So far the evidence we have says that some drivers can’t handle being on the phone while driving.
The logical conclusion to that is not to ban cell phones. Some drivers can’t handle changing radio stations while driving, yet we do not push for anti-radio legislation.
The answer, as I’ve said all along, is to ban distracted driving. That way the cop isn’t busy writing a ticket to the cell phone user who was driving perfectly while a guy eating McNuggets behind the wheel weaves dangerously past the traffic stop.
If someone’s not paying attention, they should be pulled over and given a ticket, whether their distraction is a cell phone, food, a girl on the sidewalk, or anything else. If someone’s driving perfectly and their eyes are on the road, they should be left alone, whether they’re talking or not.
OK, per Whitey’s request, I deleted his comments, but also shadowfax’s. It’s not a value judgment about who’s right, but to restore some flow and continuity. I’ve said this before, but it takes two people to have an argument. When you don’t engage, it can’t really go on…and just because someone gets the (air quotes) last word does not mean that the last word is the final, ultimate opinion.
When someone gets into an accident, why not give the investigators the right to get cell phone records of around the time of the accident of everyone involved?
If you’ve been using your phone (text, call, internet) within - say - 5 minutes of being in an accident, you’re automatically considered at fault and they’ll toss the book at you.
If you've been using your phone (text, call, internet) within - say - 5 minutes of being in an accident, you're automatically considered at fault and they'll toss the book at you.
Because that wouldn’t be proof of anything. Let’s say I hang up the phone call, and then get in my car and drive off. 1 minute later, I get in an accident. By your standards, the accident would automatically be my fault even though I wasn’t even in my car at the time of the phone call.