I think road tests should include distraction like eating and talking on cellphones. It would get many bad drivers off the road.

As long as there are lonely drivers, they will eat boogers.

I live in Oak Park and I'm all for it.

jingks: I think road tests should include distraction like eating and talking on cellphones. It would get many bad drivers off the road.

What about road head? That should be included too.

There should just be a law that requires people to drive while driving. People who fail to do so would have their vehicle cubed at the junkyard at their expense.

Would never pass... cops would wind up being filmed chowing down on donuts and other free chow too many times.

Plus, get pulled over eating a small burger or something and munch down the last few bites - what proof would police have you were eating??? Any empty wrapper "from last week"?

Elbow and knee control of steering wheel driving should be a first lesson in driving lessons.
And always always drive with lights on in an automatic - for safety

Pardon me, but do you have any Grey Poupon?
/Somehow relevant

In 2006, Winnetka Police Chief Joseph DeLopez proposed a sweeping ordinance that would have banned the operation of a radio or game, tending to pets, grooming, and eating or drinking, along with talking on a phone. That proposal never passed, but in 2007 Winnetka banned using hand-held phones while driving.

Banning the operation of a radio or taking a drink of a refreshing beverage while driving. Mr. DeLopez sounds like an authoritian dick.

Enemabag Jones: In 2006, Winnetka Police Chief Joseph DeLopez proposed a sweeping ordinance that would have banned the operation of a radio or game, tending to pets, grooming, and eating or drinking, along with talking on a phone. That proposal never passed, but in 2007 Winnetka banned using hand-held phones while driving.

Banning the operation of a radio or taking a drink of a refreshing beverage while driving. Mr. DeLopez sounds like an authoritian dick.

Winnetka - and Oak Park - are paradises for authoritarian dicks and the lickers of their smegma (see above).

Enemabag Jones: In 2006, Winnetka Police Chief Joseph DeLopez proposed a sweeping ordinance that would have banned the operation of a radio or game, tending to pets, grooming, and eating or drinking, along with talking on a phone. That proposal never passed, but in 2007 Winnetka banned using hand-held phones while driving.

Banning the operation of a radio or taking a drink of a refreshing beverage while driving. Mr. DeLopez sounds like an authoritian dick.

Sounds like a Big Noise from Winnetka...

On another note, I don't support a ban on eating while driving. I support a ban on reckless driving. If one can eat while driving without being dangerous then that's fine. If one demonstrates a lack of ability, like an inability to hold a lane, an inability to leave an appropriate distance, or a reaction time that's significantly worse than normal, then don't drive while eating.

I'd much rather see a ban on drive-through liquor stores than eating.

I think it depends on what you're eating. I drive one handed. This is because I've had my right arm broken and rebuilt repeatedly and have really gotten good at doing almost everything with my left hand (except pleasuring myself). Because I drive one handed, this leaves my right hand free to grab the burger and fries from the bag in the empty passenger seat. When I have a passenger, their job is to hand me the food when I ask for it (their job was navigation, but GPS reduced their task to feeding me). Now, when I'm alone in the car, I have everything placed well enough that I can actually get my drink and food without actually having to look around for it.

Now, the same can not be said for something like the chicken salad at Wendy's. While yes, it is better for you than the burger and fries, it doesn't eat well whle driving. If your plan is to eat and drive, please, avoid anything that requires a platter and/or a fork. This also applies to the pancake breakfast items at McDonald's and Jack in the Box. Yes, I do enjoy them, but driving down the freeway is not the time to apply syrup. What saddens me, and scares me, is that I have seen both salad eaters who are driving as well as those who think that the commute to work is the time to enjoy those syrupy pancakes. Please, use some god dam common sense!!!

When it comes to the cellphone thing, I don't think we need to ban handheld cellphone use, I we need to start shooting those who drive and text at the same time. My latest broken arm and it's reconstruction was because of some dumbass biatch who was texting while driving and plowed through my car. At least when it's a hand held cell phone call you are still looking at the road.

And grooming, if you're daily routine is grooming while in the car, you need to go to sleep sooner, get up sooner and plan your mornings better. Honestly, do you want to explain to the cop, judge and insurance company that you caused a wreck because you were putting on make up or while driving? Hell, you wouldn't even need to be at fault. Just explaining to the cop that you were in an accident while you were shaving while driving will probably lead to a ticket and the cop finding you at fault because you were shaving while driving, and if you leave that part out, I'm sure the other party (like me) would happily point out that you were shaving and probably weren't paying attention and probably that was what caused the wreck.

Isn't McDonalds World Headquarters located in Oakbrook (Oak Brook?) Illinois?
Which is also a suburb of Chicago.

And Oak Park wants to ban eating in a vehicle?
Sounds like a case of suburb envy to me.

Robotics + GPS = Cars that drive for us

That way we can continue to do all the things we keep claiming we need to do instead of concentrating on the road.

Other people shouldnt drive while eating.

TWX:
I'd much rather see a ban on drive-through liquor stores than eating.

