Ohio outlaws texting while driving

Ohio outlaws texting while driving

There are 40 comments on the The Columbus Dispatch story from Jun 2, 2012, titled Ohio outlaws texting while driving. In it, The Columbus Dispatch reports that:

Sen. Rob Portman, who is regarded as potential vice presidential mate for Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, met privately today in Tel Aviv with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak where they discussed Iran's efforts to build a nuclear bomb and the growing violence in Syria.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Columbus Dispatch.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
The Author

Columbus, OH

#33 Jun 4, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
It is annoying. Just today, I was waiting at a stop light. The light turned green, and the clown two cars in front of me was just looking down. I blew the air horn, and that got him going. When it went from two lanes to four, I ended up on the right of him at another stop light, and guess what he was doing?
On average, I would have to say I run into guys like that about three or four times a day. That's just too much. I actually had a guy almost slide under my trailer in a construction zone. These geniuses who make these temporary lanes do so giving a truck about two inches of room on each side of the lines. I heard a car horn blow, and it was the car behind the guy next to me who was heading underneath my trailer. And if I would have killed him, who do you think they would have tried to blame if no witnesses stopped?
And this is why I made the earlier comment that any accident that is questionable, law enforcement should have instant access to your cell phone account to see what you were doing on your phone at the time of the accident.
I have that happen all the time at stoplights, but it's not just people texting. When I'm at a red light, I'm looking around the intersection, then watching the light. People mess with their hair, fumble for something on the floor, anything except pay attention. A lot of drivers must have ADHD. I'm well into my 50s and if I'm the lead car at a light, when it turns green I'm always the first one to get going. Many times I'm across the intersection before anyone else has started moving. Amazing.

Agree about the instant access to cell phone if there's an accident.
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#34 Jun 4, 2012
Spookneverdies wrote:
<quoted text>
The small child darting out would not be a drivers fault , it would however then the herd of the slow and stupid.
And you would be satisfied if you were the one doing the thinning?
sidekick

Bowling Green, OH

#37 Jun 4, 2012
I'd imagine not very many text's are important enough to need to type while driving. I think it's just an addiction to fool with a phone all the time for many. People will assume it is a necessity that they have to get that message across come hell or high water. Too wrapped up into there social networking, that it's an emergency to text before they forget what they was going to "say".
Kinda like on here. You have some time to text and think about someone's reply, or a comeback, unlike you would directly calling them.
Bottom line (Bob's fav.), It's impossible to text and drive safe for what it's most likely worth.
Walt

West Union, OH

#38 Jun 4, 2012
Isn't there another similar law that bans Drinking & Driving???

How'd that work out ???
sidekick

Bowling Green, OH

#39 Jun 4, 2012
BTW: I mentioned an app that lets you speech to text (vise versa), and that is a distraction getting it to the step, in an instant of recieving a text, then switching to the app. I even have one of them suction cup iphone holders, and it's still a hassle messing with the itunes or taking calls over speakers (Just in ticking icons and settings). I'll confess to using my phone for my music every now and then, usually for trips or any freeway driving, but damn..I'm a idiot. That don't mean you'll have to be one too.
Shanikwah

West Chester, OH

#40 Jun 4, 2012
Sure there's a legal definition? And the prosecutor can subpoena the phone records to prove he/she was texting and driving at the time of infraction? That's like saying a cop can't pull you over for wreckless driving because there is no definition of wreckless. Har.
It makes people feel better if there are lots of laws, even redundant ones.
imagine2011

Brentwood, TN

#41 Jun 5, 2012
I hate extra laws and the gov't. telling us what to do. On the other hand, I think texting and driving is one of the most dangerous things to do and one of the main reasons for accidents that we have today, even way more than drunk driving.

Some dashboard car radios that include dvd players, the dvd players will not work when the car is running or in drive, some kind of safety thing is included.(radio installers can override that safety switch, if they want).

I wonder if they can put a safety switch inside phones, cars, both, something.

If we make laws against texting and driving, ppl will just hold the phones down lower and cont. to text, causing even more wrecks, b/c texting with phone in hand on steering wheel, you can at least keep a better look out on the road than with the phone in your lap and texting in secret.
The Author

