Legislating Common Sense?: New Ban Bill Introduced In NY

[Gan]

(CBS) NEW YORK First it was cell phones in cars, then trans fats. Now, a new plan is on the table to ban gadget use while crossing city streets.

We all seem to have one -- an iPod, a BlackBerry, a cell phone -- taking up more and more of our time, but can they make us too distracted to walk safely? Some people think so.

If you use them in the crosswalk, your favorite electronic devices could be in the crosshairs.

Legislation will be introduced in Albany on Wednesday to lay a $100 fine on pedestrians succumbing to what State Sen. Carl Kruger calls iPod oblivion.

"We're talking about people walking sort of tuned in and in the process of being tuned in, tuned out," Kruger said. "Tuned out to the world around them. They're walking into speeding cars. They're walking into buses. They're walking into one another and it's creating a number of fatalities that have been documented right here in the city."

Pedestrians have been hurt and killed in the manner Kruger describes. Not surprisingly, though, iPod users are less than thrilled with the senator's proposal.

more...
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_story_037234835.html
__________________________________________________

I could care less if IPod users are upset. What does bother me is that we are so pathetic as a society that we are having to start legislating common sense. (See also NJ ban on cell phone use while bicycling)

Personally, I'm of the opinion that we live in a dangerous world. So if someone isnt smart enough to use their head while moving through a dangerous environment, then they deserve whatever happens to them as a result of their negligence. (Darwinism at its finest)

[Landrion]

At what point should we start calling the government Mom?

[Skeeter]

Losing our civil liberties one at a time. I'm sure Backlash is stoked.

[Back]

Losing our civil liberties one at a time. I'm sure Backlash is stoked.

Not until you cross the street wearing an iPod.

[zhelas]

This reminds me of all the dumb warning labels on products.
http://www.dumb.com/productwarnings.htm With all the frivolous lawsuits, companies have to do this because folks don't have common sense.

[Latrinsorm]

What does bother me is that we are so pathetic as a society that we are having to start legislating common sense.Does heroin being illegal bother you? How about stricter speed limits on school grounds?
So if someone isnt smart enough to use their head while moving through a dangerous environment, then they deserve whatever happens to them as a result of their negligence.The point of government is to encourage us to do what we would agree to do if we were being rational at the time. This is necessary because humans aren't reason machines.

Your notion of just dessert is another topic entirely, but suffice it to say that it doesn't make for a very coherent system of ethics.

[CrystalTears]

Does heroin being illegal bother you? How about stricter speed limits on school grounds?The point of government is to encourage us to do what we would agree to do if we were being rational at the time. This is necessary because humans aren't reason machines.
Where do you come up with your comparisons? Using an iPod while you walk down the street is the same as using heroine?

Someone not paying attention while walking is just a person not paying attention, and I don't think it should matter what he was listening to or what he was doing. Having to put up bills for stupidity is just crazy talk.

[TheEschaton]

We actually studied a lawsuit earlier this year where a worker in a factory worker wasn't paying attention, stuck his hand in a machine when he wasn't supposed to (he placed something on the cast, then was supposed to press the button...wasn't paying attention, so he pressed the button and then put his hand in while the press was coming down, crushed his hand...).

He won his lawsuit by saying that the machine didn't have adequate safety features, even though he used it wrong.

The legal system doesn't really hold people personally responsible, at least not in the tort system. It's one of my major objections to it.

-TheE-

[Latrinsorm]

Using an iPod while you walk down the street is the same as using heroine?Common sense is common sense.

[Sean of the Thread]

Common sense is common sense.

What are you doing posting in a thread with common sense in the title.

[CrystalTears]

Common sense is common sense.
Ah okay, so listening to the radio/CD player is the same as using drugs. Gotcha.

Now listen to Sean2 and get out of the common sense thread, please. You're hurting my brain.

[Daniel]

This shit is stupid.

[Landrion]

Does heroin being illegal bother you? How about stricter speed limits on school grounds?.

