LaHood looking for ways to disable cell phones in cars

posted at 3:35 pm on November 16, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Remember, in Hopenchange, everything not expressly permitted will be outlawed.  In an attempt to deal with the supposed epidemic of distracted drivers, especially younger drivers, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced that the Obama administration will review its options in blocking cell phone use in cars:

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said using a cell phone while driving is so dangerous that devices may soon be installed in cars to forcibly stop drivers — and potentially anyone else in the vehicle — from using them.

“There’s a lot of technology out there now that can disable phones and we’re looking at that,” said LaHood on MSNBC. LaHood said the cellphone scramblers were one way, and also stressed the importance of “personal responsibility.”

The statement came during an appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, when Joe Scarborough argued that the government should mandate the installation of scrambler transmitters in new automobiles.  LaHood liked the idea:

“I think it will be done,” said LaHood. “I think the technology is there and I think you’re going to see the technology become adaptable in automobiles to disable these cell phones. We need to do a lot more if were going to save lives.”

This is frightfully dense in a number of different ways.  Let’s count them up, shall we?

  • The scrambler would also affect the passengers in a car that want to use their cell phones, which doesn’t do anything to improve public safety.
  • The presence of multitudinous scramblers in autos driving in a city will likely render cell phones used by pedestrians useless as well, or at least unreliable.
  • Adding more required equipment to cars will make them more expensive, and increase the value of used cars without the scramblers.
  • People who want to make calls from their cars or allow their passengers to do so will likely hold onto current vehicles longer.
  • Anything installed in a car can be disabled by the owner, especially electronics.  Will car owners have to submit to random searches, or annual verification of scrambler functionality?  Will the federal government make that yet another unfunded mandate on the states?
  • People also get distracted by eating, reading printed material, and applying make-up.  Shall we ban drive-through restaurants, newspapers, and cosmetics, too?

And those are just the practical considerations.  There are other problems with this as well, chief among them that it appears to be a solution in search of a problem.  A study released today by the CDC shows that auto-related deaths of younger drivers have dropped 36% annually over a five-year period despite increased use of cell phones:

Motor-vehicle accidents — not drugs or diseases — are the leading cause of death for teens in the United States. Despite alcohol, distraction and lack of experience contributing to the causes of accidents for this age group, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recently reported a decline in fatal crashes among these youngest drivers.

As part of its study, the CDC analyzed data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA’s) Fatality Analysis Report System (FARS). Reviewing fatality data for 2004 through 2008, the CDC examined reports of the 9,494 fatal crashes involving drivers aged 16 and 17 to identify trends as well as assess risks. Of the more than 11,000 people who died in these crashes, over 37 percent were drivers aged 16 or 17. The data also revealed that fatal traffic crashes had declined by about 36 percent annually for drivers in this age group.

The CDC thinks the decline in teen traffic statistics can be attributed to several factors. Decreases in travel as a result of rising gasoline prices and adverse economic conditions are two of those major factors. In troubled economic times, youth have limited funds and cut back on travel and/or delay obtaining their driver’s licenses.

While the information seems to indicate that teen drivers are now safer drivers, distracted and impaired driving still remain major safety and public health issues associated with our nation’s younger drivers. Newswires regularly report cases of teen crashes linked to texting or cell-phone use, and recent studies reveal that teens are texting more than ever before. With more than 20 percent of traffic accidents linked to distracted driving, youth texting habits are more concerning.

Allow me to translate that last paragraph.  Despite the anecdotal data we read in the newspapers, we are unable to draw a statistical relationship between cell phone use and vehicular deaths — but we want to talk about it anyway.

Finally, we come to the most basic point, which is that traffic law enforcement is not a federal jurisdiction.  It’s a state and local jurisdiction.   If a state wants to force car buyers to pay for scrambling equipment, they have the authority to do so, as Californians well know from their mandated smog-reduction equipment.  The Obama administration wants to dictate choices to Americans, and this is just another nanny-state intrusion into the lives of citizens from Washington.

