AnnotatedOpinions.com

Texting while driving is . . . a terrible scourge. Despite extreme enforcement difficulties, state legislatures are rushing to ban the practice. But they might want to broaden their focus.   

Driving while toddled should certainly be felonious. Few things are more distracting than a screaming toddler in the back seat, except perhaps two or three. You’re constantly turning around and yelling, or pretending you’re going to stop the car right there and not go to Grandma’s at all. . .  

Cities bristle with distractions: bike messengers, construction workers, pedestrians, traffic signals . . .  

Seat belts are distracting, as are all those lights and buzzers telling you your doors are open . . .  

Now, you might be thinking that the slope down which we’re skidding is awfully slippery, and that we shouldn’t even start. You might think that no one really wants to crash, and if there is good evidence that texting or talking on a cell phone while driving is dangerous, people will control their own behavior.   

I find your naivete charming. As George Washington famously said to Congress, or perhaps to his slaves, American patriots understand that real change can only be accomplished by thorough and pervasive coercion.  

[AO: This satirical column, misses an important point. See, the writer argues that legislatures should not ban texting or driving while talking on a cell phone because when people realize the danger, they will control their own behavior. This is because people don’t want to crash since crashing can lead to injury and monetary loss (damaged car, etc.). But, the reason why legislatures are taking these actions, or at least the reason they should take these actions, is not necessarily to protect the driver who is texting or speaking on the phone but instead to protect other drivers and pedestrians who are not. In other words, to protect the innocent victims.  

This is comparable to drunk driving. People know that drinking and driving can lead to serious injury and financial loss. But they do it anyway. Often, those who suffer as the result of someone choosing to drink and drive are innocent pedestrians or another driver. As a result, the state steps in to protect the innocent by giving the police the right to arrest drunk drivers. This is the argument that applies to texting.  

There is another point worth mentioning. These decisions by the legislature are base in part on the extent to which the activity, drunk driving, texting, etc. is necessary. In short, they are unnecessary activities for combination with driving. Many of the examples the writer cite, driving while toddled, existence of cities, using a seatbelt, are necessary in and of themselves or provide sufficient benefit to warrant allowing them while driving. Drunk driving, texting why driving or speaking on a cell phone while driving is not a necessity. ]