Time for comprehensive common sense cell phone control legislation

a reply to: Krakatoa

You don't see a difference in a man who buys a gun with the explicit intent to kill someone and a person who didn't pay enough attention to the road while driving?

If your mother killed someone on accident while driving would you say she was an evil person who had murder in her heart.
Would you say that she is happy that she killed someone?

Your foolish op and masshootings are not equivalent not even close .
And I know that you know that.

By the way your talking to someone that will NEVER vote on ANY kind of gun ban.
I love the 2ed amendment and all my freedoms.

You are not looking as clever as you wanted to look and from my perspective your doing more harm to us 2ed amendment lovers with nonsense like this when what you should be doing is using your mind to help come up with a solution that respects the 2ed and helps save lives. Instead of trying to divide people even more.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Krakatoa

You don't see a difference in a man who buys a gun with the explicit intent to kill someone and a person who didn't pay enough attention to the road while driving?

If your mother killed someone on accident while driving would you say she was an evil person who had murder in her heart.
Would you say that she is happy that she killed someone?

Your foolish op and masshootings are not equivalent not even close .
And I know that you know that.

By the way your talking to someone that will NEVER vote on ANY kind of gun ban.
I love the 2ed amendment and all my freedoms.

You are not looking as clever as you wanted to look and from my perspective your doing more harm to us 2ed amendment lovers with nonsense like this when what you should be doing is using your mind to help come up with a solution that respects the 2ed and helps save lives. Instead of trying to divide people even more.

I beg to differ. How can it be an accident when someone WILLFULLY breaks the LAW, text while driving and treating it like a toy. Their willful actions cause the death of people. Any you seem to think it doens't matter at all.

Death is death....the person(s) are still dead. I'm sure their families do not care how. Why should YOU??

ETA: Oh, and who said anything about guns here?? Not me. I am dead serious about this topic. If you took the time to actually read the entire thread, you would see why it is so important to me.

May I suggest you do....unless you don't care about the death of children.

a reply to: Krakatoa

Oh, and who said anything about guns here?? Not me. I am dead serious about this topic. If you took the time to actually read the entire thread, you would see why it is so important to me.

And now your lying.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Krakatoa

Oh, and who said anything about guns here?? Not me. I am dead serious about this topic. If you took the time to actually read the entire thread, you would see why it is so important to me.

And now your lying.

Please, show me where, in this thread, I said anything about guns. Please, quote it directly. If you cannot, then I am not lying at all. But, you wont do that because you seem like you do not care that thousands of innocent people are killed every single year. Deaths that can easily be prevented. Deaths from people who care nothing for the laws. So, we need to do more than pass laws, we need action. Everyone is a potential killer that owns one of these danger devices.

Everyone must sacrifice....for the sake of the families that might not get home tonight.

Even if it saved one life, isn't it worth a small inconvenience. WHY does a common person NEED to have this ability while driving? Only military an police have that level of immediate need.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Krakatoa

When people start using cell phones as the physical murder weapon , by beating people to death with it. Then we can talk about banning them, deal?

Guns are used to kill people on purpose.
Cell phone death happens by accident.

See the difference?

So, according to your statement, would you really entertain the idea of banning...?

Baseball bats

Tire irons

Rocks

I think most of the new cars now make it so you can’t use your phone to text while driving, it blocks you. Newer cars will phase in to keep smartphones on the market.

There’s a few new features out there that are preventing it. Apple has do not disturb while driving. There’s other options parents can install on their kids phones

On another note, I’ve always wondered why bars have parking lots

a reply to: JustaBill

no.
I am also against banning guns.

This op is silly, so I was being silly too.

I see it everyday. 3 or 4 cars sounding horns after the traffic lights have gone green because someone is texting and not paying attention to what's going on.
People have to realise that when you are driving, you are in a death machine that can kill in an instant if you're not paying attention. I've never used my phone when I'm driving. I just ignore it or pull over. It's not that difficult.
Clutter on dashboards also gets on my nerves. So many distractions.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: JustaBill

no.
I am also against banning guns.

This op is silly, so I was being silly too.

Okay and thank you for replying.

originally posted by: neo96
After we get some common sense cell phone control,

We can get some common sense abortion control.

Since rights are subject to the whim of the mob.