I think it was Nova Scotia(was a fark article), where they have drive thru liquor stores, but you can then get busted for having alcohol within reach of the driver, so a drive thru liquor store would therefor be illegal.
But the drive thru did say that people should drive thru and then park to store the alcohol, which would eliminate the need for the drive thru.

/Common sense is lost on the nut jobs who make the rules.
//Well I'm off in this 18 wheeler, while shifting 18 gears, eating, talking on the phone and steering past the car doing 40 miles an hour in the 65 mile an hour zone.
///And that driving is very close to a past reality too.

TheMega: Would never pass... cops would wind up being filmed chowing down on donuts and other free chow too many times.

Plus, get pulled over eating a small burger or something and munch down the last few bites - what proof would police have you were eating??? Any empty wrapper "from last week"?

What would concern me, proof. For example, here in Texas, having an empty beer can in your car is proof that you were drinking while driving and will be charged for a DUI. Even if you were just being a nice guy and picking up some empty cans off the side of the road or if someone opened up your car and tossed it in there.

With that in mind, what would prevent cops from parking outside of fast food joints and ticketting everyone who pulls out of the drive thru by saying "We don't need to actually see you eat, we just need to see you with food in the car within reach of the driver."

Great Janitor: TheMega: Would never pass... cops would wind up being filmed chowing down on donuts and other free chow too many times.

Plus, get pulled over eating a small burger or something and munch down the last few bites - what proof would police have you were eating??? Any empty wrapper "from last week"?

What would concern me, proof. For example, here in Texas, having an empty beer can in your car is proof that you were drinking while driving and will be charged for a DUI. Even if you were just being a nice guy and picking up some empty cans off the side of the road or if someone opened up your car and tossed it in there.

With that in mind, what would prevent cops from parking outside of fast food joints and ticketting everyone who pulls out of the drive thru by saying "We don't need to actually see you eat, we just need to see you with food in the car within reach of the driver."

Open Container Law, that's what. The law actually specifically defines an open alcohol container within a certain range of the driver, generally within the passenger compartment, as a crime. It doesn't matter if it's a crumpled up beer can or a bottle of Everclear with the seal broken. It's a legally-defined demonstration of the possibility of drinking and driving.

At the moment, even if the consumption of food was banned, there currently is no stated ban on the presence of food. They could, of course, change that, but I'd bet that there would be too many problems with that.

TWX: Great Janitor: TheMega: Would never pass... cops would wind up being filmed chowing down on donuts and other free chow too many times.

Plus, get pulled over eating a small burger or something and munch down the last few bites - what proof would police have you were eating??? Any empty wrapper "from last week"?

What would concern me, proof. For example, here in Texas, having an empty beer can in your car is proof that you were drinking while driving and will be charged for a DUI. Even if you were just being a nice guy and picking up some empty cans off the side of the road or if someone opened up your car and tossed it in there.

With that in mind, what would prevent cops from parking outside of fast food joints and ticketting everyone who pulls out of the drive thru by saying "We don't need to actually see you eat, we just need to see you with food in the car within reach of the driver."

Open Container Law, that's what. The law actually specifically defines an open alcohol container within a certain range of the driver, generally within the passenger compartment, as a crime. It doesn't matter if it's a crumpled up beer can or a bottle of Everclear with the seal broken. It's a legally-defined demonstration of the possibility of drinking and driving.

At the moment, even if the consumption of food was banned, there currently is no stated ban on the presence of food. They could, of course, change that, but I'd bet that there would be too many problems with that.

I do realize that there would be a burden of proof that would have to be met in order to say that someone was actually eating in their car while driving, assuming such a law was passed. At least in theory. If someone actually wants to pass a law, and has the backing to at least attempt it, that bans eating while driving, it would not surprise me if the requirement was as simple as having food ready to eat in the car. Meaning that if someone drove to Burger King alone to get dinner for the family, that as soon as he was handed the food he would be guilty of breaking this law.

Now, keep in mind that I have no faith when it comes to people who want to create laws like this, and have the power to do so. A law like this is either going to be next to impossible to enforce or be a law that be so strongly defined that simply having a box of donuts in the front passenger seat for your coworkers at the office can result in a fine. That probably means that it would never get passed because it's either going to be non-enforceable or pizza boys will be forced to quit in order to avoid being fined more than a week's pay or each delivery made.

Gyrfalcon: Depends on what you're eating, I guess.

My 15-year old nephew, who has yet to get behind the wheel, thinks that a drive-thru rib joint would be (in his words) AWESOME. And, specifically, he means he wants to drive down the road afterwards, eating ribs. Myself, I would have no problem with banning driving and eating ribs, particularly by 16-year olds who think it would be AWESOME.

That said, how many accidents have actually been caused by someone eating in the car, versus the number actually caused by drinking, texting or putting on makeup? Or, to be fair, the guy who nearly drove up my tailpipe early one morning on the 405 trying to shave off a neckbeard in his rearview mirror?

It woiuld seem to make the most sense to simply enforce the laws already in existence regarding innatentive driving, but doing so doesn't exactly get the blood of suburban authoritarian asshat officials pumping.

cmb53208,It woiuld seem to make the most sense to simply enforce the laws already in existence regarding innatentive driving, but doing so doesn't exactly get the blood of suburban authoritarian asshat officials pumping.

