[Benn]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Annihilator Annihilator:

The sad thing is that these ads were needed in the first place because some people are dumb enough to do this.

"Needed"? really? Some people are dumb enough to carry on a conversation with their passenger too, and occasionally make eye contact, even. Even though this has been shown to be just as dangerous as talking on your hands free cell. They should do another commercial for that one--only this time have dead babies. Exploding dead babies! yeah, baby.

It was about texting and not about using hands free. Your eyes are off the road much more texting than talking, even to a passenger. IF someone does not think so then they should also stop using drugs as they are obviously impeding their common sense

Yes the chance may be low you cause an accident, even if low is higher then if you were not texting. However what TEXT could be so important it could not wait until you are parked that someone would want to increase their risk? And if one says they are fine with the risk they are just selfish pricks as that's saying "I don't care about the risk to anyone but myself. People, the world and interpersonal communication went on just fine before cell and car phones, YOU CAN wait until the car is parked.

[Canadian_Mind]

Zipp, it is one thing to occasionally turn and make eye contact, it is quite another to stare at your phone for a solid 10-15 seconds while texting away. Taking your attentionoff the road for that long should be criminal, and the video shows the worst that can happen.

Good on the Brits!

[Zipperfish]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

And I'm sure you'll feel the same way when some fucktard texting away slams into one of your family members and kills or maims them right?

Yeah, yeah, yeah--I get the same thing when I squawked about the US invading Iraq--"Oh, maybe you'll feel differently when your family gets blown up by a terrorist."

The chance of my family members getting killed by cell-phone blabbing driver--and not just any cell-phone driver, think of this, but a cell phone driver who is only on his cell phone because he didn't see the above commercial--is infintessimal. Probably right up there with getting blown up by mad Muslims.

But for the mommy-state supporters, even an infintessimal chance is good enough for any infringement. "If it saves just one life" they plead wiht their big puppy dog eyes.

Lord save us from those who want to make us safe.

[bootlegga]

Well, the looking down and texting tells me that the video was made by someone 30+. The teenagers and younger crowd who work at my weekend job can flip their phone open, text a message and send it off without even looking at the phone. Maybe that's why SMS shorthand looks like crap...

Interesting video, but I don't know if it'll work any better than those 'Scared Straight' videos did 20 years ago.

[Zipperfish]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Zipp, it is one thing to occasionally turn and make eye contact, it is quite another to stare at your phone for a solid 10-15 seconds while texting away. Taking your attentionoff the road for that long should be criminal, and the video shows the worst that can happen.

Good on the Brits!

The law already exists in Canada--it's called undue care and attention. It should be added that carrying on a conversation with somone in your car is about the same risk as talking on your phone. Really, they should ban talking in cars. I'm sure you guys would be behind that 100%.

It's not that I oppose the law in theory--I'll obey it, just like a dutifully slap a helmet on when I ride my bike, just like a dutifully pay in advance for my gas so more attendents get run over, just like I dutifully smial and wave and at all the cameras in all the businesses and and at all the traffic intersections that are filming me so I'll be safe. No, it's not just this one law, it's the ceaseless barrage of them, each one another tiny little shackle on my freedom. The little shackles are virtually weightless by themselves but, like Jacob Marley's chains, they add up over time. And I find there is a general attitude of society that privacy and freedom from government interference are just some outmoded, quaint concepts.

I think I flipped a couple of months back when my friend told me he needed city approval on what colour to paint his house. I thought about that. It just blew me away. If he ants to paint his house, he has to get a permit, and the colour has to be approved for that neighborhood. That just bothered me for some reason, a lot.

On top of that I don't want to be subject to this kind of horrific portrayal--which I guess would be R-Rated in a film--for something as banal as "It's not safe to blab while driving." It cheapens the whole thing to me.

I realize I have a minority attitude these days. Everyone--left and right--is all for Big Govvernment. The bigger the better. Ah well.

[Zipperfish]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Well, the looking down and texting tells me that the video was made by someone 30+. The teenagers and younger crowd who work at my weekend job can flip their phone open, text a message and send it off without even looking at the phone. Maybe that's why SMS shorthand looks like crap...

