NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20060527/sc_space/pollbancellphoneswhiledriving

A new survey finds two-thirds of Americans would support a law banning cell phone use while driving. Fewer than half, however, wish to make them illegal in restaurants and movie theaters.

That's right - your neighbor thinks you are too irresponsible to use your phone. Soon it will be banned - just like drinking two beers is. Burt nearly half also wish to revoke your pribvilege to speak on the phone in restaurants or a theater! Instead of rude you suddenly are a criminal! So what if your babysitter calls to tell you your child was just taken away by ambulance - there's people trying to enjoy "American Pie 4 - Tits on the Ritz" for gawds sake! We'll lock you up in the same cell as the guys busted with 1/4 oz of pot.

Making laws that turn everyone into criminals is so much more productive than consumer education. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile - there is evidence that using cell phones increases your chance of a car accident. So too does eating while driving, listening to music, talking with pasengers, driving over 55, driving while sleepy, and thinking about something other than driving. All of which should also be made illegal.

Your rights and responsibilty are secondary. The government is removing them for your own good! Now be good little sheep and rationalize why you should give up more of your freedom.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20060527/sc_space/pollbancellphoneswhiledriving

A new survey finds two-thirds of Americans would support a law banning cell phone use while driving. Fewer than half, however, wish to make them illegal in restaurants and movie theaters.

That's right - your neighbor thinks you are too irresponsible to use your phone. Soon it will be banned - just like drinking two beers is. Burt nearly half also wish to revoke your pribvilege to speak on the phone in restaurants or a theater! Instead of rude you suddenly are a criminal! So what if your babysitter calls to tell you your child was just taken away by ambulance - there's people trying to enjoy "American Pie 4 - Tits on the Ritz" for gawds sake! We'll lock you up in the same cell as the guys busted with 1/4 oz of pot.

Making laws that turn everyone into criminals is so much more productive than consumer education. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile - there is evidence that using cell phones increases your chance of a car accident. So too does eating, listening to music, talking with pasengers, driving over 55, driving while sleepy, and thinking about something other than driving. All of which should also be made illegal.

Your rights and responsibilty are secondary. The government is removing them for your own good! Now be good little sheep and rationalize why you should give up more of your freedom.

I guess they would prefer going back to the "old" ways of halting the movie and paging the viewer.

I fully agree with the driving bit, but theatre and restaurant should be up to the owners and peer pressure.

People who drvie while talking on cellphones are idiots and should probably be ticketed at least. Also, studies have shown that cellphones are more distracting than listening to music or carrying on conversations with other passengers.

People who drvie while talking on cellphones are idiots and should probably be ticketed at least. Also, studies have shown that cellphones are more distracting than listening to music or carrying on conversations with other passengers.


First - proove it. Second - so what? If what you say is true then the passengers are also distracting. Pass a law against hehm before someone gets killed. There's no way I'm going to allow someone to crash their car into me or my family just because they wanted to talk.


Also - you've really not been a good sheep and defended why more of your freedom should be revoked. Becuase other people are idiots? Sorry - we'd all be slaves if that were the only reason to give up freedom.

I think adults are responsible enough to choose whether or not they want to drive. I also think adults are responsible enough to choose whether or not to drink alcohol. However, I believe that any adult who chooses to do both of these at the same time is acting like an irresponsible dickhead, and deserves to be ticketted.

Same goes for cell phones. If the call is that important, pull the fuck over.

I think adults are responsible enough to choose whether or not they want to drive. I also think adults are responsible enough to choose whether or not to drink alcohol. However, I believe that any adult who chooses to do both of these at the same time is acting like an irresponsible dickhead, and deserves to be ticketted.

Same goes for cell phones. If the call is that important, pull the fuck over.


Riiight. Having a beer then driving is sooo irresponsible. You might burp and kill someone. And heaven forbid you try to drive and talk at the same time. (shudder)

Why is first approach to a problem always "ban it" instead of thinking of alternative solutions? Someone's got an obsession with punitive punishments.

