Reading mode: Light Dark

Gas Prices

Go to last post
larrytusaz said:
Jolly Mon said:
As for cell phones unless your a doctor what can't wait until you
can pull over or get home!
Click to expand...
That's for ME to decide, NOT you.
Click to expand...
No, it's for me to decide if it affects MY safety.
larrytusaz said:
That's none of your business. What I do in my car is none of your
business. Even if this act supposedly affects your safety--which is
a specious argument at best--at some point it STILL isn't any of
your business.
Click to expand...
If it affects MY safety, it CERTAINLY is my business. If you're murdering someone in YOUR car, it's MY business because, according to your own laws, I am responsible to help a person in such a situation, and I'll be damned if your actions decrease my safety.
larrytusaz said:
The "safety" argument is just a vehicle for another Communist law.
Period. Otherwise, I think it's my business what you're doing in
the privacy of your own home--are you engaging in risky behavior
like using a wobbly old bar stool for changing that hard-to-reach
lightbulb, rather than using a government-approved step ladder? If
so, then you're increasing my medical insurance rates with that
risky behavior and I demand that the government make it their
business to spy on you in your house every minute of every day to
make sure you're not doing this--and fine you if you do, just as
they fine folks for using their phones in their vehicles.
Click to expand...
Communist? LMAO Now your comments are just plain silly, and your analogy is even more silly.

Oh, get another insurance company. You have that right. ;)
larrytusaz said:
If one applies, so does the other. If you're going to advocate
spying on me in the privacy of my car where it's not any of your
business, then you are advocating others spying on you in your
house where it's not anyone else's business either.
Click to expand...
It's the same as second hand smoke. Oh, you smoke? I'm not surprised.
larrytusaz said:
Maybe this spying on people in their cars nonsense works in
Europe--which lately looks more & more like the Soviet Union of
yore--but in MOST (not all, but most) of the US where things still
make sense, that nosiness won't fly around here. As far as I'm
concerned, our point of view is the more enlightened one.
Click to expand...
Your society is basically self-centred, and verging on anarchy. Just look at New Orleans. Anyway, anarchy eventually destroys a society. Sadly, that is exactly where you're headed.
larrytusaz said:
Can we stick to Nikons incidentally? I like Nikons, but I don't
like this liberal socialist garbage I'm hearing. Let's stay
on-topic.
Click to expand...
Sure, let's do what you want, and only what you want. Sheesh!
 
larrytusaz said:
larrytusaz said:
Your opinion is wrong. Is isn't different from mine, it's just
Click to expand...
WRONG period game set match.
Click to expand...
Hmm, you're beginning to sound like many former dictators who think they were right, and everyone else was wrong. Sad.
larrytusaz said:
Yes, now that I have spoken the truth to dispense your socialist
stuff, let's by all means do that.
Click to expand...
Read above point. You've done it again. You're right, and everyone else is wrong. Very sad.

Remember ... there is no truth, only interpretation. Let's see if you know who made that statement.
 
tdkd13 said:
Larry, you really can't be this obtuse, I mean you have a valid
argument in one respect, but to take it to the Nth degree is
ludicrous and makes you look silly. It was not necessary to add in
all the EVEN if it affects your safety, that is where you draw the
line. Your OWN words were you have to draw the line somewhere, yes,
we as a civilized world, have attemtped to draw the line in JUST
that place, when you are endangering others, your privacy ceases to
be YOURS. Its really quite simple. Personally I agree with you that
I doubt its any less safe talking on a phone and driving as it is
sipping a latte, adjusting your mirrors, changing the CD etc. But,
you really have gone off the deep end here. In your zeal to salvage
an argument that you cant win (because your wrong and a bigot) you
have made the whole point of view look silly.
You say your privacy is yours and no one should be able to complain
what you do in your home EVEN if it affects others. So, IF you are
molesting your children, and beating your wife, that is nobody
elses business, its your logic pal, now you have to live with it.
In order to be consistant, and not look any more foolish than you
already do, you now have no choice but to argue the pro-child
molester wife beater side of this. Good luck my friend.
Ted
Click to expand...
Well said. :)
 
larrytusaz said:
You failed to read my posts. I made it clear that there are no
absolutes--for example, I own a home & it's my property, but that
doesn't mean I can harbor terrorists or have slaves in my home and
it's OK because "it's my property and if I own it I can do WHATEVER
I want with it."