No but straw mans are pretty damn bothersome.

[QUOTE=Latrinsorm;555803The point of government is to encourage us to do what we would agree to do if we were being rational at the time. This is necessary because humans aren't reason machines.[/QUOTE]

Lets have a look at what the bill's owner has to say.

"If you want to listen to your iPod, sit down and listen to it," Kruger declared. "You want to walk in the park, enjoy it. You want to jog around a jogging path, all the more power to you, but you should not be crossing streets and endangering yourself and the lives of others."

Interesting view eh? Kruger seems to think that it is not rational to cross the street without being able to hear. Does he intend to fine deaf people for crossing the street as well? We already have jaywalking laws. If you cross the street when you dont have the right to do so theres already a punishment. So Im not too fond of the idea of fining someone who is crossing the street otherwise legally because they happen to have a music player on. I dont consider that rational. I consider it a nuisance law to generate some revenue.

I found this vague BS particularly entertaining.
""We're talking about people walking sort of tuned in and in the process of being tuned in, tuned out," Kruger said. "Tuned out to the world around them. They're walking into speeding cars. They're walking into buses. They're walking into one another and it's creating a number of fatalities that have been documented right here in the city.""

A number of fatalities, really. What number? 6, 13, 700,000? In a population of 8.1 million people. Bah, I dont even know why Im arguing this.

[Bobmuhthol]

I'm so fucking sick of the generalization that media player is synonymous with iPod. iPod is neither the first nor the best device that could play music and videos, and people are fucking retarded. New York is pretty stupid, too.

The end.

[Drew2]

Does heroin being illegal bother you? How about stricter speed limits on school grounds?.

Why are your analogies always so shitty?

You drive slow where pedestrians are likely everywhere. Not because it's the law, because it's common sense. Speed limit laws aside, it IS against the law to hit someone with your fucking car. It's NOT against the law to run into someone on the street by accident, or step in front of a bus if you're not paying attention.

If people are getting hit by buses because they're listening to their iPod (fuck you, Bobmuthol), then it's called natural selection.


And only you could take a law regarding handheld devices and turn it into a heroin habit in 3 posts.

[zhelas]

"Recycled flush water unsafe for drinking." -- On a toilet at a public sports facility in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

[Alfster]

Does heroin being illegal bother you?

Yes, it does bother me. Makes it a tad bit tougher to find

But on topic, if you're dumb enough to walk INTO a speeding car then the world is better off with you dead.

[Parkbandit]

The legal system doesn't really hold people personally responsible, at least not in the tort system. It's one of my major objections to it.

-TheE-

I couldn't agree more.

[Parkbandit]

I'm so fucking sick of the generalization that media player is synonymous with iPod. iPod is neither the first nor the best device that could play music and videos, and people are fucking retarded. New York is pretty stupid, too.

The end.


I couldn't agree more.

WTF is up with the ipod and the software it comes with? It's impossible to fucking use if you have music in more than one location that you want to put on it. It should act like one of those stick memory cards.. enabling me to simply copy/paste shit to and from it.. instead of forcing me to use their cumbersome software.

I hate iPods. There are much better devices out there.

[Parkbandit]

Jesus.. I just agreed with Bob AND TheE in one 2 page topic.

I must be sicker than I first thought.

[Drew2]

I couldn't agree more.

WTF is up with the ipod and the software it comes with? It's impossible to fucking use if you have music in more than one location that you want to put on it. It should act like one of those stick memory cards.. enabling me to simply copy/paste shit to and from it.. instead of forcing me to use their cumbersome software.

I hate iPods. There are much better devices out there.

Uh, learn to use iTunes. Seriously. You're dumb.

And with the "copy and paste" method, you can't set up playlists. Which would suck.

[Skirmisher]

I view this bill much like i view outlawing alcohol.

It's penalizing the much larger majority for something that is only a problem of a minority.

Most people can walk and chew gum(speak on a cell phone) at the same time, if there are some who cannot yet insist on doing so perhaps they need to get hit by a bus a couple times to get the point across.

[Parkbandit]

Uh, learn to use iTunes. Seriously. You're dumb.

And with the "copy and paste" method, you can't set up playlists. Which would suck.

I can use iTunes.. but it's far from convenient. I don't need to set up playlists.. I just want my music to go from computer to iPod...

[Sean of the Thread]

I like my Sandisk Sansa. :)

[zhelas]

"For external use only!" -- On a curling iron.

I don't even want to know.

[Skirmisher]

I like my Sandisk Sansa. :)

Picked up one of those for my dad.

It seemed pretty nice to me except for the proprietary cable.

[zhelas]

"Do not drive with sunshield in place." -- On a cardboard sunshield that keeps the sun off the dashboard.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<And with the "copy and paste" method, you can't set up playlists. Which would suck.>>

Uh, learn to use non-Apple products. Seriously. You're dumb.

[xtc]

I can use iTunes.. but it's far from convenient. I don't need to set up playlists.. I just want my music to go from computer to iPod...

....and I agree with PB, this thread is getting creepy, quick lock the thread.

[Drew]

Does heroin being illegal bother you?


Yes. I'm all for freedom. The hardest freedom to give people is to make negative choices.

[Jazuela]

I don't think they should ban it. But I do think they should order life insurance companies and any government-funded health insurance not to pay on policies of people who get themselves killed or injured by being stupid.

As far as I'm concerned, use of "gadgets" in the middle of New York City streets is just another method of culling the herd and I have no problem with that at all, as long as insurance companies or the government aren't being forced to pick up the financial consequences of the "gadget-user's" lack of common sense.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<But I do think they should order life insurance companies and any government-funded health insurance not to pay on policies of people who get themselves killed or injured by being stupid.>>

What the fuck do you think insurance is for?

[ElanthianSiren]

Kruger seems to think that it is not rational to cross the street without being able to hear. Does he intend to fine deaf people for crossing the street as well? We already have jaywalking laws. If you cross the street when you dont have the right to do so theres already a punishment. So Im not too fond of the idea of fining someone who is crossing the street otherwise legally because they happen to have a music player on. I dont consider that rational. I consider it a nuisance law to generate some revenue.

Your conclusion to this paragraph was my first thought actually. It's ridiculous.

-M

[Latrinsorm]

Ah okay, so listening to the radio/CD player is the same as using drugs. Gotcha.Your refusal to understand is beyond my power to address. :sorry:
Does he intend to fine deaf people for crossing the street as well?My guess is he doesn't, but I suppose you'd have to ask him to be sure.
Why are your analogies always so shitty?Why don't you know what an analogy is?
It's NOT against the law to run into someone on the street by accidentOWL RLY?http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/manslaughter
Most people can walk and chew gum(speak on a cell phone) at the same timeSome really fascinating psychological research has been done into the actual effects cell phone use has on perception. I encourage you to look into it. :)
The hardest freedom to give people is to make negative choicesKant has some interesting things to say about people making choices such as suicide or heroin use; namely, that the only adequate way to describe human choices is as rational choices, all else being reflex or animal. Thus, a "choice" to use heroin or any other hugely self-destructive act isn't really a human choice, so we wouldn't have to worry about impinging on that "freedom". I don't think I buy it, but it is worth considering.

[TheEschaton]

The rationale is that deaf people would be alert to the street, whereas people with their music players on tend to fucking just be obliviously emo and walk in front of cars because "man, I just don't care!!!!!111one."

-TheE-

[Jazuela]

<<But I do think they should order life insurance companies and any government-funded health insurance not to pay on policies of people who get themselves killed or injured by being stupid.>>

What the fuck do you think insurance is for?