Why is first approach to a problem always "ban it" instead of thinking of alternative solutions? Someone's got an obsession with punitive punishments.


OMG! You are too enlightened to post here. I'm passing a law against it now before you hurt someone!

Why is first approach to a problem always "ban it" instead of thinking of alternative solutions? Someone's got an obsession with punitive punishments.You mean like banning the usage of cell phones unless they're being used with a free speaking device so you don't have to be holding it to your ear?
That's how it is over here...

Riiight. Having a beer then driving is sooo irresponsible. You might burp and kill someone. And heaven forbid you try to drive and talk at the same time. (shudder)

You're kidding, right? Drinking and then driving is just insane. The same goes for making a mobile phone call. They both cause a loss of concentration for prolonged periods of time at a time when such concentration is vital.

You're kidding, right? Drinking and then driving is just insane. The same goes for making a mobile phone call. They both cause a loss of concentration for prolonged periods of time at a time when such concentration is vital.


Yes, drinking one beer is sooo reckless. (gasp!) Even listening to the radio is reckless - you may try to change the station and right at that moment a busload of nuns pulls out in front of you and they all DIE just because you didn't want to listen to "Macarena". :rolleyes: All distractions should be BANNED forever.

Yes, drinking one beer is sooo reckless. (gasp!) Even listening to the radio is reckless - you may try to change the station and right at that moment a busload of nuns pulls out in front of you and they all DIE just because you didn't want to listen to "Macarena". :rolleyes: All distractions should be BANNED forever.

The hell? I just stated that drinking impairs your ability to drive, as does talking on a cellphone. I never said they should be banned, so nice strawman there.

Riiight. Having a beer then driving is sooo irresponsible. You might burp and kill someone. And heaven forbid you try to drive and talk at the same time. (shudder)

Even drinking only one beer has a marginal effect on your ability to operate a vehicle. If you want to kill yourself in the privacy of your own home or in a bar or restaurant or anywhere else, go ahead.

However, I'd sure as hell prefer that any idiot stupid enough to drink and drive gets punished to the fullest extent of the law...you're allowed to drink as much as you want, but you're not allowed to put others' lives in danger by doing so.

Even drinking only one beer has a marginal effect on your ability to operate a vehicle. If you want to kill yourself in the privacy of your own home or in a bar or restaurant or anywhere else, go ahead. However, I'd sure as hell prefer that any idiot stupid enough to drink and drive gets punished to the fullest extent of the law...you're allowed to drink, but you're not allowed to put others' lives in danger by doing so.


Exactly what I was saying. All distractions should be banned. Drinking a beer, listening to the radio, Hell - even taking a decongestant reduces your reactions - ban them all! We need more laws NOW! I don't trust people to be responsible on their own - we need to make everything illegal then have our police arrest everyone!

Exactly what I was saying. All distractions should be banned. Drinking a beer, listening to the radio, Hell - even taking a decongestant reduces your reactions - ban them all! We need more laws NOW! I don't trust people to be responsible on their own - we need to make everything illegal then have our police arrest everyone!

They're not the same. You can turn off the cell phone or the radio or put down your food or beverage if they're a distraction but you can't just turn off or put down the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Judging by how many innocent people are killed every year by drunk drivers, I don't think people are responsible enough to make the decision not to drink and drive, and that's why such behavior has to be punished. Otherwise, a drunk driver can get away with crimes that a sober person would be imprisoned for.

Exactly what I was saying. All distractions should be banned. Drinking a beer, listening to the radio, Hell - even taking a decongestant reduces your reactions - ban them all! We need more laws NOW! I don't trust people to be responsible on their own - we need to make everything illegal then have our police arrest everyone!
Well hey, if we're creating bullshit extremist arguments, then let's not leave out the other side of things...

