Article View: misc.consumers
Article #9433Re: Should Md. Ban Cell phones in cars?
From: Bert Hyman
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 15:36
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 15:36
32 lines
2880 bytes
2880 bytes
me@privacy.net (RickW) wrote in news:b1raa4$16fm81$1@ID-82690.news.dfncis.de: > "Roy Shroyer" <badcam@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:b1r8hk$o46$1@emac1.ocs.lsu.edu... >> > > That said, I believe that if there is conclusive proof that >> > > the person at fault in the accident was talking on the >> > > cellphone when the accident occurred, that there should be >> > > severe penalites added, akin to the penalites assigned when >> > > the driver at fault is drunk. >> >> I think you misunderstood. I don't want more laws governing my >> actions. I feel that the individual should be held accountable >> for his actions, however. > > Sorry, I'm confused. First you said you'd like to see severe > penalties added, and now you're saying you don't want more laws > governing your actions.. ... He's saying that he doesn't want to see additional laws which would explicitly ban the use of cell phones in cars. But, he's also saying that IF a person is involved in an accident and IF it's proven that the driver's use of a cell phone while driving contributed to the accident, THEN he'd like to see provisions for more severe penalties. I think this can be extended to any form of "intentional" distraction that contributes to an accident. -- Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@visi.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<Xns931961B5AFE1EVeebleFetzer@news.visi.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!newshosting.com!news-xfer1.atl.newshosting.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!bbnews1.unisys.com!si05!not-for-mailReferences:
<3E40C784.881CE850@nospam.com> <b1r3nf$4ur$1@emac1.ocs.lsu.edu> <b1r6jt$161c1m$1@ID-82690.news.dfncis.de> <b1r8hk$o46$1@emac1.ocs.lsu.edu> <b1raa4$16fm81$1@ID-82690.news.dfncis.de>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10774d,53c72126a599145a X-Google-Attributes: gid10774d,public X-Google-Thread: 107518,53c72126a599145a X-Google-Attributes: gid107518,public X-Google-Thread: 108b95,53c72126a599145a X-Google-Attributes: gid108b95,public X-Google-Thread: 11299e,53c72126a599145a X-Google-Attributes: gid11299e,public X-Google-Thread: 1011e5,53c72126a599145a X-Google-Attributes: gid1011e5,public X-Google-Thread: 10e16d,53c72126a599145a X-Google-Attributes: gid10e16d,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-02-05 07:41:04 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!newshosting.com!news-xfer1.atl.newshosting.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!bbnews1.unisys.com!si05!not-for-mail From: Bert Hyman <bert@visi.com> Newsgroups: misc.consumers,rec.autos.driving,alt.cellular,md.general,alt.law-enforcement.traffic,dc.driving Subject: Re: Should Md. Ban Cell phones in cars? Date: 5 Feb 2003 15:36:24 GMT Organization: None to speak of Lines: 32 Message-ID: <Xns931961B5AFE1EVeebleFetzer@news.visi.com> References: <3E40C784.881CE850@nospam.com> <b1r3nf$4ur$1@emac1.ocs.lsu.edu> <b1r6jt$161c1m$1@ID-82690.news.dfncis.de> <b1r8hk$o46$1@emac1.ocs.lsu.edu> <b1raa4$16fm81$1@ID-82690.news.dfncis.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: rah1.rsvl.unisys.com X-Trace: si05.rsvl.unisys.com 1044459384 47798 192.61.221.113 (5 Feb 2003 15:36:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@rsvl.unisys.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 Feb 2003 15:36:24 GMT User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25