No. How about that?
Turn it off? It’s mobile. As in moving. As in traveling. It has a purpose and a function in that mode which is convenient and worth the cost of hardware, software and service.
Declaring someone can’t use technology and drive at the same time is a lazy categorical no different to ‘CO2 causes global warming’ except those who consider themselves non-PC view phones and drivers as a convenient target of scorn.
‘It’s as dangerous as DUI!’ Horseflop. Intoxication doesn’t disappear in a split second.
Are there many who are incapable of using both safely and responsibly? Yes. Are there are others who are not? Yes again.
But the point, as always, remains: is the state authorized or justified in adding yet another layer of surveillance especially for an unquantified/unquantifiable and therefore unprovable additional veneer of ‘safety?’
CDC and MADD and others are continually trying to define downward the standard for “intoxication”. Do you agree with Sweden’s 0.01 BAC standard? Our government wants to push it down to 0.03 (currently at 0.08 nationally down from 0.15 and CDC is advocating 0.05).
The mother who founded MADD left that organization decades ago and went on to lobby on behalf of the alcohol industry and drinking establishments. She was not out for neo-prohibitionism but she could see that’s what it had become.
“‘It’s as dangerous as DUI!’ Horseflop. Intoxication doesn’t disappear in a split second.”
Actually, you just supported the fact that cell phone users are FAR MORE dangerous than drunks since they get into accidents at the same rate but do so in just a few seconds.