Abortion is the number one killer of children in the US, by a long way.
I think you are right - common sense abortion control seems sensible - especially now that individual rights don't seem to matter anymore. Replaced by 'common sense'.

a reply to: vonclod


..and it isn't illegal to murder someone? Or take a firearm into a school? Or conceal that firearm unlawfully until you reach destination? Or conspire to do all the above?

All of those things are illegal already also.

Yet they do not prevent these crimes. They do prevent LAW ABIDING citizens (who do the follow the law, by the very nature of the definition) from being armed in a crucial few moments of time.

You have 2-3 minutes MAX to provide credible resistance to an active shooter - assuming you actually want to save lives/minimize casualties. Ideally, the shooter would be confronted immediately by armed staff. Additionally, the KILLER's lack of knowledge RE: who is armed/vs who is not (as opposed to KNOWING everyone is not armed) will provide VITAL moments of "analysis paralysis"

..and everyone needs to stop assuming these shooters are highly skilled operators/marksmen. They aren't. They are only as effective as they are because they are in a location that stands no chance of resisting their actions. ie: 1 person with a firearm can easily "heard" (or terrorize/victimize) dozens or even hundreds of disarmed lemmings. They have the initiative, entirely. No one is armed to conduct an IMMEDIATE counter-offensive. This maximizes death.

There are no valid arguments against teachers carrying firearms. Especially when many can and do carry outside of school.

My daughter carries to her college classes. No, it isn't permissible by school policy. However, gun free zones do not carry any force of law here so I proudly told her to ignore those mass-victim-zone signs and carry her firearm ON HER PERSON AT ALL TIMES. The worst they could do is kick her out of school. And since I already know her gun would never be used for anything other than life or death self-defense/defense of others, there's ZERO chance of that happening. And if god forbid an active shooter is on campus, I know she will have the tools and mindset to present a credible challenge.

Is that guaranteed to save her life? Of course not. Could something go wrong? Sure. But nothing is "more wrong" than a mass-victim zone where you're forced to cower in a corner and wait for the psychotic murderous KILLER to do with you as they please. I'd rather have the fighting chance myself. No other teacher should EVER have to shield a student with their own body.

Firearms + armor w/ teacher ID panels are absolutely essential. As are providing said teachers with county radios to DECONFLICT any potential confusion between staff and responding SRT/units

Realistically, soft body armor and PACA speed plate inserts could be purchased in bulk surplus for ALL STUDENTS and be kept locked in the back of the classroom in a biometric vault. Obviously this will cost significant amounts of money. Some programs may need to be cut, or additional funding acquired. But THAT combined with arming/armoring/identifying teachers *WILL* save lives. It will also result in a lot more shooters being put down before they were able to inflict their maximum destructive potential.

a reply to: JBurns

I have never argued that you should lose your guns, but there should be common sense rules(already there to some extent)..at one time that may of helped but at this point, I don't think it's possible. Maybe the rules already in place should be followed..not sure why they are not.
Our rules, for the most part have kept them out of unsuitable hands. The fact they are locked up makes theft less of an issue. Mental cases like Cruz are not going to get any due to proper vetting, not that he couldn't get one on the street but for the most part, they are no where near that available.
These arguments are no wins..you get hyperbole from either side..this OP/thread is a great example
And for the record I used to go to the range weekly, my dad was a gunsmith so I'm no stranger to firearms.
I think one major difference between the U.S. and other countries is the U.S. has a more cavalier attitude..dare I say, less respectful way of looking at it..compared to other countries that is.
It is what it is, they are deeply ingrained in your culture and that won't change for a large segment of the population.

Screw you guys, my phone is far more important than life itself , I need my phone, I have rights to own my phone and they shall not be infringed .

You can give up your phones but don't come crying to me when you get censored like they do in north Korea, they let the government take their phones and look what happened to them, you want to end up like that?

