Slashdot Mirror
Phone and Text Bans On Drivers Shown Ineffective
shmG writes to share news of a recent study on the impact of laws which ban the use of cell phones while driving. There appears to be no reduction in accidents as a result of these laws. "The HLDI compared collisions of 100 insured vehicles per year in New York, Washington DC, Connecticut, and California — all states with currently enacted roadway text bans. Despite those laws, monthly fluctuations in crash rates didn't change after bans were enacted, [although] there were less people using devices while driving. An earlier study conducted by the HLDI reported that cellphone use was directly linked to four-fold increases in crash injuries. Also independent studies done by universities have shown correlation between driving while using a phone and crashes."
Ironically though, those who think they can multitask are precisely those who can't
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8219212.stm
We can then conclude that we still might as well ban the usage in cars as those who could actually do it won't be doing it anyways.
Even though I disagree with the OP, this is a weak argument. IR and a quasi-radar array would easily surpass even human vision in object checking. Oblivious to fog, light conditions, and constantly focused on the road in front. Even small objects could easily be detected, like a nail.
You do not have the right to drive, hence the requirement for a driving test, and if you fail, you cannot drive.
Actually, you only need a license to drive on public roads.
"Civil rights" just means our rights to have privileges offered in in a fair and equal way to all. So for example, they can turn you down for a driver's license (a privilege) if you fail the driver's test, but not simply because you're black. If I open my store doors for people to come on my property to transact business (their privilege, not their right) then I have to open the doors for everybody. Just because racial (e.g.) discrimination is prohibited doesn't mean it's not a privilege.