Drivers have plenty of distractions.  Part of learning to drive responsibly is to manage them, and local and state law enforcement can handle the failures as they arise.   The only way to eliminate distracted driving is to eliminate driving itself.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Ladies and gentleman, your democrat party at war with individual liberty.

Inanemergencydial on November 16, 2010 at 3:37 PM

LaHood and Salazar the JACKWAGON TWINS. Thank you Colorado

400lb Gorilla on November 16, 2010 at 3:38 PM

Since the Gubmint owns Government Motors (GM), I’m surprised they aren’t putting a cell phone jammer into every new Chevy.

portlandon on November 16, 2010 at 3:38 PM

Sounds like something big sis’ would pull.

OmahaConservative on November 16, 2010 at 3:39 PM

What about 911 calls while driving?
Will we be able to pull over & make calls while parked, or will we have to get out of the car?
Will we ever be free from the Nanny State?

itsnotaboutme on November 16, 2010 at 3:39 PM

What we really need is dumb bureaucrat disablers that work outside of Washington.

I think I have it, cut off the money.

tarpon on November 16, 2010 at 3:39 PM

Leave us the hell alone. Sick freaks.

darwin on November 16, 2010 at 3:40 PM

I used to see drivers reading books while driving, lets ban books!

Skandia Recluse on November 16, 2010 at 3:40 PM

What is LaHood going to do about the guy that passed me on a city 4-lane, on the right, while reading…

ladyingray on November 16, 2010 at 3:40 PM

Whatever happened to that research into remotely killing an engine during high speed pursuits?? Have they given up on that idea??

Bob in VA on November 16, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Skandia Recluse on November 16, 2010 at 3:40 PM

That happened to me just last Friday. And what about all these women putting on make up?

ladyingray on November 16, 2010 at 3:41 PM

Since the Gubmint owns Government Motors (GM), I’m surprised they aren’t putting a cell phone jammer into every new Chevy.

portlandon on November 16, 2010 at 3:38 PM

They were going to do it with the Chevy Volt but they found that the additional current needed by the jammer reduced the car’s operating range to about eight miles.

Cicero43 on November 16, 2010 at 3:42 PM

I raised this issue on air with Rush Limbaugh a couple weeks ago – this is an outrage.

Are police going to have to give up their car radios?
What about delivery vehicles?

This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard our government getting in to.

It is idiotic.

jake-the-goose on November 16, 2010 at 3:42 PM

Women putting on masscara while driving is dangerous. Mr. LaHood, please find a way to disable their hands when driving.

darwin on November 16, 2010 at 3:42 PM

That is it Dems. Make the young adults who vote for you, hate you when you take their cell phones with texting away while they drive!

upinak on November 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM

What about eating and smoking?

OmahaConservative on November 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM

If you like cell phone bans in cars, vote Democrat.

WashJeff on November 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM

Another problem would be emergency situations where for some reason you couldn’t leave your car.

clearbluesky on November 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM

Hoodwinked

Schadenfreude on November 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM

Considering DUI kills and costs a heck of a lot more than cell phone talkers, I say they put breathalyzer ignitions in cars.

I mean, if the government is going to go the ridiculous route of trying to manage how people can drive, I think the breathalyzer ignition is a hell of a lot more bang for the buck than disabling cell phones in cars.

You know, like when someone being trapped in a car and have to call for help or something, they obviously got what they had coming.

Whereas a drunk unable to start their car would be a tragic mistake. The Kennedy clan would be stranded in bar parking lots across the country.

ButterflyDragon on November 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM

It’s only a matter of time and you won’t be aloud to talk to others in the car because it is a distraction.

jeridhill on November 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM

What about eating and smoking?

