Posted on 01/14/2009 5:17:04 AM PST by shortstop
Then the cops shouldn't be allowed to talk on their radios, run radar or play with their computers.
They give up their toys, I'll give up mine.
So let's just give the outlaws a competitive advantage - as usual.
No problem. If they have the phone, there will be a record of any text/voice/data transmissions with the provider.
Agreed. Very few wrecks are the result of unforseeable or unavoidable circumstance. Most are the direct result of operator error or negligence.
I agree, which is why I would just up the ante for people who cannot successfully yak and get where they are going without killing someone, which infringes on their liberty.
With freedom comes responsibility, and that is the thing we have lost.
Some people can pilot a cessena, some a 747, some an F-22, some just crash repeatedly in simulators without making a stain on the ground. Depends on the person.
Some can drive while multitasking, most, frankly, can't. Some don't 'see you' even if they aren't doing anything but driving (years of riding motorcycles taught me that, and I am a highly defensive driver as a result).
Nine of the last ten drivers who performed an illegal and dangerous maneuver in front of me whom I could ascertain one way or the other were talking on a handheld cell phone, 7 were druiving SUVs, and six of those were blonde women. I am not saying outlaw any of that, but in order to have people more realisticly evaluate their own capabilities, let's put some teeth in the lack of performance end of the envelope and let them decide what risk they are willing to take with their own life, not just those around them. I would wager people would spend more time catching up after their drive, and cut noncritical chatter to keep their own bits out of the wringer.
Sorry for my misunderstanding and thank you for the clarification.
Sorry, I don’t want to die of a theory. You can go ‘Lockerroom Constitutional Lawyer’ if you wish, but at the end of the day hand held electronic devices should not be used while operating a motor vehicle.
Thats just common sense.
As I said at the start of my post...
“I don’t agree with a national ban, “
What part of that is hard for you to understand?
When I was younger, we went for a ride with my mom’s cousin in a brand new car they’d just purchased. Her cousin asked my mom to change the radio station because the manual stated that due to the complexity of the radio, it should not be operated when the car was in motion.
It’s not a theory. It doesn’t matter what the action is, as soon as you make it illegal you have dismissed the very notion of liberty - freedom. Using your argument, then we should gan guns too - right? Because there are immature and irresponsible people who get hold of guns and very tragic things happen. That’s exactly the same idea of banning cell phone usage while driving - because of irresponsible people. Just because idiots do idiotic things doesn’t justify limiting the actions of everyone. Liberty cannot exist along side those ideals. I much rather prefer Liberty over a government attempting to keep me “safe”. One day they could feel that we would all be much “safer” living in small cells behind razor-wire fence - no thanks!
Like I said...you are all about ‘theory’.
I’m all about drivers being even more careless because they are distracted even futher.
I really should learn to proof read -—— *gan should read *ban
Wrong. Property is not protected under the Constitution, except to the extent the "takings" clause applies (which is minimally after Kelo). It does not apply at all to income or transfers of wealth. The Lochner case was overruled years ago. So the government is perfectly within its rights to impose, for example, a 100% income tax. Therefore, under your definition, since the right to earn a living is not protected under the Constitution, it is a "privilege granted by the state". That tripe belongs at DU - not here.
Not necessarily. And I think we should fine the traffic violation if one is committed while a cell phone is used or not used. But restricting cell phone usage based on a spurious correlation like cell phone usage to driving leads down a very slippery slope because most of the studies show hand held cell phone usage impairs driving as much as hands-free usage, eating, listening to the radio, or talking to someone. I prefer my freedom to the slight increase in safety.
Blonde women SUV drivers should be confined to quarters naked and well-scrubbed.
But I'm not sure that should be a federal law.
Everything after the "but".
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.