Columbus, OH

#42 Jun 5, 2012
imagine2011 wrote:
I hate extra laws and the gov't. telling us what to do. On the other hand, I think texting and driving is one of the most dangerous things to do and one of the main reasons for accidents that we have today, even way more than drunk driving.
Some dashboard car radios that include dvd players, the dvd players will not work when the car is running or in drive, some kind of safety thing is included.(radio installers can override that safety switch, if they want).
I wonder if they can put a safety switch inside phones, cars, both, something.
If we make laws against texting and driving, ppl will just hold the phones down lower and cont. to text, causing even more wrecks, b/c texting with phone in hand on steering wheel, you can at least keep a better look out on the road than with the phone in your lap and texting in secret.
Hold it against the windshield, then you'll see the road even better.
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#43 Jun 5, 2012
Walt wrote:
Isn't there another similar law that bans Drinking & Driving???
How'd that work out ???
How did that work out? About ten times better than if it were legal to get drunk and drive.
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#44 Jun 5, 2012
imagine2011 wrote:
I hate extra laws and the gov't. telling us what to do. On the other hand, I think texting and driving is one of the most dangerous things to do and one of the main reasons for accidents that we have today, even way more than drunk driving.
Some dashboard car radios that include dvd players, the dvd players will not work when the car is running or in drive, some kind of safety thing is included.(radio installers can override that safety switch, if they want).
I wonder if they can put a safety switch inside phones, cars, both, something.
If we make laws against texting and driving, ppl will just hold the phones down lower and cont. to text, causing even more wrecks, b/c texting with phone in hand on steering wheel, you can at least keep a better look out on the road than with the phone in your lap and texting in secret.
I'm not crazy about new laws either. I've tolerated cell phone users for years, but always felt that contacting my representatives to do something about it would be taking freedom from somebody else. However, since it is now a law, I certainly won't oppose it. How do you oppose a law that stops stupidity?

I always tell my tenants that if they need something, texting is fine unless it's an emergency--then call. But when texting me while I'm at work, don't be disappointed if I don't respond right away.

Somebody already came up with an invention of some sort that stopped cell phone usage of any kind while in a vehicle. The problem was that it stops passengers from using cell phones and would disable a person trapped in their car in the event of an emergency. If somebody robs you, ties you up and throws you in the trunk of your car, a cell phone being useless could cost lives as well.

Sure, people will find a way around any law. But even if the law stops 20% of people, that's 20% less you have to worry about. And if somebody is going through the trouble of making it even more dangerous just to text, then that person has a severe problem from the get to. Most people don't want to live the rest of their lives knowing they foolishly killed a mother or a family just because they couldn't control their impulse of texting. Even worse if you end up in jail for twenty years for multiple offenses of vehicular homicide. All for what????? To text and drive???
Walt

United States

#45 Jun 5, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
How did that work out? About ten times better than if it were legal to get drunk and drive.
Really?? That's not quite good enough, is it? Took a count lately of how many alcohol related deaths there are per year?
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#46 Jun 5, 2012
Walt wrote:
<quoted text>Really?? That's not quite good enough, is it? Took a count lately of how many alcohol related deaths there are per year?
Did you take a look at how many auto deaths are related to texting while driving per year? Don't bother. I'll tell you: Over three thousand per year in the US alone not to mention all the non-life threatening accidents.

Whether you are talking about drunk driving, texting, driving while under the influence of drugs, or even a woman putting on makeup while driving, nobody can argue the FACT that people drive less safe than when they are not distracted.

As to your argument about laws totally stopping a certain action, why do we have laws against rape? Certainly, women get raped every day or evening. What about laws against pedophilia? It seems like a growing trend no matter how many laws we make. What about murder? How is that working out for us? Perhaps we should eliminate laws against murder since it never wiped out the problem.

Making the argument that having laws against texting because it will not eliminate all people who do text is a ridiculous argument right from the beginning. Of course this law will not stop all texting. All laws really do is minimize the infraction--not eliminate it. No law eliminates everything. But that doesn't mean we should have no law because of that.
imagine2011

Brentwood, TN

#47 Jun 5, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not crazy about new laws either. I've tolerated cell phone users for years, but always felt that contacting my representatives to do something about it would be taking freedom from somebody else. However, since it is now a law, I certainly won't oppose it. How do you oppose a law that stops stupidity?
I always tell my tenants that if they need something, texting is fine unless it's an emergency--then call. But when texting me while I'm at work, don't be disappointed if I don't respond right away.
Somebody already came up with an invention of some sort that stopped cell phone usage of any kind while in a vehicle. The problem was that it stops passengers from using cell phones and would disable a person trapped in their car in the event of an emergency. If somebody robs you, ties you up and throws you in the trunk of your car, a cell phone being useless could cost lives as well.
Sure, people will find a way around any law. But even if the law stops 20% of people, that's 20% less you have to worry about. And if somebody is going through the trouble of making it even more dangerous just to text, then that person has a severe problem from the get to. Most people don't want to live the rest of their lives knowing they foolishly killed a mother or a family just because they couldn't control their impulse of texting. Even worse if you end up in jail for twenty years for multiple offenses of vehicular homicide. All for what????? To text and drive???
I know this is a hard problem to fix with or without laws. I won't text and drive at all, but I do know ppl who do, who are addicted to texting, addicted to their phone period.

