While I agree that texting and using a cell phone when driving is a distraction and dangerous, I have to ask at what point is continued regulation too much? If we are going to make using a cell phone while driving illegal, then why do the governments (state and federal) not also madate making radios, CD players, Ipod’s, GPS and other new auto technologies illeagal for a driver to use while operating a motor vehicle? Again, regardless of these things being proven to be a distraction, I belive that there is a big difference between turning a dial or pushing numbers and getting into a car with a BAC of .08 or more.
If I had to take my chances, I would rather face a texting driver than a drunk driver any day of the week.
Texting and driving is not worse than Drunk Driver. And saying we can’t talk on the phone and drive? That’s taking this way to far. From what the article says, the crewmate was away from his post. He was violating company policy. In that case, what difference would making it illegal make? People will break the law and for good reasons sometimes. Also, I would absolutely take a call if I found out my son was in trouble. That is a family emergency. Also, if they were anchored with engines off, how did the boat run into them? Wouldn’t that make it the fault of the other boat? This is absurd.
Texting creates a level of distraction that is much higher than talking while driving. Research has found that just talking on a cell phone while driving is an impairment comparable to driving at .08; no doubt texting is much worse. In my book the safety improvement is well worth the imposition of this regulation. Please pull over while you text, Why Bother.
This is a no-brainer. People are dying because of this and there’s such an easy fix. We seemed to get along just fine before we had cell phones and we were drivnig our cars. It should be easy to go back to those days or require hands free operations. Many companies already their employees to do such while driving on company business as a risk management procedure.
“Why Bother” took the words out of my mouth. He is absolutely correct. Where does one stop? IT’s not holding the phone that’s the problem so much, but rather the driver talking or listening to someone that is distracting. Shall we ban people talking in cars, enforceable by a constantly running recorder that is accessible in the event of an accident?
How about medical issues? Once someone has a license, he or she can come down with numerous ailments that increase risks of driving tremendosly, but little is done.
It’s a risky world. When it’s your turn to be tagged, you will be out.
People are DYING because of misuse of phones. I’m as anti-regulation as they come. One could ban the use of cars as they kill 40,000-50,000 people in the US every year. I don’t suggest we do that. But when a selfish person causes the death of another because they can’t wait to call somebody (again before we had cell phones we never even had that option) that’s an easy line to draw. Ban the use of cell phones while driving unless of the hand free variety and impose very harsh penalties to those who KILL other innocent people by refusing to comply.
It infuriates me when I’m driving behind or next to people who are texting and driving. It’s hard enough to dial a phone number on your cell phone while driving (which I think should be illegal), I can’t imagine carrying on a conversation via text while trying to drive. I have witnessed horrible driving as a result of the driver in the vehicle texting. We have become such an “I want it now” society who can’t seem to live without our phones or the instant gratification of text, internet, etc. There have been many instances already in which distracted cell phone users and texters have killed themselves or others while driving.
While I too am a MADR (mother against dumb regulations) and against the government telling us how to live our lives, if a distracted texter runs into and injures or kills my family I’ll be even madder.
Even if regulation was put into place how do you inforce it? That becomes very hard.
I think that the insurance industry should just build in exclusions for this coverage on the liability and physical damage on the policies and make each person sign acknowledgements of the exclusion. If might not stop the texting, cell phone or internet use but it might make them think twice before they do it and all it will take is a couple of unpaid claims to get attention from the world at large.
Can U.S. Make Phoning While Driving as Taboo as Drunk Driving?
If the secular progressive media can make Gay Mariage not only acceptable but if you disagree with them a homophob. Then I am sure the US can make phoning while driving what ever they want.
Now if you smoke cigaretes, you could probably be shot on the spot in California.
These texting while driving bills should be decided at the state level. We don’t need the Feds horning into this issue. They already try to regulate just about anything we do. Over 30 states have passed a texting while driving bill. Leave it to the others to decide. It will all be worked out in the end. Texting is one of the most dangerous thing a driver can do while going down the road. People are tweeting, checking face book dozens of times a day and literally don’t know what else is going on when using their phone. They are an accident waiting to happen.
While I am exasperated by the obvious lack of attention to the highway by those engrossed in phone conversations while trying to drive their cars, such a ban makes as much sense as banning listening to talk radio while driving. Operating a car while talking on a cell phone is like driving while intoxicated because the driver does not have sufficient control of a potentially lethal weapon…..his/her mind is, at least partially, elsewhere. The difference however, is that driving while intoxicated is ALWAYS premeditated. One does not always talk on a cell when in a car. Having said that however, a person who is talking on a cell phone AND driving while intoxicated…and whom has a fatal accident that takes the life of another…..should receive the death penalty.
