on, sorry, I have to pull over to talk to you." What if my passenger wants to make a call? Do I have to pull over for them, too?

You can't legistlate common sense and personal responsibility. Bluetooth communication devices are a huge success because they virtually eliminate the issue. It is your personal choice to not use a phone while driving, and while I can admittedly get behind legistlation concerning the use of hands-free devices, the ubiquity of device use in cars ensures this will not be enacted and is totally unenforcable. The industry has embraced hands-free, how do you eliminate it now? What a joke.

As long as we're in control of multi-ton steel and glass missiles traveling 60 mph+, there will be mistakes, there will be distracted drivers, there will be accidents. It is an accepted risk of getting on the road. We just weren't evolved for driving cars. Thankfully, there have been many safety measures invented to minimize the risk of injury and death in these cases. Some people are good at driving, some people are not. Bottom line: it should be the responsibility of the driver to ensure they are driving safely and to be aware of other drivers who may not be.

No doubt this is another way of taking away our freedom in the disguise of safety!

I'm still trying to figure out how this creates jobs...

Ruby, didn't Jefferson say something about giving away freedoms for protection.

"Bluetooth communication devices are a huge success because they virtually eliminate the issue."

Except they don't. Drivers using hands-free and hand-held mobile devices drive about as well as someone who is impaired due to alcohol. See here: http://www.distraction.gov/download/research-pdf/Comparison-of-CellPhone-Driver-Drunk-Driver.pdf

As for the auto-disable talk... How could they tell if the phone was being used by the driver or not? Just cause the phone is going 60mph, it could be in use by a passenger.

This could all be solved if they would just make cars like in Minority Report. Then the people wouldn't have to drive on the highways, it would be all computer controlled. Then I can get back to playing Angry Birds while I'm on my way to work. ;)

Except they don't. Drivers using hands-free and hand-held mobile devices drive about as well as someone who is impaired due to alcohol.

Thank you for the link, however I am not convinced. Where are the metrics for driver training for the participants? They each "have a license" and an average 8 years of driving experience according to the study, but beyond this baseline, what else? In most states, the requirements to obtain a driver's license are minimal. What do their driving records look like? Have any of them had advanced driver training (defensive driving, racing school, etc.)?

.08 is the baseline for "legal impairment," but I'd like to know what the reality is with regards to actual impairment of the participants and real world drivers alike. I don't own a breathalyzer and I avoid driving when I think I may be at risk for impairment. So I don't exactly test my own data, but the point I am trying to make is that everyone reacts differently to alcohol in different quantities and concentrations. What proportion of accidents are caused by drivers in the .08-.10 range when compared to drivers rocking a .26-.32 BAC? I see "legally" drunk and "actually" drunk as two very distinct things. The study does reveal that the average BAC in fatal accidents is .16.

How did the performance of the simulator compare with actual driving? Could the participants "feel" their braking in a physical manner relative to how an actual car performs, or were the responses primarily visual? I'm all for gathering data and the scientific method, but unfortunately I don't know how well these results hold up versus real-world issues.

Well,here we go again. Just one more freedom to loose and no bloody common sense. The answer to the problem is a very simple one, and I believe even the knuckle heads in Washington would agree. NO HANDHELD PHONES,AND NOTHING IN THE EARS. SPEAKERS ONLY!!!!!!!! Next,they will say no conversations in the car,and no music,because this causes a distraction. This government is OUT OF CONTROL !!!!!

*America* will not rest until it destroys the United States.

Areas where cell phone use has been banned, and enforced, have been successful in greatly reducing "distracted driver" accidents.

The idiots who are yelping about this - especially the dingbats making the 10th Amendment argument - don't realize there's quite an easy way to implement such a ban nationwide. Simply tie states' compliance to Federal highway funds. Each state, in its own way, will be responsible for the legislation and enforcement, or lose some big bucks.

This makes even moer sense than requiring seat belts in vehicles - and efforts to enforce their use - and motorcycle helmets.

KATIE..BAN DRIVERS OVER 70!!!...I AM ALMOST 70, HAVEN'T HAD AN ACCIDENT OR TICKET IN 40+ YEARS..that goes driving cars and motorcycles.how long you been driving? how long do you expect to live, enjoy your freedom of movement and all else that goes with the PRIVILEGE of driving? if you text while driving i don't think you expect to live to 70 which would exclude you from that stupid statement!i would suggest you stick that idea where the sun don't shine.

for those who want to get further involved with stifling my freedom....i feel we the people have had enough meddling from the government, dems and repubs. the next thing they will want is for you to pull to the side of the road to sneeze since your eyes involuntarily close for that split second.

they are getting way out of line with trying to fix stupid...can't be done.

This should be a state issue not a federal government issue.The constsitution is the only thing that the federal government should be concerned about.

Maybe this will be the last straw? Seems as though we have gotten as gutless as the russians and chinese, will we take this? I hope not.

i think the goverment has to much on it's plate as is,it's hard enough for them to do what they need to do as it is!before long we want beable to do anything without a permit,or license.what happen to the freedom of right?

Simple pull over to use it, what is more important a persons life or your dumb call ...

This is beyond ridiculous!

First of all, if you can't talk and drive at the same time, you shouldn't have a license. Whether it's a cell phone or another person in the car, as long as you're not dialing, it's the same thing. Are they going to ban passengers too? At this rate, we'll have to start wearing helmets to walk down the street.

Banning all electronic devices? Get a grip! You can use a GPS, but screwing around with that while you're driving is as bad as dialing a phone. If they want to do something to make the devices safer, they should make hands free and voice controls standard on new cars.

My new Corolla has bluetooth built in so I don't have to dial anything or take my focus off the road for even a second. It also has radio controls built into the steering wheel so that I don't have to even look at the radio to adjust the volume or change the station.

The solution is to make more constructive changes like those which make these devices safer and easier to use without diverting driver focus. Banning them is pointless. People will use them anyway. Give people safe alternatives and they'll use them.

I remember a long time ago when they were making laws that intruded on free choice and because it was something most did not have to worry about they got on the band wagon but now they are coming after YOU and cell phones and NOW there is outrage. Sorry no sympathy. it seems it only matters when others lose thieir rights.

And the first person who is known to have pulled over to use his cell phone was killed when his car was hit from the rear while he was stopped on the shoulder of the highway.

The only way for a ban like this to be effective and fair is to test each driver. There are some of us who can talk and drive at the same time. There are many more who can not drive no matter what.

"Safe Drivers" are the cause of more accidents than "distracted" drivers. The problem is they are not involved in half the accidents they caused. If we get rid of all the "Safe Drivers", Americas roads would be much more safer than if you banned cell phone use.

And what about the cops? Based on observation in NJ, 3/4 of the Police Officers are holding using their cell phone while driving even though it is banned. We don't need yet another ineffective law to increase local government coffers.

When a person caused an accident, does it really matter what they were doing? If a person is distracted using the phone, s/he will find something else to be distracted by. It won't matter what the distraction was.

And people like me can drive better "distracted" then most drivers. Either way, it is a small percentage of the driving public that can or can not drive distracted, so why should we pay the price for others?

And no it is not worth a human life. But we allow Police Chases to occur, so until we have a total ban on them, I will not support any other bn on driving (except driving under the influence and texting).

Gosh what a tempest in a teapot. All of those people who survived, what? 80 - 90 years without phones in cars? How did they ever do it? What a relentless hardship it must have been for them.

What most of your comments tell me is that you don't have the sense to even own a mobile phone let alone use it in a vehicle.

Tell me would you shoot a gun while talking on the phone? A car is a lethal 3000 lb weapon. If people would act in a responsible fashion this law wouldn't be necessary but you all seem to be overlooking the study that says overwhelmingly mobile phones cause accidents. And you all have the "I am an excellent driver and using a phone does not impair me" syndrome.

All the loser drivers must frequent a different board.

Texting while driving is stupid because it is dangerous. I see people having near misses EVERYDAY, something I didn't see 15 years ago before cell phones and texting were common place. And 15 yrs ago I did a lot more driving than I do today. 9 out of 10 times if I pass the person who is not driving straight, they have a cell phone in their hand. Scientists have proven that you can not look at the road and text (or dial a phone) at the same time; it's impossible. Texting and driving is dangerous, selfish and irresponsible - but then again, we live in a nation of self absorbed individuals who feel that they have a right to do whatever they want. If you want total freedom, go live on an island. Societies have rules for a reason. No text or call is more important than a human life.

They should ban smoking in automobiles, too - that's a big distraction to the driver when they light a cigarette.