OmahaConservative on November 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM

How about blinking? Disable the eyelids of people while driving.

darwin on November 16, 2010 at 3:44 PM

THis measure wouldn’t be for citizen safety, this is simply a ploy to isolate motorists and ensure control by the government.

Welcome to 1984.

Inanemergencydial on November 16, 2010 at 3:44 PM

I wonder how many waivers will be handed out on this one?

jake-the-goose on November 16, 2010 at 3:44 PM

What about eating and smoking?

OmahaConservative on November 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM

You forgot BIG slurpee’s while DRIVING!

upinak on November 16, 2010 at 3:44 PM

Considering DUI kills and costs a heck of a lot more than cell phone talkers, I say they put breathalyzer ignitions in cars.

They actually have that for people who’ve been convicted of DUI.

clearbluesky on November 16, 2010 at 3:44 PM

What if you need to report an emergency?

Kini on November 16, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Oh, I’m sure there’s a causal relationship between cell phone use and vehicular deaths.

It’s why I don’t use my cellphone while I’m driving. I don’t read a book either while I’m driving, but that’s a whole different story.

As I’ve pointed out before, all data are composed of a mass of individual anecdotes.

unclesmrgol on November 16, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Adding lead weights/paneling might do the trick … if the goal is to make cars less fuel efficient.

Jeddite on November 16, 2010 at 3:45 PM

So, does this mean government wants to disable OnStar as well? Can we use our phone as a passenger? Can a call be made from the back seat?

What next? Maybe have to get naked before getting on an airplane? Perhaps jail anyone who drinks a soda or cup of coffee in the car?

coldwarrior on November 16, 2010 at 3:46 PM

The only way to eliminate distracted driving is to eliminate driving itself.

This may be next, along with banning the consumption of anything that isn’t arugula.

It’s comforting to know how much Barry cares about people whose cars break down leaving them stranded on a highway with no cell phone.

anXdem on November 16, 2010 at 3:47 PM

The data also revealed that fatal traffic crashes had declined by about 36 percent annually for drivers in this age group.

A 36% annual decrease over 5 years is a cumulative decrease of 90%, which would imply that the problem is completely solved, with the remaining 10% being freak accidents. More likely is that they have no f**ing clue what they are talking about.

pedestrian on November 16, 2010 at 3:48 PM

I’m all for this proposal — just so long as the first time someone dies because they couldn’t call for help from their car, LaHood is tried as an accessory to murder.

cthulhu on November 16, 2010 at 3:48 PM

We had this thread a few weeks ago and I posed a very simple question:

If reducing traffic fatalities is the be-all and end-all, then why not do the one thing would greatly reducing accidents and would not cost the government 1 penny? Simply raise the minimum driving age from 16 to 18.

Now, no one wants to really do that because that would mean that Mom and Dad would have to drive their kids to soccer practice and band concerts. You see, we value our conveience and we value teens who can drive for the effort it saves us adults. And so, if some teens die in the process, well, that’s just the way it is.

I’m not advocating either restricting teen driver or restricting cell phone use. I just find it interesting what we, as a society, are willing to see people die for and what we are not.

PackerBronco on November 16, 2010 at 3:48 PM

Is something in Obama’s cheeks in that picture?

The Mega Independent on November 16, 2010 at 3:49 PM

The only way to eliminate distracted driving is to eliminate driving itself.

Mass Trasnit. Buses, Trains, Subways. I think you all get the picture. 1984 anyone?

upinak on November 16, 2010 at 3:49 PM

Here‘s your democrat solution to driver distractions

Kini on November 16, 2010 at 3:49 PM

We also need to ban billboards and political signs on the side of the rode. Why would one place those by the rode if they were NOT designed to divert our attention.

WashJeff on November 16, 2010 at 3:49 PM

First Congressman who croaks from them not being able to reach his Doctor as he was driving will generate the first exceptions (not the elimination of a bad bill).

michaelo on November 16, 2010 at 3:49 PM

They actually have that for people who’ve been convicted of DUI.

clearbluesky on November 16, 2010 at 3:44 PM

Yeah, I know. I was trying to push an extreme view to show how ridiculous this government really is.

