Hands free

As most of you might or might not know (there, I have covered all options) starting midnight, no driving with a phone to your ear in California!

The rule is simple. You can use the phone to dial out. You just cannot talk while driving, unless you are on speaker phone, or you use a "hands free" device!

Apparently the wise powers that be, in the Great state of California, have decided that this law, is going to make the roads safe, or at least, safer.

Word on the street was that the local electronics stores and Costcos were seeing long lines, with the hands free "bluetooth" devices selling like hot cakes. So, checked out a few options today and bought devices for myself and San. After the purchase and during the drive home, the mind wandered "free", and asked a lot of questions, aided by the various things observed in passing.

1. Why would it be okay to dial a phone (when you are hands and eye free) but not okay to talk?

2. Why would it be okay to drink "Starbucks" coffee and drive with one hand, but not hold a phone and drive? Could it be because promoting hands free devices, forces people to go to the store and buy a product which otherwise would be a novelty? and starbucks has not yet come up with a Handsfree drinking mechanism?

3. Could I come up with say, a hat that has a lining where you pour your starbucks coffee and there is an automatic straw that goes into your mouth for "hands free" sipping?

4. would I make a killing in the stock market if I patent such hat and straw?

5. The girl who just nearly missed the signal, being busy with her makeup and hair brushing (and who also pissed off half a dozen drivers behind her on the left turn only lane) would still be a danger on the road. How can we do "hands free" makeup?

6. Based on an average device making 30% gross margin, with the average device selling for 40 bucks, someone out there is making a lot of money this week?

7. How much did those guys pay, to get this law passed?

8. Why are there so many cops on the road today? Are they practicing for tomorrow?

9. If 1/3rd of the drivers with cell phones are safe, and 1/3rd have purchased the devices and paid their dues, the other 1/3rd will pay the fine to the highway patrol and the state government. How much will the State make?

10. Who the hell makes these rules anyways? We are supposed to work more, be more efficient, multitask to the point that dudes are talking to themselves in restrooms while peeing! No seriously, saw this today where it appeared the guy was talking to his thing.. because he looked down and was talking! Then when he was washing his hands, noticed that he had this earpiece on his right ear (which was not visible to me, when I was standing next to him).

For some reason, he thought it prudent to lower his voice in the restroom, which it made it all the more spooky. Thought he was whispering terms of endearment to his little guy! How then in a world where this happens, are we to stay away from cell phones?

11. Already Brahmin boys have to deal with pulling their "poonal", put it around their ears when they go "pee pee". What would happen to a Tambram boy who is wearing a poonal, spectacles, and a hands free? What if the whole thing gets into one tangled mess around his right ear and it all rips loose on the urinal?

12. Why didn't I buy stock in handsfree device companies a year ago? Why? Why? Why? Could have at least made money there, to compensate for what was spent today!

13. Will they actually collect impartial data over the next month or so and publish it to show if this rule actually reduced accident rates?

14. Will they actually share information, on how much money was made in fines and hands free earpiece sales over the next month?

15. Does the I-phone Junta have some cool out of the world device, that makes the cyborg looking thing I bought, look out of date? Is there an I-Free?

etc. etc. etc.

Came home grumpy, knowing that yet again, the average dude is still an average dude. A person who can only feel powerless against a law making machinery that takes ones tax dollars and finds new ways to screw him.

As soon as I entered the house though, the little one and Jr. cheered me up, with their "hands free" hugging. The little one jumped on me, clung tight like "boots the monkey" and said "Don't hold me daddy. Don't hold me with your hands. Keep walking. I keep huggy-ing you!"

Now that is one hands free, that more than makes up for all those other thoughts.

.

In the drivers seat ?

Parent's magazine had an article on the previous issue about the top three mistakes driving mother's make which cause serious accidents or fatalities. These should have been generalized to any person who drives around with kids in the vehicle, because men who drive the "mommy van's" as equally guilty of the same mistakes!

They were :

a. trying to calm down fighting kids by looking back or sending one hand back to touch the kid in the backseat
b. feeding the kid or yourself while driving
c. talking on the cell phone while driving.

Of course we could always add the special case of :

d. trying to operate a DVD player that is behind you with one hand because the kids want you to go back to the previous song!

But these are the standard offenses. This post is not about them. This is about something even more fundamental with kids in a van. The seat belt!

Apparently it is safe for kids only if they are in their car seats or booster seats and nicely buckled up. One can understand this logic, especially with all those videos you see with kid sized crash test dummies flying out of windshields during accidents when not buckled up!

Unfortunately, real kids are not as co-operative as crash test dummies. The day my kids look as calm and serene in their seats, accident imminent or otherwise, I would gladly keep my mouth shut!

In our case, putting the seat belts on is supposed to be safe for the kids, but it is highly unsafe for the driver! Jr. has learnt to unbuckle her seat belt on her own and baby has a tolerance limit of about 5 minutes in her car seat. By the time we reach the end of the street she is screaming her head off trying to get out of the belt. That said, it is impossible to focus on the road and drive, with one kid floating around the van like a free electon in a metal lattice and another one setting new records for the maximum decibel level ever achieved in a confined space of 150 cubic feet or less!

Are there any alternatives to seat belts for kids ? (I am talking legally allowed alternatives here! I already know that they will be quiet without the belts). If anyone knows of any, please do let me know.

In the meantime, I have an idea. How about I make an inflatable cushion that takes the shape of the back part of the van. The kid sits inside this box and it can be padded so well that even if the kid bounces off the walls of this enclosure, they will be safe! I am modeling this based on the space shuttle here!! Would that have a chance of making it through the transport authorities ?

Please note that I said "kid" and not "kids". The only thing more dangerous than a free floating kid in a van is, another kid! There has to be separate enclosures for each kid. If horses, cattle and wild animals can be transported on highways without restraint, why can't I transport two wilder, crazier, out of control creatures with the same rules?

That brings me to the topic of "If my wife or mother-in-law release a kid from the seat, because the kids is making a racket (this in spite of my pleas to keep them in the seat), then who gets the ticket if we are stopped by the cop ? Me, or the wife ? or mother-in-law ? ". If anyone knows the answer to that one, please let me know as well.

.