While talking on a cell phone is distracting to drivers and has led to accidents, it pales in comparison to texting while driving. The drivers eyes become fixated on the phone and not the highway. This is what is happening in our society right now. I just can’t believe the nature of this addiction.
PD: You enforce it the same way you enforce DUI laws – Officer pulls over a person who is apparently drunk or distracted. It’s easy enough to check the phone records, just as a breathalyzer or blood test is administered.
Employers who’s employees operate dangerous machinery or vehicles with passengers who are responsbible for persons lives should not be allowed to take their cell phones with them and leave them either in their car or a locker. I do like the ability to use handsfree in the car, it’s a shame that other people are so irresponsible that they are going to ruin it for other people who are responsible.. One bad apple spoils the whole bunch…
In 2009 (the latest stats available in FARS) DRIVERS involved in a multi-vehicle crash involving a fatality are as follows:
Drivers involved in all multi-vehicle crashes = 38,807
Drivers from above deemed sober based on current per se legislation: 36,549 (94%)
Drivers deemed impaired based on per se legislation: 2,258 (6%)
Impaired drivers that are above .12: 2,017 (82%)
Inattentive driving as taboo as drunk driving? Really? Maybe we can now finally stop giving over 30m taxpayer dollars per year to the MADD professional victim with tear jerking story bent on neo-prohibition organization. For the past 15 years the true DD numbers involved in a crash with a fatal look like the above – 3-6% of all crashes.
I can’t wait to watch the next organization twist the true stats from FARS to meet some nannyist’s goal to extract 10k per arrestee from any driver using a cell phone near their vehicle with the keys in their pocket. Since they are close to their car and on the phone they MIGHT have gotten behind the wheel and MIGHT have killed someone so let’s fine them 10k and throw them in jail.
The new 20b a year economy in the US on it’s way. Priceless. Finally, the uninformed pro-MADD brainwashed morons on their cell phones will become common murderers who should get life in prison. Karma.
MADD, what a jerk comment! Either your a baiting (and I’m biting) or you are just a plain jerk! The statistics you provide are based on having a lower number of drunk drivers on the road, likely as a result of society’s negative taboo. I credit MADD for that! I wonder what those statistics looked like 30 years ago when it was less taboo to drive impaired. How many lives have been spared for a measly 30M a year? Money well spent in my opinion. Out of those 6% of impaired drivers, how many fatalities could have been prevented had those idiots not been driving?
As the article stated, studies have shown that cellphone use while driving has a similar cognizant effect of driving drunk. Is a law that’s intended to save lives too burdensome for you? Is it really such a blatant infrigement on your “rights”? Like you, I do not believe that more laws and bigger govt is always the solution, but sometimes it is. The problem is when one person’s poor decision results in lost life! Why not create some consequences for making poor decisions and endagering others that share the road? If even one person’s life is saved as a result of pulling a drunk driver off the road, it is worth it – especially if kids are involved! You are right, driving has inherent risk. But when people drive drunk, they increase the inherent risk for all who share the road. This is the same for cellphone use as studies have shown.
Imagine for a moment what it would feel like to get “the call” at 2 am. I pray to God that you will never have to endure the heartache of losing anyone in a car accident involving a drunk driver! Had this ever happened to you, your tune would be very different. You may make fun of MADD’s stories as “tear-jerky” if you want, but that makes you look a real heartless jerk!
I hate to get off topic, but I am having a hard time wrapping my brain around this. Your statistics of sober (94%) vs impaired (6%) crashes seem impressive, but do you have a simple percentage of sober drivers vs impaired? If 99.99999% of drivers on the road are sober, of course the percentage of crashes is going to be skewed against sober drivers. There are more of them on the road. I think you would need to compare sober drivers vs sober crashes; impaired drivers vs impaired crashes. Then I think you would find impaired drivers provide a great threat as their crash rate would be significantly higher.
Thomas, would you call drivers using cells and texting sober or impaired? I think both drunk and cell users texting are dangerous to Public Safety. They both seem to have no clue that they are a danger to other motorists. Tragic accidents happen every day due to them being behind the wheel doing their thing.
Hey Lies, I don’t think you will win over many in this forum ranting and raving against MADD. Before they were organized, how much publicity was generated about tragedies drunk driving was causing across the country. In my view, they are a praiseworthy organization who does good work.
