Re: Should Md. Ban Cell phones in cars?

Article View: misc.consumers

Article #9450

#9450

From: Roy Shroyer
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 14:03

33 lines
3263 bytes

>
> 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

Bert, in regard to your comment about driving at .08 BAC:

Isn't that what goes on everywhere, at least in this country?  You're not
guilty if you don't get caught. A person can (and many do) drive drunk all
the time with no penalty, at least until they screw up.  I hate to admit it,
but I know people that do just that and have done it for years. I don't
agree with it, but that's how it is.

And the State will throw the book at you if you're involved in an accident.
There have been cases here where driver A had a BAC of around .05.  Driver B
causes an accident with Driver A where Driver B is clearly at fault.  Driver
A will get the blame regardless, or will have to get a mighty expensive
attorney with judicial connections to get out of it.

Cheers,

Roy

Technical Details

Message-ID: <b1tq7n$236$1@emac1.ocs.lsu.edu>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!freenix!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!hammer.uoregon.edu!same.tcs.tulane.edu!ef-01.usenetserver.com!news.webusenet.com!news.lsu.edu!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> <Xns93199E68C8D70VeebleFetzer@news.visi.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: 108b95,53c72126a599145a
X-Google-Attributes: gid108b95,public
X-Google-Thread: 107518,53c72126a599145a
X-Google-Attributes: gid107518,public
X-Google-Thread: 10e16d,53c72126a599145a
X-Google-Attributes: gid10e16d,public
X-Google-Thread: 1011e5,53c72126a599145a
X-Google-Attributes: gid1011e5,public
X-Google-Thread: 11299e,53c72126a599145a
X-Google-Attributes: gid11299e,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-02-06 06:10:54 PST
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-06!sn-xit-08!supernews.com!freenix!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!hammer.uoregon.edu!same.tcs.tulane.edu!ef-01.usenetserver.com!news.webusenet.com!news.lsu.edu!not-for-mail
From: "Roy Shroyer" <badcam@hotmail.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: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 08:03:48 -0600
Organization: Louisiana State University
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <b1tq7n$236$1@emac1.ocs.lsu.edu>
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> <Xns93199E68C8D70VeebleFetzer@news.visi.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: otc-rshroy1.ocs.lsu.edu
X-Trace: emac1.ocs.lsu.edu 1044540471 2150 130.39.198.29 (6 Feb 2003 14:07:51 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@lsu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 14:07:51 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106

Reply to Parent Message