This.

If a cop sees someone eating a big mac or folded pizza slice, texting, putting on eyeshadow or dialing a phone while driving, ect, pull their ass over and cite them.

Then we won't have asshole cops $electively citing people because they have a box of M&M on the passenger side seat.

This sounds like a 40-year old proposal in Michigan that would have included not only eating but driving with one arm embracing a person of the opposite sex. At the time, apparently the assumption was that the driver would be inclined to be less distracted by doing this with one of the same sex.

BobNesta420: jingks: I think road tests should include distraction like eating and talking on cellphones. It would get many bad drivers off the road.

What about road head? That should be included too?

Since that, doesnt happen nearly as often as eating while driving, an exemption will be made.

And I agree. If you cant talk on a phone (not text) while driving, you shouldnt be allowed to operate a motor-vehicle in the first place.

My Wednesday lunch is normally boiled eggs and salad, eaten in a Walmart parkng lot.

My lunch is too complicated to do on the run.

I'd be okay as long as this does not include parked people.

A ban on eating while driving is like helmet and seatbelt laws. It's not the law itself that's stupid, it's that officials feel there's a need for such a law because of stupid people who have no common sense.

So what's it going to take for the people in Chicago to finally get fed up and toss out their useless local politicians? How about a ban on drinking coffee while driving. That should go over well with your average morning commuter.

Most places have a "distracted driving" law on the books. This should be enough to deal with idiots trying to work a fondu system in their passenger seat while driving, but leave the guy snacking on some peanuts. In fact, there was no need for a cell phone ban since this should have covered it.

Evanston? Now, off to read the article...

Is road head still legal under this proposal?

Great Janitor: TheMega: Would never pass... cops would wind up being filmed chowing down on donuts and other free chow too many times.

Plus, get pulled over eating a small burger or something and munch down the last few bites - what proof would police have you were eating??? Any empty wrapper "from last week"?

What would concern me, proof. For example, here in Texas, having an empty beer can in your car is proof that you were drinking while driving and will be charged for a DUI. Even if you were just being a nice guy and picking up some empty cans off the side of the road or if someone opened up your car and tossed it in there.

With that in mind, what would prevent cops from parking outside of fast food joints and ticketting everyone who pulls out of the drive thru by saying "We don't need to actually see you eat, we just need to see you with food in the car within reach of the driver."

Sir, I detect the odor of bacon on your breath...

I'm going to have to take you down to the station for a blood sugar test. If you haven't eaten in 4 hours as you claim, it should be low.

How about just a legal limit for Blood Sugar Level for driving?

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: A ban on eating while driving is like helmet and seatbelt laws. It's not the law itself that's stupid, it's that officials feel there's a need for such a law because of stupid people who have no common sense.

That's why we have all manners of warnings and cautions stamped onto everything, and why these laws exist. Stupid people exist, they'll always exist, and it's because of them that the rest of us suffer.

I was just thinking we need more laws.

Seriously, distracted driving is already on the books. If someone is eating and driving perfectly, they win. If they're swerving, you already have a legal reason to pull them over.

Ah, yes, the Chicago suburb- home of the ban.

I love socialism. I'd like to have government sleep with me everyday.

But how will I eat my delicious deep dish pizza now? If I can't have a good pie while driving I may finally go postal.

Finally! We'll all be SAFE!

/For sure this time!

I don't think a ban is really needed, but if you simply can't wait to eat and you get in to an accident because some special sauce fell in your lap, you should be 100% liable.

Tyrannosaurus Reich: Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: A ban on eating while driving is like helmet and seatbelt laws. It's not the law itself that's stupid, it's that officials feel there's a need for such a law because of stupid people who have no common sense.

That's why we have all manners of warnings and cautions stamped onto everything, and why these laws exist. Stupid people exist, they'll always exist, and it's because of them that the rest of us suffer.

Speaking of such warnings and cautions, I've sometimes wondered why, from a legal standpoint, why it apparently doesn't work for a defendant to argue "We shouldn't have to put a warning or caution on our product because what could happen when used in the way the plaintiff used it is obvious" (or something like that)

Restaurants with drive-throughs in Oak Park -

McDonald's
Dunkin DOnuts
Popeye's
KFC
Wendy's
Tasty Dog
Buona Beef

And that's just north of the Eisenhower.

I've heard truckers tell stories of watching the female drivers in the vehicle next to them stirring the soup. I really hope they don't ban that.

Bans on both eating while driving and on using common sense?

That would really put a wrench in my morning commute. I take down a bagel and coffee on the way into work everyday. Am I really expected to just let it sit there until I get to my desk?

On the same topic, anyone who gets White Castle and doesn't eat it immediately after driving away is a MUCH stronger person than I.

Hawnkee: I've heard truckers tell stories of watching the female drivers in the vehicle next to them stirring the soup. I really hope they don't ban that.

Love the term "stirring the soup". Thanks for it; it's been added to my vernacular.

JoeBlack: I love socialism. I'd like to have government sleep with me everyday.

What does this have to do with socialsim?