Interesting video, but I don't know if it'll work any better than those 'Scared Straight' videos did 20 years ago.

Scared Straight? Did they show a bunch of piled up corpses of gays who had died of AIDS?

[Bodah]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

You know what mindless drivel I hate more than any other? I'll tell ya--it's "If it saves just one life, it's worth it." What a mindless fucking mentality. You know what?--banning driving altogether would ensure there'd never be any horrific accidents like that for any reason, cell-phone blabbing or otherwise. It would save thousands of lives every year.

Should we ban driving? Well, according to Bodah we should, because it would save one life. How about making everyone wear body armour everywhere all the time. Think of the lives that would be saved. Maybe not very many, but--according to Bodah--if it saves just one life it must be worth it.

God what a nation of wussies England has turned into.

I used that in context of the commericial, commercial. How you took that and lept to me wanting to ban cars and force everyone to where body armor is beyond me.

Stop smoking the drapes son.

[Zipperfish]

Bodah Bodah:

I used that in context of the commericial, commercial. How you took that and lept to me wanting to ban cars and force everyone to where body armor is beyond me.

Stop smoking the drapes son.

You said if a thing saves just one life it's justified. I merely carried that concept through to its absurd conclusion.

[Canadian_Mind]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

The law already exists in Canada--it's called undue care and attention. It should be added that carrying on a conversation with somone in your car is about the same risk as talking on your phone. Really, they should ban talking in cars. I'm sure you guys would be behind that 100%.

The PSA and following conversation revolve around texting on a cellphone, which uses your eyes and a hand, while driving, not talking on a vcellphone while driving, which only requires your voice and maybe a hand if you dont have a hands-free device. Maybe the distraction is the same, I dunno, I'm not a scientist. But even a kid ould tell you that sight is alot more important when driving then hearing, which is why blind people can't drive. If you can't understand this then your a fucking idiot.

$1:

It's not that I oppose the law in theory--I'll obey it, just like a dutifully slap a helmet on when I ride my bike, just like a dutifully pay in advance for my gas so more attendents get run over, just like I dutifully smial and wave and at all the cameras in all the businesses and and at all the traffic intersections that are filming me so I'll be safe. No, it's not just this one law, it's the ceaseless barrage of them, each one another tiny little shackle on my freedom. The little shackles are virtually weightless by themselves but, like Jacob Marley's chains, they add up over time. And I find there is a general attitude of society that privacy and freedom from government interference are just some outmoded, quaint concepts.

I think I flipped a couple of months back when my friend told me he needed city approval on what colour to paint his house. I thought about that. It just blew me away. If he ants to paint his house, he has to get a permit, and the colour has to be approved for that neighborhood. That just bothered me for some reason, a lot.

I agree I'm not a fan off a loss of certain freedoms. We should be free to choose our own destiny and risk our own lives as we see fit, but not at the risk of others.

$1:

On top of that I don't want to be subject to this kind of horrific portrayal--which I guess would be R-Rated in a film--for something as banal as "It's not safe to blab while driving." It cheapens the whole thing to me.

I realize I have a minority attitude these days. Everyone--left and right--is all for Big Govvernment. The bigger the better. Ah well.

You didn't have to choose to watch the film. Hell, it even says in the title the film was graphic, so don't go whining about how graphic it is. You made the choice.

As for government, not everyone is for big government, but alot of people do feel that it is up to the government to look after public affairs and look after public safety... Baically the social administrators of our lives. Some of what they do I support, and some I don't. I think this was an excellent video and should be shown everywhere. I was subjected to worse things in highschool without warning and nobody complained.

[Zipperfish]

[

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

You didn't have to choose to watch the film. Hell, it even says in the title the film was graphic, so don't go whining about how graphic it is. You made the choice.

As for government, not everyone is for big government, but alot of people do feel that it is up to the government to look after public affairs and look after public safety... Baically the social administrators of our lives. Some of what they do I support, and some I don't. I think this was an excellent video and should be shown everywhere. I was subjected to worse things in highschool without warning and nobody complained.

I'm not offended by the content, just the heavy-handedness of the whole concept. Like we're so fucking stupid we have to be shown gruesome slow-motion pictures of people dying in order to understand that you shouldn't be talking on your cell phone and driving.

