California Teen Cell Phone Use Ban While Driving

[Roland]

Helmets, seat belts, air bags, 5 point crash harnesses, roll bars are all good ideas, but mandating them steps in the realm of nanny law. It is the state saying "I'm making this law to protect you from your own stupidity."

I know you're not ignorant enough to think that's the ONLY reason why they do it. It also serves to protect us from everyone else's stupidity, as well as nature. It may be common sense, but so is not touching a hot stove. How would a parent be seen if they knowingly let their child touch a hot stove to teach them common sense, instead of "laying down the law"? Social Services might disagree with your views.;)It's the same case here.

Believe me, I am not bigger fan of legislation than you are, but I do truly think you're making a mountain out of a molehill, in this particular case. Now, if you want to talk about targeting teens, rather than a blanket ban, that's something else entirely. Although, unless I read it wrong, I believe this was the "first step" in a blanket banning on cell phone usage while driving. I suppose it seems "unfair" to "target" teens, but trying to pass a blanket no-cell law is tedious, at best (they've tried in my state, several times, and it always gets shot down one way or another). Using a partial ban, directed at a more at-risk demographic, seems perfectly logical to me, especially since it could very well get the ball rolling and open the door for a blanket ban (which, for the record, I am in favor of).