We're coming to the point where useful technology is required to defeat another useful technology. Although I despise (as I've almost been victim countless times of inattentive drivers due to text messaging or mobile phone use)any telephone use while driving, I think the last sentence of this column, personal responsibility is the key answer but I won't put too much stock in it's enlightenment amongs cell phone users.

I ride a bike 200 mi./wk. and am 100% behind this! If there were a way to harmlessly disable drunk drivers, would anyone out there object?

So, the next time your car breaks down or plows into a snowbank, or you're witness to a wreck, you'll have to get to a telephone that's hardwired in order to call for help. Great idea. More people will die from the delays than from accidents related to cellphone use by drivers.

No, this isn't about safety. This is about government control through the erosion of individual liberty.

I am strongly in favor of minimal government. There are areas where laws are appropriate, such as when your actions can fatally impact other people's lives. This is why we have traffic laws...2-3 tons of metal is a deadly force at a relatively low speed. I have a short 20-25 minute commute and am daily put in danger by drivers who have their attention directed downward toward their wireless device, head even bowed down. Swerving back and forth between lanes as if there are not thousands of others on the road. This is a law that is too late in coming for some who have suffered the results, and not soon enough for those of us who are becoming rightfully frightened to pull out onto the roads every day.

Friends of the U.S., PLEASE do what you can to ensure this protective law is passed, whether state- or nation-wide.

When it comes to personal protections, such as if I have a hankering for a bag of fries because I spend so much time eating right to keep my cholesterol down but just have to have one treat this month...to put it in words of the (shudder) pro-abortion murder crowd, "keep your laws off my body".

Scott,

Engine/battery "on" = cell phone disabled. If you're plowed into a snowbank such that you cannot get out, you'll probably have the engine turned off anyway...but wouldn't hurt to do it long enough to make the call, should you have to keep warm.

Bill, spot-on regarding the similarities with drunken drivers...it is no consolation, but at least drunk drivers are looking at the road. I think drunk driving and/or texting while driving should carry a mandatory suspension of the driver's license. My family's (and your family's) lives are just too precious to leave to the fate of distracted people with no sense of responsibility or reality.

More of the Governement protecting us from Ourselves. How about Government protect us from more Government.

I will pay vast amounts of money to disable any control devise they put on my property. I will also drive eating ice cream in the summer time and with one hand tied behind my back in the winter. I will risk accidents just to defy government. I will resist more government by all means. Freedom does not come without the risk of life and limb.

Who are these IDIOT's??? You are in an accident and trapped in your car, you can't call for help? You witness an accident, you must stop, get out of your car, move away from it, then get run over and killed by the politician who can't stop because he is to important!!?? GOD, I AM SICK AND TIRED OF WHAT THIS COUNTRY (THAT I USED TO LOVE) IS COMING TO. I am glad that I am old and don't much life left, because life won't be worth living after that POS obama and his horde are done with it. Just remember "YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID"

There are many negative consequences to this idiotic law. 1) Delay in reporting a vehicle described in an Amber Alert. (sorry but stopping you from using a cell phone in your car prevented rescuing your child from a pedophile) 2) Your car is being repeatedly rammed from behind by a total stranger (this actually happened to me) but you cannot stop for fear of your life and cannot call the police for help. I could go on, but you get the point.

This law is just another way to erode our personal liberty and for the federal government to turn the citizens of this country into serfs. You can bet Congress will exempt themselves (just like politicians cannot be arrested while going to or from legislative sessions).

The more nanny laws that are passed the less you will see of personal responsibility and that is just plain WRONG!

Some of the potential impacts suggested here are overblown. First, if the jammer was placed in the steering column, the power output could be designed for an effective radius of about 2 feet, so passengers or pedestrians wouldn't be affected, and would only function if the car was running. But, more importantly, driving is a *privilege*. Some of your personal responsibility in exchange for that privilege is to protect other drivers on the road. For instance, the primary reason for auto insurance is to make others "whole" as the result of your error, and secondarily for your financial interests. Turn signals exist to warn other drivers of your intentions, not because you need them to turn the car; same with brake lights. Similarly, if technology is available to protect *other drivers* from irresponsible ones who talk or text while driving, then by all means it should be implemented. If you don't like it, take the bus.

