Missouri Moves to Ban All Drivers from Texting

The point is that it is already illegal. One should not have to waste resources on spelling out what distracted driving is. Next they will have to pass a law against reading newspapers while driving or applying make up.

and eating food

And I'd be ok with all of that.

It is not wasting resources to clarify a law. It is passed by legislators that will be there one way or another. It is a simple bill, 2 minutes in committee and to the consent calender on the floor. All told, about 5 minutes will be spent on the whole thing- and it may keep someone from killing an innocent person.

Remember- it isn't a matter of your rights. You do not have the right to drive. It is a government granted privilege. You're driving on public roads, meaning you're subject to any whim that the government believes is in your best interest. If you don't like it- you can build your own roads and operate your vehicle on them without regulation from the government.

Exactly. Well said.

Every time the comments are the same. You are not loosing rights. Wrong. Each time it take away a little more of your freedom.

I am not in any way stating texting and driving is a good thing. But will this law, as opposed to the other laws on the books now, prevent the problem? Will the issues stop because people know that there is a law? NO! If the law did prevent it, then why do we need THIS new one?

The agrument that it is worth it if it saves just one life it is worth it is stupid. Where do you stop with that? Example say the problem is texting while driving. We know that driving cause a lot more damage than texting, then lets have a law to stop driving. I mean hey if the stopping of driving saves even one life it is worth it righ...
(continues)

Its illegal to run a red light. Infact probably more expensive and more points then texting/talking when driving.

It is not your right to put my safety at risk. Your own safety, fine. Mine - absolutely not.

Fine..... then ban smoking in public. I don't like inhaling your poison.

Many places are banning smoking. As unrelated as it is, I think its pathetic that non smokers cried about how they never went to bars/restaraunts because of smokers, but when they banned smoking there, nobody saw the increased traffic that all the whiny nonsmokers promised. Guess it's just their way to rain on people's parade.

In related news, If you honestly think that people have the common sense to not need laws like this, you have much more faith than you should. This is the same society that gave a woman a huge lawsuit victory because her hot coffee burned her when she tried to hold it between her legs and drive...

First: It would depend on the nature of the restaurant, but some restaurants do see increased traffic. But the ban had nothing to do with increasing traffic. What you whiners never consider is that the people who work there don't have the choice to not patronize another restaurant. You are protected in your workplace, why shouldn't they be?

Smoking in public isn't the issue. Someone smoking outside doesn't damage my lungs. Address the real issue, don't make up a bogus one.

They have the choice not to work there.

And I'm not whining about it. (The only place I really smoked in public was bars anyway so no biggie for me) And I realize that increasing business was not the main goal, but it was one very common justification used in the discussion.

And I'd much rather not be protected from smoking in my workplace, It's be great to sit at my desk in the winter time and have a cig on my break 😁

I want to sit at my desk and smoke pot. It is less harmful than tobacco.

BUT, the only reason health safety issues have been a hard fight is because of Big Tobacco had a economic stranglehold on lawmakers.

Smokers tend to suck in general. Why do they think that tossing a cigarette butt out the window is any less littering than my beer can? Why can't they read signs that say "no smoking witin 50 ft of door".

I agree littering is bad. Though, on the upside, cigarette butts are bio-degradeable, while beer cans are not. And more importantly, should you be drinking beers whie driving? 😳

If I was drinking and driving I know I would definitely want a cigarette too.

good point. But keep the cans in the car to put your butts in!

Cigarette butts are not biodegradable.

And, using your logic, why don't we just throw all of our garbage (food) on the street as it is technically biodegradable?

It was a joke. 🤣 Sense of humor much?

Well, I wasn't sure as many smokers are a little touchy about the subject. Especially when I flip them off while passing just after they tossed a butt out the window. 🙂

the trick is knowing how to bounce one off the windshield of the guy whos tailgating you. 😉

Believe it or not, a buddy of mine saw this happen on the interstate going through Tucson. Unfortunately for the smoker it was a cop car he bounced the burning butt off of.

My buddy called me as soon as he saw it, thank God he didn't text !!!

haha awesomely bad luck!!

but it IS different, because in order to text most people MUST take their eyes off the road (at least with iTap you do - I know I used to have the T9 in my old phone memorized, and didn't have to look), but you DON'T have to take your eyes off the road to sing, or yell at your kids, or whatever.

It doesn't impact your freedom of speech, or quality of life, to have to wait until you're done driving in order to resume a conversation. Do I text while driving? Sure, sometimes I do. But I still think it's a good idea to have a law against it. I bet if I got a ticket, I'd stop doing it.

~ miss chris

I somewhat agree with you. But the problem I have with your statement was that it would take a ticket to possibly stop you. What if before you got the ticket, you caused an accident? Is it honestly worth risking your life or someone else's for that text?

Of course it's not worth the risk. But is my texting while glancing at my phone any worse than someone reaching for their soda bottle on the floor, or putting on lipstick in the mirror? Of course it's not.

The whole argument is kind of silly. Laws are laws, whether we agree with them or not. We can break them, or obey them- but if you don't like them, then go live somewhere else!

bgraviett said:

By outlawing these things, they are just taking away things that we should be smart enough to not do. By saying that it is against the law, infringe's on our freedoms. We should at least have the CHOICE to do it, but the common sense to not.

And this quote pretty much sums that observation up.

Texting is being BANNED because idiots will continue to do it without the ban. And with the ban, too, probably.

bgraviett said:
we just have to hope that the drivers are smart enough to reduce disstractions. By outlawing these things, they are just taking away things that we should be smart enough to not do. By saying that it is against the law, infringe's on our freedoms. We should at least have the CHOICE to do it, but the common sense to not.

Hey, while we're at it, lets legalize Drunk Driving, and just HOPE people have the common sense not to do it. Not being allowed to drink and drive infringes on your freedom, right? And let's make it legal to run red lights. It'll be okay, we can HOPE people will have the common sense to stop there. Having to stop for all those pesky red lights is a hassle, especially w...
(continues)

If you run me over in the school zone going to Wendy's, can you at least grab me a Baconator on your way back?

YOU'RE INFRINGING ON MY RIGHT TO IGNORE YOUR SCREAMS FOR HELP!!!