AlanF,
You're consistently failing to address the fact that a large fraction of the population doesn't have enough common sense to properly decide that they're incapable of simultaneously using a cell phone and driving safely. Maybe each of you is capable, but that doesn't affect the dummies who aren't. Maybe each of you is capable of driving while drunk better than most people can drive while sober, but that doesn't mean that drunk driving laws are bad. Laws have to apply to everyone, and as I said, are necessary to protect everyone from the dumbest of the population since they don't have the common sense or ability to decide proper courses of action for themselves. There can be no shades of gray in laws against drunk driving or using cell phones in cars. That should be obvious.
You've understood my point basically. However, laws only have a relative effectiveness on any sort of conduct/behaviour. I believe in personal responsibility which is not in favour in some lands like Canada, but THAT is a whole 'nother subject! I agree that so much of our society caters to the 'lowest common denominator' principle, however, a higher respect and enforcement of personal responsibility might just change that situation. An awesome sci-fi about a society based on being responsible for your actions is Le Modessitt jr. 'Gravity Dreams'.
I disagree with there being no shades of gray in lawss against drunk driving. The blood/alcohol limits are imposed by governments for political reasons and are not some sort of 'natural law'. Speed limits are based on many things but in the end are arbitrarily imposed by governments. This clearly shows that this issue about cell phones and a lot of other things are in 'shades of grey'.
People can take/use many different drugs and be 'legal' to drive: caffeine, antihistamines, have an 'endorphine' rush lol, nicotine and many others. These can affect a persons perceptions, mood, coordination and yet what will we require next? In car cameras to make sure you don't do ANYTHING that some person somewhere got in an accident over? Will you have to put your finger in a device that tests your blood for any known body-chemistry altering drug and if you have something (like that strong java in da morning), your car won't start? How many of us would like to have ALL of our cars hooked through wireless so that our speeds are monitored (they already are recorded in virtually all modern cars for use by Electronic Transmissions, ABS and Airbag systems) and everytime you go over the maximum possible speed for your state/province, you get a ticket in the mail? Hell, they have the technology now to track where you are on what street so that going over even less than maximum speeds in city limits could be fined!
Not trying to make a crapile out of a little turd here, its just that the emotional appeal of some of these posts because 'i was in an accident and it was terrible' isn't good enough a reason on its own to go BAN IT BAN IT! Don't get me wrong, a car accident is a terrible thing and I don't mean to diminish your suffering or painful experience, lord knows I've attended enough of them over the years, but the simple fact is that driving, drivers, and driving conditions are all a game of chance every time you go out. The reasons accidents happen are many. Cell phone use while driving IS a risk that varies in riskiness depending on where you are (heavy, light, or no traffic), driver skill (VERY variable), what you're talking about on the phone and many other things.
Banning cellphones is liking banning guns cuz dey hurt people...total crap....many thousands more people die each year from knife attacks/wounds. Implements you find in any kitchen.
boa...thought i was done up above....yikes