I mean, if their concern really is for public safety and reducing driving accidents and deaths from those accidents, why wouldn’t you go after the low hanging fruit?

The technology is there and it’s undeniable DUI causes more accidents and deaths than cell phone talkers.

So why would the government totally ignore that low hanging fruit and talk about creating technology to combat a lower percentage of the problem with iffy numbers to back it up?

It’s government incompetence. This is a shining example of what is wrong with government.

ButterflyDragon on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Wasn’t Ray Lahood a Republican?..:)

Dire Straits on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Is something in Obama’s cheeks in that picture?

The Mega Independent on November 16, 2010 at 3:49 PM

I didn’t see a TSA patdown in that picture

Kini on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

What about drinking coffee? Or even having a conversation while driving.

rbj on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

I use the GPS function of my phone when driving. It requires a cell phone connectin because the maps are downloaded in real time.

I guess I could go back to trying to open my 4′x4′ AAA map in front of my while driving…

I wonder if they intend to scramble the CB, FRS, GMRS, and ham band frequencies too?

SPCOlympics on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Ladies and gentleman, your democrat party at war with individual liberty.

Inanemergencydial on November 16, 2010 at 3:37 PM

It’s not just the Democrats. In Texas, a Republican Senator filed a bill a week ago that would generally prohibit drivers from using their cell phones.

Jimbo3 on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Thinking while driving is distracting. Mandatory lobotomies. Talk about a nanny-state utopia.

anXdem on November 16, 2010 at 3:51 PM

I wonder what causes more deaths, cell phone use in a car or illegal alien criminals driving drunk?

ctmom on November 16, 2010 at 3:51 PM

Gov’mint owns Guv’mint Motors, which has OnStar for some of its vehicles. I don’t see OnStar being disabled. Hmmmm…, maybe only OnStar will be allowed to function in new vehicles.

What’s the expression? How convenienet.

parke on November 16, 2010 at 3:51 PM

I just paid _Good_MONEY_ for a car for the wife with bluetooth in it that allows her to make hands-free phone calls. Now they want to put in a device that makes that impossible.

Like hell.

kurtzz3 on November 16, 2010 at 3:51 PM

If you like cell phone bans in cars, vote Democrat.

Ray LaHood is a Republican. You know, like Mike Castle.

Emperor Norton on November 16, 2010 at 3:51 PM

Wasn’t Ray Lahood a Republican?..:)

Dire Straits on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

He was a former Republican, he’s now apart of the Clown party

Kini on November 16, 2010 at 3:51 PM

I always get distracted when a bee flies in my window. I think LaHood should ban bees. Wonder what Scarborough thinks about that?

ctmom on November 16, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Boy, for being “progressive”, it seems like all liberals want to do is take my rights away and tell me what to do.

search4truth on November 16, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Well that will kill OnStar!

Oh, and if you’re in a crash, trapped, can’t get out. FORGET about using that cell phone to call for assistance.

WE’RE FROM THE GOVERNMENT, WE’RE HERE TO HELP!

GarandFan on November 16, 2010 at 3:52 PM

What about drinking coffee? Or even having a conversation while driving.
rbj on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Don’t forget: Pretty girls walking along the road must now wear burkas.

Most femi-nazis will not be impacted by that law.

PackerBronco on November 16, 2010 at 3:53 PM

I wonder what causes more deaths, cell phone use in a car or illegal alien criminals driving drunk?

ctmom on November 16, 2010 at 3:51 PM


Bingo!

It’s not just the Democrats. In Texas, a Republican Senator filed a bill a week ago that would generally prohibit drivers from using their cell phones.

Jimbo3 on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

At the STATE LEVEL???? In a REPUBLIC???

Inanemergencydial on November 16, 2010 at 3:53 PM

Sure, fine, go ahead.

