MA PSH: Not Just For Guns Any More...

Now we're soiling our armor over cell phone use:

Keller at Large: Let’s All Give Up Foolish Cell Phone Use

BOSTON (CBS) – It happened yesterday afternoon at the Fresh Pond rotary on Alewife Brook Parkway in Cambridge, a woman in a big SUV came barreling into the path of a smaller car that clearly had the right of way.

If driver number two had been less alert, or driving any faster, no way could he have slammed on the brakes before being broadsided and, most likely, killed by the nitwit in the SUV.

He's blaming cell phones for near-accidents, and while I agree that folks seemingly addicted to talking on cell phones in their cars are culpable, blaming the phone for accidents is hardly the issue. You know, like blaming guns for crimes. Again, it's the person responsible, not the tool used. I hate to sound like a broken record, but they still just don't get it. I know that some get it, and use the fear of the tool to push their nanny state objectives; however it's simpletons like the author of this piece that help authoritarians implement their plans.
Look at the rhetoric used:

So you can’t count on the state to step in and restore some order to the wild west scenario that’s playing out on our roads.

Look at that, would you? In one sentence, he manages to invoke the "Wild West" AND a call for Nanny State Kenobi to come save us from ourselves. First off, Jon, there were no cell phones nor automobiles in the "Wild West", so I fail to see why you would even use that particular idiom. Unless, of course, it's a subtle reminder of the pat anti-gun rhetoric, and you're falling back on that tired cliché because brings in the sheep. Or do you really think that distracted cowpokes reading Pony Express missives were causing massive three and four horse pileups in Dodge City? Secondly, we don't *need* the state to step in - there are plenty of penalties for distracted driving as it is, and there's even a private industry incentive in the form of (compulsory) automobile insurance. Have a lot of accidents, pay through the nose.

So what's his grand suggestion for dealing with folks that ignore the rules of the road simply because they're talking on a cell phone? Yep, you guessed it - just one more law! Just like gun control, where the solution is always one more law, the solution is to make life more onerous for everyone because of the abuse of a few. I like, too, how there's the "exceptional circumstances" clause - kinda like a "May Issue" permit, it's up to how important your call is as to whether you can make it. Look, this is an all-or-nothing thing here. Either cell phone usage is so dangerous that we have to ban it or it isn't. Saying that we should have an exception for certain scenarios is just leaving the door open for abuse.

And let's be honest here. The vast majority of the folks on the road are responsible, alert drivers (despite my protestations to the contrary). We are - much like with guns - trying to pass legislation affecting everyone based on the abuse of a very small subset - people that will most likely not abide by the law even if it does pass. And even if by some miracle cell phone use does decrease, these same people will be distracted by their passengers, radios, or SQUIRREL!s. You can't legislate responsibility no matter how much you wish you could...

That's the mindset we're dealing with here, folks...

That is all.