3 ms·

You're completely undermining the concept of deterrence. You're imposing a .002% chance of dying on someone else, you incur a .002% chance of jail. If it were

You're completely undermining the concept of deterrence. You're imposing a .002% chance of dying on someone else, you incur a .002% chance of jail. If it were feasible, we'd never put people in jail for risky driving, we'd just have immediate unavoidable small punishments (example: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2016/2/9/10952842/rand-sobriety-study https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2016/2...). But there's no way to fine someone $5 every time they pick up that phone in the car, short of a police state.

rhino369 9y ago
>You're completely undermining the concept of deterrence. You're imposing a .002% chance of dying on someone else, you incur a .002% chance of jail. A .002% chance of jail is not an effective deterrence because people are shit at calculating low risks like that. We should treat it like we do drunk drivers. You get caught on your phone, you face serious penalties even if nobody is hurt.