While it is true many teens develop a "superiority complex" ("no one understands me wahhh"), that doesn't really apply in this situation. Insurance companies, based on statistics, charge teen drivers more for insurance. That is fine, because theirs is a business of numbers. In government, however, it is different. As I have an income, I pay the same taxes as any adult, and I can join the military, yet I am treated differently? That doesn't seem constitutional; however that is whole other argument.
In this case, all one has to consider is that cell phones are distracting to everyone, regardless of experience. They are comparable to alcohol; it doesn't matter how many times you've driven the indy 500, talking into a cell phone can distract you to a point you can hit another vehicle, just as alcohol can cause even the best of drivers to do stupid things (sources: http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-6090342-7.html, http://bicycleuniverse.info/cars/cellphones.html.)
I'm not saying teens shouldn't be banned from talking while driving, I'm saying everyone should be. Being afraid of a young teen yapping vs. a businessman yapping is personal opinion, and while it may be valid for you, it is an unethical basis for a law.
I think the reason Oregon didn't pass an all encompassing law is because they wouldn't have been able to dredge up enough voter support. Notice how this law targets those unable to vote, and therefore enable to speak in their own defense? It seems to me that the adults of this state are the ones with the superiority complex, who use teens as scapegoats but refuse to restrict themselves.
As an Oregon teen, I'm not sure why this law is teen specific. I never talk on my phone when I drive (which may be due to the fact I drive a stick and can't talk and drive), but I have nearly been hit on at least three occasions by an adult driver on the phone. First was someone who pulled out of a side street and almost into the side of my car (I accelerated in time, but it was close), second was when walking a crosswalk, and had to jump out of the way of a jabbering driver making a right-on-red and ignoring the pedestrians, and finally was on my bike, waiting for a red light. Guy on the phone didn't see me sitting there and came up so fast i had to ride forward into the crosswalk to avoid getting hit. All of these people were adults.
What I'm saying is who decided that adults were more competent than teens at driving and talking? Even if teens don't have the driving experience as adults, the level of distraction is the same. That, I believe, gets to the root of the problem. It isn't handsets which are distracting, it is yelling at your kid/friend/secretary/co-worker/doctor etc which takes the driver's attention away from the road and channels it into a piece of plastic. If the government feels it needs to get involved, ban it all, don't be ageist about it.
Looking over ones shoulder while biking is never fun. Not only can you not see much, especially when you're wearing a backpack, but you can lose your balance and stray into other lanes. Which means into other cars, in front of other cars, the curb, or, if you're really unlucky, off a bridge. While I'd never buy one myself (I'd end up trying to put on movies and watch those in stead of the road), it may be useful for some hardcore (rich) commuters.
Just wanted to say I have a post price drop iPhone and I threw my number in to see what happened and got a credit and PIN. I'm guessing this is possible because I got mine about 30 minutes after the price drop at my local store, so the SN probably shows up as a pre-price drop phone. Is that even possible?
"With all the new multitouch capable monitors coming out, which one is the best? With the release of Windows 7 I really want a touchscreen monitor for my desktop. I'm looking to get a Full HD monitor that supports multitouch and can still look great during gaming and movies. Which one has the best specs for the price?"
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
In this case, all one has to consider is that cell phones are distracting to everyone, regardless of experience. They are comparable to alcohol; it doesn't matter how many times you've driven the indy 500, talking into a cell phone can distract you to a point you can hit another vehicle, just as alcohol can cause even the best of drivers to do stupid things (sources: http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-6090342-7.html, http://bicycleuniverse.info/cars/cellphones.html.)
I'm not saying teens shouldn't be banned from talking while driving, I'm saying everyone should be. Being afraid of a young teen yapping vs. a businessman yapping is personal opinion, and while it may be valid for you, it is an unethical basis for a law.
I think the reason Oregon didn't pass an all encompassing law is because they wouldn't have been able to dredge up enough voter support. Notice how this law targets those unable to vote, and therefore enable to speak in their own defense? It seems to me that the adults of this state are the ones with the superiority complex, who use teens as scapegoats but refuse to restrict themselves.