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: JBurns

I have never argued that you should lose your guns, but there should be common sense rules(already there to some extent)..at one time that may of helped but at this point, I don't think it's possible. Maybe the rules already in place should be followed..not sure why they are not.
Our rules, for the most part have kept them out of unsuitable hands. The fact they are locked up makes theft less of an issue. Mental cases like Cruz are not going to get any due to proper vetting, not that he couldn't get one on the street but for the most part, they are no where near that available.
These arguments are no wins..you get hyperbole from either side..this OP/thread is a great example

And for the record I used to go to the range weekly, my dad was a gunsmith so I'm no stranger to firearms.
I think one major difference between the U.S. and other countries is the U.S. has a more cavalier attitude..dare I say, less respectful way of looking at it..compared to other countries that is.
It is what it is, they are deeply ingrained in your culture and that won't change for a large segment of the population.

Please do not derail this thread with the unrelated topic of gun control. That is NOT what this thread is about....and I am serious about that.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Screw you guys, my phone is far more important than life itself , I need my phone, I have rights to own my phone and they shall not be infringed .

You can give up your phones but don't come crying to me when you get censored like they do in north Korea, they let the government take their phones and look what happened to them, you want to end up like that?

Please show me where in the United States Constitution you have a guaranteed right to a cellphone. Fact is, there is none. So the police could confiscate it at will, the government could pass a law making possession a felony offense with mandatory jail time. These are not protected from any sort of infringement....none. So, taking them away should be considered common sense. After all, we have over 3200 deaths due to these things on an annual basis. So, if peoples lives (especially children) are really important, you would voluntarily give up this device, and be grateful you have done your part to save a life from being snuffed out on the road for no other reason than your own selfless narcissism.

a reply to: Krakatoa

Just try and take my phone buddy, see what happens, my right to communicate trumps life itself ,also had their been phones when the constitution was written they certainly would have included, life liberty and communication.

a reply to: Krakatoa

Riiiiight
Funny you never advised the poster I replied to the same

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: Krakatoa

Riiiiight

Yes sir. That is correct. Please, show me anywhere in this thread I ever mentioned that other topic. I challenge you to do that....please.

I was almost KILLED by one of these narcissistic Jackhats.
I had to have 2 spinal fusions surgeries to correct the damage to my neck.
I lived 24x7 in a neck brace for 3 months.

Do not DARE tell me I am not telling it like it is in here.

Just. Don't.

a reply to: Krakatoa

Bovine scatology, it's like you're trolling your own thread.
Anyway..enjoy, truly sorry about your neck..I get it.

Here is how we solve all the problems in 1 go

Boost the driving age to 25, this gets rid of college drunks/parties teenage testers. (Which by your post are the number 1 offenders)

If you have a history of anxiety, ptsd, adhd, etc you must be fully cleared by a doctor and not just an eye doctor if you wear glasses.

I have anxiety, and I refuse to get my liscense because I could never forgive myself if I hurt someone. Half the time I can’t even be in a passenger seat without feeling like I am floating and ripped back down in a panic.

If you have problems with the law, even before 18 you must pass a full psych-eval..

To many believe that driving is a right and not a privilege.

Also, every 3-5 years you should be retested.. and be forced to take it.

These rules should apply for all cities with a population greater then 25,000 people.

Country people have more to lose by losing their drivers liscense, that they should remain the same at 18.

With that said... It’s not cell phones that need to be banned. It’s stupid people that need to grow the hell up and actually learn responsibly.

People have been avoiding taking responsibility for so long in their behaviors and wonder why we have all the problems we do today.

Story that happened to me.

“Your kid is causing trouble, jumping on cars, etc here is the video”
“You don’t know me, you racist”
“Where is your kid now?”
“I don’t know, I haven’t seen my 10yr old since last time I made Mac n cheese for dinner he such a good boy and ate it all up. He is bein watched by that 13 yr old down the street”
“So a 13 yr old is watching your 10 year old who is watching a 7yr old who is changing the neighbors 3 year old?”

Woman’s eyes glaze over and you know it’s coming.
“You racist &$;!&,?! get off my property, you don’t tell me how to raise my kids.”

7 years later that boys head was scraped off the highway. Because his parents didn’t raise him right, and he took his “right” to drive as a way for him to be an asshole on the road.

Again above is an actual real life situation, that woman has no right to be driving or having kids but sadly we can’t stop her. These kids are not like previous generations, they have no responsibility and then expect everything as soon as they are legal to drive with the parents permission.

The law has to change with the time. As long as you are deemed immature or any of the above listings you should not be allowed to drive.. period.