where’s new hampshire when you need it?
by Matthew Smock
Published: July 3, 2008
On July 1st, a new law went into effect in California, banning hand-held cellphone use while driving. While this law certainly affects Californians, including myself, it isn’t news to the rest of the nation. The ban doesn’t break any new ground; New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Washington and Washington, D.C. already have similar cellphone bans. However, as we move forward, cellphone bans will become more commonplace, affecting drivers in more and more states. Eventually, members of Congress will take it upon themselves to enact a national ban, disregarding the will of state legislatures to decide for themselves, as is almost always the case.
But I need not go on to defend states’ rights yet because, thankfully, it still remains an issue for states to decide and most states have acted wisely. California is not one of those states. Here is the logic behind the cell phone ban:
Problem: Cell phones are the number one cause of distracted-driving accidents.
Solution: Criminalize hand-held use while operating a motor vehicle so as to reduce distracted-driving accidents.
I might be alone on this one, but it seems obvious that this measure only marginally promotes public safety.
First of all, state laws that mirror California’s don’t prevent the real dangers caused by cellphones and do little to improve driver safety overall. The California ban still allows drivers to use a hands-free device while driving, which supposedly keeps them from being distracted. But a hands-free cellphone conversation still requires one to take their mind off the road even though both hands may be on the wheel. Not to mention, the only way to get to a “hands-free state” is by old-fashioned “hands-on dialing.”
Problem unsolved.
And it gets even more ridiculous. Text messaging - although clearly more dangerous than a hand-held conversation and certainly at least as dangerous as dialing a number - remains legal in all of the states that ban hand-held conversations, with the exception of New Jersey and Washington. At least Minnesota and Alaska have figured out which distractions are most dangerous and have banned text messaging first.
But even if California were to move logically and also ban text messaging, why all the sudden are we picking on cellphones? State legislatures act as if driving distractions are a recent phenomenon of the cellular age. Why aren’t there bans on eating, drinking non-alcoholic beverages, smoking, getting dressed, putting on make up, shaving, changing the radio station, reading directions, reading billboards, having conversations with people in your car, rolling the windows up or down, looking at yourself in the mirror and singing along to Whitney Houston, Elton John, Counting Crows and Evanescence songs?
Of course, one could argue that driving-distraction laws should start with cellphones because they are the number one accident-causing distraction, according to CHP. However, there are hundreds of possible ways you can get distracted driving, so even if hand-held use is number one, it is possible that cellphone accidents amount to only a tiny fraction of all accidents caused by distraction.
In addition to their failure to solve problems, cellphone bans like California’s have the potential to create new ones, like putting individual liberty in jeopardy. In states like California, the police can pull over someone who appears to be holding a cell phone to their ear. If someone has their head rested on their hand, police now have another reason to pull him or her over because of a suspicion that the person is using a phone. Also, 911 calls are still legal, but how’s a cop to know that beforehand? Why do we need to give the police an excuse to harass lawful citizens?
While completely against cellphone bans similar to California’s, I am not suggesting that there is no legislative remedy to the distracted-driving problem. States like California could actually learn something from New Hampshire’s distracted-driving law. The ”live free or die” state is the only state with a fully comprehensive driving-distraction prohibition, including eating, drinking and applying makeup. While the law may at first seem to contradict the state motto, it’s actually completely in line with it. In New Hampshire, you can only be ticketed for a driving distraction if it causes an accident; you remain “free” to drive distracted so long as you don’t cause an accident. The law doesn’t illogically limit itself to cellphones, nor does it allow for its citizens to be unnecessarily pulled over.
Why can’t the rest of the nation think like those in New Hampshire? Honor personal responsibility. Give citizens the benefit of the doubt, and let them live their lives. Don’t punish everyone because of the actions of a few. If a person proves reckless and harmful to others, hold them responsible, but otherwise, let lawful citizens hold themselves responsible. Instead of solving problems, our lawmakers are creating new ones.
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
(6)