As long as for ever person we find dead in an upside-down car on a country road with a useless cellphone in their hand, we execute a bureaucrat.

WTF are these people smoking, seriously? We’re already ON the slippery slope here, folks. Time to rein them in before it’s too late, and YOU’RE the one in the burning car with the disabled cellphone.

Merovign on November 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM

Wasn’t Ray Lahood a Republican?..:)

Dire Straits on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Does it matter? Republicans and democrats both comprise the party of big government. Our job is to find them, and kick them out.

darwin on November 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM

You know what one of the biggest distractions while driving is?
Driving. It is a stressful activity.

In fact, they may as well put an ignition cutoff in all vehicles after a certain number of hours of driving per day has passed.

After all, a tired driver causes accidents.

MagicalPat on November 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM

As Ed pointed out, this is another attempt by the Regime to erode States rights.

Kini on November 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM

So I get this image of driving alone on an unlit back road at night, you hit a deer and total your car, you are severely injured and cannot get out to place an emergency call, but you have your cellphone, yet due to the government need to “protect you,” you are unable to make an emergency call, so you bleed to death. I wonder what statistical category you will be placed in – “death by government?”

Done That on November 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM

Kini on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Heh.

The Mega Independent on November 16, 2010 at 3:55 PM

He was a former Republican, he’s now apart of the Clown party

Kini on November 16, 2010 at 3:51 PM

LOL!..I thought I saw a RINO horn!..:)

Dire Straits on November 16, 2010 at 3:55 PM

I know, they can issue waivers, for a small donation.

It’ll be like the permit system (for anything) in Mexico. “This is illegal. How much money do you have?”

They could use the “bribe” system to balance the budget.

Merovign on November 16, 2010 at 3:55 PM

ctmom on November 16, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Bees!!

coldwarrior on November 16, 2010 at 3:56 PM

Where are the cell phone while driving banners?
Please tell me when you want this insanity to stop?
Bcs when you give them an inch, they will take the mile.

Badger40 on November 16, 2010 at 3:56 PM

Are police going to have to give up their car radios?
What about delivery vehicles?
This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard our government getting in to.
It is idiotic.
jake-the-goose on November 16, 2010 at 3:42 PM

Oh don’t worry, they’ll get waivers.
So will government employees.
And people who work in construction – as long as they’re unionized.
And University Professors.
And companies that contribute to the DNC …

PackerBronco on November 16, 2010 at 3:56 PM

I can’t wait until I don’t have to bother searching my kidnap victims for their cell phones. Just toss them in the van and drive off without worrying about them calling 911.

cameo on November 16, 2010 at 3:57 PM

Wait until you see the list of “waivers” issued for this one!

GoldenEagle4444 on November 16, 2010 at 3:57 PM

What a bunch of asshats we have in the Obama administration.

They only technology they understand is plugging in a teleprompter. And to do that they probably need someone to tell them what a wall outlet is, where to find one and how the plug is inserted.

Bumbling idiots without a clue, top to bottom, every department.

fogw on November 16, 2010 at 3:57 PM

darwin on November 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM

Good Point!..This is a really stupid move!..There will be a r!ot!..:)

Dire Straits on November 16, 2010 at 3:57 PM

It’s time to send a message to the government – Can you hear us now?

Drained Brain on November 16, 2010 at 3:58 PM

Remember, yobummer said, that there are a lot of distructions, which are bringig information not alwyas high on the truth scale? Well, after cell phoen distraction is dealt with, internet is next, with the biggest illustration, government employees watching porn on work computers.

anikol on November 16, 2010 at 3:58 PM

They’re pouty children.
They haven’t gotten their way,
So now you’ll suffer…

Our betters have declared that we shall not use cell phones while driving, and they are angry to find out that people are just ignoring them and their stupid laws. So now they are going to increase their threats and abuse their power all the more to make us comply.

