Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderball
First, you're assuming the passenger is another adult educated in the rules of the road, and not someone ignorant of such things, like a child. Especially if this conversation is taking place from a backseat (which is should be, since children are at a high risk of lethal injury in a frontseat).
Second, the studies I've read say it can be as bad as driving drunk, depending on the person and how they react. We're not talking alcohol where its pretty much a universal constant. With that, comparing it to driving drunk is pretty simplistic... alcohol impairs more than reaction time, it impairs judgment, mobility and coordination.
As for the why should governments regulate it? I guess we come from different sides of the coin here. I think overprotective governments make people stupid more often than not, just like spoiling one's kids make them lazy and directionless more often than not. Why think when someone else will do it for me? There are certain univeral things that governments need to enforce, but when it comes to some things, like driving and talking on a cellphone (let alone something as absolutely ######ed as texting and driving), something in people's heads really should say, "hmm... this isn't safe, unless I (insert intelligent thing to mitigate danger)." So, I guess, is not forcing people to make smart decisions for themselves the mark of a caring government? Its a sad state when you see people doing clearly stupid and dangerous things, and their excuse is, "if it was that bad, there would be a law against it."
As for the finance issue... the question is (and there isn't really an answer for this floating around to my knowledge) what is actually cheaper long term, enforcement of this rule (cost of officers, vehicles, equipment, loss of man hours in a different branch of law enforcement (ie: downtown/east village patrols to which the police already claim to be shorthanded on)) or the clean-up and healthcare cost of the occasional exclusively cellphone-related accident. (I know this sounds very cold and heartless but that's the rationale for the financial issue, versus a more humanist point of view)
|
The masses are lazy, and frankly not very smart to begin with, might not be very nice, but the masses do need a little handholding.
By this rationale we should legalize drunk driving while we are at it.
We aren't talking about regulating every aspect of people's lives, it's ensuring that when people are controlling 100km/h missles we reduce the amount of distraction. Sure there may be other distractions like kids but why is that even relevant. If not talking on cell phones while driving is safer, then why not just do it?