Also sounds like you wouldn't be able to plug your ipod into your car stereo, if I am strictly interpreting what they are saying.

Hi Johnny, I agree with you , here in Washington State, the current law reads is that you can't talk on the cell phone while driving unless you have a hands free device whether its blue tooth or other hands free device. those that are hard of hearing that is another matter they are excused from that law. I drive and I am hard of hearing, but I don't talk on my cell while driving, I prefer to pull over and call or check (mapquest the information) to see where I am. Most cars like Onstar is equipped as a hands free device. I think the NTSB has gone to far and have not thought things through. Most of the accidents that we had so far this week have not involved cell phones rather it has involved drugs or drinking. You never hear anything about cell phone distraction. I don't think they will get very far, since most states have their own cell phone laws. and it is very hard to enforce as well.

Let us not forget the GPS and touch screens installed in many cars today too. How about lap tops? This list can go on and on and it all comes down to another reason for them to stop you for any reason and issue a ticket. Big brother cares about you and loves you, here is your 500 dollar ticket thank you.

b-895713: will we have to wait 15 MORE years until you stop driving altogether and we won't have to consider your unreasonable position on this matter?I think it's agreed by all that texting should be off limits. However plenty of people can engage in a conversation just fine, and if you can't that's your problem not ours.

Bit of information for all those that know they are able to talk on the phone while driving. Not everyone is you. If your the exception great. What about all the people that have a hard time walking and chewing gum at the same time. If they cannot use the phone, allowying you to is a violation of their rights. Ban them from everyone.

For those that do not understand why blue tooth is included. It is give room. Take into account that banning everthing will cause problems, so they recommend everthing be banned and then allow for a few items to be permitted as give.

Check the facts people. Accidents from drinking are on the decline. But the number of accidents is not going down as rapidly. Why, because someone cold sober is texting his girl to let her know they he is not coming home, he is going out with the boys. Some girl is texting her friend on the way home from work.

MJ-1451595: The fact we're all alive, well and breathing pretty much shoots holes in your position. We drove. We took a call when it was necessary. We didn't die!

well...

heres an example of where we could start cutting the national debt...get rid of the people in government coming up with these proposals...

they obviousley have TOO much time on their hands.

Well, shall we try a little common sense?

We have the most people, per one hundred, in jail than any other country on earth. Are we the world's

worst law breakers; or do we have too many laws?

Only thing to do is ban together as citizens and tell the overbearing goverment to kiss our behinds, we will not stand for it. Take your new law and stick it where the sun don't shine!

Since when is talking/texting on your cell phone while driving a freedom? It's more like the behavior demonstrated by so many these days that have little to no common sense. Experienced or inexperienced, driving with a cell phone stuck in your ear is distracted driving. Texting while driving is as bad as drunk driving. When you drive on public roads, you have no right to put my or my family's lives at risk. Driving without phones was never a problem, and shouldn't be a problem now.

Until you own the road, use of the phone while driving is not a right.

For whatever reason, phone use/texting and driving DO NOT MIX! I cannot count how many idiots I encounter EVERY DAY, who are driving like jack asses, paying no attention to the world around them, as they hurtle down the highway, a menace to me and everyone else who doesn't feel the need to feel soooo self important, that they must be connected to whoever for whatever reason. KNOCK IT OFF!

And of course the Gov't is going to start the ban with it's own people before it does it to the citizen's ... Right?

So for safety reasons, no communications devices while driving for Police, Fire, Ambulance -

RIGHT?

Please you know they won't do that - it's just one more thing they will reserve for themselves. Real meaning to the words Big Brother.

When the Public Servants are the Masters, the Citizens are Slaves.

Or - All the animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

I do not own or use a cell phone. So far as laws go, this one will be no worse than countless other ones. The problem is that the aggregate of them is oppressive. Like pills, no law is without side effects.

Wait.....

Who will develop the "magic bullet" to disable all electronics in your vehicle, except for GPS devices ?

OF COURSE......GE......GE......GE.

Another payback by this administration.

So when the late governor Timmy Kaine shut down toilets, yes we should consider stopping morons that can’t multitask on a phone and drive,,,,,,,,,,, but not the ones that can!!! DC DEMOCRAPS!!!!!

Oh, Scott! I have been beating this drum for years!

"Talking on cell phones while you are in the car is distracting."

"Oh, really? And how is that different from talking to a person physically IN the car?"

"Well, with a 'real" person ..."

"Yeh. With a real person in the car you are tempted to actually turn and LOOK at them as you talk. So let's ban passengers. No more car pooling! And no more transporting the kids in the car. Can't be tending to their fussing and fighting." (Now there really is a big cause of too many accidents!)

Where does common sense come into the equation? Nowhere, I guess. We lost that a long time ago.

"No call, no text, no update, is worth a human life," Deborah Hersman, chairwoman of the National Transportation Safety Board, said at a news conference in Washington.

Ban __________(fill in the blank), if it saves only one human life then it is worth it.

A human life, if the GDgovernment gets its way, won't be worth living.

Before these jackasses pass anymore laws about cell phones,why do the police not enforce one about people holding cell phone up to ear and talking on it while driving? I see people always talking on cell while driving and a police car going by. Work on the that one first, STOP telling us what to do.

David-3861032

It's easy to stop the cell use and texting while driving. The providers already have the capability since gps's are in all cell phones to stop transmissions while above a certain speed.

Note the article specifically talks about drivers. Your plan would disable the devices while riding shotgun, or taking the bus or the train. That would piss off more than a few commuters.

Talk about going overboard with scenarios, jeez. Seems logical to me that if you are controlling a 2000 pound vehicle then if you want to talk on the phone you should pull over.

Most people can't drive worth $h1t. No one drives as well when they're on the phone whether it be bluetooth or otherwise. (don't act like you're the ONE person who drives just as well because you're lying to yourself just like you think you're a good driver). Banning use of cellphones is a great idea because everything can wait. If it had been this way since the beginning no one would be batting an eyelash. And its not just your safety. Its the other folks that you're driving 50+ around that you're risking.

Mythbusters on the Discovery Channel did an episode where they drove a road course outlined with traffic cones with no distractions and counted the number knocked over going 35 miles an hour. They then drove the course while talking on a cell phone and counted the traffic cones knocked over. They then drove the course while texting and counted the cones knocked over. Last but not least they drove the course after blowing a .08 (legally intoxicated) and counted the cones knocked over. Reviewing the results they had knocked over as many cones talking on a cell phone as they did when legally intoxicated, and the number knocked over while texting was double the number knocked over while intoxicated. They made me a firm believer that drivers should be banned from using cell phones while driving. I don't want my loved ones killed by a distracted driver, nor do I want to pay higher insurance rates / medical care costs because of foolish drivers. Driving is not a constitutional right, it's a privilege!

This will probably work as well as enforcing the speed limit and we all know that doesn't work very well. Lets ban all beverages, food, any electronic device including the radio and see what happens. But there will still be collisions because some people still cannot drive or just don't think rules apply to them. Maybe we really need is to work on drivers education and needing more skills to get a licence.

Some people can't drive, even with both hands on the wheel, radio off, and staring straight ahead.

Our technology is developed for the wow factor and convenience. People will never give up talking on the phone whenever, even if it's illegal.

Oh, and here's another spin: Women can multi-task infinitely better than men. So only women get to talk on the phone while driving?
And what constitutes an emergency to a 17 year old girl is much different than to a 35 year old man. To a 17 year old girl, a broken fingernail is an emergency, neccesitating a phone call to make an appointment for repairs. And don't tell me it isn't so. I have five daughters.

The problem might be too many drivers are simply chit-chatin' unnecessary personal conversations and some might be work-related. But what about the food eatin', makeup touch ups and every type of distraction but simply driving to your distination safely and quickly? Humans are sick people. I am sorry but you can't do everything in your automobile you do in your home or workplace...just drive safely!!

I'm all for doing something to curtail distracted drivers and their cell phones. I too, have multiple close calls every single day by people who've got a phone plugged in their ear. No, this isn't your rights being taken away, the roads are maintained by the government so, that one doesn't fly with me. NTSBs job is to make recommendations, to make things safer so, they did their job but, they went a bit overboard.

The technology is already present to disable phones but, as pointed out that would cost cell phone companies money. My recommendation would be to program a phone so that it can't receive or send calls or text while going over 5 miles per hour unless a hands free device is being used. Like many have said, it'd be just like talking to someone in the car. As for GPS systems, most of those installed by the manufacturers, can't be programmed or changed while the vehicle is in motion. But, it is impossible to live in a plastic bubble when driving a 3-4,000 pound vehicle going 70 mph.