All activities should be allowed! Driving drunk, waving a loading gun around in a public square, bringing a nuclear weapon into City Hall...Hell, even killing a man can be a reasonable action in some situations, so allow it all! We need fewer laws! I trust people to know when it is and is not appropriate to kill one another, so we need to make it legal and quit having the police enforce laws on everyone!

Exactly what I was saying. All distractions should be banned. Drinking a beer, listening to the radio, Hell - even taking a decongestant reduces your reactions - ban them all! We need more laws NOW! I don't trust people to be responsible on their own - we need to make everything illegal then have our police arrest everyone!

Like having nagging spouses and irritating kids in the car while you're driving too?

Like having nagging spouses and irritating kids in the car while you're driving too?
I want to go on record as saying that I am totally ok with banning spouses and irritating children.

They're not the same. You can turn off the cell phone or the radio or put down your food or beverage if they're a distraction but you can't just turn off or put down the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Judging by how many innocent people are killed every year by drunk drivers,
According to whom??
http://www.getmadd.com/
Exactly 16,694 alcohol-related deaths! That's the government's number for 2004. They imply that it is exact--sure looks like it is-- but quietly admit it is just an estimate. They also publish another estimated number: 14,409 as the number of deaths involving a drunk driver and then admit that there is nothing in either of their numbers to indicate that alcohol was the cause of these deaths. They admit none of their numbers are based solely on a computation of actual deaths and that their estimates are based on data that is, on average, 60% incomplete. They admit to profiling certain age groups and genders in deciding if maybe alcohol was involved in a traffic death. They admit prejudice toward people who own pick-up trucks and those who drive late at night in making their ASSumptions. They admit that no other civilized country uses their methods of imputation, profiling and guessing, to come up with drunk driving statistics. Finally, they admit that their staggering numbers may be misused and misinterpreted by special interest groups.
You really oughta get your facts straight before you make such blanket statements.

I don't think people are responsible enough to make the decision not to drink and drive, and that's why such behavior has to be punished. Otherwise, a drunk driver can get away with crimes that a sober person would be imprisoned for.

Who said anything about drunks? There is a difference between drinking and drunk. People can also not choose to stop being 'under the influence' of decongestants, pain killers, and sleep deprivation. By your standards they too should be punished. And - just because someone can turn off the distraction - if they chooses not to then they too ought to be punished by your standards - right?

Well hey, if we're creating bullshit extremist arguments, then let's not leave out the other side of things...

All activities should be allowed! Driving drunk, waving a loading gun around in a public square, bringing a nuclear weapon into City Hall...Hell, even killing a man can be a reasonable action in some situations, so allow it all! We need fewer laws! I trust people to know when it is and is not appropriate to kill one another, so we need to make it legal and quit having the police enforce laws on everyone!

Straw man. Nice try. There is a far difference between drinking a beer and carrying nuclear arms. One requires a law - the other does not.

Like having nagging spouses and irritating kids in the car while you're driving too?


Nagging spouses should be illegal based on their own merits alone. But yes, you draw a good point. It should be either illegal or all cars should be equipped with sound-activated ejector seats.

Straw man.

Um, the word you were looking for was "satire."


There is a far difference between drinking a beer and carrying nuclear arms. One requires a law - the other does not.
Well gosh, if you say so! I guess there's no more arguing on this topic. Move along, folks, nothing to see here.

Um, the word you were looking for was "satire."


Well gosh, if you say so! I guess there's no more arguing on this topic. Move along, folks, nothing to see here.


No, straw man is the accurate descrpition of your failed attempt to make a misrepresentation of my position then refute it under those terms. Sarcasm would be if I pretended that it was a good attempt, and satire would be if I pointed out that your name would be improoved if it were preceed by 'beer' or at least 'recycleable'.

Banning talking mobile phones in cars has already happened here in the UK, and it makes a hell of a lot of sense, as does not drinking and driving.
However, i think it should be up to the individual restaurant/cinema (in fact most cinemas prevent from having your mobile phone on in cinemas here) as to whether or not you should be allowed. I think it should merely be discouraged.