Does anyone know if, in the event of an accident, it can be determined if a driver was using the hands-free feature? It’s easy to determine that he/she was using the phone, but what indicates the hands free use?
I think most will agree that cell use whether it is hand held or hands free is still a dangerous habit and distracting to drivers. The worst is the texting while driving since the eyes have to leave the roadway while texting. No excuse for doing this.
One would think that if the perp was unable to produce a bluetooth device or prove that their phone was linked to their bluetooth enabled auto it could be shown they weren’t using a hands free device. Unless of course their phine had a speaker phone capability.
I must say, based on your response that you are the target audience the MADD run NHTSA is focusing on and their focus has succeeded with you. While I refrain from name calling, I do provide FACTS. Whether you like the FACTS or not is your choice.
I am not baiting you or any other reader. Period. I happen to be a FARS database expert as I have decided to question propaganda being generated by this organization. Propaganda funded annually with my tax dollars to the tune of 30m+ annually over 2.5 decades. Do the math – 30m x 25 yrs = 750m. I wouldn’t want my funding to dry up either.
While I agree it is terrible to get a phone call at 2:00 in the morning about the crash that killed your loved one, it does not mean every drinking driver across the US is to blame for that call. It also doesn’t mean every accused drinking driver needs to be punished as if they killed someone when the FACTS show they DID NOT. That’s the difference DL. The statistics support the FACT that SOBERS kill more annually. Period.
By the way, these statistics are valid dating back to the mid 1990’s when MADD and the NHTSA were put to the table and had to admit they were lying to the public with their inflated statistics. What is being reported by your favorite pro MADD propaganda outlet is not truth. Here’s why:
1. Why does MADD count fatalities and not drivers? Inflation
2. Why does MADD count drunk pedestrians killed by a SOBER driver a drunk driving fatality? Inflation
3. Why does MADD use an imputation methodology to make up drunk drivers when an actual police report shows no physical evidence a driver was over the per se limit? Inflation
I can go on and on. Stop blindly believing the media because one of those 2k TRULY over the limit drivers annually happened upon your life. People who have had the experience choose 2 paths. Forgiveness or vengeance. I believe MADD is in the business of the latter. Well, the latter and profit from every arrestee that had nothing to do with the death of their loved one.
We can agree to disagree and you can move on. That is the best choice you can make in a debate like this. There is no upside for you as the facts show your emotional response has no basis.
DL…on final comment in response to this statement….You may make fun of MADD’s stories as “tear-jerky” if you want, but that makes you look a real heartless jerk!
Heartless is using my tax dollars and a tear jerking story to push an agenda to punish a minority of people on the roadway to hide the true agenda of neo-prohibition. In addition see my comment above regarding forgiveness vs vengeance. Eye for an eye is not justice. Especially when driving with a substance in your blood equates to prison time. Can’t wait for speeders to start serving prison time after 2 offenses. Remember sober speeders and inattentives are doing over 94% of the killing on the roads.
Lies, you and others on this blog have made this story more about Drunk Driving than Texting while driving. We already have laws on the books about drunk driving and penalties/fines/loss of license for getting caught. In my view, texting is just as serious because it diverts the attention of the driver so bad. In my view, this is not something the Feds should be involved in, but let the States decide what the penalties should be. Drivers caught doing this should be fined heavily and a second violation should result in loss of license. This is a Public Safety issue.
The latest statistics show cell phones are still being used for personal (i.e. non-business) purposes nearly 80% of the time. If you seriously want to cut down accidents and road rage at the same time, ban them altogether unless or until the car is off to the side of the road.
Most cell phone companies now have flat monthly rates, not per-call rates, so their complaints should fall on deaf ears. Stick a $1000 fine for cell use and $2500 fine for texting, and this will go away.
It is amazing how this country survived for 200 years before the cell phone craze of the past 10 years. With the advent of Facebook, Twitter, Apps out the kazoo, people are so distracted that many cannot have a legitimate conversation with someone in the same room. They are constantly either talking on the cell or texting someone or downloading an app. It is very rude. They then get in their car and do the same thing while going down the road. They are an accident waiting to happen. Heavy fines should be levied and perhaps they will get the message they shouldn’t be texting while driving.