Yes, we have a lot of problems but, people are dying everyday because others are on the phone or texting and are distracted, as pointed out here. As for people putting on make-up, shaving, plucking eyebrows and all those other things that are distracting them, all I can say is they are the most ignorant, self-centered drivers on the road and if caught they should loose their license for about a month and see how good they have it.

All of you screaming that the government is going overboard, need to find another topic to complain about because this one is a no brainer if you ask me. Some of you can't seem to do anything but talk out your a$$es when you talk about no passengers, no kids in the car, no radios, no seat belts or things like that. This is a real issue, and it is a real problem.

Driving is a privilege, it isn't guaranteed under any law or the Constitution. If you want to drive with a phone plugged in your ear or want to text, please stay off the roads, I don't want myself, my family, my friends or anyone for that matter, to pay for your ignorance!

Most of Europe has had hands free laws for more than 10 years and they have been proven to save lives and with this topic, that's all that matters.

Just more of the control freak mind set of this administration. They will have us wearing a breathing moniter to make sure we remember to breath pretty soon. I'm really sick of the regulations for morons they keep shoving down our throats. These people can't do their jobs or pay thier taxes but they think they need to tell us when to get up and what to eat and what to do or not do all day until its the time they say we should go to bed. Sorry guys but I'm not wanting to be one of a herd of brain dead robot sheep.

Katie

maybe they should stop letting people over the age of 70 drive cars around...

Sat What??

It is the young folks that get the high insurance premiums because it is the young folks that get the most tickets and accidents.

The older generation are generally better drivers.

Some people think women drivers are bad, should we ban them too?

I have no problem driving with my bluetooth on! What are they going to do next...ban all talking in the car...ban other passengers in the car? This is stupid! Clearly they are going overboard and I would vote against anyone who supported such a ban! They need to do something productive like start arresting all those driving under the influence of prescription drugs that impair driving...ESPECIALLY those addicted to prescription drugs! What about those who are impaired with alcohol in their system BEFORE it's at the legal limit? It's an outrage that they would go after ME...a person who doesn't take drugs, doesn't drink alcohol, doesn't have any driving violations in 30 years of driving just because I use a bluetooth! Get real!!!

You know what's coming with this...this is more of Obozo trying to force all drivers out of their cars and onto public transportation, so that government can control the flow of people and where, how and when they move. That's been part of his agenda for a while. Obozo would like to outlaw cars completely and let government order people around according to their preset schedule to different areas, as they try to migrate (push) us into different ways of thinking. I even heard Gingrich talking to Beck about the migrating idea last week...just more control by government over the people.

Culling, as natural as a cell phone.

I was crossing the street yesterday and nearly got hit by a girl ran the red. She didn't even slow down, and yes, she was texting. At the minimum, texting and calling without a hands-free device should be illegal. It's dangerous and not worth the risks.

About a year ago a guy pulled out of a parking lot and turned left. Directly into the path of 2 lanes of one way traffic headed right at him.

I was in the right hand lane. I saw his cell phone fly through the air as he drove on the sidewalk to avoid a head on.

$15 trillion in debt...and growing by the day. And our government will soon be spending their time...no, make that "spending the taxpayers time"...debating the intricacies of how to make the use of electronic devices in automobiles illegal, which types are to be illegal, and how these illegal acts will be dealt with in the future.

Small wonder that we're $15 trillion in debt...and growing by the day.

We taxpayers should make a national agreement that the first member of the United States Senate or House who dares to speak on this asinine topic gets NO votes in his or her re-election campaign.

$15 trillion...and growing !

I would like to think that most of us use cell phones responsibly while driving. There is wide evidence that many of us do not. I fail to see why all should face serious restrictions because of the recklessness of a minority.

If you are seen or reported driving erratically, the officer should ask for for your D.L, registration AND cell phone. The same for all drivers involved in an accident. A quick check of last calls would tell the tale. Cheap electronic devices provided to law enforcement would easily detect a cell phone hidden by liars.

Treat careless cell phone drivers like drunk drivers. If the cell phone proves to be a factor in reckless(impaired) driving, the penalty should be just as harsh as drunk driving. The results are often the same.

I certainly agree with the reasoning, if it had been reasoned when the "cell phone" was first introduced. I hate the damn things. I use mine maybe a dozen times a year. Such a recommendation now though, would be as uproarious as prohibition was, maybe worse. The only thing such an idea from the federal government will bring now is; cash strapped states looking for revenue by hook or crook, will pass all sorts of selective laws, allowing drivers of working vehicles to buy permits to use these devices, maybe seniors of a certain age, disabled people etc., then fine the hell out of all others caught using them, or claiming to have caught them using them. I, and many others commenced screaming about their unsafe use while driving, and their annoying usage in public places, to public officials more than 18 years ago. We were basically told we were impeding a great new industry, and to just sit down and shut up.

John in San Diego-2810384 - I never said anything about people not being able to hold conversations while they're driving. In our busy lives driving kids around is an easy and great time to catch up on what they & their friends are doing & interested in. I don't know where you got that from. But if you need to dial your cell phone or you don't have a handless phone, then you might want to consider pulling over.

Traffic deaths are at an all-time low, while there are more drivers than ever, and more cell phones than ever.

So the govt is full of @!$%#ake, and this is just another intrusion, created for government revenue enhancement.

Distracted driving is already illegal in most if not all states. It matters not what the reason, if you can drive without distraction and talk on your phone, great. If you drive like an idiot, they can already ticket you. We cannot prevent accidents in a free society. These constant stupid over-reactions are beyond tiring.

If you really want to address avoidable death, deal with the 300,000 accidental deaths annually in hospitals. Yeah, 80x more death in 1 year than 8 years in Iraq.

The way people here act like not being able to use their phone in their car will kill them, but guess what it could kill someone else three times I've all most been hit in the cross walk and two of those times the person was guess what on their piss azz phones ... I have two cell phones and don't use them in my car it ain't going to kill me, I can pull over if I really need to use it and I won't kill someone over a call either ..

Why not just enforce the existing laws instead of creating more laws that won't be enforced? I live in a state (Maryland) that has a law that makes it a requirement that a "hands-free" device be used with a cell phone when the vehicle is in motion. Enforcement of this law is non-existent. I have witnessed people sitting at traffic control devices talking on their phones through cycles of the control devices. I have witnessed people driving past Law enforcement and wave at the officer while they continue to drive and have their phone up to their ear haveing a conversation. In Maryland the Law is a joke and is universally ignored by enforcement agencies. GO AFTER THOSE THAT BREAK THE LAW AND LEAVE THE REST OF US ALONE!!

Cynic-537088

Lovely. So if NTSB is taken seriously, parents can't get calls from kids stranded at school, people can't call for directions if lost, doctors can't receive emergency summons, you can't call 911 to report that car following you, etc. PC Schmucks.

Just do what they did during the 80's, 70's, 60's... people were still able to do all the above without cell phones.

Although I hate getting stuck behind some moron on a cell-phone that doesn't seem to notice ANYONE ELSE on the road, I won't support this when it doens't even allow hands-free use.

I think the blind cellphone drivers are really more a symptom of a new technology combined with a plain ol' bad driver than anything. Give it time, proper training, proper regulations and it will work out fine. Banning it outright is a bit too much.



Just do what they did during the 80's, 70's, 60's... people were still able to do all the above without cell phones.

Hahaha. See a working pay phone lately? And no, people couldn't report the car following them in the 80, 70s, and 60s without getting out of the car and putting themselves at risk. It was FAR more inefficient.

Ridiculous. Yeah, let's just get rid of computers too since the old way worked fine. Hell, let's forget technological progress all-together....

If they take all my communication devices away from me in my car, then all I have to communicate with is my "middle finger".

Which would be rightfully used whenever I pass a federal building or federal employee.

Britt Carter

Bit of information for all those that know they are able to talk on the phone while driving. Not everyone is you

That's like driving in the snow. I'm okay everyone else is an idiot.

Federal Government as "Big Brother" once again...next they'll make sneezing "illegal" while driving because it might cause an accident.

And a lot of accidents are reported as caused by a "medical incident" like a heart attack or stroke...so maybe it should also be against the law for those with heart conditions to drive cars. And those folks who have heart conditions and do drive cars...well they better not make a cellphone call if they think they just suffered a heart attack. That's a crime too !

