Driving with a cell phone..

Article: http://www.naturalnews.com/004823_cell_phone_cell_phones_drugs.html

This article plays a little off my previous post about driving with a cell phone. This article is actually about, an obvious fact, that driving with a cellphone is a lot less dangerous than driving on prescription drugs.

Statistics show that those who use cell phones while driving cause a much greater percentage of accidents than those who avoid using their cell phones. And the studies have shown that it's not just the physical coordination required to punch numbers into the cell phone while you're trying to work the vehicle that causes accidents; it's actually the lack of attention resulting from driving and talking on the cell phone at the same time. It seems that when you're distracted, you're more likely to cause accidents.


In terms of public safety, it's probably correct to say that banning cell phones would reduce the number of traffic accidents. But I think, more accurately, it depends on the person. Some people are operating on, shall we say, lower power CPUs in their heads to begin with. They might be zoned out on prescription drugs, and when you add a cell phone to the equation, they do become a danger to the other drivers on the road. But there are individuals who are perfectly capable of talking on the cell phone or operating other non-visual electronic devices while they are driving.
 
The real test of driver safety should be determined by the reaction time of individuals, not simply noting whether they using a cell phone or other portable electronic device. Some people need to be taken off of the roads just the way they are, even without any distractions, because they have about a two-second reaction time. Those people are a danger to other drivers, regardless of what electronics they might be using. And of course, when they pick up a cell phone, their reaction time might double to four seconds, and then they're more than likely going to hit somebody. We should go all the way and just ban drivers with low cognitive function and slow reaction time.
A traffic control officer recently said that as many as 30 to 35 percent of all traffic accidents are caused by people who are dosed up on prescription drugs. Another third or so are caused by people on alcohol or illegal drugs. So prescription drugs are causing just as many accidents as people doped up on cocaine, marijuana and alcohol. And occasionally there are really bad drivers -- people who are taking antidepressant drugs, smoking pot, drinking beer and trying to talk on a cell phone to hook up their next drug deal.
-----------------------------------------------------------
So should cell phones be banned from the hands of drivers? Should we outlaw the use of portable electronic devices by people who are operating automobiles? I would only support that if we also ban drivers with slow reaction times and actually start testing people for reaction times. I say, stop blaming the electronics, and start holding drivers accountable for their mental states.


I guess that cell phones don't even come close to the dangers posed by prescription drugs and over-the-counter drugs. Approximately 40% of all drivers are on at least one drug at all times, and if you include nicotine and caffeine, that number goes up to around 70%. The abuse of drugs is the root cause of the vast majority of automobile accidents.

Eavesdropping

Article: http://www.naturalnews.com/021240_cell_phones_cell_phone_Big_Brother.html

This website has learned that the FBI has developed a technique that can remotely activate a nearby cell phone's microphone, thereby turning it into a listening device. The "roving bug" technique was approved by U.S. Department of Justice officials for use on members of an organized crime family in New York that was getting increasingly suspicious of tails, wiretaps or other traditional surveillance techniques.


The cell phones of alleged mobster John Ardiot -- considered by the FBI to be one of the most powerful men in the national Mafia's Genovese family -- and his attorney Peter Peluso, also an alleged mobster, were activated by this technique in order for authorities to monitor nearby conversations. U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled that the technique was legal in an opinion this week, stating that federal wiretapping law was broad enough to cover the monitoring of conversations occurring near a suspect's cell phone.

The new method works whether the phone is on or off, because many phone models cannot be truly powered down without removing the battery.

"If a phone has in fact been modified to act as a bug, the only way to counteract that is to either have a bugsweeper follow you around 24-7, which is not practical, or to peel the battery off the phone," Atkinson said, adding that some security-conscious corporate executives make a habit of removing their cell phone's battery when the unit is not in use.


This is not the first time the FBI has commandeered built-in microphones as listening devices. In a 2003 lawsuit, it was discovered that the FBI was able to activate the microphones of automotive systems such as OnStar and listen to passenger conversations without the speakers knowing. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the practice was not legal, but only because the technique prevents the system from being used in an emergency
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow...opinions?
This whole cellphone being bugged business, not necessary. I would assume that cellphone manufacturers would make their phones be less suseptible to being rigged, but to think that one day someone would be able to put a bug in my phone? Scary. I can't believe that the FBI would allow such a thing.

Well, I guess if the case called for it. I really don't believe I"ll be in any trouble anytime soon. But still, the thought it scary.

However, it is just crazy to see what can happen because of technology. Because people seem to need cellphones now to communicate at any point, at any time and also be able to make their called 'anonymous'. Even with the use of cellphones, which we hope to be used privately, they can easily be bugged for another persons use or deception.

Say what?!

Here is an interesting article:::

http://www.naturalnews.com/024386_mobile_phone_health_mobile_phones.html

Supposedly, phone use places undeveloped babies at risk.--Please try to explain this to me?!

Researchers from the University of California and the University of Aarhus Denmark surveyed over 13,000 women who had given birth in Denmark in the late 1990's about their mobile phone use habits while pregnant and their children's use up until the age of 7. But considering the fact that it was done in the late 1990's, mobile phone use wasn't very popular and very infrequent.

Stats say that women who used handsets two or three times per day while pregnant were 54 percent more likely to give birth to children who developed behavioral problems by the time they reached school age than women who did not use them.-- Personally I do not see the connection as to how cell phone use could really cause that much of a difference. What is so different from the use of house phones, or listening to music, being around computers and laptops?

The article then states a hundred(exaggeration) statistics about the use of children using mobile phones and how it relates to behavioral problems especially if and when the use of the technology was frequent.

However the researchers urged that their results "should be interpreted with caution." They also suggested that there might be some correlation between cellular phone use and some other factor that leads to behavioral difficulties such as neglect by a mother.


My question is what is the point of this article and the statistics if there is really no true proof that cell phones are causing these 'problems.'

Hand free cell phone use

http://www.NaturalNews.com/025551_cell_phone_cell_phone_use_cell_phones.html


The article beings stating that cell phones may play a large role in an increase in cancer and have banned in certain areas of the world. I personally do not agree that it causes cancer or at least I haven't seen good evidence that states that cell phones do 'insert scientific word' which in turn creates cancer in humans. What are your opinions? Have you seen any solid evidence to show this fact?

Hands free cell phone devices are being banned in areas around the world, while places such as England are looking to even ban the use of cellphones themselves in cars. They claim that the use of this type of technology creates a large distraction for up to 10 minutes after the conversation ends. So when driving, your mind tends to be elsewhere and usually on the past conversation or the conversation as it is taking place. Oddly enough, cellphone use in the car is more distracting than having an actual person in the car with you? I find that hard to believe considering the fact that I know I could be just as absent minded with someone in the car as well as with someone being on the phone with me.

I guess all in the all, I think the ban of cell phone use while driving should be in place in all states and all countries because it really does cause a distraction and causes many accidents, rather than banning it because it may cause cancer? Everything seem to cause cancer!