There are obviously a lot of people who are NOT responsible! Driving while under the influence of alchohol, decongestants, pain killers, and sleep deprivation SHOULD be punished. They should be required to pull over before making cellphone calls. And they should be allowed to gag spouses & kids. :p

There are obviously a lot of people who are NOT responsible! Driving while under the influence of alchohol, decongestants, pain killers, and sleep deprivation SHOULD be punished. They should be required to pull over before making cellphone calls. And they should be allowed to gag spouses & kids. :p


EXACTLY! Roadside capital punishment NOW!

Banning talking mobile phones in cars has already happened here in the UK, and it makes a hell of a lot of sense, as does not drinking and driving.
However, i think it should be up to the individual restaurant/cinema (in fact most cinemas prevent from having your mobile phone on in cinemas here) as to whether or not you should be allowed. I think it should merely be discouraged.


What about all the other distractions and impairments? Why haven't you made them illegal yet? Doesn't your government care about safety?

-snip-
You really oughta get your facts straight before you make such blanket statements.

Even if only one person died from drunk driving, that would make it unacceptable. Several thousand people who did not have to die were killed because people decided to drink and drive...and if we allowed it, the drunk drivers would just get away with killing innocent people.

So, what happens if a person is sober, kills a person with their car, and then drinks to make it look like they were drunk? Do they get away with it scot-free?


Who said anything about drunks? There is a difference between drinking and drunk. People can also not choose to stop being 'under the influence' of decongestants, pain killers, and sleep deprivation. By your standards they too should be punished. And - just because someone can turn off the distraction - if they chooses not to then they too ought to be punished by your standards - right?

Absolutely they should be punished if they're under the influence. One drink can impair your ability to react to stimuli while driving...it's your responsibility to drive responsibly, and if you don't you deserve the punishment that you accepted as an outcome for irresponsible driving. Operating a vehicle is a contract.

They know they are unable to drive a vehicle safely but do so anyway, so they deserve punishment for a crime they knowingly committed. When you drive a vehicle, you do so knowing it is totally your responsibility for anything that happens while you operate that vehicle, and if you are under the influence of a drug or are otherwise unable to operate the vehicle safely you do so knowingly and are fully liable for doing so.

Unless you have a device to talk on the cellphone while driving, without having to hold the phone with your hand, talking on the cellphone while driving should be totally illegal. Its not just the distraction caused by the talking itself, but the fact that you would be driving single handely.

Here its illegal to talk on the cellphone while driving if you have to use your hand to hold it the whole time, so you get a device, or just pull over.

All distractions should be BANNED forever.
There was a report on the network news a couple weeks ago that determined that 80 percent of auto accidents were caused by not paying attention to driving. Duh! That should foretell the end of radios, cellphones, dvd players, newspapers, makeup mirrors, passengers, outdoor advertising, spectacular views, etc.

Even if only one person died from drunk driving, that would make it unacceptable. Several thousand people who did not have to die were killed because people decided to drink and drive...and if we allowed it, the drunk drivers would just get away with killing innocent people.

Hmm, One person, eh? Then lets ban people over the age of 80 from driving, ban showers, ban public and private swimming pools, ban parasailing, ban motorcycles, ban power tools, ban aircraft, ban food that is large enough to choke on. etc. etc. etc. Too dangerous. You are not responsible enough to operate one if even just one person dies in or as a result of that activity.

Meanwhle - you say 'thousands' are killed by drunk drivers. By what sample size? World wide? United States? Texas? Dallas? Really - it makes a difference. So too does the accuracy of your data - which is questionable at best. (baaa? says the sheep!) Here;
http://www.getmadd.com/
NHTSA and MADD proclaimed that 17,970* people were killed by drunk drivers in 2002. We say prove it!
Click here for details on our $20,000 challenge! (http://www.getmadd.com/20000reward.htm)


So, what happens if a person is sober, kills a person with their car, and then drinks to make it look like they were drunk? Do they get away with it scot-free? WTF are you talking about?