Additionally....driving during a snowstorm should be made against the law too...lots of crashes when the snow is falling.

"Traffic deaths are at an all-time low, while there are more drivers than ever, and more cell phones than ever."

So, because not enough people died, we shouldn't make laws that might have prevented the deaths of those who did? That's the logic you're going with?

lets get rid of any passengers and kids they are just as destacting i agree no texting and driving hands free devices are alot safer in accidents its texting and driving not talking on hands free device that causes them talking on them is the same as talking to anyone else in the car

I am an automotive engineer and a civil libertarian but this is the correct decision from the NTSB. There have been numerous independent studies that have confimred that using a cell phone while driving is every bit as dangerous as driving while intoxicated, even when you use a hands free device such as a Bluetooth or even Ford's Sync system. The problem is not just holding the device while you talk, but because your brain is more involved with the conversation than what is happening around you.

People who are trying to text while behind the wheel are far more dangerous than drunk driving because of the manual task and trying to compose the message, so either pull over or give your device to a passenger while you concentrate on the task of driving. If you want to talk then pull over and chat but you do not have the right to put the lives of others at risk because you are attempting to multitask.

If you need any proof just watch the eepisode of Mythbusters for proof because their episode proved the previous studies by numerous groups. It is a serious fine in Germany to talk and drive on the Autobahn so there is precedence for the NTSB. There will be a problem enforcing it and that remains to be determined.

bs. the sync system does not. i have one and it is easier to use then applying the cruise control on your car

I just read a book about people fighting for state's rights - let's see - what was it about? Oh, yeah...the Civil War!! Seems some people wanted to own human beings and they called that state's rights, too.

It's the states' decision, but the Feds only have to make highway dollars contingent on having a cell-phone ban in place. They'll all fall in line just like they did with BAC-levels and open-container laws.

So, it's illegal to use a cell phone, but okay to tweeze your eyebrows? Or shave? Or eat? Or...

(You get it)

This is a state's rights issue.

Actually, I believe every state in the country receives boatloads of federal highway money, so I'm sorry, this is one thing that is most certainly NOT a "state's rights" issue.

I'd get behind something that disables phones in vehicles while in motion. If you've got half (or more) young drivers out there texting while they're driving, and beyond that, many of those doing it on phones without physical buttons, forcing them to look down at the phone repeatedly while creating the text, that's really a dangerous game that's being played with people's lives.

federal highway money,

And where does this money come from?

@Misty-739152

I just read a book about people fighting for state's rights - let's see - what was it about? Oh, yeah...the Civil War!! Seems some people wanted to own human beings and they called that state's rights, too.

Oh God, not this asinine argument. States rights are protected by the 10th Amendment, do you honestly believe we should abandon it because it was used to protect something that was wrong? The a-holes who hold anti-gay protests at soldiers funerals use the First Amendment to protect what they do. Should we therefore abandon the First Amendment also? Try using your brain BEFORE opening your mouth.

Hey Chad were in the Constitution does it give the Federal Government that power?

Cut to the chase ban driving... It's really the only responsible thing to do and if it saves even one life it's worth it. Anything less than banning driving is people who don't care about other people.

So why don't you ban talking to the person next to you in the car? Having a bluetooth and never touching the phone is almost the same thing. This is ridiculous. 10 years ago when I took my behind the wheel exam, my driver person was "amazed" that I could actually drive and (gasp) hold a legitimate conversation at the same time! Oh my, some people can actually do two things at the same time. Because some people ruin it for everyone, they shouldn't take away these liberties away from everyone.

That is the problem with "States Rights". It isn't just a problem with one or two States, it is a NATIONAL PROBLEM. And it doesn't just cover cars and light trucks. It also covers any powered vehicle including airplanes (or didn't you read about a certain actor that was in the news lately). PS: Do you really think otherwise?

All that federal highway money comes from anyone who buys gas, cigs, etc.

I refuse to talk on a cell phone while driving. I refuse to talk with anyone who is driving and using a cell phone. The first question I ask when receiving a cell call is "are you driving".

That being said. This is more stupid government control and I'm dead against such legislation. Our country is already a police state - and now they're going to legislate common sence? HELL NO!!!

This is one of many reasons RON PAUL has my vote in 2012. I'm a child of the '60's and remember well reading Orwell's 1984. It's rapidly comming to pass. You people had better WAKE UP!

And that's all I have to say about that.

RON PAUL 2012

Stupid, unenforceable and impossible. This is more a reflection on the fools recommending this than anything else. They should be prevented from handling sharp objects.

Perhaps it is time for a libertarian president.

I don't know why people are so distracted while talking on the phone while driving. I'm usually too busy eating breakfast, drinking coffee, shifting gears and rolling a joint to answer the damn thing!

Of course this safely recommendation does not apply to Wall Street Bankers, their already immune from prosecution for any and all illegal activities.

So, all these devices banned while the vehicle is in motion. Guess that means my passenger can't use their phone or kids in the back can't play games or watch TV. If it even does pass, I give it a week at the most before there are work-arounds.

@ KenD-3836641,

A couple of things you mentioned through me for a loop. Radios are still programmable and most cities have noise ordnances so boom boxes coming out your u-kn-w are kept at a level as to not invade the car next to you. That, I find annoying to the point I want to ram my car into the idiot that would never hear me coming.

Well I knew it was only a matter of time before this ridiculous texting fad led to a crackdown on all cell phone use while driving. If someone had told me ten years ago that someday 20% of all drivers would be doing something as moronic as texting while driving I would not have believed them, and I always believe in the potential stupidity of my fellow man. Of course the thing that really makes it so ridiculous is that there is no reason to text in the first place when you can just call the person by phone. Phone texting was invented as a way to get a quick message to someone when they were not in a place where they could talk or to send info that the person might need to reference again later, such as an address. It was not meant to take the place of a back a back and forth phone conversation. Unfortunately though using phone texting in place of talking became a fad with kids many years ago and then that fad eventually spread to adults who did it thinking it made them seem hip and up with the times. Lets face it, nobody wants to be the only person not keeping up with the latest fads theses day. But to do something behind the wheel that requires you to constantly be taking your eyes off the road for several seconds at a time is just stupid beyond belief, especially something that it not even necessary. Here’s a news flash people – EVERY TEXT YOU GET DOES NOT HAVE TO BE IMMIDIATELY ANSWERED. I usually only answer mine once or twice a day at best. If people want to talk to me immediately they know to use the phone which I will usually pick up right then and there. Of course this texting fad would be little more than an annoyance if people weren’t actually trying to do it while driving down the road. This is such a level of dangerousness beyond just talking on the phone that it’s not even funny. So now not only are people getting killed but these habitual texters may have taken away everyone else’s right to uses a cell phone responsibly while driving for good. Thanks a lot idiots!

EVERY TEXT YOU GET DOES NOT HAVE TO BE IMMIDIATELY ANSWERED.

I have to remind my girlfriend of that all the time. Expecting an immediate reply kind of defeats the whole purpose of texting, doesn't it?

If someone needs to talk to me now, they best call me. If they text, I will get around to replying at my own convenience.

As for in car use - I never text in the car, that's just retarded. I will either call if it's something hot... or just wait until I get a moment at a gas station or something. Not a big deal.

@cherokee-1166981

That is the problem with "States Rights". It isn't just a problem with one or two States, it is a NATIONAL PROBLEM.

So you're saying someone talking on the phone as they drive down a desolate back highway in South Dakota is the same "problem" as someone talking on the phone as they drive through rush hour traffic in San Diego? Since every state has a different set of potential circumstances each state should be allowed to address the problem however they see fit.Aside from that, the Federal Government was NEVER intended to deal with issues such as this, these types of "problems" were intended to ALWAYS be in the providence of the individual states. If the Federal Government was intended to control every aspect of our lives why did we start a republic and give individual states the right to make their own laws?

C'mon Pal. are you saying Sioux Falls does not have rush hour traffic? Just as federal law applies to the entire nation, state law applies to the entire state. Perhaps all laws should be enacted by individual villages and single stop-sign municipalities in the middle of nowhere. Free abortions in Mayberry. A death sentence for seeking an abortion in Dewberry (just 20 miles down the road). That may not bode well for an unfamiliar young lady from Mayberry that was impregnated by a filthy rapist while in Dewberry.

State's Rights was a critical part of the Constitution to get all 13 tiny colonies of limited population (with varied cultural leadership) to sign on. Our wise forefathers made provisions to the Constitution called amendments to change things as this great nation grew and matured. States Rights was never the foundation of our Constitution, but a necessary compromise at that particular time. State's Rights was also the guise for wealthy southern slave owners to start the horror of The American Civil War with the threat of secession.

