Re: Should Md. Ban Cell phones in cars?

Article View: misc.consumers

Article #9442

#9442

From: Bert Hyman
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 21:34

31 lines
3102 bytes

bashley@myrealbox.com (The Real Bev) wrote in
news:3E418187.B5CB814@myrealbox.com: 
>> "Roy Shroyer" <badcam@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > 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. 
> 
> In addition:  similar penalties for driving while adjusting the
> radio, eating, shaving, yelling at your dog/child, putting on
> makeup, reading, etc.?  That's like punishing people for having bad
> thoughts even though they haven't actually done anything illegal or
> immoral. 

I think you missed the part where he said "if there is conclusive
proof that the person at fault in the accident ... ".

So, nobody is calling for adjusting the radio, eating, etc. to be
criminalized, but that enhanced penalties be available ->if it can be
proven that the driver was doing something inappropriate, like
talking on a cell phone, that contributed to an actual accident. 

Carrying this line of thought to an extreme, you could make the case
that there's nothing inherently wrong with driving with a blood
alcohol content of 0.08%. If you're able to pull it off without
getting into an accident, well, more power to you! But, if you do get
into an accident, let the state throw the book at you. 

-- 
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@visi.com

Technical Details

Message-ID: <Xns93199E68C8D70VeebleFetzer@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-09!supernews.com!newshosting.com!news-xfer2.atl.newshosting.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!sac.uu.net!bbnews1.unisys.com!si05!not-for-mail

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> <3E418187.B5CB814@myrealbox.com>

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 13:41:06 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-09!supernews.com!newshosting.com!news-xfer2.atl.newshosting.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!sac.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 21:34:26 GMT
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <Xns93199E68C8D70VeebleFetzer@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> <3E418187.B5CB814@myrealbox.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rah1.rsvl.unisys.com
X-Trace: si05.rsvl.unisys.com 1044480866 63218 192.61.221.113 (5 Feb 2003 21:34:26 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@rsvl.unisys.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 Feb 2003 21:34:26 GMT
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25

Reply to Parent Message