Reconsidering the initial demand that we give up the cell phones is not an option. That would require them to admit to an error, and that just cannot be. The Secretary of Transportation was speaking ex cathedra, and is infallible.

By definition,
You can not make a mistake,
When you are perfect.

Haiku Guy on November 16, 2010 at 3:58 PM

So.. what about Road Rage? How does this help?

upinak on November 16, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Kini on November 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM

Guess we better find those old copies of Animal Farm and 1984..:)

Dire Straits on November 16, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Associated Press:

‘General Motors announced today that Teleprompters will be installed in all new GM cars for the 2012 model year so that drivers can recieve important messages when their cell phones are inoperative.’

percysunshine on November 16, 2010 at 4:00 PM

Not only will this erode our freedoms, it will also cost us money.

Wanna bet they’ll mandate an annual phone scrambler certification at a service shop like they do now for smog check?

SPCOlympics on November 16, 2010 at 4:01 PM

Say goodbye to OnStar

Eff Cliffy on November 16, 2010 at 4:01 PM

The statement came during an appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, when Joe Scarborough argued that the government should mandate the installation of scrambler transmitters in new automobiles.

Joe Scarborough, life long conservative. Sheesh!!! Is there something in the water in DC?

jnelchef on November 16, 2010 at 4:02 PM

People also get distracted by eating, reading printed material, and applying make-up. Shall we ban drive-through restaurants, newspapers, and cosmetics, too?

Drivers engaged in these activities while driving get cited and FINED. Do it enough, you lose your license. Same applies to texting or drinking.

I see people texting while they drive often. The cops need to pull the offenders over and give them a hefty citation.

We have laws on the books to enforce good driving. No new equipment required.

dogsoldier on November 16, 2010 at 4:02 PM

It’s not just the Democrats. In Texas, a Republican Senator filed a bill a week ago that would generally prohibit drivers from using their cell phones.

Jimbo3 on November 16, 2010 at 3:50 PM
At the STATE LEVEL???? In a REPUBLIC???

Inanemergencydial on November 16, 2010 at 3:53 PM

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Search/DocViewer.aspx?K2DocKey=odbc%3a%2f%2fTLO%2fTLO.dbo.vwCurrBillDocs%2f82%2fR%2fS%2fB%2f00138%2f1%2fB%40TloCurrBillDocs&QueryText=138&HighlightType=1.

Wentworth is a Republican (hope the link works).

Jimbo3 on November 16, 2010 at 4:03 PM

Up next, a federal ban on talking while in an automobile. And blinking, sneezing, laughing, itching, farting……..

ThePrez on November 16, 2010 at 4:03 PM

Say goodbye to OnStar

Eff Cliffy on November 16, 2010 at 4:01 PM

Umm isn’t OnStar owned by GM?

And we all know who owns GM.

So, say you are driving down the road and try to call someone… you hear a DING and “I am sorry, we have disabled your Cell Phone due to the new Obama Administration Federal Law prohibiting private calling while driving. Please accept our apology for banning your call. Thank you for using OnStar.”

I see a bunch of people buy FORD soon.

upinak on November 16, 2010 at 4:05 PM

Typical example of nanny-state bureaucrat-think. Brought to you by the party dedicated to solving all your problems, and saving you from your own inadequacy to live your life as you really, really should.

Now wolfing down a big Coke, large french fries and half-pound double cheeseburger at 70 mph is an example of poor judgement, unless you’re as good a driver as I am. (Actually I haven’t done this much in recent years, though I did once decades ago tap another driver’s rear bumper while fiddling with my car’s cassette player. Better take those car audio systems and air conditioners and heaters and anything else with controls out too.)

I once saw a woman in the driver’s seat in a car at a stoplight in the morning commute putting on her pantyhose while driving to work. Perhaps we should ban that too.

etaoinshrdlu on November 16, 2010 at 4:05 PM

Jimbo3 on November 16, 2010 at 4:03 PM

The only point associated with your response is the one on top of your head, reprobate.