I am 100% behind such a law! I ride a motorcycle and I can't count the times some moron with a cell phone has endangered my life while I was riding my bike. Passengers can't use the phone while in the car? Too bad. How did they manage to live before cell phones? Need to make an urgent call? Pull off the road and shut off the car. If you can't get through your daily commute or drive to Aunt Sadie's for Sunday dinner without using your phone then you shouldn't be allowed to drive, period. Patriot Post, you're dead wrong about this one. Driving is not a right, it's a privilege.

Lets see, it is a very cold day, in near blizzard conditions, I am low on fuel, and even if I am stopped I can't use my smart phone to find a gas station? I MUST shut off the engine, and disconnect the battery before I can use the phone??? I am sick to death of S T U P I D politicians.

"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin

Some of the potential impacts suggested here are overblown. First, if the jammer was placed in the steering column, the power output could be designed for an effective radius of about 2 feet, so passengers or pedestrians wouldn't be affected, and would only function if the car was running. But, more importantly, driving is a *privilege*. Some of your personal responsibility in exchange for that privilege is to protect other drivers on the road. For instance, the primary reason for auto insurance is to make others "whole" as the result of your error, and secondarily for your financial interests. Turn signals exist to warn other drivers of your intentions, not because you need them to turn the car; same with brake lights. Similarly, if technology is available to protect *other drivers* from irresponsible ones who talk or text while driving, then by all means it should be implemented. If you don't like it, take the bus.

I think the scrambler is a good idea. There are few stats out there but we know that a number of serious and/or fatal accidents have occurred while drivers were texting or talking. Just two days ago (on TV) a father of a teen killed while driving and texting was lamenting that his warning went unheeded. End result, an unnecessary end to a young life. Life is not that complicated that we must be able to spend every moment in communication with someone else.

Well Bill, lets hope those massive amounts of money you're willing to spend include some very stiff fines. And let's toss in some serious jail time as well. If you can't tear yourself away from your cell phone long enough to complete your drive then take a cab. And maybe think about checking into some kind of addiction rehab.

Bull... The FEDERAL government does not regulate highway safety inside a state. It does not have the authority to do so. The state will not dictate when a person can use a phone through automated means (i.e. forcing people to install equipment they do not want in their cars). This should be handled as a local law. If it is against the law, let officers pull drivers over and fine them, just like any other offense.

If such a device is optional, then great! I'll buy one for my teen daughter's car. THAT is MY decision, NOT the federal or state government's. The government cannot protect everyone against everything. That is not their role. Our government has tried to do too much and is consequently not doing a good job at anything except tax and spend.

I think it is great that people walk, jog and ride bikes on roads, but pedestrians only have the right-away at cross-walks and bicyclists don't follow the traffic laws and should not be on roads were they endanger others by driving 20 miles under the speed limit.

I was forced to lay my motorcycle down at 25 MPH to avoid hitting a group of 12 joggers, running three-wide on a major road in the middle of the morning commute who REFUSED to move out of the traffic lane. Next time, I'll drive through them. Then I'll call an ambulance on my cell phone.

Just another way to make more money off the general public instead of holding them responsible for their actions. If you hold the death penalty to be punishment for conducting the act of murder you would find there is a lot less murder, but we house them and feed them instead of killing them for killing. Same applies, you find that one is responsible for an action do to the use of a cellphone instead of operating the equipment safely, they loose their right to drive, bet you would find a lot less people using there phones while driving. If they murdered someone as a result of their negligence to operate their equipment responsibly, they too should be held accountable no different then a murderer, bet that would reduce the problem too. Instead we allow lawyers, judges and special interest groups to continue protecting the criminals and leave us good citizens to fear life. Boy are we backwards or what?

A thought for those who are so concerned about being stuck in a snowbank and having to turn off the engine and maybe freeze to death in the 2 minutes it would take to call 911: All modern cars have fuel shut-off devices that automatically turn off the fuel pump in the event of a collision. Sorry to squash your idiotic argument.