You do know that some car insurance policies won't pay if the driver wasn't wearing his seatbelt, right? And a few insurance companies are adding a clause stating they won't cover accidents caused by people who were using hand-held cell phones when the accident occured. Life insurance policies don't cover death as a result of suicide, and many (not sure about all) won't cover death as a result of drug overdose. It seems a reasonable expectation that insurance companies would want to protect themselves, and their investors and other policy holders (the ones who live a long long time without ever filing a claim, thereby paying the most money into their companies), by adding an "intentional stupidity clause" regarding getting hurt because you were too busy in your own myopic world of cell phones/iPODs/whatever else to notice that you are about to walk into a moving semi's path.

[Sean of the Thread]

I don't think they should ban it. But I do think they should order life insurance companies and any government-funded health insurance not to pay on policies of people who get themselves killed or injured by being stupid.

As far as I'm concerned, use of "gadgets" in the middle of New York City streets is just another method of culling the herd and I have no problem with that at all, as long as insurance companies or the government aren't being forced to pick up the financial consequences of the "gadget-user's" lack of common sense.

Holy shit you're stupid.

[Landrion]

The rationale is that deaf people would be alert to the street, whereas people with their music players on tend to fucking just be obliviously emo and walk in front of cars because "man, I just don't care!!!!!111one."

-TheE-

LOL

[Sean]

Since when is Albany in New York City?

[Bobmuhthol]

<<You do know that some car insurance policies won't pay if the driver wasn't wearing his seatbelt, right?>>

You know that it's breaking the law to not wear a seatbelt (where insurance companies enforce this), right?

<<And a few insurance companies are adding a clause stating they won't cover accidents caused by people who were using hand-held cell phones when the accident occured.>>

Copy and paste time.

You know that it's breaking the law to use a cell phone when driving (where insurance companies enforce this), right?

<<Life insurance policies don't cover death as a result of suicide>>

This makes sense, since it is the same thing as setting your insured house on fire intentionally. So far you have said nothing constructive. Let's move on.

<<and many (not sure about all) won't cover death as a result of drug overdose.>>

Hey, another scenario of insurance companies not funding illegal activity!! You're really on the ball!

<<It seems a reasonable expectation that insurance companies would want to protect themselves, and their investors and other policy holders (the ones who live a long long time without ever filing a claim, thereby paying the most money into their companies), by adding an "intentional stupidity clause" regarding getting hurt because you were too busy in your own myopic world of cell phones/iPODs/whatever else to notice that you are about to walk into a moving semi's path.>>

What a stupidly long, stupid sentence that makes absolutely no sense.

INTENTIONAL STUPIDITY LOL!

[Bobmuhthol]

Since when is Albany in New York City?

lmao

I'm upset that I missed that.

[Tolwynn]

If they're this serious about protecting folks, the fine for smoking in any situation (which carries a far higher fatality rate, albeit over time) must be enormous - but oh, wait... then they'd lose the hefty tax revenue on every pack sold. Never mind.

[Stanley Burrell]

This started like 4 months ago.

I think the pretentiousness pays off in the long run :shrug:

[Skirmisher]

Some really fascinating psychological research has been done into the actual effects cell phone use has on perception. I encourage you to look into it. :)

I've seen some, but it mostly dealt with reaction times while driving.

No argument it distracts attention, but walking is not the same as driving a one ton+ vehicle.

Just as newer drivers tend to suck at first when it comes to watching all sides of their vehicle but improve with time and practice, so should anyone who needs to walk with an ipod or a cell phone.

Just because there is that small percentage who exist in their own self absorbed world is no call to change the laws for all.

I think them getting hit because they walked into traffic would most likely cure them of many of those tendencies especially if they force the person to pay any deductibles from causing the accident and there already exist laws addressing that.

[Bartlett]

While enjoying the idiocy of some of our fellow posters, it seems people have missed that we listen to music -often pretty loudly- in our cars as we drive them. During this time, we are likely operating the radio. I suppose if it is too dangerous to listen to music while walking, all radios should be taken out of vehicles, too.

AND where was this law when everyone was walking around with giant headphones coming out of their walkman when that was the craze? This is just another example of a public figure trying to justify his existence by releasing whatever piece of crap he can conjure up.

[Sean of the Thread]

Love your signature.