Which in turn leads to more tickets, which leads to more revenue, which leads to more police, which leads to more tickets, which leads to more revenue, _{which leads to more police,which leads to more tickets}

A study in the United States suggested that anti-cell phone laws increased accident rates for the same reason given in this article.

A recent study by police in British Columbia determined distracted driving was a contributing factor in 32% of crash deaths, while Saskatchewan recorded 8,500 distracted driving collisions in 2010.

Accidents are caused by whatever it is fashionable to complain about. Another 32% are from alcohol, and another 32% are from speeding, and another 32% are from tailgating, and another 32% are from running red lights, and ...

It makes you cringe to think what would have happened if he'd hit a bump.

See Airplane II: The Sequel.

"I think it's even more dangerous than before, because now you've got the phone in a place where you've never had it before," said Hagen.

No, I've had my phone there before...

umad

Hands free devices don't seem to be safer. Bans on handheld phones are feel-good laws by politicians who like regulating people.

While I don't like the law, because I think it's wasteful and ill conceived, I would like to point out that the Calgary Sun has the journalistic integrity of the Daily Fail

umad: Hagen says with every major collision, cell phone records are checked to ensure distracted driving was not a factor.

So Canucks can't even use hands-free devices? That is stupid.

The law is worded to allow for hands free, and i'm sure they check to see if one was likely used, but again, see my previous post as to why that kind of detail was likely left out

umad: ZAZ: umad

Hands free devices don't seem to be safer. Bans on handheld phones are feel-good laws by politicians who like regulating people.

They are safer. Not having to hold your phone up to your ear is one less thing to be distracted by. It also allows you to keep both hands in control of the vehicle.

I agree with the rest of your post.


Well, also a lot of the recent problems are texting while driving.
Which is much more distracting to do while driving then talking is.

The Bestest: Also, narc'ing out drunk drivers is encouraged?

Yes it is, and almost I called one in

/I can't actually say if he was drunk, but he was at least driving like a maniac
//By maniac I mean not staying in his lane at the best of times, at the worst he was speeding, crossing all the lanes back and forth on a winding section of highway that is also bumpy, at such a rate that his tires often came off the road two at a time. This was not helped by the fact that he was in an older modified SUV with the suspension raised and tall but not very wide (1.5 X normal width for such a car -ish) off roading tires.
///To be honest, I was surprised not to see the guy further down the road, with his car in a smoldering heap
////And he was lucky that the road was clear at the time

Hagenhatesyouall: the_sidewinder: While I don't like the law, because I think it's wasteful and ill conceived, I would like to point out that the Calgary Sun has the journalistic integrity of the Daily Fail

So it's like every other newspaper on the market?

Shocking.

No, it's worse

I don't quite get why we needed to outlaw driving while talking without handsfree, or texting, here in the Golden Sewer, since we already had a law against distracted driving.

I know, revenue. Doesn't stop the cops from talking on their cellphones while they speed past, either.

Not to mention that for the majority of the slack-jawed, mouth-breathing morons out there, carrying on a conversation while they drive is already distracting...

umad

People who have studied cell phones and driving report that hands free devices are not safer. I have not checked their methods. I find their results plausible if not inevitable. Lots of things that are obviously true turn out to be false on closer examination. A famous example is the Munich study on antilock brakes. ABS did not make drivers safer because drivers were aware of the system and drove knowing it would save them. Drivers holding cell phones may be more cautious because they think they are doing something dangerous.

frtmn7

Where I live court cases over minor accidents should happen only if one party's damage is not covered by insurance and the circumstances are ambiguous. Claims between insurance companies are negotiated.

Bill_Wick's_Friend: Dave and the Mission: List is incomplete without

So you're saying the shabu-shabu set up that I mounted on my dashboard is a bad idea?

No, I think shabu-shabu is fine. If you spill, the water will just hit you, burn a bit, and be gone.

Good fondue, on the other hand, should stick to exposed skin like napalm, and continue to burn...

We had a story within the last few months about a Canadian who called in a drunk driver. The operator took the report then told him to hang up and drive. Calling in a drunk driver was considered proper use of a phone. Reporting on subsequent movements was not.

AcneVulgaris: Ponzholio: "I think it's even more dangerous than before, because now you've got the phone in a place where you've never had it before," said Hagen.

No, I've had my phone there before...

You're that guy that accidentally 'sat' on his phone?

One in a million chance doc!

Gaylord Q. Tinkledink: Albertans are the worst drivers in the country.

Beg to differ
/Parts of BC are worse
//But not by much

untaken_name: The theory I've heard is that your brain uses part of its capacity to imagine the person you're talking to and their facial expressions, etc. You don't have to do that when they're in the car since you can see them. Don't know how accurate that is, but that's the answer I've heard to that question.

Maybe, but you have to look at the passengers to know what their facial expressions are, so I call BS