Re: No fault cell phone law

Liste des GroupesRevenir à cm android 
Sujet : Re: No fault cell phone law
De : bashley101 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (The Real Bev)
Groupes : comp.mobile.android
Date : 20. Mar 2024, 21:13:40
Autres entêtes
Organisation : None, as usual
Message-ID : <utfch5$1lior$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/68.0 Thunderbird/68.12.1
On 3/20/24 8:33 AM, AJL wrote:
On 3/20/24 6:17 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
 
Over here, the law says it is forbidden to use a phone while driving, without a hands free system. And even with such a system it recommends to keep the conversation to a minimum, and is justified by causing accidents.
Fine with me. The one time I did it I could actually FEEL my peripheral perception closing down.  It's fortunate that I rarely need to use the phone in the car, and when I do I pull over and stop.
  Does it recommend keeping conversation with passengers to a minimum also?
  When hearing that warning I often wondered why they weren't also included.
  They are perhaps more dangerous since folks sometimes glance sideways at
  their passenger while talking...
I never look at my passenger and it drives me nuts when I see the driver looking at the passenger in movies.  Like seeing an open refrigerator door.  I don't even like talking while driving -- I've missed far too many turnoffs when I was chatting.  Our internal autopilot works entirely too well.
--
Cheers, Bev
  "Many realize that the control of language is power. If you can't speak
   your mind, your opinions have no weight."           --nightfire-unique

Date Sujet#  Auteur
17 Mar 24 * Re: No fault cell phone law36The Real Bev
17 Mar 24 `* Re: No fault cell phone law35Stan Brown
17 Mar 24  +* Re: No fault cell phone law7Frank Slootweg
17 Mar 24  i+- Re: No fault cell phone law1Stan Brown
17 Mar 24  i`* Re: No fault cell phone law5The Real Bev
17 Mar 24  i `* Re: No fault cell phone law4Frank Slootweg
17 Mar 24  i  `* Re: No fault cell phone law3The Real Bev
18 Mar 24  i   `* Re: No fault cell phone law2Frank Slootweg
18 Mar 24  i    `- Re: No fault cell phone law1Andrew
17 Mar 24  +* Re: No fault cell phone law4AJL
17 Mar 24  i+- Re: No fault cell phone law1Frankie
18 Mar 24  i`* Re: No fault cell phone law2Stan Brown
18 Mar 24  i `- Re: No fault cell phone law1AJL
17 Mar 24  `* Re: No fault cell phone law23Andrew
17 Mar 24   +* Re: No fault cell phone law2The Real Bev
18 Mar 24   i`- Re: No fault cell phone law1Andrew
20 Mar 24   `* Re: No fault cell phone law20Carlos E.R.
20 Mar 24    +* Re: No fault cell phone law17AJL
20 Mar 24    i+* Re: No fault cell phone law10Carlos E.R.
20 Mar 24    ii`* Re: No fault cell phone law9Carlos E.R.
20 Mar 24    ii `* Re: No fault cell phone law8Andrew
21 Mar 24    ii  `* Re: No fault cell phone law7Hank Rogers
21 Mar 24    ii   `* Re: No fault cell phone law6Andrew
21 Mar 24    ii    +- Re: No fault cell phone law1Andrew
23 Mar 24    ii    `* Re: No fault cell phone law4The Real Bev
23 Mar 24    ii     +- Re: No fault cell phone law1Your Name
24 Mar 24    ii     +- Re: No fault cell phone law1Harry S Robins
29 Mar 24    ii     `- Re: No fault cell phone law1sms
20 Mar 24    i`* Re: No fault cell phone law6The Real Bev
20 Mar 24    i `* Re: No fault cell phone law5Carlos E.R.
20 Mar 24    i  `* Re: No fault cell phone law4The Real Bev
21 Mar 24    i   `* Re: No fault cell phone law3Indira
21 Mar 24    i    `* Re: No fault cell phone law2The Real Bev
21 Mar 24    i     `- Re: No fault cell phone law1Indira
21 Mar 24    `* Re: No fault cell phone law2Frank Slootweg
24 Mar 24     `- Re: No fault cell phone law1Andrew

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal