Sometimes it sucks to be right

[brendala]

When I was returning from San Francisco back in April, I got in a HUGE fight with my sister and her friend, Kay. Kay was the driver (we were using her car) and she had a terrible habit of constantly texting while she was driving. Worst of all, she has one of those internet phones that allows her to check her Facebook (she did that while driving, too! O_o). I kept asking her nicely to stop doing it and, after the fifth or sixth time I asked, she snapped at me and said...

Kay: "Look, Brenda. I don't want to be mean. But this is MY CAR and I don't appreciate you telling me how to drive! I text and drive all the time and I've never had an accident. It's no big deal!"

Me: "You've been texting non stop for nearly two hours. Can't those messages wait until we get back home?"

Kay: "I've been away for four days and I have to catch up with a lot of people!!"

Me: "If you absolutely MUST send a million text messages right now, why not let someone else drive?"

After that, Kay and my sister ragged on me for having the audacity to question Kay's driving (apparently, being the driver=being above criticism). And, once we got home, both of my sisters (the one in the car with me is 23, the other is a teenager) and one of my other sister's teenage friends echoed the "texting is no big deal" line. They even accused me of "acting like an old lady" because I got on Kay's case! I told them that I was just being sensible and that it was only a matter of time before Kay had an accident.

Well, a few days ago, Kay had a car accident.

Thankfully, nobody was hurt. She rear-ended another car; but there wasn't much damage and her car can be fixed. She claims the accident happened because she was tired. But I think she lied because texting is illegal and her parents might have smashed her phone and if they knew her texting habits.
I really hope this will wake up Kay and make her realize that text messages and Facebook can wait until she stops the car. If she gives up texting behind the wheel, my sister is sure to follow.


I hate to sound like an after school special. But I really hope that, if any of you reading this are in the habit of texting while driving, you'll stop. And if you don't do it but you know someone who does; please be a nag and tell them it's a BAD idea. They probably won't listen (ESPECIALLY if they're stupid f#$king teenagers); but it's worth a shot.
/gets off soapbox

Comments

[brendala.livejournal.com]

I get what you're saying. I've heard Libertarians make the "don't outlaw texting, just mandate stiff fines/punishments for texters who cause accidents" argument. But I personally don't think the anti-texting laws fall into the same intrusive Nanny State category as, say, taxing soda and banning excess salt.

Too many people have the "I'm a good driver. I can text and pay attention to the road" mentality as it is. If texting while driving was only punished when an accident happened; it would only make those attitudes worse. For many people I know, fear of getting a ticket is the ONLY thing that stops them from using their phone in the car.

Also, texters can avoid the fine and just lie about what caused the accident if no one actually saw them holding their phone (like I suspect Kay did).

[schpydurx.livejournal.com]

I think it IS Nanny-state. This is just another excuse to pull a vehicle over and harass an otherwise law-abiding citizen.

In your sister's case, if she lied, her conscious will eventually bother her; if not, it's between her and God.

If she kills someone next-time, she'll have plenty to think about as she rots in her jail cell. The we can talk about her being a "good driver."

[brendala.livejournal.com]

The problem with that argument is that it assumes driving is a RIGHT. It's not a right, it's a PRIVILEGE.
A 21-year-old who legally obtained a drivers license has every "right" to drink alcohol. He also has every "right" to drive his car. But if he does both of those things at the same time and gets caught, he can lose his license even if he doesn't cause an accident. However, according to extreme libertarian logic, a cop shouldn't legally be able to pull over someone who is chugging a can of beer while driving if that person isn't swerving or crashing into anyone. That's ridiculous.

Like people who text behind the wheel, many drunks believe that driving while "buzzed" is no big deal because they've managed to do it many times before. And the only thing that might make them think twice about doing it is the fact that its illegal. If the law only punished those people AFTER they hurt someone, than that's just too little too late.

[schpydurx.livejournal.com]

But from a perspective of what government should do vs. what it shouldn't do, should the government be involved in preventing future crime al la Minority Report?

I can see both sides of the argument. I'm not one of those Libertarians that sides with whatever the Libertarian movement is doing; in fact, I often describe myself as a Conservative. (Though I'm starting to hear the debate more often that Libertarianism is what Conservatism used to be, so go figure.)

It's one thing to take preventative measures (i.e. metal detectors–but don't for a moment think that I'm in favor of the TSA's asinine polices). It's something else entirely to punish someone for a future crime.

If texting-while-driving was such an issue, the government would mandate that vehicles have jammers installed so that your phone can't get signal while the vehicle is turned on.