While I agree that texting and using a cell phone when driving is a distraction and dangerous, I have to ask at what point is continued regulation too much? If we are going to make using a cell phone while driving illegal, then why do the governments (state and federal) not also madate making radios, CD players, Ipod’s, GPS and other new auto technologies illeagal for a driver to use while operating a motor vehicle? Again, regardless of these things being proven to be a distraction, I belive that there is a big difference between turning a dial or pushing numbers and getting into a car with a BAC of .08 or more.
If I had to take my chances, I would rather face a texting driver than a drunk driver any day of the week.
Texting and driving is not worse than Drunk Driver. And saying we can’t talk on the phone and drive? That’s taking this way to far. From what the article says, the crewmate was away from his post. He was violating company policy. In that case, what difference would making it illegal make? People will break the law and for good reasons sometimes. Also, I would absolutely take a call if I found out my son was in trouble. That is a family emergency. Also, if they were anchored with engines off, how did the boat run into them? Wouldn’t that make it the fault of the other boat? This is absurd.
Read the article again.
Texting creates a level of distraction that is much higher than talking while driving. Research has found that just talking on a cell phone while driving is an impairment comparable to driving at .08; no doubt texting is much worse. In my book the safety improvement is well worth the imposition of this regulation. Please pull over while you text, Why Bother.
It should be like California and only allow hands free talking, no texting,etc.
This is a no-brainer. People are dying because of this and there’s such an easy fix. We seemed to get along just fine before we had cell phones and we were drivnig our cars. It should be easy to go back to those days or require hands free operations. Many companies already their employees to do such while driving on company business as a risk management procedure.
“Why Bother” took the words out of my mouth. He is absolutely correct. Where does one stop? IT’s not holding the phone that’s the problem so much, but rather the driver talking or listening to someone that is distracting. Shall we ban people talking in cars, enforceable by a constantly running recorder that is accessible in the event of an accident?
How about medical issues? Once someone has a license, he or she can come down with numerous ailments that increase risks of driving tremendosly, but little is done.
It’s a risky world. When it’s your turn to be tagged, you will be out.
MADR (Mothers Against Dumb Regulations)
People are DYING because of misuse of phones. I’m as anti-regulation as they come. One could ban the use of cars as they kill 40,000-50,000 people in the US every year. I don’t suggest we do that. But when a selfish person causes the death of another because they can’t wait to call somebody (again before we had cell phones we never even had that option) that’s an easy line to draw. Ban the use of cell phones while driving unless of the hand free variety and impose very harsh penalties to those who KILL other innocent people by refusing to comply.
It infuriates me when I’m driving behind or next to people who are texting and driving. It’s hard enough to dial a phone number on your cell phone while driving (which I think should be illegal), I can’t imagine carrying on a conversation via text while trying to drive. I have witnessed horrible driving as a result of the driver in the vehicle texting. We have become such an “I want it now” society who can’t seem to live without our phones or the instant gratification of text, internet, etc. There have been many instances already in which distracted cell phone users and texters have killed themselves or others while driving.
While I too am a MADR (mother against dumb regulations) and against the government telling us how to live our lives, if a distracted texter runs into and injures or kills my family I’ll be even madder.
Even if regulation was put into place how do you inforce it? That becomes very hard.
I think that the insurance industry should just build in exclusions for this coverage on the liability and physical damage on the policies and make each person sign acknowledgements of the exclusion. If might not stop the texting, cell phone or internet use but it might make them think twice before they do it and all it will take is a couple of unpaid claims to get attention from the world at large.
Can U.S. Make Phoning While Driving as Taboo as Drunk Driving?
If the secular progressive media can make Gay Mariage not only acceptable but if you disagree with them a homophob. Then I am sure the US can make phoning while driving what ever they want.
Now if you smoke cigaretes, you could probably be shot on the spot in California.
These texting while driving bills should be decided at the state level. We don’t need the Feds horning into this issue. They already try to regulate just about anything we do. Over 30 states have passed a texting while driving bill. Leave it to the others to decide. It will all be worked out in the end. Texting is one of the most dangerous thing a driver can do while going down the road. People are tweeting, checking face book dozens of times a day and literally don’t know what else is going on when using their phone. They are an accident waiting to happen.
While I am exasperated by the obvious lack of attention to the highway by those engrossed in phone conversations while trying to drive their cars, such a ban makes as much sense as banning listening to talk radio while driving. Operating a car while talking on a cell phone is like driving while intoxicated because the driver does not have sufficient control of a potentially lethal weapon…..his/her mind is, at least partially, elsewhere. The difference however, is that driving while intoxicated is ALWAYS premeditated. One does not always talk on a cell when in a car. Having said that however, a person who is talking on a cell phone AND driving while intoxicated…and whom has a fatal accident that takes the life of another…..should receive the death penalty.