"Basically the social administrators of our lives"??? Yeah, whatever. For you maybe. If you want the government to be your mommy fine; not me.

[Canadian_Mind]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

I'm not offended by the content, just the heavy-handedness of the whole concept. Like we're so fucking stupid we have to be shown gruesome slow-motion pictures of people dying in order to understand that you shouldn't be talking on your cell phone and driving.

"Basically the social administrators of our lives"??? Yeah, whatever. For you maybe. If you want the government to be your mommy fine; not me.

Well todays youth have been sort of pacified to more convetional meathods by such things as video games. In grand theft auto you can crash your car and walk away fine, in grand tourismo you can watch yourself hit a wall at 250mph and your car still runs. So showing the exact effects fo what was a very low speed collision did what other PSA's normally can't: make the message personal.

As for you not wanting the government being a social administrator, would you rather pay your own medical bills up front, would you like to pay the fire services up front when you house burns down, would you like to have to pay a toll for the road infastructure everytime you get into the car, or better yet pave your own portion of road as you see fit?

[Bodah]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Bodah Bodah:

I used that in context of the commericial, commercial. How you took that and lept to me wanting to ban cars and force everyone to where body armor is beyond me.

Stop smoking the drapes son.

You said if a thing saves just one life it's justified. I merely carried that concept through to its absurd conclusion.

yes and that thing was the graphic commericial.

[Zipperfish]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

Well todays youth have been sort of pacified to more convetional meathods by such things as video games. In grand theft auto you can crash your car and walk away fine, in grand tourismo you can watch yourself hit a wall at 250mph and your car still runs. So showing the exact effects fo what was a very low speed collision did what other PSA's normally can't: make the message personal.

As for you not wanting the government being a social administrator, would you rather pay your own medical bills up front, would you like to pay the fire services up front when you house burns down, would you like to have to pay a toll for the road infastructure everytime you get into the car, or better yet pave your own portion of road as you see fit?

Bullshit. Today's youth is the same as yesterday's youth. The only problem is old farts who can't remember what it's like to be young so they assume that the "new youth" is some kind of alien speices. They're not. They're just kids. They watch Road Runner and, miraculously, don't go jump off cliffs!!!

And yes, I'd love to pay my medical bills up front, thank you for asking. I don't mind the tolls either, except that I get further dinged for highway taxes on top of the tolls. If I had my way you'd pay for every km of road you drove on.

I wasn't railing against the government in general; it provides certain services. But we just keep giving it a mandate to do more and more and more. And every time anything, however minor, is deemed a "problem" for society, then like a bunch of mindless sheep the Canadian Public turns to its government and says "Help us. What are you going to do about this?"

[Zipperfish]

Bodah Bodah:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Bodah Bodah:

I used that in context of the commericial, commercial. How you took that and lept to me wanting to ban cars and force everyone to where body armor is beyond me.

Stop smoking the drapes son.

You said if a thing saves just one life it's justified. I merely carried that concept through to its absurd conclusion.

yes and that thing was the graphic commericial.

Works for anything though, don't it. It's the ralllying cry of the mommy-state supporters: "If it saves just one life..."

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

[

I think I flipped a couple of months back when my friend told me he needed city approval on what colour to paint his house. I thought about that. It just blew me away. If he ants to paint his house, he has to get a permit, and the colour has to be approved for that neighborhood. That just bothered me for some reason, a lot.

Because he is part of a neighbourhood, and like it or not property appearance affects everyone's house prices nearby. If you paint yer house in some god awful fucked up colour scheme, like it or not, it could potentially affect the house prices of the homes around it.
The reason the government gets involved now is because too few people give a shit about having things like block commitees to make these types of decisions in a more democratic manner. If the neighbours don't care if he paints his house bright lime green with purple polka dots, (just as an example), then by all means go for it. But people can't be bothered taking part anymore so now it gets left up to governments to be the decision maker.
It may also shock you to learn that if you don't keep up your property as a home owner, in some places, the city or town will finally do it for you and bill you for the service. Example: if yer lawn gets to be like 3 feet tall.