Also, it would not be a problem to program such a jamming device to deactivate when the gear selector is set to PARK or NEUTRAL, leaving the engine running and protecting you from frostbite.

I changed my mind... I'm all for it. BUT, I want another device installed as well...

An engine-killing device that would trigger the shutdown of people's cars and police notification when they make more than a 30 degree turn and don't use a signal, pull up to a drive through window, or enter the vehicle with a make-up bag that is stored forward of the trunk.

That reminds me...drive through windows should be outlawed! Penalize everyone who picks up food for their kids or to take it home and consume it on the chance that they may be involved in an accident if they become tempted by the evil french fry!

Get a grip, people! You cannot legislate common sense no more than you can punish everyone based on the actions of a few. More people are killed eating, doing make-up, etc. than talking on a phone. Make it illegal and ticket those who do, but don't try to take away my right to get an emergency call from my kids, wife, or Liberal politician looking for more money!

"We know"... stats? You sure? CDC doesn't agree. 'We know' that global warming is caused by man and we're in a horrific warming trend that will raise the oceans and flood our coasts in less than 100 years... We knew this just a few short years ago and now we're in a '10 year cooling trend' (gaze into your crystal ball, Mr. Gore). I mean REALLY??? A knee-jerk reaction based on 'feelings and perceptions' never works out well for the majarity...

Utterly ridiculous... is no one listening to our demand for less government intrusion? Hello?

Here's a news flash for the poliwhackos in charge, most late model cars have some form of Sync radio already. Why not just get people to use it? Maybe offer them free set-up at dealers so they don't have any reason to not use it. For those driving older vehicles (yes we have 2 of those, too), how about a free $20.00 blue-tooth with every cell phone purchase (Don't we pay enough for cell phones to cover this already)?

Coming from someone who drives countless miles a day, I feel I am in more danger from driver's reading the newspaper (I see the same gentleman M-F doing this on his morning commute), applying makeup (including mascara), doing their hair (seriously, you can't just get up 10 minutes earlier?), or even chowing down their McMuffin while traveling at 75MPH than I am someone talking on a phone (please note, texting is already illegal).

Seriously? I am amazed at the number of people who think this is a good idea. Yes, distracted drivers are dangerous whether they are distracted by their phones, radios, mp3 players, or conversations. But to deprive someone of of legitimate, even emergency, use of a cell phone via government intervention is plain wrong. It makes sense to have laws against using your phone while you drive, but this is invasive. Enforce those laws and make the penalty severe enough to curtail the behavior.

Greater danger exists from people playing the radio so loudly that they cannot hear emergency vehicles.

I would have expected more from Patriot readers...can't believe some are arguing for such government control. When has more government control EVER been a good way to control behavior. It's just like dealing with a two-year old...if you can't behave, you get punished. When you learn that enduring the punishment outweighs enjoying the behavior, you quit the behavior. As always, punish the offenders and leave the rest of us alone. If you're a decent driver to begin with, using a cell phone is no more dangerous than drinking a cup of coffee.

All these things fall under "reckless driving".

We don't need extra laws.

We need personal responsibility.

Driving used to be a privilege, not a right. All we get in the country anymore is bitching and moaning about everyone's so called rights, while the most basic right of all - freedom - is being being sodomized in the process.

This is for all the "Big Gov. Butt Kissers" who want more rules & regs put on people. YOU are the reason that our country has been going down hill for the last 50+ years. Any device put on a car can and has

malfunctioned. (like you Robert S?) Tell me just how would "ON STAR" work?? A fuel shut-off wont work if you get hit in the ass. You can put all the safety devices on a car that you want to, but that still will not stop the chief cause of its malfunction - the loose nut holding the steering wheel.

Everybody talks about the cell phones being the problem. Maybe the speed at which cars travel (i.e. Speed Limits are mere suggestions) and the disregard that drivers have for limits, road and traffic conditions, etc., should be addressed. Maybe "Speed Governors" should be employed instead of simply limiting the cell devices.

