Originally Posted by
AirMoore
We hold them accountable before it happens (in NY let's say) via 5-points on their license, and what can amount to an exceptional sum of money in toto. Furthermore, IF they do cause an accident, then it is generally considered an aggravating factor in the legal process.
As for the whole state trooper bit, I'm not wholly sure what the point was, so I'll just let it slide.
Are you trying to affirm my point for me, or what? As you can see from the independent study I have furnished (and there are hundreds, if not thousands)... this is not theory. This is empirically backed data. If texting and driving were made impossible, it would categorically save lives.
It COULD save lives, Just like drinking and driving ( Dont drink and drive, save a life) or anything else that takes your eyes or mind off the road... Even changing the station on the radio or look over at our waze screen, It only take a second for an accident to happen.
Speeding is fundamentally different from Texting/Drinking&Driving This I agree
Ahhh, you can predict the future, so you know precisely when to use your cellphone in every situation, knowing in advance that it will be safe to do so. Fantastic really, could you please let me know the lotto numbers for this upcoming week?
Now how did i know that you where going to say that i could tell the future..... No I can not, But what i can do is, A visual assessment of my speed, road conditions, weather, and of what ever else may or may not be a Poss Threat IF i was going to pick up my phone and use it..
Thanks again for affirming my point. You may be better at driving, they are likely better at texting.
They can be better then me at texting, That does not mean that because they can text better then me that they should do it while there driving? I know what MY limits are behind the wheel,
You are using it as a qualifier, you did in the last post. Perhaps more comical is that you use it AGAIN as a qualifier after directly stating you are not using it as such. This is how your argument plays out:
"I'm not using it as a qualifier of how come I am different and should be allowed to do this. Here is why I am more qualified to do this activity... NY/Florida, 43 years old, etc, etc."
I am in NO way saying that I should be allowed to or not to text, Im stating that i know what my abilities are when it comes to driving and what my car can and can not do SAFELY, I mean what i feel is safely
I call it experience... Qualifier is a word that you are using...Your breaking it down into Statistics ... But for me the fact of the matter is that at 16 or 17 years of age your not going to have the experience that i myself have or anyone else older with experience of over the road driving..
Going back to agreeing to disagree, I absolutely support this. When I say things like I will dismantle your argument, I don't mean objectively, I mean subjectively (though, in this case, it's near objectively).
Don't take it personally old chum, I rather enjoy this, it's not a personal affront in any way (ie: if you are ever back in New York, and wanted to discuss such topics over tea-and-crumpets, I'd be more than willing). Some of my best friends have ideals that are diametrically opposed to mine, and we can get into some serious discussions; yet... we are still friends come the end of the day.
