Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by snerd, Jun 15, 2012.
It's coming, I tell ya.
The real problem in America today is texting while driving.
The problem is the Americans aren't taking any of responsibilities for himself; texting while driving is one of it.
Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
It's a real problem on America's highways.
There's only 2 solutions to this problem:
1. Drivers must voluntarily become more responsible and pay attention to their driving.
2. Laws must be passed and enforced to "encourage" them to pay attention and drive responsible.
If you know of any other solution, let's hear it?
Stop wasting resources trying to modify behavior. Prosecute property crimes with more-than-adequate existing laws. Crash into someone, pay the price. A government that monitors behavior, rather than result, is not something thoughtful people desire.
The anarchist is strong in barbedwiresmile.
Laws against distracted driving save lives.
Thoughtful people want their lives saved.
They don't care about the punishment of distracted drivers after they've already killed their family members.
They want the distracted driver stopped BEFORE they destroy property and kill people.
That's what thoughtful people desire.
Darwin will handle the problem,it's not a fed issue.'08.
Sometime a law couldn't do anything, for example, everyone is speeding over 55 mph. Therefore, why don't a police department to pull everyone that is driving over 55 mph? If a police department could enforce that law 100% and then it could have the effect on us.
We need to impose a rigor standard test to obtain a driving license, so they could pay respect to have the privilege to drive a car.
IMO, all states shouldn't issue a license to anyone without training of a manual shift lesson, speeding over 100 mph with a crap car (to teach them driving a crap car in high speed isn’t fun), braking course, race a car against a qualifying time in a racing circuit (so they could learn how to corner well with a car), drive high speed and cornering on a wet road, understand how a car functions, understanding how to maintenance a car, and they must always drive on right lane unless they have to pass a car in front of him.
Fixed it for you.
Freedom seems to be abhorrent to you.
Gotta take up for BWS here, if only to wonder how a law against distracted driving is effectively enforced prior to the behavior resulting in damage or injury.
Texting while driving has all the hallmarks of addiction. The behavior is reinforced in a positive manner for the user the majority of the time. The downside is the negative consequences when things don't go as planned by the user. These are the same addiction challenges that those addicted to alcohol and drugs face.
No easy answers here. Prosecute the same as drunk driving and education to stop the practice. I have a feeling we'll be seeing more texting while driving accidents before people learn.
Doesn't that violate the forums ROS, altering another person's post?
I didn't say or even imply anything about firearms.
This thread has nothing to do with firearms, and for you to imply that I'm anti-gun is just plain wrong and deceitful.
Freedom means far more to me than it does to you.
Freedom comes with sacrifices and responsibilities, of which you probably know nothing about.
Laws are required in a civilized society.
Without laws we're all just a bunch of animals wearing clothes.
In the future speak for yourself, not me.
The thread does have something to do with firearms, because the arguments to ban firearms are the same ones you make to ban texting while driving. The more you encourage bans on things you don't like ("for safety's sake"), the more bans will "magically" appear on things you do like ("for safety's sake").
Yeah, no reason to ban texting and driving.
I went and scanned my copy of the Constitution and the the 2nd Amendment covers our guns, but can't find anything that secures the right to text while driving.
The anarchists (like Gundude) responding to this thread need to check out that link.
...and no firearms were involved in any of those accidents.
That makes absolutely no sense.
So anything that isn't explicitly mentioned in the Constitution is fair game? Is that how it was designed?
No, not magically, the quotes were there to give a hint at the sarcasm. It happens as a direct result of people supporting bans on things they don't like or are scared of. When you are one of those people, you're part of the problem.