Or, since "it's my car and I do what I want with it, I can run
people over with it--after all, it's my car." Of course I'd never
advocate such a thing.

I clarified that in a previous post. There is a relative scale to
these things, they are not absolute.

And, just as it's not absolute that "if I own it, I can do WHATEVER
I want with it" it is also not absolute that "if your actions
affect others, they are subject to regulation." It is subject to
these same scale of relativity as "I can do what I want on my own
property" or whatever is subject to.

Like I told the previous posters, using the "what you do affects
me" routine you could argue that the law should mandate devices
which insure that we're not off looking at the girls on the side of
the road and thus crashing, or that radios should be required to be
connected to your speedometer to know when you're moving and thus
electronically disable the controls so you can't fiddle with your
car stereo while driving. Or, now we should pull over people for
eating in their car because it's a distraction that affects safety
for others.

Even if you can establish "it affects me and it's in a public
setting so it's my business", we have to at some point say--maybe
so, but that's taking it too far. Otherwise we're going to wake up
one day and not be so different from the way the former Soviet
Union was.

Again, to me, these things are not absolute. You have to draw the
line somewhere. To me, even if these measures did improve safety,
even if you could make the case just as you supposedly could with
cellular phones, that is a path I don't want to go down. I don't
want to make every single "your actions affect others" a premise to
stick my nose into someone else's business. It is NOT an absolute
thing, just like "I own it I can do what I please with" is also not
an absolute thing.

Where it concerns intoxicated drivers--and that have been proven to
kill and in numbers MUCH MUCH greater than cellular phones or
eating in the car do--I can see the point. Where it concerns how
free speech doesn't make it OK to yell fire in a crowded theatre, I
concede the point.

But you have to draw the line somewhere, at some point you've taken
it too far.

And again--they're targeting cell phone users here. And it's not
the first time a certain group gets singled out but not others. To
wit--why are potential flyers so up-in-arms about the possibility
of cell phone users being allowed to use their phones on the plane,
but no one DARES complain about how aggravating crying children are
on the plane--and how outrageous it is that parents won't control
their children and the crying out of respect for others' quiet.

But--let someone pick up a cellular phone, and now we're up in
arms. I say--if you're going to forbid cell phones on the planes
due to the noise, I see keep the kids off the plane too; make the
parents take planes designed only for them so the noise doesn't
bother others.

Also--how come everyone complains day & night about loud car
stereos, but they say nothing about those loud car mufflers which
make noise and there's not even any element of musical
entertainment involved? "Booming" car stereos get singled out, but
not the mufflers.

Meanwhile, around here, the media makes a big deal about our Air
Force Base and its noise--never mind the Air Force helps protect
the freedoms of those who live here. Meanwhile, joe bloe down the
road with loud barking dogs bothering the whole neighborhood--no
one says anything about that. You tell me that isn't a double
standard.

That's my point--(1) even if you can establish a link "your actions
affect me" it is not an absolute anymore than "I own it I can do
what I want with it" and (2)it's not right for cell phone users to
be singled out when there are plenty of other driver distractions
that are just as bad.

Oh, by the way--if I am beating my wife, is that no one else's
business? Actually I do feel that way--it is my wife's place to
complain about it, and if she does complain then by all means throw
the book at me. Otherwise if she chooses to keep on living with me
that way despite pleas from her friends to leave me, then at that
point it's no one's business--not even the neighbor's, or the
police's, I don't care what the law says.
Click to expand...
Blah, blah, blah. My goodness, are we making dissertations now?
 
peterbeyer58 said:
No, it's for me to decide if it affects MY safety.
Click to expand...
OK, well, I think it's unsafe for you to drive on the same road as me with your kids in the car (if you have any) since they probably distract you from your driving task. Are you going to leave your kids at home? No? Then stay out of my business too.
peterbeyer58 said:
If it affects MY safety, it CERTAINLY is my business.
Click to expand...
Spoken like a true Communist.
peterbeyer58 said:
It's the same as second hand smoke. Oh, you smoke? I'm not
surprised.
Click to expand...
If I did, what damn business is it of yours?
peterbeyer58 said:
Your society is basically self-centred, and verging on anarchy.
Click to expand...
I LIKE my society. If you don't like America, stay in Europe and go hump yourself.