Some politicians use this divisive issue today to further their own goals just as they did in President Lincoln's era. . I believe that most proud Indiana Hoosiers would rather see uniformity in the law while visiting Buckeye relatives in Ohio and vice versa. Who wants to go to jail for an offense that is deemed legal just across a State line?

If you're a homebody that doubts my words, just talk to an interstate truck driver. They are the most numerous victims of this injustice.

C'mon Pal. are you saying Sioux Falls does not have rush hour traffic?

No, that's not what I'm saying although comparing SF rush hour traffic to that of SD is apples to oranges, trust me, I've driven in both. What I'm saying is that the people in South Dakota might not want to enact a law that is only going to solve a minor problem where as that same issue in California would be much, much more serious.

States Rights was never the foundation of our Constitution, but a necessary compromise at that particular time.

A necessary compromise? Are you serious? Why did they decide to form the nation as a REPUBLIC if the rights of individual states was nothing more than a compromise? And who exactly were they "compromising" with? Themselves? Give me a break. They all wanted the ability to maintain their way of life and recognized that what was good for people in Mass was not necessarily good for people in Georgia.

State's Rights was also the guise for wealthy southern slave owners to start the horror of The American Civil War with the threat of secession.

I've addressed this ridiculous argument above. The First Amendment is used by all sorts of a-holes, let's just toss it aside also right?

I believe that most proud Indiana Hoosiers would rather see uniformity in the law while visiting Buckeye relatives in Ohio and vice versa. Who wants to go to jail for an offense that is deemed legal just across a State line?

And I'd like to not have to slow down from 65mph to 55mph when I cross over the border into Iowa. So does that mean people in Iowa should give up their right to set their own speed limit in order to placate me? What a ridiculous argument. Why the hell should anyone in Ohio give a rat's @ss what the people of Indiana want? If you're a guest in their state you should follow their rules. Would those same Hoosiers leave their shoes on when visiting their relatives in Ohio because that's what they do in their own home even if their Buckeye relatives asked them to take them off when they came in the house?

Just did a quick check of the statistics, 17,626 motor vehicle accidents last year in South Dakota. 138 were attributed to cell phone distractions. Do we really need a new law that is going to accomplish nothing more than the handing out of an additional ticket to 138 people? The money recovered from the tickets won't come close the the amount spent investigating whether or not 17 thousand + people happened to be using a cell phone when their accident occured.

Hey Wake UP most of the stupid decisions made in this country are at the voting booth.

Exactly. Where are the laws banning shaving, eating, reading, applying makeup, looking for something that dropped on the floor, talking to passengers (since that is no different than talking on the phone), or fiddling with radio controls (which isn't much different than text messaging)? I've seen more instances of people performing these tasks while straddling multiple lanes or driving over into the shoulder than anyone having a problem while using their phone.

This is nothing more than an attempt for government to take away your rights. Just be responsible and phone use isn't an issue. Instead, because a few people made the unwise decision to direct too much attention to their phones and not enough during a moment of driving that necessitated extra attention, we will pay the consequences. The laws to punish those who are distracted while driving already exist. That's why people who injure others with a vehicle pay a fine and go to prison, whether they were using a phone or performing some other distracting activity.

"US wants ban"??? I think the writer means Obama's Transportation Lieutenant wants such a ban ... yet another government agency trying to get into the citizen's personal space and effect every aspect of one's life. Nobody asked me or anyone I know if I (US) wanted this ban ....

Screw your rights, Mark. Other people have a right to drive, without the possibility of some idiot with a phone stuck in their ear and driving one handed, crashing into them and causing injuries or death. Going to prison or a fine, does not help the victim of a crash.

I do think having a bluetooth phone should be allowed. It is no more distracting, than talking to a passenger.

I agree. Too much government. Yesterday, I couldn't get home in time to get my child from school. If my friend hadn't picked up her cell phone and answered it my 7 year old would have come home to a locked and empty house. What constitutes an emergency? Fine ban texting, and internet if the car is in motion but sometimes we need to reach others in vehicles. Plus how can you enforce this anyway? Pull people over if you see their mouth moving?

Liberals never mind taking someone else's rights, as long as they get their way everything is fine.

I guess we'll blame Obama for everything. Then we'll get the good old boys back in there and bomb Iran and take all their oil and dare China and Russia to blink. Then pass Patriot 2 and start Armagrdon 1. But Obama will be better off anyway.

RalphH: Entirely wrong. Nobody has a right to drive. Some people have the privilege to drive, which is why driver's licenses exist. When people hurt others, then the state takes that privilege away. This system has worked for over half a century and it can continue to do so. Again, it doesn't matter if you're talking on the phone, eating, drinking coffee, or shaving. They're all distractions and there are laws to address what happens when people don't pay attention while driving.

Rach-

Just to point out, 20-30 years ago, your daughter would have gone home to a locked house, because people didn't really have cell phones. Looked like we all survived.

What adversely affects the FEW or beneficially affects the FEW can never adversely
affect the MANY!

I believe from what I digest from social information, observation and the current
paradigm the state of society is in; the above statement is reversed.

The MANY are not a food source/income to feed upon until depleted!

Nationalize the Oil companies, tighten up all credit, limit credit, reduce government, no
social benefits if you smoke, drink or use or abuse drugs and make every person
responsible for themselves and not the MANY!

Screw your rights, Mark. Other people have a right to drive, without the possibility of some idiot with a phone stuck in their ear and driving one handed, crashing into them and causing injuries or death. Going to prison or a fine, does not help the victim of a crash.

Yeah screw YOUR rights, only MINE are important. And if prison or a fine does not good then what good would another law be? They've tried this with texting in some states already and it just made things worse. Now people hold the phone in their lap where no one can see it and they have to take their eyes off the road completely. The same will happen with phone usage, people will just use the speaker phone and keep the phone where it can't be seen. The idea that laws provide a deterrent is ridiculous, all new laws would do is add another charge to the person at fault for an accident.

@ the comment above: you do not have the right to infringe on my rights.

If you read a book while driving, you are indeed an idiot. If you shave while driving, you are an idiot. If you put makeup on while driving, you are an idiot. Driving while DUI/DWI, and you are an idiot. Disregarding traffic laws, and you are an idiot. Engaged in doing anything that distracts you from committed driving, and you are an idiot. You need your license removed indefinitely and perhaps have your car impounded. No excuses. You are a danger to anyone else driving and certainly a danger to yourself.

You are using your car as a weapon. And the Laws need to be changed to reflect that.

We must also ban the use of road maps while in a vehicle. And, there must be some other stupid things we can ban. I know! Cars will be safe if we ban drivers. Sheesh! My tinfoil hat isn't working. It was an alien that said that. Must have been an alien responsible for that government report too.

Stexan, yeah this is right along the lines as the Patriot Act as far as citizens' rights violations eh? That was the last guy though if you remember. I don't think most people realize that neither side has our best interests and our rights in mind when they make laws.

The law would save lives. I'd hardly call that "useless."

While I agree that texting while driving is just dangerous , Does this also mean that emergency services can not use their radios, A ban on everything should be a ban on everything

Ryan Conduit: Yes, because bullsh!tting on the phone about unimportant crap is EXACTLY AS IMPORTANT as an ambulance rushing someone to the hospital. Or a fire truck on the way to your house burning down. Or a cop trying to report something/call in back-up.

Common sense before typing please.

Emergency services can get around usual traffic laws in cases of emergency. There's a reason that police cars, fire trucks, and ambulances are allowed to speed, even though it too is against the law.

Rest assured cops, fire fighters, etc will continue to use cell phones and laptops if this law were to actually be enacted. But when people start getting pulled over and heavily ticketed because they appear to be "talking" but they are the only one in the vehicle, this nonsense will come to a stop. People have limits, and this will surely be one of those infringements most sensible people will not tolerate.

The whole idea is goofy any way. So cops are actually going to be looking for people "talking in a vehicle"? ... seriously? Obviously LE can not rely on 911 calls anymore, so it will be up to LE to track down all of these "killer drivers". Good GAWD, Obamaville is getting more unbelievable and bizarre by the month.

Well here comes another law for me to break. I use to wear my seat belt all the time until they told me that I had too. I guess that is the free man in me that makes me want to rebel.

On Kjunme's headstone were his last words "I use to use my seat belt all the time until they told me that I had too"

Well, I can't object with that arguement, as it does help "thin the herd" of the stupid people!