While talking on a cell phone is distracting to drivers and has led to accidents, it pales in comparison to texting while driving. The drivers eyes become fixated on the phone and not the highway. This is what is happening in our society right now. I just can’t believe the nature of this addiction.
PD: You enforce it the same way you enforce DUI laws – Officer pulls over a person who is apparently drunk or distracted. It’s easy enough to check the phone records, just as a breathalyzer or blood test is administered.
Ok, my phone is password protected. Got a warrant?
AND, I strongly agree that this is a states issue.
Employers who’s employees operate dangerous machinery or vehicles with passengers who are responsbible for persons lives should not be allowed to take their cell phones with them and leave them either in their car or a locker. I do like the ability to use handsfree in the car, it’s a shame that other people are so irresponsible that they are going to ruin it for other people who are responsible.. One bad apple spoils the whole bunch…
In 2009 (the latest stats available in FARS) DRIVERS involved in a multi-vehicle crash involving a fatality are as follows:
Drivers involved in all multi-vehicle crashes = 38,807
Drivers from above deemed sober based on current per se legislation: 36,549 (94%)
Drivers deemed impaired based on per se legislation: 2,258 (6%)
Impaired drivers that are above .12: 2,017 (82%)
Inattentive driving as taboo as drunk driving? Really? Maybe we can now finally stop giving over 30m taxpayer dollars per year to the MADD professional victim with tear jerking story bent on neo-prohibition organization. For the past 15 years the true DD numbers involved in a crash with a fatal look like the above – 3-6% of all crashes.
I can’t wait to watch the next organization twist the true stats from FARS to meet some nannyist’s goal to extract 10k per arrestee from any driver using a cell phone near their vehicle with the keys in their pocket. Since they are close to their car and on the phone they MIGHT have gotten behind the wheel and MIGHT have killed someone so let’s fine them 10k and throw them in jail.
The new 20b a year economy in the US on it’s way. Priceless. Finally, the uninformed pro-MADD brainwashed morons on their cell phones will become common murderers who should get life in prison. Karma.
MADD, what a jerk comment! Either your a baiting (and I’m biting) or you are just a plain jerk! The statistics you provide are based on having a lower number of drunk drivers on the road, likely as a result of society’s negative taboo. I credit MADD for that! I wonder what those statistics looked like 30 years ago when it was less taboo to drive impaired. How many lives have been spared for a measly 30M a year? Money well spent in my opinion. Out of those 6% of impaired drivers, how many fatalities could have been prevented had those idiots not been driving?
As the article stated, studies have shown that cellphone use while driving has a similar cognizant effect of driving drunk. Is a law that’s intended to save lives too burdensome for you? Is it really such a blatant infrigement on your “rights”? Like you, I do not believe that more laws and bigger govt is always the solution, but sometimes it is. The problem is when one person’s poor decision results in lost life! Why not create some consequences for making poor decisions and endagering others that share the road? If even one person’s life is saved as a result of pulling a drunk driver off the road, it is worth it – especially if kids are involved! You are right, driving has inherent risk. But when people drive drunk, they increase the inherent risk for all who share the road. This is the same for cellphone use as studies have shown.
Imagine for a moment what it would feel like to get “the call” at 2 am. I pray to God that you will never have to endure the heartache of losing anyone in a car accident involving a drunk driver! Had this ever happened to you, your tune would be very different. You may make fun of MADD’s stories as “tear-jerky” if you want, but that makes you look a real heartless jerk!
I hate to get off topic, but I am having a hard time wrapping my brain around this. Your statistics of sober (94%) vs impaired (6%) crashes seem impressive, but do you have a simple percentage of sober drivers vs impaired? If 99.99999% of drivers on the road are sober, of course the percentage of crashes is going to be skewed against sober drivers. There are more of them on the road. I think you would need to compare sober drivers vs sober crashes; impaired drivers vs impaired crashes. Then I think you would find impaired drivers provide a great threat as their crash rate would be significantly higher.
Thomas, would you call drivers using cells and texting sober or impaired? I think both drunk and cell users texting are dangerous to Public Safety. They both seem to have no clue that they are a danger to other motorists. Tragic accidents happen every day due to them being behind the wheel doing their thing.