---



LRH
http://www.pbase.com/larrytucaz
 
larrytusaz said:
tdkd13 said:
If you break a law, such as beating your wife, society should be allowed > to pass judgement on you, even if your wife doesn't want to.
Click to expand...
I respectfully, and I mean respectfully, disagree. The reason--I am
married, and no I DO NOT beat my wife obviously, and like most
persons I consider such an act totally wrong and amorale. I agree
with NO such actions for a man to do.

But, the thing is, I have talked to many a woman who was actually
quite level-headed for the most part, they admitted to past
relationships with men who beat them, and they actually didn't
consider it a big deal. They were not "rescued" from that situation
and made it clear--at that time back then & more recently talking
to me about it--that they were NOT interested in being "rescued,"
they knew full well the situation and wanted to remain.

Now, if you're thinking "that's not logical thinking on their
part," hey--I AGREE with you. I couldn't agree with you more. But,
deplorable a situation that might be, that is THEIR choice to
remain in it if they choose. I can assure you--these women made it
clear it was NOT a case, was NOT a case of them being "afraid" to
leave, or that their men threatened to kill them or whatever if
they reported the abuse. It was totally consensual.

And as sick as that arrangement might be, I say--if she wants to
remain in that situation, I am inteferring in affairs that don't
concern me if I were to report the man to the police against the
woman's wishes.
Click to expand...
My goodness, now he's gone mad, simply mad. Poor guy. I kind of feel for him, even though he's lost his mind.
 
larrytusaz said:
I wouldn't have replied to this post in this manner, if it were not
for the poster who stated his disdain for the persons using their
cellular phone.

That is the main thing I take issue with. Why is it just cellular
phone users who are singled out? Why does no one say the same
things about persons eating, fumbling in their glove box while
driving, or looking at a hot chick and almost rear-ending the
person in front of them, or applying makeup and becoming
distracted, or talking too much to the person riding with them in
the passenger's seat, or reading a map, or reading the
paper--whatever?

Instead, we pick on the cellular phone users exclusively. That is
the REAL problem I have with posts like these.

Again--it's the same way with other things. Why is it that our
local media makes a big deal about the Air Force Base noise--and
says nothing about the numerous times I've noticed persons with
barking dogs which wake up an entire neighborhood? At least the Air
Force Base serves a useful purpose--how necessary is a dog really?
(If you want to protect your property, get a burglar alarm.) How
come people complain about "booming" car stereos but not loud
muffers? Why do restaurant managers throw a hissy fit over someone
talking on their cell phone even if they're discreet doing it--but
turn a deaf ear towards someone's brat throwing a fit and totally
ruining the dining experience for everyone?

It is worth noting, too--here in the US, most states and places
which have attempted to pass laws regarding using the phone while
driving--those measures have failed. Maybe this is attributable to
a powerful cellular phone lobby, but I think it's just as much
because others here feel the same as me--taking the "if what you're
doing affects me it's my business and the law's business" argument
with this situation is taking it too far. Again, there aren't
absolutes with this; there is a point at which you take things too
far.

Like I said, you otherwise open the doors to all types of nosiness
that would go even beyond this--and that is something most of us
sensible Americans don't like the idea of.

And yes, I absolutely despise SUVs, and you could make the argument
that a person driving one does affect me since SUVs are shown to
pollute the air more than regular cars do, and since that excessive
fuel consumption adds to this current crises. But I STILL wouldn't
dare try & make it my business to have the government MAKE people
drive something else. I recognize that as going too far.
Click to expand...
Why not pull that stick out of your, well, you know ... and take a pill? You seem to have so much angst against so many things. Do you ever smile? Just asking.
 
peterbeyer58 said:
Hey, if you want to be stupid, that's your right ... I guess. Just
don't let it affect me by making the roads more dangerous. If so,
then we need laws against such activities.
Click to expand...
If I am proper, we already have "distracted driver" laws, so we don't need any targeting cell phone users in particular. Besides, unless or until I hit you and damage your vehicle, it isn't your business. This isn't "Minority Report."

---



LRH
http://www.pbase.com/larrytucaz
 
larrytusaz said:
rockemsockem said:
It just happens to be that when something acting squirrely while
making a left, that driver, MANY TIMES, are on the phone. Yeah, he
could be drinking coffee, reading a map (right...), or fiddling
with the radio, but in my experience, it's USUALLY, A DAMN IDIOT ON
THE PHONE!
Click to expand...
So, his being on the phone makes him an "idiot?" And what gives you
this right to make this judgment call about him?
Click to expand...
For crying out loud ... YOU ARE MAKING JUDGMENTS ABOUT EVERYONE HERE. STOP BEING A HYPOCRITE.

