The idea of banning the use of hand-held telephones when driving is shortsighted.
Continuing to push the effort at the state Legislature might also be more of a way to draw headlines than provide for motorist safety.
|
Advertisement
|
Badon is arguing hand-held phones impair a driver’s ability to drive safely by creating blind spots, particularly when turning or merging onto a highway.
“When you look at the ... steering capa-city, because one of your hands is tied up, it does make a difference,” Badon said according to the Associated Press.
If Badon’s contention is cell phones cause unsafe driving circumstances when one of a motorist’s hands are tied up on the phone, why does this bill not include food restrictions, tobacco dip restrictions and car stereo remote control restrictions?
If a motorist can legally pass through a fast food restaurant and buy a value meal that includes a big kahuna burger, large soft drink and french fries and then is legally allowed to negotiate that meal while weaving in and out of traffic on U.S. 90, then we should be able to use our hand-held cellular devices to make phone calls.
The same goes for fans of tobacco products like Skoal or those with fancy car stereos that have remote control access. Those products require hands for use but are not mentioned in Badon’s bill.
This bill appears to be nothing more than an attention grabber, as much designed to circulate the author’s name as it is to enhance motorist safety. If the bill tried to prevent the distraction of one of a motorist’s hands by making it illegal to occupy them with anything other than pursuits of driving, instead of solely focusing on hand-held phones, it would be more honest and effective.
As it stands now, this bill is full of headline material and little teeth. For every motorist who puts down a phone, two can pick up a burger.
STEPHEN HEMELT
CITY EDITOR
Comments