[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

I've been reading and following the thread since it was posted. I've commented a few times in the thread, but thanks for your concern. I've read the posts that support and oppose my position. I haven't said anyone was wrong, but gave my side of the debate. I disagree that the possibility that the police could search through a person's phone is worth letting them text and drive. I think driving is hard enough, and that laws to help prevent accidents, injuries and fatalities should be explored. I don't see it as taking away someone's personal liberties.

I just don't see why you'd get riled up over something that everyone agrees as dangerous. Maybe it's over the top, but the current way isn't curbing the appetite for texting and driving. If the police wanted to seize your phone for speeding, I'd agree that seems dumb. Your phone had no part in breaking the law. If you take away someone's phone, they can't text and drive. If you want to keep your phone, don't text and drive. It's easier for all parties to take the phone, rather than the car. People don't need their phones. People existed, and thrived, without phones. Yes, I like my phone; it makes my life easier and I want to keep it. I won't text while driving in order for this to happen.

If a person was found driving with an open case of beer in the car, the police would take away the beer. Does this infringe on the personal liberties? I don't find either of these situation much different from each other.

Exactly. If you get pulled over with a bottle of unopened whiskey on your passenger seat the police will confiscate it. I would say that people should just be happy they get their phone back after 24 hours because you don't get your booze back.