And, YES, he's an idiot because he simply doesn't care about anyone but himself.
larrytusaz said:
It isn't any of your business what he is doing in his vehicle if he
doesn't hit you. "Acting squirrely" isn't tantamount to hitting
you--although it's clearly undesirable--but until he DOES hit you
and cause damage to your property, what he is doing in his vehicle
isn't any of your freakin' business.

---



LRH
http://www.pbase.com/larrytucaz
Click to expand...
 
I am ready to let this die, I had my little post-exchanges with you and things were ending respectfully.

But now this "peter----" guy or whatever has decided to spout his insults to the equation, so I don't know when this will end.

---



LRH
http://www.pbase.com/larrytucaz
 
larrytusaz said:
Bigotry has nothing to do with it. When you're right, you're right.
In this case, I'm right--all the rest of you are wrong. That's not
arrogance or bigotry, that's confidence and self-assuredness--and I
have it in spades.
Click to expand...
Hmm, Hitler thought the same way, and so did Stalin, and ... I could go on and on, but you get my point ... I hope.

A person who claims to always be right is, in fact, wrong. No one can be right all the time, and if one thinks that, they have much to learn.
 
You can smear makeup all over your face in the middle of moving traffic, driving from the back seat with your legs straddled around the front, blinders on, Chicken McNuggets in your face--and it's OK. But pick up a phone, and suddenly you're the Anti-Christ.

---



LRH
http://www.pbase.com/larrytucaz
 
larrytusaz said:
Anyone who wants to make it their business what I'm doing in my car
is a Communist and un-American--and a disgrace to society. Even if
my behavior affects you, yes EVEN if it affects you. You have to
draw the line somewhere--this "what you do affects me too" can only
go so far, as I'm about to illustrate.
Click to expand...
People, people, people, it's clear that Leapin' Larry will never listen. I don't think he's ever listened to another person in his entire life. He will spout whatever scientific evidence he deems fit to support his argument, even though such scientific evidence doesn't exist. Saying it doesn't make it so.

Let's just forget about this unfortunate soul, and move on. He is who he is, and we can't change him. Fortunately, people like him exist because the rest of us can be thankful we're not like him.
 
larrytusaz said:
Anyone who wants to make it their business what I'm doing in my car
is a Communist and un-American--and a disgrace to society. Even if
my behavior affects you, yes EVEN if it affects you. You have to
draw the line somewhere--this "what you do affects me too" can only
go so far, as I'm about to illustrate.
Click to expand...
Oh, Larry ... we all love you. I love you. Bush loves you. If Hitler was alive, he'd truly love you. Now, big boy, give me a kiss. :)
 
RickG said:
Hello-

Say I have a cell phone open and to my ear but the power isn't on.
Would that be wrong?

Thanks
Click to expand...
As I have stated in previous post it has been proven that it is not the act of holding a cell phone to your ear that is distracting. It is the concentration that it takes to talk on a cell phone that is distracting. Most cell phone bans are useless because they allow the use of hands free phones. The most dangerous acts of using these phones still exist. You still need to dial the phone (unless you have a voice activated dial set up for the number you are calling), and you still need to devote attention to the conversation. As I have stated previously, other actions can be equally or more distracting. But in most cases you have more control of these actions. You can choose not to tune your radio when you are in a situation that demands concentration. You can choose not to take a sip of your scalding hot McDonalds coffee. You actually can cease to continue a conversation on the cell phone when you are in a demanding traffic situation. This however is usually not what people do. It is very hard if you are in the middle of a conference call to tell everyone involved to halt while you make your way through a school zone. This is why I prefer to pull off of the road if I am having an in depth conversation. As I stated before, I believe a law that cover distracted driving is more useful than a law banning cell phone usage.

As for your original question, I do not think you would be distracted by holding a phone to your ear. But if your driving in a state were cell phone usage is prohibited, then you would have a hard time convencing the police that you were not actually talking on the phone.

--

'We all have photographic memories. Some of us just don't have very big CF cards.'
 
road with a guy who's being DANGEROUS on the road? Have you seen somebody, who's going slow because he's on the phone? People swerving around him? Erratically making a left turn because he's navigating the wheel and the phone at the same time. DO YOU KNOW HOW DANGEROUS THAT IS TO ME IF I'M BEHIND HIM? You sir, are an IDIOT!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top