Maybe we should just allow stupid people to not wear their selt belts (you know the "free man rebel" types), as it would help to control the population explosion and provide plenty of jobs to street scrapers, repair shops, hospitals etc.

kjunme: Well here comes another law for me to break. I use to wear my seat belt all the time until they told me that I had too. I guess that is the free man in me that makes me want to rebel.

Wow, can I worship you? You are so far beyond cool.

Wait a minute...No, you're an ass.

ummm, the drinking and driving argument in this case really isn't a good one since it's already illegal to drink and drive. Imagine if we made it legal again to to drink and drive???? We would probably have a HUGE increase in the number of people drinking and driving. Making something illegal does not stop everyone, but it does stop a large number of people. Hence, if we make texting and talking while driving illegal nationally, we might still have some folks doing it, but probably not as many as we see now.

LoL @ Leatherneck918: To true friend, yes there is a law but it doesn't stop retards who choose to drink and drive.

Jam- the point was that it didnt stop people from doing it. This law about no phone use while driving is kind of bunk, if you consider that it is no different than talking to a passenger in the car. It is also really hard to enforce, it would be a second class offense meaning you would have to be doing something else to get pulled over for it. so really its a lil ridiculous to do make this law.

"This law about no phone use while driving is kind of bunk, if you consider that it is no different than talking to a passenger in the car."

That's your conclusion, but the evidence doesn't support that conclusion.

DUI/DWI should be punished the same as pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger and is nothing more to the driver than Russian Roulette. And a fine or suspension of your license is not enough. Neither is a infantile judge. Murder or attempted murder charge should suffice ( Death by Vehicular Suicide can await those who do so).

cherokee-1166981, how about tired driving or under prescription meds or just being uncoordinated or suffering someother impairment that limits reaction time like being old!? If it were up to driving nazis like you we'd all be rolled in bubble wrap rocking in a corner somewhere for safety. I'd rather have a life thanks.

The laws in place now are not completely enforcible. What make you people think that anything is going to change just because the federal government says so.So let the government put cameras in every car to watch you if you are distracted.Think of all the jobs that might provide,Watching idiots drive.Im not really serious.The feds need to but out.

Some of you people might want to watch what you ask for. I was working in Virginia in I think it was 2004 and while I was there I heard on the radio that they were trying to pass a law that banned doing anything that distracted your driving. Some of the banned things were adjusting your radio,drinking or eating, talking to someone in the car or turning your head to view the scenery. In fact it pretty much stated that if and officer observed you driving and you where not looking forward with both hands on the steering wheel except when viewing the side mirrors or looking to make sure the road is clear to change lanes, etc. you could be cited.

Oh yea, What is with all the collapse post on here. Isn't this the USA home of Freedom of speach?

As for my opinion, I travel a lot as I work out of state and even though I don't talk on the phone when I around other cars I do in the middle of the night when I am on the highway and no one is around call my wife to talk to her to keep me awake. Of course I do use blue tooth. And to say that driving is not a right is telling Americans that they are limited to their success in life and must take what ever job is available walking or bike riding distance from their home. We cannot fit everybody in this country in the city that has taxis or buses.

nobody can think for themselves, so the government has to do it; that isn't a way to run a country.

Until it hits home. Think of the numerous families who lost loved ones because of some idiot's texting.

think of all of the people that have died because of poor choices and stupid decisions, that will inevitably continue to be made. The worst thing that we have done is put warning labels on things like lawn mowers; if people lost a few toes they may think twice about doing something else stupid, like texting and driving. Oh no, it is the lawn mower companies fault they got their toes chopped off, or it is the cell phone companies fault he was texting and driving, or the car companies fault that their car went into the wrong lane, or it is McDonald's fault I poured hot coffee in my lap. The gov can not change our diapers and powder our butt every time we get out of bed.

But they are trying.

Wake up. That is what the democrats and administration wants. You can't think, they can, and you have to be totally dependant on the federal government for everything. Wake up, people and smell the democrats, I mean stink!!!

Beam me up Scotty!

changing the law isn't going to change anything. people still drink and drive. if you see someone texting or otherwise driving while distracted, either pass them and get away from them, or pull over and let them get up the road.

Hey Jam, I think the are talking about drinking a coke or something like that while you are driving.

no it won't, people will still make poor choices and get into wrecks; you are too naivete and idyllic. Your right about driving being a privilege though, and you should be punished for your poor choices. The liberals want to raise gas prices so high that people will be forced to ride the bus; a better option is to take away licenses from people who make poor choices and cause wrecks, and let them ride the bus.

Wakeup: I think your sarcasm detector may be on the fritz....I think you and Chris are on the same side.

ummm, the drinking and driving argument in this case really isn't a good one since it's already illegal to drink and drive. Imagine if we made it legal again to to drink and drive???? We would probably have a HUGE increase in the number of people drinking and driving. Making something illegal does not stop everyone, but it does stop a large number of people. Hence, if we make texting and talking while driving illegal nationally, we might still have some folks doing it, but probably not as many as we see now.

HadEnough-3538363

you are right, I was on my cell phone and I clicked the wrong "reply" button; my bad.

Hand free doesn't lessen the distraction. Any distraction can cause an accident. I've scraped enough vehicular accident(?) victims up from the roadways in Georgia to be an expert in that task. 20+ years.

Eating and driving is, in fact illegal, in some States.

Killing cell phone usage is LEGAL in some places like PRISONS, movie theaters, and in some offices and in some shops. And there is a REASON why they do so.

I use my iPhone hooked up to my radio to listen to music in the car. This bill would make that illegal too.

Sorry, I hope they shoot this down. Giving the government total control of something and they will always mess things up more.

Well then Cherokee... you need to remove your radio too as that is a huge distraction! As for phones legally shut down in theaters, NOT SO, they ask you to turn them off or kill the ringtone, as for prisons, why do prisoners have cell phones? They shouldn't, it's illegal for a prisoner to have a cell phone, offices, again NOT SO!

The only place that my cell doesn't work is in a Las Vegas Hotel, any of the "good" hotels, it kills their phone charges...they block the signals legally or illegally.

But when your government decides what is good for you and what is NOT good for you, they are coming real close to a communist/Nazi rule. This is a country where we are SUPPOSED to have rights, that is rapidly changing due to the Senators/Congressmen telling us what is good and what is not good for us....McCarthy thought he was right too....

Yeah, because this whole problem is a problem of what devices you have access too...not! Its a self control problem. For those who talk on the phone while driving and let their driving suffer...it's their fault and those who can control ourselves and not let our "dangerous electronic devices" distract us too much should have to suffer this regulation that i'm sure they'll want to shove down our throats. Hands free talking doesn't help as much as many people think it does, btw. Its the mental distraction thats the problem. But again, banning those devices is one of the stupidest ideas I've ever heard. All we need to do is encourage not let yourself become too involved with your electronic devices while driving. NO MORE STUPID, UNENFORCABLE, and UNREALISTIC LAWS AND REGULATIONS! The government's attitude of telling me that "they know what's best for me" as opposed to me knowing whats best for me, has got to stop.

i meant to say........ the car manufactures now have to redesign, that cost will go to the consumer

bingo!

I lived in Germany for several years (many years ago). Hands down they were the most rude and impatient drivers I've ever been on the road with, but damn they were skilled drivers.

German drivers are put through drving test and checks close to that of obtaining a pilots license. Driving there requires pretty much the same attention and skills as flying an airplane, perhaps even more. As for those who don't obtain and maintain the proper attention and skills, well they aren't around for very long.

@ Mark. Lol yeah i agree, the rule and law roughtly translates to "drive to the right" and its nice to see that people actually abide by it.

@ Old-Pilot

yeah, also the fact that the drivers license in Germany costs $1500-2k USD.

When my friend received a call from her husband, she asked me to pick up the phone. Her husband was asking me where we were. Since I was a guest, I had hard time to explain it. I wanted to give the phone to my friend. She refused to take it. And we were not on the highway, we were somewhere in the woods where you could not see other cars for miles.

So yes, driving in Germany is a task all in itself. And they take it seriously. And cup holders in my Benz suck.

"Older" American cars don't have cupholders either.

Wow....do you take everything to extremes? I only read about cell phones.

Yeah, well the rest will be next. Once you let the gov into anything, they take it to the extreme; just wait until your taxes go up because you have high cholesterol.