Hey Lies, I don’t think you will win over many in this forum ranting and raving against MADD. Before they were organized, how much publicity was generated about tragedies drunk driving was causing across the country. In my view, they are a praiseworthy organization who does good work.
Does anyone know if, in the event of an accident, it can be determined if a driver was using the hands-free feature? It’s easy to determine that he/she was using the phone, but what indicates the hands free use?
I think most will agree that cell use whether it is hand held or hands free is still a dangerous habit and distracting to drivers. The worst is the texting while driving since the eyes have to leave the roadway while texting. No excuse for doing this.
One would think that if the perp was unable to produce a bluetooth device or prove that their phone was linked to their bluetooth enabled auto it could be shown they weren’t using a hands free device. Unless of course their phine had a speaker phone capability.
DL:
I must say, based on your response that you are the target audience the MADD run NHTSA is focusing on and their focus has succeeded with you. While I refrain from name calling, I do provide FACTS. Whether you like the FACTS or not is your choice.
I am not baiting you or any other reader. Period. I happen to be a FARS database expert as I have decided to question propaganda being generated by this organization. Propaganda funded annually with my tax dollars to the tune of 30m+ annually over 2.5 decades. Do the math – 30m x 25 yrs = 750m. I wouldn’t want my funding to dry up either.
While I agree it is terrible to get a phone call at 2:00 in the morning about the crash that killed your loved one, it does not mean every drinking driver across the US is to blame for that call. It also doesn’t mean every accused drinking driver needs to be punished as if they killed someone when the FACTS show they DID NOT. That’s the difference DL. The statistics support the FACT that SOBERS kill more annually. Period.
By the way, these statistics are valid dating back to the mid 1990’s when MADD and the NHTSA were put to the table and had to admit they were lying to the public with their inflated statistics. What is being reported by your favorite pro MADD propaganda outlet is not truth. Here’s why:
1. Why does MADD count fatalities and not drivers? Inflation
2. Why does MADD count drunk pedestrians killed by a SOBER driver a drunk driving fatality? Inflation
3. Why does MADD use an imputation methodology to make up drunk drivers when an actual police report shows no physical evidence a driver was over the per se limit? Inflation
I can go on and on. Stop blindly believing the media because one of those 2k TRULY over the limit drivers annually happened upon your life. People who have had the experience choose 2 paths. Forgiveness or vengeance. I believe MADD is in the business of the latter. Well, the latter and profit from every arrestee that had nothing to do with the death of their loved one.
We can agree to disagree and you can move on. That is the best choice you can make in a debate like this. There is no upside for you as the facts show your emotional response has no basis.
DL…on final comment in response to this statement….You may make fun of MADD’s stories as “tear-jerky” if you want, but that makes you look a real heartless jerk!
Heartless is using my tax dollars and a tear jerking story to push an agenda to punish a minority of people on the roadway to hide the true agenda of neo-prohibition. In addition see my comment above regarding forgiveness vs vengeance. Eye for an eye is not justice. Especially when driving with a substance in your blood equates to prison time. Can’t wait for speeders to start serving prison time after 2 offenses. Remember sober speeders and inattentives are doing over 94% of the killing on the roads.
Ever had a speeding ticket DL?
Lies, you and others on this blog have made this story more about Drunk Driving than Texting while driving. We already have laws on the books about drunk driving and penalties/fines/loss of license for getting caught. In my view, texting is just as serious because it diverts the attention of the driver so bad. In my view, this is not something the Feds should be involved in, but let the States decide what the penalties should be. Drivers caught doing this should be fined heavily and a second violation should result in loss of license. This is a Public Safety issue.
The latest statistics show cell phones are still being used for personal (i.e. non-business) purposes nearly 80% of the time. If you seriously want to cut down accidents and road rage at the same time, ban them altogether unless or until the car is off to the side of the road.
Most cell phone companies now have flat monthly rates, not per-call rates, so their complaints should fall on deaf ears. Stick a $1000 fine for cell use and $2500 fine for texting, and this will go away.
It is amazing how this country survived for 200 years before the cell phone craze of the past 10 years. With the advent of Facebook, Twitter, Apps out the kazoo, people are so distracted that many cannot have a legitimate conversation with someone in the same room. They are constantly either talking on the cell or texting someone or downloading an app. It is very rude. They then get in their car and do the same thing while going down the road. They are an accident waiting to happen. Heavy fines should be levied and perhaps they will get the message they shouldn’t be texting while driving.
The latest statistics show cell phones are still being used for personal