Many years ago I saw a study on Bluetooth and the conclusion was it was "more dangerous" because the tendency was to stay on the phone longer which means longer periods of divided attention while you are driving.

 

With the cars now driving themselves this will be less of an issue.

With the cars now driving themselves this will be less of an issue.

 

I am as big of a tech guy as anyone on BGP but widespread automation on our roadways is a long way away.

Not by the so called "assault style weapons". That's where the loud outcry is. So if 11 teens a day are dying, this is much bigger problem. Again, ask yourself why.

 

Irresponsibility vs. Malicious intent

Irresponsibility vs. Malicious intent

 

I am not sure about that, if you are going to "text and drive" I think your mental state is knowingly and therefore any crimes committed with that mental state are far beyond "irresponsibility."

501.020 Definition of mental states.

 

The following definitions apply in the Kentucky Penal Code

 

1) "Intentionally" -- A person acts intentionally with respect to a result or to conduct described by a statute defining an offense when his conscious objective is to cause that result or to engage in that conduct.

 

(2) "Knowingly" -- A person acts knowingly with respect to conduct or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that the circumstance exists.

 

(3) "Wantonly" -- A person acts wantonly with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. The risk must be of such nature and degree that disregard thereof constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation. A person who creates such a risk but is unaware thereof solely by reason of voluntary intoxication also acts wantonly with respect thereto.

 

(4) "Recklessly" -- A person acts recklessly with respect to a result or to a circumstance described by a statute defining an offense when he fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur or that the circumstance exists. The risk must be of such nature and degree that failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.

 

Effective: January 1, 1975

History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 12, effective January

 

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19651

I am as big of a tech guy as anyone on BGP but widespread automation on our roadways is a long way away.

 

Depends who wants it.

If you create reliable technology, you can save 1000's of lives a day by taking over the transportation industry.

Depends who wants it.

If you create reliable technology, you can save 1000's of lives a day by taking over the transportation industry.

 

You are preaching to the converted!

I am not sure about that, if you are going to "text and drive" I think your mental state is knowingly and therefore any crimes committed with that mental state are far beyond "irresponsibility."

 

IMO texting and driving it would fit into "Wantonly." The texter didn't intentionally wreck and kill. So yeah I agree more than irresponsibility.

 

A shooter intentionally pulled the trigger to kill.

IMO texting and driving it would fit into "Wantonly." The texter didn't intentionally wreck and kill. So yeah I agree more than irresponsibility.

 

A shooter intentionally pulled the trigger to kill.

 

No matter which mental state it is, they are both mental states that support severe criminal conduct, but on the larger point we agree.

I am as big of a tech guy as anyone on BGP but widespread automation on our roadways is a long way away.

 

I agree that even though we have developed this technology it is quite a long way before we would see widespread adaptation of the technology. Another thing to consider is at what cost does this technology come. Seems like this type of technology would be cost prohibitive for most people, especially at the early stages of adaptation.

I agree that even though we have developed this technology it is quite a long way before we would see widespread adaptation of the technology. Another thing to consider is at what cost does this technology come. Seems like this type of technology would be cost prohibitive for most people, especially at the early stages of adaptation.

 

Exactly, and especially expensive considering teenagers would normally only have access to the 2nd or 3rd car in a family.

Yes, I do know that much (but not much more about technology!) Isn’t there an app or phone feature that allows your texts to be read via Bluetooth over your radio, and allows you to respond verbally? I thought there was something like that. Of course, I guess most teenagers would not want their texts read aloud in a car unless they were alone.

 

My car is old and doesn’t have anything like that and I bet many teens also drive older cars. Maybe, if the above does exists, older cars can be adapted to this technology?

 

I upgraded the radio in my 99 Buick so it could have bluetooth.

 

Actually, the cost to upgrade was less than replacing the factory radio that was originally in the vehicle. Even for me, and I work for a remanufacturer of that factory radio.

:laugh:

 

1999 Buick Cars, 1999 Buick Models | Autobytel.com

 

Which one do you have swampy?

Retroactive fit. If you can’t put the $50 part on you don’t drive.

How does Bluetooth help when kids don’t know how to carry conversations today?