It appears a lot of people are missing the point entirely here. Distracted driving has *always* been a problem, because unfortunately there are always going to be stupid people, or people who feel they are too important to obey simple rules. A few here have mentioned drivers not using directionals. Tell you what - I'd rather have someone *not* use their signals, but check their *mirrors* before turning or changing lanes. Some of these idiots on the road flip on their signals and jump a lane without paying any attention at all to any vehicles in a lane.

No - the answer is police enforcement. Most jurisdictions require police to observe another violation before they can cite you for using a phone. That is utter nonsense. People ignore traffic laws like it's some sort of game these days - it's ridiculous. Petition your state representatives to change your local traffic laws to read an officer can stop a driver for a specific violation like using a phone while driving. 90% of these calls are probably sheer nonsense anyway and can easily wait until another time.

to date, cell scramblers have been illegal. If they become required

equipment on cars will business be allowed to install them?

theater, eateries, office,ect?

While far too many Americans refuse to self-police their actions, the answer is not to increase the intrusiveness of the government. Drivers who are negligent should be punished with fines and or jail time when they cause an accident. Cell phone records can clearly show if a driver was texting or talking on a cell phone. I’m an ex-cop and I can’t tell you how many times I would follow a vehicle that was all over the road. My first though was that I had a drunk driver, but upon closer observation I could see them talking or texting on their cell phone. After I pulled them over, I would ask to see their phone. Almost every time the text messages were utterly trivial. At that point I could not resist issuing them two or three citations.

This has to be one of the worst ideas to come from Washington so far. I also despise the people who concentrate on their phone calls instead of their driving, but what about real safety? What about when you have a heart attack and need to call 911, or your loved ones have been in a terrible accident and you need to call the hospital? It does all come down to one major point: the Constitution of The United States grants certain enumerated powers to the federal government and beyond those enumerated powers the federal government has NO legal standing whatsoever. ZERO power. Even though Constitutional safeguards have failed to stop politicians who live under the impression that they can pass absolutely any law that they can come up with, we are still a nation of laws. If Congress is given free reign, then we will all continue to suffer under these power-mad fools. The people who live under the impression that bigger government is better government need to wake up. Washington mad men are making a farce of the millions of lives that have been given to ensure our freedom under the Constitution.

Well now, I've just run off the road and slammed into a tree; my legs are pinned which makes it impossible for me to leave the vehicle. The cell phone is in my hand - DISABLED BY A GOVERNMENT WHO ONLY WANTS TO HELP ME AND SAVE ME FROM MYSELF! GOD HELP US ALL!

Having read all of the comments above, I feel I should point out to RobertS that 1. fuel shutoffs DON'T disable the electrical system,hence not a jammer either and 2. they don't always work either,having been to any number of MVA's where the engine was still running when we arrived on scene. Sorry to squash your argument Robert. A better approach would be a 1. A state level requirement for a hands off cell phone system if you feel you need to use a cell in your car with 2.Severe penalties if caught not using one while using a cell while driving. This would be Constitutional,but probably wouldn't work any better than DUI laws do now. Point being that such a law or regulation is a stupid idea,period

I believe that as soon as the new Congress is in session, the first thing they should do is cut off all funding for Sebelious', Napolitano's, and La Hood's departments untill all three have resigned their positions and left Government altogether in order to restore some sense of Liberty to the American Citizen.

I feel that a cell phone jamming device embedded in the dash that is active while the car is in motion and has an effective area radius of 3 feet would be the most sensible solution. This way it would only affect the people that are seated in the front seat of the car. If there is a concern about the prevention of the front seat passenger not being able to use a cellphone, then the device could be place in the far left hand corner of the dash near the side view mirror.

To all the people who think this is a good idea: you are the frogs in the slowly warming water...When was the government job to protect us against ourselves? And there is absolutely no way to completely exclude all risks from life, no matter how much you'd want the government to do it...I cannot believe you poeople: that is why we have the issues we are having in this country, because people like you thought it was a good idea to have Social Security, Medicare, welfare, TSA...yes, ask the government to protect you from your neighbour, and then don't cry when it will "protect" you fron all freedoms...