Inanemergencydial on November 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM

COMING SOON:

Federal standards which require “Naked Body Scanners” on all automobile doors. Cars will not start unless all doors are OK’d by a remote Government Scanner Reader.

Roving “Government Groping Squads” will be immediately dispatched to the site of any suspicious scan…especially if 20-30 year old females are involved.

“It’s for your own protection.”

(War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, ….)

landlines on November 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM

Why does Obama hate phones!!?? I’ll do it as soon as he does, when Pimp Mobile 1 can’t make or take calls, I’ll submit.

Alden Pyle on November 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM

Someone should attempt to explain to LaHood that it was this exact same Nanny-Nation/We-Control-You-For-Your-Own-Good mentality that just recently sent a rather large number of Democratic Congressional Reps and Senators into early retirement.

It is also the type of mentality that will result in an even larger number of Americans suggesting rather loudly and vocally that LaHood himself be sent early retirement, not to mention him taking his Bozo-Bucket boss who seems to believe this is a wonderful idea that should be implemented as soon as possible with him.

pilamaye on November 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM

Fundamentally transforming America like you never saw coming

Kini on November 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM

HeY CoooLio!

Those scramblers will also disable/disrupt radar guns, so everyone can speed to their hearts content. A sure way to enhance public safety.

Brilliant!

Archimedes on November 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM

Big Government: “We’ve got our hands in your pants!”

Mr_Magoo on November 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM

Is anybody worried by the fact that deliberately interfering with radio communications is a violation of federal and international law?

As someone else pointed out, you may have to use your phone in an emergency without leaving your car. Like if you’re stranded in a bad neighborhood at night or pinned inside your car after an accident. It’s also likely that the constant flow of mobile scramblers going by will render any roadside communications useless on most busy highways, freeways, and city streets.

And, just like with the TSA, liberals never want to be “judgmental” and put the burden on the abusers, but always shift the burden to everyone.

Socratease on November 16, 2010 at 4:07 PM

Umm isn’t OnStar owned by GM?

And we all know who owns GM.

So, say you are driving down the road and try to call someone… you hear a DING and “I am sorry, we have disabled your Cell Phone due to the new Obama Administration Federal Law prohibiting private calling while driving. Please accept our apology for banning your call. Thank you for using OnStar.”

I see a bunch of people buy FORD soon.

Or….

They might propose a law banning cell phone use in cars BUT permitting OnStar for emergency and navigation assistance only.

SPCOlympics on November 16, 2010 at 4:08 PM

I once saw a woman in the driver’s seat in a car at a stoplight in the morning commute putting on her pantyhose while driving to work. Perhaps we should ban that too.

etaoinshrdlu on November 16, 2010 at 4:05 PM

WoW!..That lady has talent!..:)

Dire Straits on November 16, 2010 at 4:08 PM

The only way to eliminate distracted driving is to eliminate driving itself.

Now you’re thinking, Ed. The Democrat utopia. Two bicycles and a rickshaw in every garage.

Harrell on November 16, 2010 at 4:08 PM

Say goodbye to OnStar

Eff Cliffy on November 16, 2010 at 4:01 PM

Oh no. You’re totally wrong on this one. They will require us ALL to have onstar-like gadgets in our cars. That way they control who we talk to, how we talk to them, and can track us all while driving.

Onstar may seem like a great convenience, but they are watching you wherever you go, and can disable your car if they want to. It’s a Nanny convenience.

tickleddragon on November 16, 2010 at 4:09 PM

I once saw a woman in the driver’s seat in a car at a stoplight in the morning commute putting on her pantyhose while driving to work. Perhaps we should ban that too.

etaoinshrdlu on November 16, 2010 at 4:05 PM

Ban it? Are you nuts, we should make that mandatory.

ButterflyDragon on November 16, 2010 at 4:09 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3