We better ban all pretty women from going anywhere a man can see her while he is driving. How many of you turned your heads almost backwards a time or two to take a second look at a beautiful woman walking along side of the street and when you turned back around had to hit your brakes.( Whew close call ) Now be honest and don't lie.

better yet, make it so their insurance company doesn't have to pay if they were on the cell phone; that will get people's attention.

That would.

If you do so you passed the test but how about those thousands driving when they shouldn't be. And those cover the vast majority of drivers who complain about traffic laws.

Wake up,

So Person A talks on their cell phone and gets in an accident. Their insurance company doesn't have to pay under your new rules. So person B can't get their car fixed or pay their medical bills since Person A doesn't have enough to pay them out of pocket? Sounds like the non cell phone talker is getting screwed again.

Then REPORT them! Report any traffic offense made by anyone -- contact your DMV and your newspapers.

Who are you to say which of my phone calls are important? The Government certainly has no right to. Speaking on the phone in the car is no less distracting than speaking to a passenger. If you can't manage to drive safely, you don't deserve the privilege of a license. Simple.

Ed-1117913: If your phone call is so important, you should pull over and devote your entire attention to the call. Wouldn't want something like not wrecking to interfere with your oh-so-important reminder from Sweety to pick up bread and milk.

Whoa, whoa, lets ease up on the sensible arguments and ignore the fact that compared to someone's life Ed's calls are definitely not important!

No. You're missing my point. In my view, pulling over on a heavily trafficked road, especially an Interstate highway, is a dangeous proposition that puts you and other drivers at great risk. It is an unexpected event relative to everything else that happens on the road. There is a reason you're given a few hundred feet to merge into traffic from an on-ramp.

Speaking on my phone via a hands-free connection does not endanger myself, other drivers, or pedestrians. I am not risking anyone's life, including my own, to make or receive a phone call in the car. I am cognizant of the risks of driving distracted, have participated in advanced driver training, and have a clean record. In the humble opinion of my insurance provider: I'm good at driving a car. Whether anyone else thinks my personal business is or is not important is not the material issue, it is whether you possess the common sense to be a responsible driver and whether phone calls are really the issue at hand.

Ed-1117913: I am not risking anyone's life, including my own, to make or receive a phone call in the car.

Bullsh!t. You may think you're not, but you are. Everyone I know says "I can drive and cell at the same time". They can't. Some of them are so haphazard I've jumped down their throats, in front of their own children who were in the car that almost wrecked because Mommy thought she was all that.

Get over yourself. Any bit off attention that isn't aimed at driving is working against your driving. Common sense. Deal with it.

Any bit off attention that isn't aimed at driving is working against your driving.

We may have a difference of opinion, and we can debate the factors that go into this all day, but I can't tell you that you're wrong there.

I still think this potential legistlation is bunk. Though there should be penalties for accidents arising from distracted driving, whether it is via fines or denial of insurance claims. To specifically reference hands-free cell phone use, which is one of the least distracting things you could do, while ignoring the hundreds of other ridiculous activities people engage in behind the wheel unrelated to driving, is extremely short-sighted.

Ed,

What you are basically saying is that your right to field a phone call for whatever reason is more important than the safety of your other passengers or other drivers on the road. You are basing that on your self-assessment of your driving skills and the task. The stats for accidents caused by cell phone use says you are wrong. No call is worth a human life. Just pull over or get the call later...oh and your claims that pulling out of traffic is too difficult is ridiculous.

Ed-1117913: We do have a difference of opinion.

You want "penalties" in case of accidents. We already have those, and you see how well they work.

I want to prevent the accident. Problem solved before it exists.

Which makes more sense?

Eugene, but if we're going to ban talking on a cellphone even with a handsfree device, then how come talking to your passenger isn't considered distracting? If anything it could be more so as many will turn to face the person they are speaking to (including people in the backseat).

A little common sense is needed. I am 100% for banning cellphone use unless it is handsfree and that includes dialing. But I have to admit further than that it gets a little fuzzy in my mind as to how far we should take it.

Voter-in-LA: Drivers shouldn't be conversing with passengers. They shouldn't be on the phone, eating lunch, doing their make-up...They should be DRIVING. Of course you can't stop people yakking if they're side-by-side, but you can electronically disable a cell phone.

As Ron White said: You can't fix stupid. Stupid people are always going to be stupid, always going to think they can handle things average humans can't. And they're always going to be wrong. Unless we decide to start denying morons licenses, it makes sense to make driving less of a hazard for everyone they encounter.

No call is worth a human life. Just pull over or get the call later...oh and your claims that pulling out of traffic is too difficult is ridiculous.

It is the act of pulling IN to traffic, or even being present on the shoulder, that is dangerous. I never said "difficult"

What you are basically saying is that your right to field a phone call for whatever reason is more important than the safety of your other passengers or other drivers on the road. You are basing that on your self-assessment of your driving skills and the task. The stats for accidents caused by cell phone use says you are wrong.

Yes. I suppose that is exactly what I am saying. I would like to see whether those statistics specifically cite the use of an integrated hands-free device, or if they are for "cell phone use" generally whether that includes headsets, texting, holding the phone to your head, etc. There is more than one way to use a phone, and some of them are more practical than others in certain situations. I would never drive with my phone to my ear, it's distracting.

Drivers shouldn't be conversing with passengers.

Remind me never to take a car trip with you! Seriously, if you can't speak and drive effectively at the same time, you may want to reconsider your method of transportation.

Ed,

A couple of quick samples of the myriad of articles on the relative dangers of of hands free vs hand held cells use while driving:

Sunday, May 23, 2010

New Jersey statistics show that talking on a hands-free cell phone while driving can be just as dangerous as talking on a hand-held phone.

Between 2006 and 2008, people using hands-free phones were involved in 4,530 crashes, according to state Department of Transportation records that attribute cell phone use as a cause of the accidents. That number is only

18 percent lower than the 5,541 crashes during the same period involving people who were illegally using hand-held cell phones. Talking on a hand-held phone while driving has been illegal in New Jersey since 2004. Talking on a hands-free phone while driving is not illegal in New Jersey.

A motorist is also almost as likely to be injured or killed when involved in a crash while using a hands-free cell phone.

State Department of Transportation’s accident records for 2006-08, the latest available, show that crashes involving hands-free cell phones injured 1,834 people and killed 10 statewide. Crashes with people using hand-held phones injured 2,317 people and killed 16 in those three years....

pressofatlanticcity.com/news/top_three/article_dcab06b6-6614-11df-9e65-001cc4c03286.html

-or-

Driving while using a handsfree cellular device is not safer than using a hand held cell phone, as concluded by case-crossover studies. epidemiological, simulation, and meta-analysis. The increased "cognitive workload" involved in holding a conversation, not the use of hands, causes the increased risk. For example, a Carnegie Mellon University study found that merely listening to somebody speak on a phone caused a 37% drop in activity in the parietal lobe, where spatial tasks are managed.

The consistency of increased crash risk between hands-free and hand held cell phone use is at odds with legislation in many locations that prohibits hand held cell phone use but allows hands-free. Nevertheless, dialing a cell phone is more distracting than talking on a cell phone, and hands-free devices that offer voice-dialing may reduce or eliminate that increased risk.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety#Handsfree_device

-or-

Cell Phones and Driving

www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=stats%20on%20hands%20free%20cell%20phone%20use%20and%20driving&source=web&cd=12&ved=0CI4BEBYwCw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.house.leg.state.mn.us%2Fhrd%2Fpubs%2Fcellphdrvg.pdf&ei=pH7oTue_FY2ltweursDbCg&usg=AFQjCNFHl_HJgJkjUYvw4peu7V7mudgMJA&cad=rja

Eugene

but you can electronically disable a cell phone

That has been discussed a few times with a cellphone that is moving between towers at a predetermined pace being disabled from making calls. However, that in reality would also prevent passengers in cabs and limos (or the 1% in the back of their private cars) being able to make calls.

While something needs to be done, finding the right method to combat stupidity behind the wheel isn't that easy without affecting others.

Voter-in-LA:

Yes, sometimes the intelligent have to suffer with the idiots. And as I've said before, no phone call is that important. Stop the car/cab/limo and get out if you have to, eventually people will realize their calls AREN'T that important after all.

You're as stupid as them. Go ahead, give up your freedoms for the idiots that use them while driving.

couldn't agree with you more man

meaning raptor not the sheep he repied to

Go ahead, give up your freedoms for the idiots that use them while driving.

You mean the freedom to risk other people's lives?

Totally agree with you!!!