No wonder we're going down the drains...For goodness sake, take some personal responsibility, and understand that this is life! Government, from cradle to grave, should be your ralying cry, you serfs!

This is so stupid. Why can,t they try to figure a way to get us out of this recession and stop wasting time on ridiculous items like this. Are cell phones a problem? yes. should somthing be done? yes. But by the highway patrol. If they want to start making the roads safer. Then outlaw the production of alcohol. it is the leading factor in more accidents and fatalities. And has caused more family and health problems than cell phones ever.

Anyone want to bet that Govmint Motors will be the first to do it?

Some of the potential impacts suggested here are overblown. First, if the jammer was placed in the steering column, the power output could be designed for an effective radius of about 2 feet, so passengers or pedestrians wouldn't be affected, and would only function if the car was running. But, more importantly, driving is a *privilege*. Some of your personal responsibility in exchange for that privilege is to protect other drivers on the road. For instance, the primary reason for auto insurance is to make others "whole" as the result of your error, and secondarily for your financial interests. Turn signals exist to warn other drivers of your intentions, not because you need them to turn the car; same with brake lights. Similarly, if technology is available to protect *other drivers* from irresponsible ones who talk or text while driving, then by all means it should be implemented. If you don't like it, take the bus.

Instead of trying to eliminate the use of cell ph.ones on cars, why not make it safe. They could install hands free technology in all cars, not just the high end ones

"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin

First of all, I cannot be convinced, no matter how many miles a week you ride a bike, that every person writing in favor of this foolishness has not taken a cell call in their vehicle. And yes, I have had to avoid a bicyclist who swerved into the middle of the road while trying to drink from his water bottle. Should we outlaw that too?

There is already a law on the books that covers most of these issues. It's "Careless Driving". Whether a wreck is caused by someone not paying attention because of cell phone use, a spilled drink, changing the radio station, attending to a child in the backseat, or getting stung by a bee on the back of the neck, it can only be proven that some individual was careless possibly if one is observed by police or AFTER the damage is done. At that point the "individual" is responsible for their actions and should pay the appropriate price.

How many people/miles are driven each year by people who are able to maintain their focus while using cell phones or doing any other activity that MAY take their attention from the wheel? Why should their LIBERTY be taken away?

Man up, be responsible, and quit trying to manage EVERY risk. The unintended economic consequences, opportunity costs, cost in lost liberty and inability to police this action are proof to me that this is a fool's errand.

OK, let's also require 5-point harnesses, no one in the front passenger seat, crash helmets, prohibition of eating & drinking (including non-alcoholic beverages), talking, or listening to the radio/cd/tape deck/(for those who still have them), or your GPS , and anything else we can think of that MIGHT distract a driver! For those of you who support this stupidity, don't get out of bed,you might twist your ankle or step on the cat!

It's about Personal Responsibility, STUPID!

Let the market forces of personal responsibility to the job here. If you are in a wreck and cell phone usage is the assigned cause to you, no insurance payoff. Let a few folks be financially ruined by their skirting of the law and that will decrease its use.

I disagree that driving is a privilege, but it is a 'qualified' right. Each driver should be required to pass a proficiency test once in their lifetime, & perhaps each time they may be involved in an accident, or are cited for a moving violation (within 30 days)by traffic law enforcement. In GA, failure to renew auto insurance by non/late payment will result in suspension of driver 'Right', though the person is still capable of driving and should be able to drive a vehicle insured by another person or business (their livlihood may depend upon driving for someone else), but personal exigenies may have required financial resources be diverted temporarily from auto insurance to a more pressing expense. If we have this type technology, why not use it more partically to jam radio tuners & other electronics entertainment decks in autos when a ER vehicle siren is audible within a 1/2 mile so it can be heard thru closed windows in time to yield?

Wow! I cannot believe all the responses from people that think this law is a good idea. I guess there are a lot of people who probably consider themselves conservative but they think that a personal practice they prefer should be a federally mandated commandment. A better idea would be a Constitutional amendment that states that before Congress or any federal agency can pass a new law or regulation it must first repeal FIVE.

