Forgot your password?

If I could (or had to) ban texting in one place ...

Displaying poll results.
I'd start with cars
  14938 votes / 57%
I'd start with restaurants
  561 votes / 2%
I'd start with classrooms
  1703 votes / 6%
I'd start with public sidewalks
  520 votes / 2%
I'd argue that in a sense "everywhere" is one place
  4517 votes / 17%
What's wrong with texting?
  3536 votes / 13%
25775 total votes.
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
  • Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
  • Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
  • This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

If I could (or had to) ban texting in one place ...

Comments Filter:
  • Why ban in cars? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by octothorpe99 (34654) on Friday March 15, 2013 @11:28AM (#43182781)

    Banning texting in cars makes no sense if the "texter" is not the "driver".

  • by chargersfan420 (1487195) on Friday March 15, 2013 @11:34AM (#43182855)
    Agreed. Here in Alberta, Canada, we just passed a "Distracted Driver" law last year. There are heavy fines for anyone caught using their cellphone (or other device) while behind the wheel, grooming, or eating anything that would be considered a "meal" and not a "snack".

    Since it is already banned in cars for drivers here, it led me to vote "What's wrong with texting?", because I think the other options are just silly attempts at oppression of freedom.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15, 2013 @11:44AM (#43182939)
    There is no situation where texting on your phone is acceptable when you are at the helm of a fast moving lethal weapon which requires 100% concentration to operate safely. Only when you are stationary in a safe location should you ever use your phone while driving.
  • by arth1 (260657) on Friday March 15, 2013 @11:55AM (#43183041) Homepage Journal

    Laws like these tend to be overly broad. What if someone uses the mobile phone for driving directions like if it was a dedicated GPS navigator?
    Or has it display alerts from the car through an OBD II bluetooth dongle?
    Or calls to report a crash on a no-stop highway?

    Without actually charging the person and getting a court order for SMS/MMS logs, I don't see how a cop can be burdened by determining what the actual use was.

    Stop people when they drive badly. That should be enough.

    As for TXTing, if I had to ban it in one situation, it would be whenever facing another human being.
    Oh, and in movie theatres. I want it to be dark, not cell phones blinking on and off all over the place.

    Restaurants? Ban children from restaurants intended for grown-ups first. If they don't have child seats and crayons for your spawn, it's a strong hint that noisy smelly tykes disrupting the dining for others isn't welcome.
    Someone might take a picture and MMS it to a Bad Parents wall, which would redeem texting in restaurants...

  • by DRMShill (1157993) on Friday March 15, 2013 @11:56AM (#43183051)

    What the Hell? How did they miss this option?

  • by DodgeRules (854165) on Friday March 15, 2013 @12:05PM (#43183163)

    I didn't vote to ban texting in cars because that statement is too broad. That unfortunately covers passengers and that is just idiotic. It also covers while the car is stopped and turned off. If I want to text someone while I am driving, I will hand my phone over to the passenger and have them do it for me, or wait until I am stopped at a red light or in a parking lot. (If the light changes before I am finished sending my text, I place the phone on the passenger seat until I am stopped again before finishing.) Now if the choice was to ban drivers from texting while the car is in motion, then I would choose that option.

  • by kwiqsilver (585008) on Friday March 15, 2013 @12:08PM (#43183189)

    I went with the (amazingly unpopular) choice of "public sidewalks" -- as people often put both themselves and others into harm's way, or just walk along slowly, completely oblivious to how they're affecting sidewalk traffic. If people pulled off to the side of the sidewalk to text, I wouldn't have a problem.

    So then what about tourists who walk down the sidewalk slowly, taking in the sights? Should we ban them, too? And if you're banning things that are inconsiderate, I'd like to humbly suggest one of the most inconsiderate acts possible: banning others from doing things the banner doesn't approve of.

  • by White Flame (1074973) on Friday March 15, 2013 @12:21PM (#43183317)

    We need to ban billboards. Their sole purpose is to take attention from drivers.

  • by arth1 (260657) on Friday March 15, 2013 @12:24PM (#43183351) Homepage Journal

    * from the bathroom

    What's wrong with that? It's one of the few situations where your hands are unoccupied and you have time to compose good texts while you take good dumps.

  • by Rob the Bold (788862) on Friday March 15, 2013 @01:09PM (#43183915)

    We need to ban billboards. Their sole purpose is to take attention from drivers.

    Starting with the goddamn video billboards.

  • by Mark Lewis (2834621) on Friday March 15, 2013 @01:20PM (#43184043)

    The US is supposed to be a free country and mostly we still are, but recently there's been a big trend towards overcriminalization [overcriminalized.com].

    No offense to the person who wrote the quiz, but the mind-set is troubling. Honestly, why would we think about banning texting anywhere? Making something illegal is a big deal, we are removing liberties from everybody.

    Unless you're committed enough to freedom that you're willing to oppose laws that ban things that you think are stupid, you're not committed enough to stay free. I think it's stupid to text while driving and I won't do it, but I oppose efforts to ban it legislatively.

    For those who take refuge behind the safety argument (because there is a valid argument to be made for safety): If you are also opposed to other things that research shows are similarly unsafe, like any form of talking while driving, congratulations, you really are in it for safety. Otherwise, you need to examine your motivations.

  • by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Friday March 15, 2013 @02:09PM (#43184641) Homepage Journal

    I went with the (amazingly unpopular) choice of "public sidewalks" -- as people often put both themselves and others into harm's way, or just walk along slowly, completely oblivious to how they're affecting sidewalk traffic. If people pulled off to the side of the sidewalk to text, I wouldn't have a problem.

