3 ms·

Ok didn't expect the rate down. I ask you who did and who've replied, how does this law protect the innocent bystanders? It's still the driver who's doing somet

Ok didn't expect the rate down. I ask you who did and who've replied, how does this law protect the innocent bystanders? It's still the driver who's doing something stupid, and most of the time they only get caught when things go really really bad. Do you want roving scan vans on highways looking at every driver on the road for these infractions? Massively increase police presence on all roads (and gl getting anyone to pay for that these days)? Yes the Fed can try to make a full electronics ban, but that won't stop people from using the devices and still causing deaths that shouldn't have happened. People are selfish by nature. They don't care about how their actions affect anyone else. Trying to put more and more laws in place to try to stop this just leads to societies that have already existed and failed under this massive weight of "there's a law covering absolutely everything you could possibly do". So really, what is this Fed law going to stop?

anigbrowl 15y ago
how does this law protect the innocent bystanders? By making drivers a bit more paranoid. Massively increase police presence on all roads Not needed. Police manage to enforce seatbelt laws quite effectively without any special technology or vast budget increases. It's pretty easy to see when someone is using a cellphone; I notice it all the time without having any special training whatsoever. You could also use evidence of a phone/text conversation as evidence in accident lawsuits, leading to increased damages or charges of criminal negligence where it can be shown that the driver was operating a phone at the time of the accident. This would probably provide an even larger disincentive than issuing tickets: where the action is unlawful, then liability for an accident involving that activity is much easier to prove and win damages for, so the cost of causing an accident becomes much higher and insurers start looking for ways to discourage drivers from engaging in cellphone use too, such as refusing to provide coverage where it is shown that the driver was on the phone. Emergency use would still be available as an affirmative defense. So really, what is this Fed law going to stop? It's not a fed law, it's an encouragement to the state governments to pass laws against cellphone use (and similar). If you read the NTSB report (executive summary: http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/2011/gray_summit_mo/index.html http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/2011/gray_summit_mo/index.ht...) you'll see that they've anticipated many of the issues you raise and considered the problem in context. Personally, I think the NTSB is one of the best government agencies, along with NIST and a few others which have a strong engineering focus.

anigbrowl 15y ago

how does this law protect the innocent bystanders? By making drivers a bit more paranoid. Massively increase police presence on all roads Not needed. Police manage to enforce seatbelt laws quite effectively without any special technology or vast budget increases. It's pretty easy to see when someone is using a cellphone; I notice it all the time without having any special training whatsoever. You could also use evidence of a phone/text conversation as evidence in accident lawsuits, leading to increased damages or charges of criminal negligence where it can be shown that the driver was operating a phone at the time of the accident. This would probably provide an even larger disincentive than issuing tickets: where the action is unlawful, then liability for an accident involving that activity is much easier to prove and win damages for, so the cost of causing an accident becomes much higher and insurers start looking for ways to discourage drivers from engaging in cellphone use too, such as refusing to provide coverage where it is shown that the driver was on the phone. Emergency use would still be available as an affirmative defense. So really, what is this Fed law going to stop? It's not a fed law, it's an encouragement to the state governments to pass laws against cellphone use (and similar). If you read the NTSB report (executive summary: http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/2011/gray_summit_mo/index.html http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/2011/gray_summit_mo/index.ht...) you'll see that they've anticipated many of the issues you raise and considered the problem in context. Personally, I think the NTSB is one of the best government agencies, along with NIST and a few others which have a strong engineering focus.