meembo

Where did I say this or anything like this? It seems you are riffing on shakran's sarcasm, not my words. Didn't you just castigate Yellochef for not reading your posts carefully? Please read my original post. I think it has good arguments that haven't been answered yet.

My last sentence in my previous post says "The reduction of cell phones and other distractions to the driver is precisely the issue."

Phone calls, and conversations with passengers, occupy us cognitively for extended periods, and that persistently divides our concentration from the big piece of steel hurtling down the road. Do we agree on this?

Would you also agree that it is the accumulation of distractions that causes accidents that are attributable to carelessness?

I don't see what the mystery is here. I recognize the libertarians in the crowd that don't like government telling them what not to do. I can respect that. If those drivers were the only ones who ever paid the cost for driver carelessness, I'd respect the idea a lot more. Careless people cause accidents that hurt others. Careless accidents are caused by an accumulation of distractions to a driver. It follows, therefore, that we reduce those distractions from drivers, starting with the unnecessary ones that occupy the minds of those drivers the most.

Cells phones are the most obvious offenders on the list. Until most callers have true hands-free operation of their phones, the argument that phone conversations are as distracting as one with a passenger is obviously untrue. Most people don't have headsets for their phones, and the phones still have to be handled to make or take a call. They remain a distraction for drivers, moreso than other activities in a car (radio, heat, etc.).

__________________
less I say, smarter I am