nationwide ban on the use of cell phones and text messaging devices while driving.

[David Weaver]

Either way the magnets really mess with the cell phone reception.

I have a solution. Lead-wrapped "talking" phone with external antenna. Bingo, now you can multi-task and talk on the phone while doing a daily personal scan.

[Daniel Berlin]

Are these the new easy access MRIs we're talking about, or the old confining loud ones?

All it says is "Participants were scanned at 3 Tesla with a blood-oxygenation level dependent fMRI acquisition sequence while they maneuvered a virtual car in a driving simulator (see Fig. 1). "

(Figure 1 is, sadly, not a cool picture of a guy lying in an MRI machine playing video games with a cell phone taped to his head)


Actually, here are some more details i dug up:

"The imaging was carried out at the University of Pittsburgh
Magnetic Resonance Research Center on a 3-Tesla GE Signa
scanner using a GE quadrature birdcage head coil. For the
functional imaging a T2⁎-weighted single-shot spiral pulse
sequence was used with TR= 1000 ms, TE= 18 ms, and a flip
angle of 70°. Sixteen adjacent oblique-axial slices were
acquired in an interleaved sequence, with 5-mm slice thickness,
1-mm slice gap, and a 20 × 20 cm FOV. The spiral k-space
data was regridded to a 64 × 64 matrix, resulting in in-plane
resolution of 3.125 × 3.125 mm"

[Bryan Morgan]

I was talking to someone at work about something he wanted to be banned because they "might" cause harm (fireworks). I propose a solution. When the numbers of bad incidents increase past the incidents of nothing bad happening, then we can talk about "banning" things. For example, if 1,000,000 light off a firework (or yack on the phone, shoot a gun, etc etc) and only 1000 get hurt/cause damage, banning is off the table. When 500,001 people get hurt or cause damage maybe then we will discuss it. The masses should not be punished for the actions of the few. Freedom is too precious to be ruined by worry warts and chicken littles.

[ray hampton]

I was talking to someone at work about something he wanted to be banned because they "might" cause harm (fireworks). I propose a solution. When the numbers of bad incidents increase past the incidents of nothing bad happening, then we can talk about "banning" things. For example, if 1,000,000 light off a firework (or yack on the phone, shoot a gun, etc etc) and only 1000 get hurt/cause damage, banning is off the table. When 500,001 people get hurt or cause damage maybe then we will discuss it. The masses should not be punished for the actions of the few. Freedom is too precious to be ruined by worry warts and chicken littles.

This make so much sense that it will never work

[Greg Peterson]

Daniel - Science is no longer a legitimate explanation. People know what they know. Besides, scientists are only milking the grant gravy train.

Bryan - Your firework analogy leaves some factors off the table. In short, it is an over simplification. While you and Ray appear to be in agreement, I would argue that there is more at stake than just physical injury. Property damage would have to be a factor as well. Another factor, believe it or not, is that some folks are actually ambivalent or worse about fireworks. It would be one thing if everyone did their stuff on the 4th, but we are 'treated' to random explosions for weeks before and after the 4th. If I want to partake in fireworks, I'll go to a professionally staged display. Or if I feel the need to blow things up I'll go where it imposes the least on others.

Under your rule, over half the population would have to sustain an injury before fireworks could be banned. Interesting. How about just having a majority vote on the matter rather than having some arbitrary injury threshold. That seems to be a more sensible approach.

Let's put the cell phone ban to a simple majority vote. This thread is overwhelmingly in favor of banning them.

Adding undue risk to an already risky action might prove Darwin was right, but in my experience it ain't all that much fun. YMMV.

[John Coloccia]

Let's put the cell phone ban to a simple majority vote. This thread is overwhelmingly in favor of banning them.

I know I said I was bowing out, but I couldn't let this one go.

Tyranny of the majority is no better than tyranny of a ruling class. Just because it's popular doesn't mean it's right. There's good arguments on either side of the issue, but this just isn't one of them.

[Daniel Berlin]

I know I said I was bowing out, but I couldn't let this one go.

Tyranny of the majority is no better than tyranny of a ruling class. Just because it's popular doesn't mean it's right. There's good arguments on either side of the issue, but this just isn't one of them.

This is of course, why the US is not a strict democracy, but instead a republic

[Chuck Stone]

i just seen this morning on GA they were talking that congress wants to ban all types of cell phones including hands free devices
saying talking while driving can be just to distracting.

Somehow I doubt this. Perhaps they just need more money from the lobbyists,
so they're stirring the pot.
Congress couldn't pass such a bill and expect to get re-elected.

