
Quoting
MADDLIES
CYjeff- Again you need help with basic logic. My point is that ANYTHING that causes a potential risk needs to be made illegal, IF, people in charge are truly committed to "saving lives"
Your point about drugs and alcohol causing many..... Again cell phones have not been around as long as alcohol or drugs. That would be like saying Scottie Pippen was a better scorer than LeBron James becuase he has more points. No kidding. Hes played longer.
Tests show that these two distractions are just as likely (cell more likely) to cause accidents or driving impairment. So why would you try to chose which should be illegal if your MO was to make things safe rather than to wage "war" against drinking?
Sniper- Again the point is if SAVING LIVES is the main objective, why wouldnt you do things to ELIMINATE THE RISK? Again your "logic" makes no sense. To prevent accidents from happening. That sums the whole argument up there. SIMPLY BECAUSE SOMEONE DRINKS or TEXTS or TALKS ON THE PHONE, doesnt mean that they WILL DEFINATELY wreck. Thats your problem; tricked into thinking they will.
You are twisting my argument into unfounded hypotheticals. But yes the last item is my point. So why is there a difference between CITATIONS for cell phone use and ARREST for consumption of drugs or alcohol when they are both proven to be unsafe.
Also my DD comment was in reference to how shady the govt claims "alcohol related accidents. It was a hypothetical. If I had nothing to drink, and my passengers did, and I wrecked govt still would assess it as alcohol related which is why your Trooper/govt stats are not valid.
Tidbit. EVERY ONE HAS ALCOHOL IN THEIR BODY AT ALL TIMES. IT IS HUMAN PRODUCTION.