Posted on 08/26/2006 11:13:18 AM PDT by radar101
Your wit is in line with your debating skills.
I have to assume you ARE one of those self-important people who think your silly-ass little phone call is more important than other people's lives.
I don't wish bad on anyone but suffice it to say it would not suprise me to see you in prison for Involuntary Manslaughter for running someone over while yacking on the cell phone.
Got hyperbole? Strawment arguments don't cut it.
Do I need to give you a primer on whatit means to be in a Representative Republic and how laws are made?
I have been personally run out of my lane at least 10 times and was almost hit in a crosswalk when I had the green and every single time it was from someone driving while on a cell phone.
Scientific studies have shown the human brain can't properly multi-task when using a phone and that using a phone is the same as driving drunk.
Or do you think drunk driving laws are also a sign of a "Nanny State?"
As far as what you do or don't do, I clearly said "I assume" since you are defending such dangerous behavior. I also never use the phone when driving and I appreciate the fact you also show proper respect. Too bad most people don't.
I don't even want to scroll down and see the cheerleading for this statism.
Okay. I'll concede that I understand how you feel; I see the same things you see; people drifting out of their lanes, essentially traveling along in their own little world with just them and their phone. But, rather than castigate EVERYONE who uses a cellphone behind the wheel, let's be a bit more in-depth with our analysis fo the real problem.
As I see it; it's all about skill and personal capabilities.
Look. That State chants the mantra "Driving is not a right; it's a privilege". It is the State that erects itself as THE licensing authority. So, then, it seems to me that; if the level of skill exhibited among the driving masses leaves something to be desired -- people are licensed that can't drive and talk on the phone at the same time -- the the licensing authority has the obligation to raise the bar.
You are exactly right that people are literally getting killed out there, but it's not the phones that are the real problem; it's the level at which the State has deemed that a person may be licensed to drive. I frankly doubt that someone who has trouble driving while talking on the phone would have any less trouble driving while talking to a passenger, changing a CD, or drinking a soda.
I do not believe that there is a one-size-fits-all answer in the form of anti-_______ (fill in the blank with the 'distraction' of your choice) legislation. Rather, I firmly believe that answer lies in a one-size-fits-all raising of the bar for a license; perhaps even with the introduction of a tiered licensing structure such that those demonstrating greater skill are granted greater privilege.
Perhaps the existing license should be defined as a 'Basic' license that allows mobility within defined restrictions. For example, a Basic licensee may have unlimited surface street access but may not travel upon any highway, except in the rightmost lane, and may not pass slower traffic.
Add to the existing minimal testing requirements successful completion of a one-day closed-circuit driving course and you qualify for an 'Extended' license that grants full access privileges to all lanes. Courses could be required to be repeated at ten-year intervals to maintain proficiency. Anyone not passing the road course would still be able to get a 'Basic' license as long as they could pass the minimum requirements for it. 'Extended' licensees would receive a tag that they would be required to display in a corner of the windshield. This tag could be made of that vinyl that adheres to glass without any adhesive (if you've ever been to a 'Jiffy Lube', you've seen it) so it would be easily transferable from vehicle to vehicle. Countrfeit of such a tag would be a $50,000 fine and ten years in the slammer. Unauthorized usage of an 'Extended' tag would be a 2-point violation resulting in a $996 fine and 40 hours of public service (usually picking up garbage along the shoulder of the highway).
In this kind of a situation, 'Extended' licensees could be required to meet a higher bar on an ongoing basis or lose their 'Extended' license. For example, get a DUI as an 'Extended' licensee and you're busted down to 'Basic' license level FOR LIFE. Insurance companies could get in on the act and give premium breaks for 'Extended' license holders. Whatever the case, the upshot would be that the 'Extended' license would be recognized as a high-value license, and those in posession of one would drive far more carefully knowing that they had something valuable to lose if they were careless or inattentive.
All of the foregoing is just an example of what could be done, if there really was the will to fix the problem and not just get political points by having one's name on a piece of legislation addressing, but not really fixing, a social peeve.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.