rominl

iTrader: (4)

in the same notion, a person speeding doesn't mean it's the danger. it can be the person driving slow but not payment attention to the surrounding traffic. they have laws against speeding?

E6BAV8R

I see your point but disagree. Under that logic, why have speed limits; or any other law? People will be deterred from doing it simply because they have the chance to be fined from it. Does that mean everyone will stop? Of course not.

Like some other states, it is already illegal here in Texas to drive through school zones on a mobile device. I'm perfectly fine with that and abide by it. Does it always stop me from doing it? Mostly. However, I can tell you that if I am driving through a school zone and my boss is calling me, and there are no cops around... well I'll just stop there

Kostamojen

Every texting while driving accident is caused by not having two hands on the wheel.

An average person can drive a car very hard and talk at the same time as long as their hands are free. There have been conclusive studies on this, its no longer a point of contention.

E6BAV8R

There's a difference between merely talking and being actually engaged and comprehending what is going on in the conversation. I'll try to find it, but there was a study done a number of months ago that found that only a single % of people can actually be engaged in a conversation whilst also driving, to where the driver could drive around a road course safely while also being able to recall the conversation that took place while doing so (via being able to recall sentences and answer specific questions) - it was a very interesting study.

I still fail to see how a texting-while-driving accident is caused by not having two hands on the wheel. It is caused because the driver is paying attention to their phone to type a message and not looking at the road where they should be. That is driver in-attention; not an accident caused by a lack of two hands on the steering wheel. People tend to look at the result of the accident, not the root cause.

mmarshall

We had a Federal National-Speed-Limit of 55 from 1974 to 1987 (some states still have it on urban/suburban freeway stretches). Did it work? I'll tell you the answer.....That law was repealed specifically because it did not work. The public, as a whole, simply did not accept it. And when most of the public does not accept a law, it can't be significantly enforced, no matter how hard the police work.

Another law that, though with good intentions that simply don't work in practice is the right-turn-on-red-after-stop rule. I supported this law (and come to a complete stop before turning right, as the law dictates). But, it is clear that the vast majority of the public doesn't.....in fact, I see some people make the right turn without even slowing down.

Trust me (I'm not exaggerating)....you will have (and already have) the same situation with cell-phones. Regulating them in cars is all but impossible......their use is too widespread.

Well, you've just proved, by your own example here, why some laws don't work. You make exeptions here and there, according to your own desires and circumstances. Multiply what you are doing by the millions of other drivers who are also making the very same exceptions you are while the cops aren't around (and the cops, of course, usually aren't), and it's obvious why some laws simply won't work.

T0ked

iTrader: (2)

In NYC it used to be a secondary offence meaning they couldn't pull you over just for talking on the phone. Now it is primary and they'll pull you over just for holding one while you're driving. Not only that but since it is now illegal, if you get into an accident because of it, expect higher penalties and a law suit. It's ridiculous that people still do this. So many accidents secondary to this and people do it en mass. I hope this passes.