A law is a good idea when 3rd parties can be negatively affected. So yes to a ban on texting while driving, but no to helmet laws. And no to spending tens of millions of dollars to advertize a law.
THERE SHOULD BE ONE LAW REGARDING THIS AND MANY OTHER ACTIONS WHEN DRIVING. NTM, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD NEVER EVEN HAVE A SAY IN THIS. THE ONE THIS THAT SHOULD BE PASSED BY THE STATES, IS JUST A LAW AGAINST RECKLESS DRIVING.
There is the freedom to do whatever you like. However everyone can agree that does not apply to anything that directly leads to the harm of another. Which is where The Law comes in.
In Australia, every State Police Force can give tickets for texting or even holding your phone and speaking on it. It was brought in because the public cost through insurance and injuries of excessive collisions caused by text/phone call distractions was just too high. Texting while driving directly leads to harm.
@bcklipfel This law makes it easier to prosecute people who text while driving. Otherwise each texting driver can argue in court that they weren't really distracted, and it's an invitation for endless litigation. If it didn't cost a dollar to enact, I would support this law.
Maybe what ought to happen with issues like these is for non-profit charities to be set up to educate the public.
A non-profit organization could do commercials or something a bit more creative such as a car simulator & offer a prize of $10k to the person who could drive a 10 mile route without getting into an accident or even veering out of the lane in the simulator while constantly texting & reading texts. This might get through to teenagers who wouldn't text while they are playing MW3.
Whittle is right. If people don't realize you have to PAY ATTENTION to their driving, whether they're texting or eating, or talking on the phone, some silly law isn't really going to do anything to change the situation, Yup...nanny statism at its finest.
How do you enforce this? Cop: sir I need to see your cell phone.... Already happening...
denniscasey5 1 week ago
Republican Field Head to Head Polling VS Obama
*data from Real Clear Politics (dot) com
Romney: 33 months worth of polling (136 polls total)
28 wins, 14 ties, 94 losses – 20.59% winning percentage
Averages losing to Obama by 1.8%
Gingrich: 21 months worth of polling (71 polls total)
2 wins, 1 ties, 68 losses – 2.82% winning percentage
Averages losing to Obama by 11.0%
Any candidate other than Romney is an easy win for Obama.
miturbinesdurti 1 month ago
A law is a good idea when 3rd parties can be negatively affected. So yes to a ban on texting while driving, but no to helmet laws. And no to spending tens of millions of dollars to advertize a law.
koyunbaba73 1 month ago
Of course it should be illegal. I can't tell you how many times I've almost been hit by these fools!
Yesica1993 1 month ago
Well, we don't have the $10 million so forget it already.
henrycate 1 month ago
THERE SHOULD BE ONE LAW REGARDING THIS AND MANY OTHER ACTIONS WHEN DRIVING. NTM, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD NEVER EVEN HAVE A SAY IN THIS. THE ONE THIS THAT SHOULD BE PASSED BY THE STATES, IS JUST A LAW AGAINST RECKLESS DRIVING.
riddler251 1 month ago
National Socialists nice allusion to the NSDAP
Which is where we heading full speed ahead.
Winky395 1 month ago
When they mandated seat belts in cars we started down this slope
why should we resist anything at this point? We should stop whining and realize that
we are unable to lead our lives without government intervention.
They know best.
Winky395 1 month ago
There is the freedom to do whatever you like. However everyone can agree that does not apply to anything that directly leads to the harm of another. Which is where The Law comes in.
In Australia, every State Police Force can give tickets for texting or even holding your phone and speaking on it. It was brought in because the public cost through insurance and injuries of excessive collisions caused by text/phone call distractions was just too high. Texting while driving directly leads to harm.
Siegetower 1 month ago
We already have laws against distracted driving. Why do we need a law aimed specifically at texting?
bcklipfel 1 month ago
@bcklipfel This law makes it easier to prosecute people who text while driving. Otherwise each texting driver can argue in court that they weren't really distracted, and it's an invitation for endless litigation. If it didn't cost a dollar to enact, I would support this law.
GarrettPetersen 1 month ago
Maybe what ought to happen with issues like these is for non-profit charities to be set up to educate the public.
A non-profit organization could do commercials or something a bit more creative such as a car simulator & offer a prize of $10k to the person who could drive a 10 mile route without getting into an accident or even veering out of the lane in the simulator while constantly texting & reading texts. This might get through to teenagers who wouldn't text while they are playing MW3.
MrConservative608 1 month ago
Whittle is right. If people don't realize you have to PAY ATTENTION to their driving, whether they're texting or eating, or talking on the phone, some silly law isn't really going to do anything to change the situation, Yup...nanny statism at its finest.
r1pbuck 1 month ago
Do you have any idea how many men drive while getting a blow-job or even just a hand-job? Those are hands free, so are they okay?
captainpisshard 1 month ago