Kids are distracting in the a car - other passengers can be distracting. Talking to my husband in the car can be quite distracting. It boils down to personal responsibility and a code of conduct.

Would they disable my bluetooth? When we bought our new car, we were excited that it and my phone had bluetooth and we could talk hands-free.

I talk hands-free to my passengers now.

I guess we will all have to drive one-person cars or have a driver who can be responsible, since normal American citizens don't care about personal responsibility any more and want to abdicate everything to the very noisy government.

I'm with Tim Mercer - - there seems to be a lot of hidden liberal nannyism inside of outward appearing conservatives.

This issue like many others, seems innocent but it is the camel getting his nose in the tent, especially where federal regulators are involved. A few years ago the feds were talking about putting "kill" devices on car engines in order to remotely end car chases - - what then would we do for tv news excitement? Next, they wanted to use it to stop cars that were putting out too many tailpipe emissions based upon sensors on freeway ramps and traffic signals. My husband was in the industry; this technology exists. It is all proposed with "the best of intentions" but regulators are never able to go just a little way - - they simply must, must I tell you, regulate (or their budget might shrink). Just look at the EPA.

As a driver you are responsible for driving well. You should also be driving DEFENSIVELY. Always expect the other driver to do something stupid and know what you will do "IF". Be aware of escape holes in traffic and what the shoulder of the road is like if you had to ditch. Sometimes the opposite side is the way to go. Timing is everything.

Here in the South, you never believe the other guy is going to turn until you see his wheels turn - - local convention . . . prevents getting T-boned.

So, to all you would-be conservatives, if we want to shrink the Federal Government we must stop asking it to do things we should do for ourselves. Grow up and quit whining to "mommy."

There is far too much blindness that favors Government responsibility over personal responsibilty, and we are seeing the results of this blindness in our gradual and continual loss of liberty as Government power and control grows. All who prefer more Government over more liberty would be better off helping to destroy liberty in some other country. Respect our Our Founding Fathers and the many who have fought for our country. fight for liberty!

It's like a scene from "Bananas" - when the new Castro-like 'freedom fighter' assumes control one of his first new laws is that the people will be required to change their underwear twice a day, and it must be worn on the outside - "so we can check".

Brilliant.

First they get you to turn in you old car for a new one, then they destroy the old ones, next they limit your use of the new one.

WTF!?!?

A few things to keep in mind:

(1) You cannot legislate common sense.

(2) IGNORANCE can be remedied, but STUPID is forever.

(3) Personal responsibility is what it's all about.

USA Today: Traffic deaths at lowest in 60 years -

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-09-09-1Aroaddeaths09_ST_N.htm

The key issue this raises is how much effort will be made to circumvent such a device and what the penalties would be. Some suggest a 2 foot radius of effect - highly unlikely, since cell phones vary their power output to overcome weak signal conditions. Even if it could magically be achieved (and it can't) - the solution is a 3 foot ear wire. So, that's a non-starter.

Don't you wonder what government bureaucrats (or other Fascists) have invested in the company to produce these? Soros was invested in the body scanners for the airports and sold, presumably for a high profit...

I think we've all read stories of drivers stranded in snow storms or off-road ravines who used cell phones to dial for emergency rescue. How "safe" is a scrambler in such cases?

I find it some of the comments I am reading above completely pathetic. What if I drive into a snow bank and then can't call for help? Are you for real? If you weren't talking on your stupid cell phone you probably wouldn't have driven into the snow bank in the first place. The government isn't trying to take away people's rights, they are trying to do for us what we can't seem to do for ourselves. Take responsibility for our actions. If people just wouldn't talk on their phones because it's against the law then no action would be required but stupid idiots continue to do it because they think it is their "right". We got along fine with cell phones for quite a few years, I think we can all manage while in the car. Oh and by the way, you can pull off the road and make a call. And if you get stranded and you are a nice person maybe another nice driver will stop and help you out. That does still happen these days.

"I see stupid people everywhere, and they don't even know they're stupid".