    So then what about tourists who walk down the sidewalk slowly, taking in the sights? Should we ban them, too? And if you're banning things that are inconsiderate, I'd like to humbly suggest one of the most inconsiderate acts possible: banning others from doing things the banner doesn't approve of.

    The difference being, by "taking in the sights" the tourists are, obviously, paying attention to the world around them, unlike those with their heads stuffed in a cell phone screen.

  • by Pfhorrest (545131) on Friday March 15, 2013 @02:57PM (#43185149) Homepage Journal

    Then criminalize driving dangerously, regardless of the reason.

    In fact, decriminalize everything that simply might cause someone to drive dangerously, and just criminalize driving dangerously for any reason. Anyone who would get caught by the former but not the latter is by definition an innocent caught in an overly broad law; everyone actually endangering anyone would be caught by the latter.

  • Re:Restaurants (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CrimsonAvenger (580665) on Friday March 15, 2013 @03:52PM (#43185641)

    Not sure why restaurants is so low. It's relatively infuriating when you sit down at a restaurant and immediately everyone gets out their phones and looks down. Why the fuck am I eating "with" them if they're going to spend all their time talking to other people outside the restaurant?

    That doesn't sound like a problem with texting in restaurants so much as a problem with your choice of friends.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15, 2013 @05:01PM (#43186283)

    "What I really need is a decent totally hands-free text-to-speech and speech-to text texting system."

    Uhm, at that point aren't you just making a hands-free phone call? Like, seriously?

  • Movies theatres!! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SilverJets (131916) on Friday March 15, 2013 @07:17PM (#43187243) Homepage

    There should be a special place in hell for jackasses that text in dark movie theatres.

  • by jamesh (87723) on Friday March 15, 2013 @10:04PM (#43188157)

    Agreed. Here in Alberta, Canada, we just passed a "Distracted Driver" law last year. There are heavy fines for anyone caught using their cellphone (or other device) while behind the wheel, grooming, or eating anything that would be considered a "meal" and not a "snack".

    Since it is already banned in cars for drivers here, it led me to vote "What's wrong with texting?", because I think the other options are just silly attempts at oppression of freedom.

    I went with the (amazingly unpopular) choice of "public sidewalks" -- as people often put both themselves and others into harm's way, or just walk along slowly, completely oblivious to how they're affecting sidewalk traffic. If people pulled off to the side of the sidewalk to text, I wouldn't have a problem.

    As for all the other options, they're more a social issue than a safety issue (assuming it's not the driver of the car texting). Actually, I'd suggest that in the case of the car, having the non-drivers texting is probably safer than having them talking or listening to music.

    I'm not so bothered about people texting while walking. If you are texting while driving you can easily hurt a lot of other people. If you are texting while walking and step out in front of a moving car then the problem has probably taken care of itself. Someone might have some panel damage and will need to do a bit of scrubbing to get your brains off their windshield but at least some comfort can be taken in the fact that you won't do it again.

    As for the nuisance factor, people texting while walking doesn't contribute significantly to my annoyance while out for a walk in town.

  • by tompaulco (629533) on Saturday March 16, 2013 @09:42AM (#43190291) Homepage Journal

    What I really need is a decent totally hands-free text-to-speech and speech-to text texting system.

    That would be awesome. Then you could say something and it would translate it to text, send it to the other recipient in another car, where it would be translated from text to speech and they could hear it. Why, it would be just like making a phone call, except it would take 10 times longer to get information across and you would lose all sense of inflection and emotion.

  • by tompaulco (629533) on Saturday March 16, 2013 @09:47AM (#43190307) Homepage Journal
    This is why I applaud the stores that have put up signs saying "no cell phones". If you're on the phone, they won't serve you. Subway seems to have an unwritten exception to this, though. They have signs saying not to use your cell phone while being waited on, but they allow people to be on the phone to order sandwiches for other people. This really annoys me. I think I'm second in line, but it turns out I'm 10th in line behind a bunch of people who were too lazy to go to the store but still extremely particular about what they want on their sandwich.
  • by Acapulco (1289274) on Saturday March 16, 2013 @12:26PM (#43191189)

    I believe the fundamental difference (in this context) between a phone call and text messages is not the input medium (voice/text) but the fact that text messaging is asynchronous. So, what the GP is proposing is a system to communicate by sending/receiving "voice mails" of sorts (without hearing the annoying recorded greeting every time I would hope). One for each message. One of the things that make SMS messages so attractive is not the fact that it's a written message but the fact that I can send it and not worry about an immediate response. And as a receiver of a message, I know I can read it when I want, and even chose to avoid response.

    I'm not aware of a system that does what the GP says (althought it shouldn't be too hard) and it seems it could be a nice addition to text messages. I could send the spoken message, but don't need to hear the answer until later.

  • by dryeo (100693) on Sunday March 17, 2013 @04:02PM (#43198385)

    Why would you lie to someone that you want to talk to? If you need to lie, then you should probably stop communicating with the person entirely.

    When it's the wife asking if something makes her ass look big, it is sometimes a survival skill to lie.

  • by Macgrrl (762836) on Monday March 18, 2013 @08:24PM (#43209377)

    Well, she may ultimately stop asking you, but may start asking the new man in her life. I'm not going to speculate why there's a new man in her life and how you left - toes up or otherwise.

Life. Don't talk to me about life. - Marvin the Paranoid Anroid

 



Forgot your password?
Working...