Absolutely they should be punished if they're under the influence. One drink can impair your ability to react to stimuli while driving...it's your responsibility to drive responsibly, and if you don't you deserve the punishment that you accepted as an outcome for irresponsible driving. Operating a vehicle is a contract.

They know they are unable to drive a vehicle safely but do so anyway, so they deserve punishment for a crime they knowingly committed. When you drive a vehicle, you do so knowing it is totally your responsibility for anything that happens while you operate that vehicle, and if you are under the influence of a drug or are otherwise unable to operate the vehicle safely you do so knowingly and are fully liable for doing so.

I see - so, by your logic, if you have an accident while NOT under the influence of anything then all is forgiven.

There was a report on the network news a couple weeks ago that determined that 80 percent of auto accidents were caused by not paying attention to driving. Duh! That should foretell the end of radios, cellphones, dvd players, newspapers, makeup mirrors, passengers, outdoor advertising, spectacular views, etc.

Exactly. I think accidents should be banned. People should just stop before they happen. How hard is that?!?!?!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20060527/sc_space/pollbancellphoneswhiledriving

A new survey finds two-thirds of Americans would support a law banning cell phone use while driving. Fewer than half, however, wish to make them illegal in restaurants and movie theaters.

That's right - your neighbor thinks you are too irresponsible to use your phone. Soon it will be banned - just like drinking two beers is. Burt nearly half also wish to revoke your pribvilege to speak on the phone in restaurants or a theater! Instead of rude you suddenly are a criminal! So what if your babysitter calls to tell you your child was just taken away by ambulance - there's people trying to enjoy "American Pie 4 - Tits on the Ritz" for gawds sake! We'll lock you up in the same cell as the guys busted with 1/4 oz of pot.

Making laws that turn everyone into criminals is so much more productive than consumer education. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile - there is evidence that using cell phones increases your chance of a car accident. So too does eating while driving, listening to music, talking with pasengers, driving over 55, driving while sleepy, and thinking about something other than driving. All of which should also be made illegal.

Your rights and responsibilty are secondary. The government is removing them for your own good! Now be good little sheep and rationalize why you should give up more of your freedom.

I don't own a cell phone, personally, but I think this is nuts. I mean, most people know how prohibition worked out.

Compromise and get a hands free set. Then everyone's happy.

Oh, sorry - you should have the right to text message while driving and endanger others, right?

Unless you have a device to talk on the cellphone while driving, without having to hold the phone with your hand, talking on the cellphone while driving should be totally illegal. Its not just the distraction caused by the talking itself, but the fact that you would be driving single handely.

Here its illegal to talk on the cellphone while driving if you have to use your hand to hold it the whole time, so you get a device, or just pull over.

You have a point. Driving with only one hand should be illegal (meaning manual transmission should be banned)

In the UK driving while talking on a handheld mobile phone is illegal, as is drink driving, and driving while under the influence of drugs (and that includes some painkillers and decongestants- there's no distinction made between legal and illegal drugs here while driving).

You can buy a handfree kit for a few pounds, and that way you have both hands free to drive. Works fine here.

You have a point. Driving with only one hand should be illegal (meaning manual transmission should be banned)

Driving includes manual transmission. Therefore, while talking to the cellphone with one hand, you only have one hand to the wheel and no hand to the transmission, not to mention, when you change a gear, you take 3 seconds, when you make a call, you generally take more than one minute. You really like making easy jokes, dont you?

Compromise and get a hands free set. Then everyone's happy.

Oh, sorry - you should have the right to text message while driving and endanger others, right?


You're getting closer. Dangerous driving is dangerous driving. You don't need to break it down ad infinitum and create laws for every subset. If you kill someone while distracted yelling at your rambunctious kids in the back seat or if you kill someone while yelling at your rambunctious kids on the cell phone - they are no more or less dead and you are no more or less at fault.

