4 ms·
This is unconstitutional. Same with the law requiring a seatbelt. Please tell me whos life you are endangering by crossing the street while viewing your phone?
by PatientTrades 9y ago
This is unconstitutional. Same with the law requiring a seatbelt. Please tell me whos life you are endangering by crossing the street while viewing your phone? The answer is only your own. The state/government is basically saying we own your life (slavery) by instituting laws like these.
- jeffdavis 9y agoWhat part of the Constitution are you referring to? Preventing you from looking at your phone while walking is not forced servitude. If it were a federal law, perhaps it would violate the 10th amendment. But it's just a local thing.
- PatientTrades 9y agoThis law violates the constitution by restricting a basic liberty (In this case walking across the street while viewing your phone) this action does not directly hurt or harm anyone other than potentially yourself. Under the constitution we have a right to our life. This law violates that principle
- nkrisc 9y agoIt does in fact endanger other people. You are creating a dangerous situation. A pedestrian in the street who is oblivious to their surroundings is a hazard to all drivers.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- jeffdavis 9y agoWhat specific part of the constitution? Prohibiting you from using a phone is not taking your life.
- dang 9y agoIt breaks the site guidelines to take threads on generic ideological tangents like this. It makes discussions less interesting, so we ask people not to do it. Similarly, we ask people not to use HN primarily for politics or ideology. A certain amount is inevitable; more than a certain amount destroys the site for the things HN exists for. So would you please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow them when commenting here?