Off topic, on giving cellphones to kids

[Volznut]

Speaking of driving and cell phones.... A couple of years ago, my next door neighbor's daughter was texting and driving.  Drove into cove lake and drown.

I think it is worse then drunk driving.

It is.

[ReVOLver]

It is.

I think it's just as dangerous but I don't think it's worse than drunk driving because with texting you can put up the phone and be instantly "sober".

However teenagers don't understand the danger of it and it is definitely just as dangerous as drunk driving or maybe even more so when it is happening.

[10EC]

I think it's just as dangerous but I don't think it's worse than drunk driving because with texting you can put up the phone and be instantly "sober".

However teenagers don't understand the danger of it and it is definitely just as dangerous as drunk driving or maybe even more so when it is happening.

I guess I look at like.... If you are drunk driving, you are at least looking at the road.  You may see 6 lanes on a 2 lane road, but at least you are looking at the road.

[Volznut]

I think it's just as dangerous but I don't think it's worse than drunk driving because with texting you can put up the phone and be instantly "sober".

However teenagers don't understand the danger of it and it is definitely just as dangerous as drunk driving or maybe even more so when it is happening.

The thing with texting is that people are totally not looking at the road, while with drunk driving they're looking, but impaired.

[ReVOLver]

The thing with texting is that people are totally not looking at the road, while with drunk driving they're looking, but impaired.

I guess I look at like.... If you are drunk driving, you are at least looking at the road.  You may see 6 lanes on a 2 lane road, but at least you are looking at the road.

This is why I said "and it is definitely just as dangerous as drunk driving or maybe even more so when it is happening."

But, you can put down the phone and be instantly focused.

The term "worse" to me implies that it is a worse offense and I don't think it is. I think "as dangerous" or arguably "more dangerous" is the way I look at it.

All in all, semantics... they are both stupid.

[TheRealOrange]

I guess I look at like.... If you are drunk driving, you are at least looking at the road.  You may see 6 lanes on a 2 lane road, but at least you are looking at the road.

Not in my experience, which admittedly is pretty limited and based on watching others.  Drunk drivers do not think they are drunk, so they go about doing the same things they do while driving when they are not impaired.  That is, they eat snacks, drink beverages, light up their smokes, engage in conversations and goof off with their passengers, etc. Their attention is often (usually?) anywhere but on looking at the road.  Even drunk, many people probably could concentrate and get where they are going if they actually paid attenttion.  But, that's the problem, they are drunk and do not pay attention.  The bottom line is both being drunk and texting while driving are stupid and dangerous. 

[10EC]

This is why I said "and it is definitely just as dangerous as drunk driving or maybe even more so when it is happening."

But, you can put down the phone and be instantly focused.

The term "worse" to me implies that it is a worse offense and I don't think it is. I think "as dangerous" or arguably "more dangerous" is the way I look at it.

All in all, semantics... they are both stupid.

It is interesting that our Gov't has not tried to "require" some sort of jamming device be made mandatory for all cars.  Not that I want that, but it seems like something they woud do.

[ReVOLver]

It is interesting that our Gov't has not tried to "require" some sort of jamming device be made mandatory for all cars.  Not that I want that, but it seems like something they woud do.

I've wondered the same thing. I also wonder if they might try to force carriers to make it possible to jam data and text without jamming voice. Of course the problem with that is passengers. My wife would likely die if she couldn't facebook or text while I was driving. 

[midtnvol]

from a (former) teachers perspective. Don't do it. They are used for so much more than emergency communications and most of the uses are not good. I took one off a student one day and he complained using the excuse that he had a kid. I told him I had two and didn't need one. If they need to be reached at school you can call the office and if you can convince them it's an emergency then they will page them. Children don't need to call mommy and daddy every time someone looks at them hatefully. I know there are extreme instances (ex. Columbine) where it might be useful to have one but really how often is that.

[VoLynteer]

My oldest stepson had a cell phone at 11.  He could not take it to school and he could not text. He only had it because they would be home alone after school for 2 hours and his mother had no house phone.

[Stogie Vol]

I wish my 16 year old never got one. He still doesn't really need it and as someone mentioned earlier, many teens do not know how to communicate with them appropriately.  Things are "said" and shown that never would be in person. I'd prefer a gps device be inserted into him.

[BigOrange Maniac]

I've always assumed that my kids would not be allowed to have a cell phone. Now that they're five (going on six) and it won't be too long before it's time to make that decision, I find my opinion changing a bit. Their momma is a school teacher, so they will be in the same building with her until they move to high school. But of course there will be after-school stuff and hanging out with friends that will come before then. IMO, it's not a matter of whether they NEED one; there are lots of things we survived without because we didn't have a choice. In the unlikely event that a true emergency happen, I would rather my kids have a way to get in contact with their ol' man than me have to worry about where they are and if they're okay.

Their phones will not have texting or multimedia capabilities, though. That's where I'll firmly stand my ground.

[Volznut]

from a (former) teachers perspective. Don't do it. They are used for so much more than emergency communications and most of the uses are not good. I took one off a student one day and he complained using the excuse that he had a kid. I told him I had two and didn't need one. If they need to be reached at school you can call the office and if you can convince them it's an emergency then they will page them. Children don't need to call mommy and daddy every time someone looks at them hatefully. I know there are extreme instances (ex. Columbine) where it might be useful to have one but really how often is that.

They're not even allowed in their school

[Volznut]

My oldest stepson had a cell phone at 11.  He could not take it to school and he could not text. He only had it because they would be home alone after school for 2 hours and his mother had no house phone.

We don't have a house phone either. My wife and I just carry cells

[10EC]

Their phones will not have texting or multimedia capabilities, though. That's where I'll firmly stand my ground.