Driving includes manual transmission. Therefore, while talking to the cellphone with one hand, you only have one hand to the wheel and no hand to the transmission, not to mention, when you change a gear, you take 3 seconds, when you make a call, you generally take more than one minute. You really like making easy jokes, dont you?

Right. We need a law against driving with no hands and we need it quick!

Changing gears is still more dangerous than not changing them. Especially if you have more than one gear and live in the city. Between stoplights you'll spend nearly all of your time shifting. How RECKLESS!!!

Right. We need a law against driving with no hands and we need it quick!

Changing gears is still more dangerous than not changing them. Especially if you have more than one gear and live in the city. Between stoplights you'll spend nearly all of your time shifting. How RECKLESS!!!

Is it all a joke to you? You change gears, you have to. Did i say that changing gears was dangerous? No. I was countering your answer. So, why dont you try and stop the sarcasm? Its really not working.

Is it all a joke to you? You change gears, you have to. Did i say that changing gears was dangerous? No. I was countering your answer. So, why dont you try and stop the sarcasm? Its really not working.

Um, I believe it was you who concluded that driving with one hand is reckless. I am simply agreeing with you.

Um, I believe it was you who concluded that driving with one hand is reckless. I am simply agreeing with you.

It is. And by driving i mean not just handling the wheel, but also changing the gears, making signals, whatever.
If i missed your point, im sorry for that.

It is. And by driving i mean not just handling the wheel, but also changing the gears, making signals, whatever.
If i missed your point, im sorry for that.

Nope - if having only one hand on the wheel is dangerous under one circumstance then it is dangerous in all circumstances. It don't matter if you are using the other hand to change gears, hold a soda, hold a phone or whack your pud.

Nope - it having only one hand on the wheel is dangerous onder one circumstance then it is dangerous in all circumstances. It don't matter if you are using the other hand to change gears, lhold a soda, hold a phone or whack your pud.

Well, yeah, you do have a point there. However, you have to change gears and signals in order to drive safely. So, holding a soda in the other hand is not exacly smart, since you need both hands on the wheel, to change gears, and signal. Thats my point from the beggining.

Well, yeah, you do have a point there. However, you have to change gears and signals in order to drive safely. So, holding a soda in the other hand is not exacly smart, since you need both hands on the wheel, to change gears, and signal. Thats my point from the beggining.

Actually I completely disagree with your presumption in every way. People don't need an endless litalny of rules to drive safe - they need common sense and decent instruction/education. If someone is reckless we don't need a law governing their specific behavior to define it as reckless - reckless is enough to warrant corrective behavior. If others do it without being reckless then so be it. We do not need to criminalize everyone for the weaknesses of some.

Actually I completely disagree with your presumption in every way. People don't need an endless litalny of rules to drive safe - they need common sense and decent instruction/education. If someone is reckless we don't need a law governing their specific behavior to define it as reckless - reckless is enough to warrant corrective behavior. If others do it without being reckless then so be it. We do not need to criminalize everyone for the weaknesses of some.

And we need to put the other drivers in jeoparty just because? I get your point that there shouldnt be laws dictating everything we do or not. But hell, something can be controlled, others dont. Drunk driving, talking on the cellphone, are more easily controlled than being totally distracted and not knowing what your doing while driving. And yes, i agree with you that all we need is common sense. But people dont work on common sense, do they? Most accidents happen due to human inconscience, people kill, steal, rape. We need laws to "control" people, anarchy doesnt work, human common sense is just that bad.

And we need to put the other drivers in jeoparty just because? I get your point that there shouldnt be laws dictating everything we do or not. But hell, something can be controlled, others dont. Drunk driving, talking on the cellphone, are more easily controlled than being totally distracted and not knowing what your doing while driving. And yes, i agree with you that all we need is common sense. But people dont work on common sense, do they? Most accidents happen due to human inconscience, people kill, steal, rape. We need laws to "control" people, anarchy doesnt work, human common sense is just that bad.

