i gotta dissagree, thats the kind of nanny state BULLSHIT this country is known for....
do you not understand that people can ride in vehicles, above 5mph, without driving?
its obvious your not a texter, and therefore dont care about blanket outlawing it while in motion... i wonder how you would feel if they outlawed something youve been doing safely for YEARS?
PERSONALLY, i have a no-phone while driving rule, phone or text, its because I, not you, not anyone else, have deceided its not safe.
SELF CONTROL > GOVERNMENT CONTROL... its hilarious saying this, as i know for a fact theres some of you tea baggers talking positively about new laws curbing freedom... and its not even in the constitution!
If more people would exercise that sort of self-control, I wouldn't be anywhere near as irritated by it.
Ideally, I'd like to see us living in an easy-going anarchy and hang the government - or, at least, reduce them to their basic functions (protection of the body politic.)
However, how many people feel like it about you - and I? I don't drive on the phone except in cases of
extremis dire for the same reason - I don't consider it safe. If I don't think it's safe for other people to do, why should I think any differently for me?
If people would restrict themselves to doing it only when they had an emergency that required it, I wouldn't be bothered. If people would stop tuning out when they pick up the 'phone, I wouldn't be bothered.
But, most of these people out here can barely operate a motor vehicle - much less drive one! - in the first place. Allowing themselves to be willfully distracted while so doing is irresponsibility - both on their individual part, and on the part of society as a whole (the government should not need to step in - laws should be few, easily understood, and carry effective punishments. If you think incarceration is effective, I'm inclined to question your sanity. Having done volunteer work in jails, I contend otherwise.)
Simply put, the idea of the Social Contract has all but broken down - the problem is that is was caused by the intrusion of the Nanny State on people, and what rules we now have tend to be selectively - and relatively lightly - enforced. As stated, rules should be few, rigid, and thoroughly enforced and transgressions punished properly (bringing back the lash may have more effect on drunken drivers than six months' lockup, and the pillory may be effective as well.)
"The less you allow people to be responsible for, the less people will
be responsible for." I don't like having to agitate for a law - and I honestly think that between half and two-thirds of the laws currently on the books (at all levels) could be rescinded out of hand with little to no negative effect on society. I'd like to take a stab at it, but the penal system has become a growth industry (I'm not sure who to blame for that. Hell, Bob Barker - yes,
that Bob Barker - has been making jail uniforms for years...)
I see no logical nor ethical reason why the
entire body of law to which a person is subject -
anywhere in the country - cannot be contained in a smallish (pocket-sized) paperback volume that can be perused effectively in a week-end and distributed freely. But Hell, the
Vehicle Code alone won't fit in any pocket I own! (5-1/2"x8-1/2" by, oh, say three inches thick. And that's just California - that doesn't include all of the drivel in the first section of 49CFR - collectively known as FMVSS, or Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. Nor does that include the regs by CARB, CalEPA, or USEPA.)
However, I have a problem when the sort of irresponsibility that
endangers other people is being so obviously displayed. If you want to pitch yourself off a cliff, fine. If you want to see how fast your vehicle can go
when no-one else is on the road, fine. (The less said about what I think of current "driver training," the better. Frankly, I think they're doing a piss-poor job just about everywhere anymore.)
Protecting me from me is intolerable. Protecting me from
you (used generically) is borderline acceptable,
when you show a flagrant disregard for the safety of the people around you.
I honestly don't think that people who consistently distract themselves behind the wheel should not be allowed to drive anymore -
whatever form this distraction takes. Whether it's DWI, DWY, DWT, or just readin' a damn newspaper - if you get dobbed in for it consistently (thrice will serve,) you get your wings clipped. You can read, text, ride drunk all you want on the bus.
Think of it as a variation on "Your right to throw a punch ends where my nose begins." If you're going to willfully put others at risk, you damned well
should be punished! I honestly think that Driving While Intox shouldn't be a legitimate charge - call it Vehicular Assault" if they don't hit anyone, "Attempted Vehicular Manslaughter" if they do, and "Vehicular Homicide" if anyone dies. The difference between "impaired capacity" naturally and "impaired capacity" from drinking? You did it to yourself in the latter case...