Raptor ... so can I assume that YOU don't use them while driving and so won't be giving up ANY liberty like those "other idiots"??

great!

Those apps have a fatal flaw. If he's a passenger they still disable the device. The better solution is to fine and jail people who cause accidents. It doesn't matter what the distraction is, there's no reason to discriminate against mobile phone users while people apply makeup, shave, read, smoke, and eat behind the wheel without consequence. Make it all illegal or none of it.

So even when I'm a passenger in a car, I wouldn't be able to use my phone?

I have been riding my motorcycle for years and I still smoke, talk on cell phone, drink a beer, and I have never had a problem. I have not worn a helmet in 20 years. My CHOICE!! Not anyone elses

I wouldn't put it past the idiots!

"The better solution is to fine and jail people who cause accidents."

The problem with that solution is that following the accident, it's too late for the person who was a victim.

The problem with that solution is that following the accident, it's too late for the person who was a victim.

All of the safety features and legistlation in the world can't eliminate the fact that accidents are just a part of driving cars. It's not idiot-proof and it's simply just not something we are designed to do. Learning how to drive safely and defensively will go a lot further than banning distracted driving.

Good idea. PS: Track his movements if necessary. You may be surprised. Maybe even be able to keep him and others alive.

Mark Johnson,

Those apps also have another fatal flaw. They can be turned off or disabled.

I agree with you. If sense WAS COMMON, perhaps not as many laws would have to be put into efffect.

Depending on where you live, there are laws that don't allow smoking in public buildings. Most of the counties in Texas are smoke free. It's generally not up to the Federal Government to enforce those types of laws. It's up to the state and local Governments to do that, which they have done.

Lol, those are grossly overestimated. A few studies have contradicted these findings. Google is a powerful tool.

Don't forget that they have no legal right to pass such a law and that the burden of enforcing it falls on the states as usual. It would be quite another thing if they simply said they discourage using electronic devices. If they get serious about it, they will find a way into bribing the states to pass such a law individually like they did with the drinking age.

How about a ban on alcohol in the veins of a driver of a car (any amount)? Since 1948, more than 1,600,000 people have been killed by drunken or otherwise impaired drivers and another 10,000,000 plus maimed for life and these people are talking about banning cell phones? Come on Washington - get real. Focus on some priorities for a change. They even want to take away our guns which have killed far fewer people than the drunk behind the wheel. I cannot believe this country. Where are the priorities?

@ShelRama, Who wants to take your guns away?

Are you aware that numerous studies have proven that the use of cell phones, either voice or texting, is as dangerous or even more dangerous than driving while intoxicated? The use of Bluetooth or Ford's Sync system doesn't significantly change the situation because your brain is more focused on the conversation because you are extremely insulated from the speed and danger of driving by modern cars.

If you don't want to read the research studies because of the big words you can view the proof in a episode of Mythbusters on Youtube because they came to the same conclusion that drunks and phone users are equally dangerous behind the wheel of a car.

If you want to chat or text then pull over and sext to uncle JimBob because I am sick and tired of having to take evasive action from morons who are chatting on their phones at 65mph.

If this total ban would have been in affect 17 months ago my daughter might still be with us. Generally I go along with the "you can't legislate away stupidity" crowd but in this case I hope they pass the legislation, may save lives. If it saves 1 life it's worth it.

I am very sorry for your loss, however, I do not feel this is a federal government issue.

Not directed at you red-830681, but I'd bet money each person who is for this out-right ban has been a distracted driver at some point in their life, whether they were rubbernecking (staring at an accident, a cop pulling someone over, or other distractions on the roadside) or eating, drinking, changing the radio, reading, etc. At what point do you draw the line? Drivers will find a way to take their mind off their long commutes.

I drive 2+ hours a day in stop-and-go traffic. Is it okay to use my phone in that kind of traffic? I mean, I'm traveling around 15 mph most of the time. If I am anything, it's a distracted phone talker, as I trail off the conversation when I need to pay attention to the road. I try to avoid texting, but I do it sometimes when I'm not in stop-and-go traffic and find it rather stupid/scary/dangerous.

Red, probably not. If the person wasn't distracted by whatever they were distracted by at the time, they would have found a new distraction: finding a new song, fishing the cigarette lighter off the floor, a shiny object on the side of the road.

Fact of the matter is we can 'ban' anything we want, the only thing that will actually SOLVE the problem is driverless cars. Until then, the next best thing is better training.

I will have to respectfully disagree as well. I can't imagine losing my kids to an irresponsible driver, but having a cell phone in the car is important too. I have used it to summon help when I've been stuck in the snow, to call the troopers' non-emergency number when there has been a wreck without injuries, to find out that my nephews were locked out their house after getting off the bus in the winter, to get a call from my daughter's school that she was sick and needed picked up when I was not home to get the call at my house, etc.

Every human life is very important, but I do not believe that saving one life is worth giving up many freedoms. I do not even know if it is worth it for 3,000 lives. But existing laws about texting and talking while operating a vehicle should continue to be enforced, as the state level. Making the same law at the federal level doesn't make it any more illegal, and making new laws does not mean people will obey them.

Brad, if it happened to you I'd bet you'd be agreeing with the ban too. That's the problem, people thinking only about themselves and not how their behavior affects everyone else. Spouting rhetoric to justify the loss of life is pretty lousy.

hoosier-3171992: In stop and go traffic, that is the TIME to be more vigil and NOT to be distracted!!!!

JLM-268998: If you were mired down in snow you were not moving but rather stopped. And it would not be a problem if you pulled over. My life, or someone else life, is MORE important than anyone's rights to drive while distracted by a cell phone. PS: I drive a motorcycle so that REQUIRES me to pull over to use my cell phone and never have I encountered any problems.

PS: I drive a motorcycle so that REQUIRES me to pull over to use my cell phone and never have I encountered any problems.

You've never seen Bluetooth integrated helmets, then? Surely, you have to be more vigilant on a bike due to having less visibility to other drivers, less protection, and more mechanical operation to be concerned with, but you can still talk and ride a bike at the same time, no?

In case you hadn't noticed the NTSB deems motorcycles unsafe and would like to ban them as well. I just love how these government enities try to dictate how "we the people" should live our lives, and try protect us from ourselves because we are not capable of making our own choices in life.

to ban all american drivers ????? wtf---i have to unamerican me to have a right :-(

Just when did the NTSB say they wanted to ban motorcycles?

No Apologiies,

Peoples right to Ride a motorcycle has nothing to do with endangering the lives of other people due to the distraction from people talking and texting while trying to drive. People have been seriously injured and died because of peoples inabilties to drive,text, or talk. It's time to get the phones off the road and drivers back in their cars.

JLM-268998 - if you're stuck in the snow, your vehicle isn't moving and you cell will work. Gee whiz people, pay attention to the details. The proposed device would prevent cell phone use in your car while your car is moving. Cop cars and other emergency vehicles wouldn't be affected, and if you aren't moving, you aren't either.

The bigger point is, why do we all feel this huge need to be electronically connected all the time? When you get in your vehicle, you are there for one thing - to drive. So hang up your danged phone and drive and if you need to talk on the phone so bad, pull over and deal with it. I have no sympathy for people who think they should be able to yack away on the phone while driving. I call my husband before I leave wherever I am to tell him on my way home or making a stop or ask him if he needs me to stop anywhere for him. If I stop somewhere, I check in with him again - not because I'm on a leash but just to take advantage of the time when I'm not driving, in case he needs something.

Hands-free, maybe, but what is this obsession with having a cell phone attached to your head all the time?????

My impression of the article was that cell phones would be disabled in vehicles (no specification about whether it was moving). I do agree that a person should pull over to text or dial a number, but you can't control when you receive a call.

Hands-free, maybe, but what is this obsession with having a cell phone attached to your head all the time?????

It depends on your situation. I live in rural Alaska, and my daily commute is 80 miles. My husband's daily commute is 5 miles. There isn't much in between, and we have to work and live somewhere, so that's how it works out. Mechanical troubles, road closures, and unforeseen events are a fact of life. Not daily, but certainly a few times a year. Back before cell phones, you pull over, put on your hazard lights, and someone would drive you to a gas station to make a pay phone call. That's not how it works any more. You use your cell phone, and most people expect you to have one, so they don't pull over for you unless you're stuck and they have a pickup truck with rope. If I have errands, I combine them with my trip to town, so if the school needs me or someone needs me to pick up something, they call - rather than spend an hour driving back to town after I get home. And I receive those calls mostly when I'm driving because I have a long commute. Well, there's *my* answer to your question.