You're so close to the right answer it almost hurts! You're getting warmer... warmer... HOT HOT HOT OUCH You're on fire!! HOT.. oooh, cooling off... getting warm again... HOT HOT HOT OUCH!

Fewer laws does not equal anarchy. Most people DO work on common sense. (or else we'd all be posting this while driving down the interstate and doing shots of Jack) When people get distracted or impaired it is a lapse of common sense. We do not need a litany of laws to know these things are bad. We do not need to manufacture criminal behavior. Reckless behavior is all that needs to be illegal and enforced. You really should puruse this site for some insigt into what happens when laws overreach;
http://www.getmadd.com

Cell phones are the fourth scourge of humankind. We've gotten off very well without them. Why are they suddenly so necessary?

Cell phones are the fourth scourge of humankind. We've gotten off very well without them. Why are they suddenly so necessary?

I like that my babysitter can reach me no matter where I go.

You're so close to the right answer it almost hurts! You're getting warmer... warmer... HOT HOT HOT OUCH You're on fire!! HOT.. oooh, cooling off... getting warm again... HOT HOT HOT OUCH!

Fewer laws does not equal anarchy. Most people DO work on common sense. (or else we'd all be posting this while driving down the interstate and doing shots of Jack) When people get distracted or impaired it is a lapse of common sense. We do not need a litany of laws to know these things are bad. We do not need to manufacture criminal behavior. Reckless behavior is all that needs to be illegal and enforced. You really should puruse this site for some insigt into what happens when laws overreach;
http://www.getmadd.com

So, erm, is it dangerous for me to say that we actually have the same point? Except the fact that i believe that talking on the cellphone while driving should be criminalized, and you dont. I know fewer laws are not equal to anarchy, maybe i made a bad example. But here in Portugal, about everyone drove and answered the mobile phone at the same time, it was criminalized, because lots of accidents were happening because drivers were on the phone and the law did help (based on statistics and news and whatevers i saw at the time, sorry, i have nothing concrete to back this up), but i do believe that if means less accidents and less people dying on the roads, a law like this is ok to be enforced.

I read a little of that site and do agree with some of the things. You think drunk driving should be decriminalized? One thing is having one beer and drive, another thing is driving totally wasted, that, should be criminalized.

So, erm, is it dangerous for me to say that we actually have the same point? Except the fact that i believe that talking on the cellphone while driving should be criminalized, and you dont. I know fewer laws are not equal to anarchy, maybe i made a bad example. But here in Portugal, about everyone drove and answered the mobile phone at the same time, it was criminalized, because lots of accidents were happening because drivers were on the phone and the law did help (based on statistics and news and whatevers i saw at the time, sorry, i have nothing concrete to back this up), but i do believe that if means less accidents and less people dying on the roads, a law like this is ok to be enforced.

I read a little of that site and do agree with some of the things. You think drunk driving should be decriminalized? One thing is having one beer and drive, another thing is driving totally wasted, that, should be criminalized.

Driving totally wasted IS reckless - we don't need two laws for that. Talking on the cell phone may be distracting (and believe me I think people who cannot do both yet do so anyway deserver to be beaten with stale marshmallows) but making a law aginst it is useless. Enforcing laws against reclkess driging can do the trick. Having 'focus' enforcement can also get the job done - but eduation and information are far more useful than redundant, infringing, or just plain stupid laws.

Driving totally wasted IS reckless - we don't need two laws for that. Talking on the cell phone may be distracting (and believe me I think people who cannot do both yet do so anyway deserver to be beaten with stale marshmallows) but making a law aginst it is useless. Enforcing laws against reclkess driging can do the trick. Having 'focus' enforcement can also get the job done - but eduation and information are far more useful than redundant, infringing, or just plain stupid laws.

Yeah, i totally agree with you. Like i said before, i just think some laws should be enforced because they might actually help. That is all, and this is my last post on this thread, i guess.