The San FranFreakShow Mindset

[wiggles]

"Migden's office released a statement saying that her cell phone rang and in reaching for the phone, she took her eyes off the road."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/18/BAG9MPTMU88.DTL&feed=rss.bayarea

Okay. It's not as though she's denying her responsibility then, so what's the problem?

 

[Gunny]

Um, herloooo? She's only being a do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do elitist if she wasn't using a hands-free dealy or is refusing to pay the $20. Otherwise, she's following the same rules her constituents are.

You don't think elected officials should try to set an example of doing what they think is right? If she voted to ban talking on the cell phone, then she must have thought doing so was right, right?

Her actions directly contradict her vote.

 

[Gunny]

I haven't done any digging on this, but my understanding is that - according to the general opinion of law enforcement - the level of impairment suffered by a driver talking on a cell phone is similar to his being legally drunk. And, the "hands-free" aspect is largely immaterial; DISTRACTION is the issue.

EXACTLY. I don't know how many times I end up behind someone doing 10 mph under the speed limit and oblivious to those around them while they're busy yapping on the phone.

Too many people drive like idiots nowadays as it is. An added distraction isn't doing anything to help THAT.

 

[musicman]

The thing is your just talking to someone ,should we band talking to your passenger?

In Ohio, young people driving on temporary licenses are only allowed to have so many other teenaged riders - for just that reason. Trying to instill good habits, I guess. Distractions cause accidents - I can tell you from personal experience. A 17 year-old, bullshitting with his buddy, blew a stop sign right in front of me - and I had my small son in the car with me. If I hadn't broadsided this kid, he'd have driven right in to a motel office. It's not fair, man; me and my kid were minding our own business. Driving is a responsibility.

 

[Ninja]

Okay. It's not as though she's denying her responsibility then, so what's the problem?

The problem is that an ultra-liberal, far-Left, Marxist Democrat, who has a say in passing laws that I, as a resident of the Glorious People's Republik of KKKalifornistan (a division of Lucasfilm, Ltd ), am forced to abide by, thinks that she's exempt from said laws.

Yes, she took responsibility, but in my opinion that's because doing so was the only politically expedient thing to do.

Also - notice how her office had all of the fancy excuses - she was lost, someone called her, she was only reaching for the cell phone, etc.

Clearly she doesn't deserve prison, but she does deserve a good tarring and feathering. And no taxpayer money to repair the car or pay the damages to the victim. In fact, she should lose her taxpayer-funded SUV (wouldn't be surprised to find out that she voted to outlaw SUVs either, btw).

Also, after Gov. Corzine's incident and now this... Am I noticing a disturbing but not all that surprising trend of communist politicians acting as though they're above the law?

 

[Truthmatters]

This is no major infraction guys.

I could set up la senario in which you would do the same.

Your looking for your teenaged daughter who stormed out of the house with the boy down the street who has been in more trouble than you can shake a branch at and You left a messsage on her cell phone to call you if she needed help to get back home.

You hear the phone and think Oh my god what its her

 

[Ninja]

I could set up la senario in which you would do the same.

And exactly how many of us voted to ban the use of cell phones while driving?

 

[Truthmatters]

BTW she didnt answer the phone she reached for it right?

 

[wiggles]

You don't think elected officials should try to set an example of doing what they think is right? If she voted to ban talking on the cell phone, then she must have thought doing so was right, right?

Her actions directly contradict her vote.

She didn't vote to ban talking on a cell while driving.
She voted for a $20 fine for talking on a cell while driving without using an earbud or hands-free device.
There's no word in any article on this I've seen so far that she wasn't using an earbud or hands-free device.

 

[Ninja]

We know for a fact that she was using her hands. Her office admitted it.

 

[Ninja]

BTW she didnt answer the phone she reached for it right?

She used her hands. She violated the law she voted in favor of.

She mindlessly supported a piece of feelgood, socialist B.S. legislation that she doesn't believe in, and she thinks she's above the law.

You shouldn't be shilling for this woman. You should be outraged.

 

[wiggles]

We know for a fact that she was using her hands. Her office admitted it.

With an earbud or hands-free, you still have to reach for the phone when it rings in order to answer the call.

 

[Ninja]

Maybe during the Bronze Age. Anything anyone besides the homeless would purchase these days is voice-activated.

 

[Gunny]

She didn't vote to ban talking on a cell while driving.
She voted for a $20 fine for talking on a cell while driving without using an earbud or hands-free device.
There's no word in any article on this I've seen so far that she wasn't using an earbud or hands-free device.

I would think that she wouldn't have taken her eyes off the road or been reaching for a ringing phone if she were using a hands-free device.

Doesn't a $20. fine mean it is against the law to talk on a cell phone while driving?

 

[Truthmatters]

Throw the book at her I say , I hope she gets sued .

Its still is a minor infraction

 

[Ninja]

Tried to call her office just now... Got an answering machine.

I'm going to call tomorrow and ask them exactly what type of set-up she was using.

 

[wiggles]

I would think that she wouldn't have taken her eyes off the road or been reaching for a ringing phone if she were using a hands-free device.

Doesn't a $20. fine mean it is against the law to talk on a cell phone while driving?

She'd still have to flip the phone open or press the "accept" button. When your cell rings, don't you pick it up and look at it to see who's calling before you answer it? Everyone I've ever known who's owned a cell phone has.

Yea a $20 fine means it's illegal. Jaywalking fines are higher.

 

[Ninja]

B. Hussein Osama has a lot of explaining to do about Carole Migden's behavior

 

[Gunny]

She'd still have to flip the phone open or press the "accept" button. When your cell rings, don't you pick it up and look at it to see who's calling before you answer it? Everyone I've ever known who's owned a cell phone has.

Yea a $20 fine means it's illegal. Jaywalking fines are higher.

I really don't know what all goes into operating a phone with a hands free device. I don't answer my phone when I'm driving. I'll check it as soon as I stop.

I was under the impression a hands free device was a headset and the phone sat in a holder on or around the steering wheel? Otherwise, it isn't truly a hands-free device if you have to take your eyes off the road to find the phone then check it before answering.

 

[Ninja]

Otherwise, it isn't truly a hands-free device if you have to take your eyes off the road to find the phone then check it before answering.

In which case she'd have been supporting a law so difficult to comply with, that literally everyone would be outside of it.