I hardly ever answer my phone while I'm driving until I at least stop at a light or get to my destination, if I don't have my bluetooth with me.

Makes my friends upset because I do this, but I just don't feel safe. I also feel like its just asking a policeman to pull you over, even though it still isn't against the law, I feel they are watching for people talking while driving. I will talk with my bluetooth though.

I have a feeling that a law will just cause some to try and hide their dangerous behavior of texting and driving. Wish there was a phone switch that could just turn off texting only and not phone calls while in a car.
Walt

West Union, OH

#48 Jun 6, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you take a look at how many auto deaths are related to texting while driving per year? Don't bother. I'll tell you: Over three thousand per year in the US alone not to mention all the non-life threatening accidents.
Whether you are talking about drunk driving, texting, driving while under the influence of drugs, or even a woman putting on makeup while driving, nobody can argue the FACT that people drive less safe than when they are not distracted.
As to your argument about laws totally stopping a certain action, why do we have laws against rape? Certainly, women get raped every day or evening. What about laws against pedophilia? It seems like a growing trend no matter how many laws we make. What about murder? How is that working out for us? Perhaps we should eliminate laws against murder since it never wiped out the problem.
Making the argument that having laws against texting because it will not eliminate all people who do text is a ridiculous argument right from the beginning. Of course this law will not stop all texting. All laws really do is minimize the infraction--not eliminate it. No law eliminates everything. But that doesn't mean we should have no law because of that.
That was a lot of typing for practically nothing...

The seat belt law perhaps... What brilliant lawmaker come up with this one?
Do we really need to FORCE people to wear their seat belts? I urge everyone to wear their belts but a lot of people just don't understand the need for them..or care...or want to use them.

So we get laws to force the public to do something they don't want.
All we need is MORE laws to complicate our already incompetent & dangerous justice system...
England 2012

Hull, UK

#49 Jun 6, 2012
Using a mobile phone whilst driving is already illegal in the UK, as for texting FFs, imagine a 70 yr old half blind granny doing it? and she kills your kids.of course it should be illegal.
England 2012

UK

#51 Jun 6, 2012
American gun laws mmm, keep em mate, I've seen what your gun laws mean, your high school shootings & other massacres, I've also seen the fine specimens of American manhood that frequent your gun shows etc, do you think a gun makes you a man?, lol,
Bollocks

UK

#53 Jun 6, 2012
Spookneverdies wrote:
<quoted text>Last time I checked you are a british subject not a citizen. Words on paper are meaningless without force to uphold them.
Subject is just a word, although I do agree it's a word I dont like, but you can have as many guns as you like, there's allways someone with a bigger gun & they will always be doing the bidding of the Rich, You only have the rights you can Afford. Mate. So ultimately gun or no gun your only as free as your wallet let's you be.
Bollocks

UK

#54 Jun 6, 2012
And what the hell do gun laws have to do with dangerous driving? That's a dumb analogy. As I said if some idiot killed your family whilst concentrating in their phone rather then the road, god forbid, you'll change your opinion,fact
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#56 Jun 6, 2012
Walt wrote:
<quoted text>That was a lot of typing for practically nothing...
The seat belt law perhaps... What brilliant lawmaker come up with this one?
Do we really need to FORCE people to wear their seat belts? I urge everyone to wear their belts but a lot of people just don't understand the need for them..or care...or want to use them.
So we get laws to force the public to do something they don't want.
All we need is MORE laws to complicate our already incompetent & dangerous justice system...
There are distinct differences between seat belt laws and texting laws. Texting laws protect other people.
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#57 Jun 6, 2012
Bollocks wrote:
<quoted text>
Subject is just a word, although I do agree it's a word I dont like, but you can have as many guns as you like, there's allways someone with a bigger gun & they will always be doing the bidding of the Rich, You only have the rights you can Afford. Mate. So ultimately gun or no gun your only as free as your wallet let's you be.
Are we talking about politics or personal safety? Ever since I started carrying a gun, I do feel safer for a number of reasons. All gun laws really do is disarm the people who need protection. Bad guys don't listen to laws. That's why they are the bad guys.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Franklin County Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News State to go after ex-judge Carole Squire for ye... (Aug '10) Apr 6 angrymum67 29
News Ohio metro, county jobless rates rise as holida... Mar 23 The Power Elite 4
News Accused murderer of Reagan Tokes repeatedly vio... Mar 20 Oliver 2018 2
News City, county weighing options for paying for ex... Mar '18 Reality Speaks 1
Celebrating Black Women/Ohio Senior Warden Mar '18 NewsOne 1
News Monitoring data ties accused to Tokes' murder Mar '18 Bump Thump Thump 2
News Jurors being chosen in trial over Ohio State st... Feb '18 a1 b2 c3 d4 e5 f6... 6