The prejudice against Cell phones

Check out this headline:

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...10313/1118/RSS

"Fatal crash blamed on cell phone user"

You have to get to the 4th paragraph before they tell you:

"Since then, prosecutors said they have learned that Cates had drugs in
his system -- cocaine, marijuana and amphetamines -- which will likely
up the charge to involuntary manslaughter, punishable by 15 years in
prison."

Yeah right, it was the cell phone...

On 1 Mar 2006 16:04:21 -0800, "Larry Bud" >
wrote:

>Check out this headline:
>
>http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...10313/1118/RSS
>
>"Fatal crash blamed on cell phone user"
>
>You have to get to the 4th paragraph before they tell you:
>
>"Since then, prosecutors said they have learned that Cates had drugs in
>his system -- cocaine, marijuana and amphetamines -- which will likely
>up the charge to involuntary manslaughter, punishable by 15 years in
>prison."
>
>Yeah right, it was the cell phone...

---
Mantill Williams, spokesman for AAA's national office, said drivers
should be banned from using cell phones or even headset devices, which
are often seen as being safer.

"What makes it dangerous is the distraction of a conversation itself,"
he said Tuesday. "We think laws for careless and reckless driving in
general could be strengthened. If you're distracted, you should be
prosecuted to the fullest."
---

How about banning passengers also? Conversations can cause accidents,
right? From Michigan's chart next to the article sick drivers have
killed as many people as cell phone users, how about banning illness
also?

Dave
---
http://www.davidphogan.com/sdroads
Amature Ass(phalt) and more!

"Larry Bud" > wrote in
oups.com:

> Check out this headline:
>
> http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...NEWS04/6030103
> 13/1118/RSS
>
> "Fatal crash blamed on cell phone user"
>
> You have to get to the 4th paragraph before they tell you:
>
> "Since then, prosecutors said they have learned that Cates had drugs
> in his system -- cocaine, marijuana and amphetamines -- which will
> likely up the charge to involuntary manslaughter, punishable by 15
> years in prison."
>
> Yeah right, it was the cell phone...
>
>

Maybe the CP was the straw that broke the camel's back.

the coke and meth ought to cancel out the pot's effects. 8-)

But seriously,how much coke,meth and pot was in his bloodstream,and how
much effect would it have had for that particular person?
Whereas,the CP is a known distraction with known effects.(diversion of
attention)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

>
> To take that track, you also don't know how much the CP was a
> distraction. It seems pretty ridiculous to have a HEADLINE of an
> article that blames cell phones when the guy was loaded on a variety of
> drugs, don't you think?
>
>

No ****. That's just plain WRONG. Almost criminal, in fact. -Dave

Larry Bud wrote:
> Check out this headline:
>
> http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...10313/1118/RSS
>
> "Fatal crash blamed on cell phone user"
>
> You have to get to the 4th paragraph before they tell you:
>
> "Since then, prosecutors said they have learned that Cates had drugs in
> his system -- cocaine, marijuana and amphetamines -- which will likely
> up the charge to involuntary manslaughter, punishable by 15 years in
> prison."
>
> Yeah right, it was the cell phone...

Even without the drugs it should have been manslaughter... if not
murder. Stop coddling these killers on our highways.

"Larry Bud" > wrote in
oups.com:

>
> Jim Yanik wrote:
>> "Larry Bud" > wrote in
>> oups.com:
>>
>> > Check out this headline:
>> >
>> > http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...01/NEWS04/6030
>> > 103 13/1118/RSS
>> >
>> > "Fatal crash blamed on cell phone user"
>> >
>> > You have to get to the 4th paragraph before they tell you:
>> >
>> > "Since then, prosecutors said they have learned that Cates had
>> > drugs in his system -- cocaine, marijuana and amphetamines -- which
>> > will likely up the charge to involuntary manslaughter, punishable
>> > by 15 years in prison."
>> >
>> > Yeah right, it was the cell phone...
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Maybe the CP was the straw that broke the camel's back.
>>
>> the coke and meth ought to cancel out the pot's effects. 8-)
>>
>> But seriously,how much coke,meth and pot was in his bloodstream,and
>> how much effect would it have had for that particular person?
>> Whereas,the CP is a known distraction with known effects.(diversion
>> of attention)
>
> To take that track, you also don't know how much the CP was a
> distraction. It seems pretty ridiculous to have a HEADLINE of an
> article that blames cell phones when the guy was loaded on a variety
> of drugs, don't you think?
>

It would be a wrongful to conclude that the guy was "loaded" on the
drugs,since minute levels of drugs can be detected,and no mention was made
of how much drugs were measured,if they measured LEVELS at all,or what
effect they would have had on that person.They could have been trace
amounts,with negligible effects;a GO/NOGO sort of test.

BUT,the use of a CP was determined to be at blame.
CP's are a known distraction,measured to have as much effect as a drunk
driver.(which would be over the legal limit of .08 BAC)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

> How about banning passengers also? Conversations can cause accidents,
> right?

The difference passengers can see what's going on and will STFU when
appropriate.

> Larry Bud:
> "Fatal crash blamed on cell phone user"
>
> You have to get to the 4th paragraph before they tell you:
>
> "Since then, prosecutors said they have learned that Cates had drugs in
> his system -- cocaine, marijuana and amphetamines -- which will likely
> up the charge to involuntary manslaughter, punishable by 15 years in
> prison."
>
> Yeah right, it was the cell phone...

Of course the cell phone is at fault. It is a visible and convenient
scape-goat.