Cynical much?

BTW.. I didn't vote because the initial post says that the NTSB wasn't proposing
to eliminate hands free devices, but that isn't true. They are calling
for a ban on all cell phone devices not installed by the manufacturer.
(I'm not sure why a cell phone built into your radio is any different than
a Bluetooth that works through your radio, but there it is.)

I could never understand trying to use a cell phone while driving, but when I
went hands-free it was different. And I find it no different than having a
passenger talking or the radio going. When I need to focus, I can tell a passenger
or caller to wait. I can press a button and kill the radio.

And not answering a cell phone definitely means lost revenue. People want their
calls answered now, not later. "No answer" is no longer acceptable. It may not
be right, but this is what people have come to expect.. if you don't answer,
they'll move on to the next number

[ray hampton]

There is no need to ban the cell phone use while you are driving instead hire a driver or a passenger that can do all of the talking, the second method will be to invent a better mouse trap than the cell phone

[ray hampton]

I drive a Jeep Liberty [use ], one thing that are different on this truck is the radio controls are on the steering wheel, what happen to the phone that would dial a number when you spoke to it ?

[John Coloccia]

I drive a Jeep Liberty [use ], one thing that are different on this truck is the radio controls are on the steering wheel, what happen to the phone that would dial a number when you spoke to it ?

It's funny. Out Volvo has controls on the wheel too. I NEVER use them, not because I don't want to but simply because my hand just naturally reaches out for the radio dial. Controls on the wheel are so counter intuitive to me...why would I want to combine non-essential functions with the primary steering of the car? Planes often have controls on the yoke or stick, but that doesn't twirl around...hitting the Push-To-Talk or trim never puts my hands in a situation where an emergency maneuver would be awkward.

::::thread hijack:::::

Which brings up another issue, though somewhat off topic. Why is the steering wheel right smack dab in front of my face where it can cause massive injuries in an accident when we can have a side mounted knob/wheel/stick/whatever, with power assisted steering? That makes no sense to me at all. I know there will be problems because of glitches in the steering system but I would bet that injuries and deaths saved from not having a steering wheel, plus removing engineering compromises from needing a mechanical linkage, would more than make up for it.

::::::thread hijack done::::::

[ray hampton]

It's funny. Out Volvo has controls on the wheel too. I NEVER use them, not because I don't want to but simply because my hand just naturally reaches out for the radio dial. Controls on the wheel are so counter intuitive to me...why would I want to combine non-essential functions with the primary steering of the car? Planes often have controls on the yoke or stick, but that doesn't twirl around...hitting the Push-To-Talk or trim never puts my hands in a situation where an emergency maneuver would be awkward.

::::thread hijack:::::

Which brings up another issue, though somewhat off topic. Why is the steering wheel right smack dab in front of my face where it can cause massive injuries in an accident when we can have a side mounted knob/wheel/stick/whatever, with power assisted steering? That makes no sense to me at all. I know there will be problems because of glitches in the steering system but I would bet that injuries and deaths saved from not having a steering wheel, plus removing engineering compromises from needing a mechanical linkage, would more than make up for it.

::::::thread hijack done::::::

I total my f i l car when a stone wall got in my way, my hand were at the top of the wheel, my head smack my hand hard enough so two teeth came out, if my hand were not in my mouth , I would ate the steering wheel, the impact from my head on my hand broke the wheel

[Greg Peterson]

I know I said I was bowing out, but I couldn't let this one go.

Tyranny of the majority is no better than tyranny of a ruling class. Just because it's popular doesn't mean it's right. There's good arguments on either side of the issue, but this just isn't one of them.

What argument are you referring to. The portion of my post you quote presents no argument. It was clearly a statement.

[Craig Matheny]

Hands free is the only way to go Reality is do we want the government to control more of our life/ Personally I am in the opinion people need to be responsible for their actions, more people are killed by drunk drivers then from cell phones but yet you don't see a hole lot happening to the drunk drivers usually a ticket slap on the hands and a class. Now the whole texting and driving thing first who in their right mind thinks that is safe? Secondly until the police enforce the law there is not a lot that is going to happen. If you recall in California Schwarzenegger (sp?) past the hands free only law and who but his wife was caught not once but twice doing it, the penalty is to weak or the problem is not that big an issue. I live in So. Cal and every day I can count 10 - 15 people to and from work on phones that includes police (they have radios for police business).

[Kevin W Johnson]

This proposed law is totally un-enforceable. Heck, what will Legislators' Wives do when stopped for talking on a cell?

Nahh, it's called selective enforcement.