No, I’m not ticked off at any of you. You know that. I’m ticked off at the, “do it because we have to do something” mentality of the people we voted to power to represent us. Secondly, I’m ticked off at the willingness of the American people to simply set back and allow laws to be passed which not only are not in line with our interests, but are actually contrary to our interests, while we rise not a whimper of objection. I’m ticked off at the population who revel in the hiring “rights” they celebrate which come in the form of the vote, but who fail to use the firing rights they possess.
How do we define what it means to “represent us”? To make a public service fulfilling our real needs, desires and interests. So if they are to “take action” on anything during the course of their doing the job we assigned them, it should be in line with the interests we hold important. We did not send them to Austin or to any other state capital or Washington to simply do their own thing nor to venture into wild avenues of irresponsibility. We send them there as representatives of “us.” You know, the old ”We the People” ideal. What does “Government of, by and for the people” mean anyhow?
The latest thing now to poke up its ugly head is the talk of passing legislation which would ban not only cell phone use while driving within certain sensitive areas such as school zones, or to ban hand held cell phone use, but to ban ALL cell phone use while operating a motor vehicle. Why is such a ban even being considered? It’s all in the interest of safety. No it isn’t, folks. That’s a vicious lie. It has nothing to do with safety at all for it has no relationship to safety at all. “But Dan, you have heard the news reports. You have heard the studies of the contribution cell phone use while driving has on the accident rate.” I’ve heard it. The news media makes sure I hear it. They have done their best to insure that the American public knows that it is a growing concern of safety. They give us the startling statistics. The scary numbers. I heard it again last night on the news. Six percent of accidents are attributed to cell phone use while driving. Did you hear that? Is there anything in that number which is sending you a red flag message? If not, there should be. They continue with the number of accidents that represents. Now it’s not just a percentage, it’s a whole number, representing actual accident victims. Honestly I forgot what they reported the number to be. It was rather large. That’s a lot of accidents. All caused by or contributed to because of people talking on cell phones while driving.
Now some of you have a pet peeve regarding people talking while driving so you’re probably in agreement with the idea of regulations which would put a stop to the irritant. You know who you are. You see a driver apparently not paying attention, or one who is in the passing lane going thirty miles under the posted speed limit and as you pass, your irritation prompts ”idiot talking on a cell phone” or perhaps you have taken up the cry, “hang up and drive!.” So sure, whatever can be done to curb that menace is a good thing. And besides that, it would cut down on a whole lot of accidents. You like the sentiment, “if one life is saved, it is worth it.” Saving lives and avoiding injuries is what it’s all about. Right?
Wrong! It’s not about saving lives or avoiding injuries at all. Think of the idiocy of the statistic and the number and the real motivation behind it. Here is the number you really need to pay attention to. If six percent of accidents are attributed to cell phone use while driving, ninety-four percent of accidents are NOT attributed to cell phone use. Why are our legislators who are allegedly looking out for, and representing our interests going after something which accounts for less than ten percent of all automobile accidents rather than going after whatever it is that causes ninety-four percent of all automobile accidents?
Believe me, they will. After, they eliminate the cause of the six percent of accidents. What will be next? What is the cause of the next six or ten percent of all accidents? You surely don’t believe they will stop when they have banned cell phone use in cars, do you? Go back a little while. What was the first cell phone use concern which prompted legislation? Hand held cell phone use while driving. They said the problem was caused by people dialing while driving and becoming distracted and not keeping their eyes on the road. The concluded that the problem was the distraction and if they simply passed laws requiring all cell phone use to be hands-free, the safety problem would be taken care of. Do you remember those arguments? Ok, we can live with that. Use an earpiece or a Bluetooth and the distraction factor will be eliminated and you will now be compliant to the law. Not a big deal. So why did that not settle the matter?
It did not solve any problem. No law passed to solve any problem ever succeeds in solving any problem. It just uncovers another problem. It uncovers another problem to be dealt with by the passing of another law. And that law in turn……… you get the point and you see the problem. For every problem, another law is required. And for every law passed, a little more of your freedom is eroded away.
No, they did not stop when more and more states local and state localities passed laws making hands free cell phone use while driving mandatory. That was only a stop gap on the way to the real agenda. In fact, some places (apparently it’s being considered on a broader scale here in Texas) are bypassing the hands-free phase completely and are going for a total ban on ANY cell phone use while driving. Maybe that seems like a good thing to you. I’ll assure it is not a good thing for anyone. I don’t have to argue the point that it not only takes the right away from the teenage girl chatting with her friends while in route to the mall, but it takes away the tool of the physician in route to the hospital being briefed on the condition of the patient emergency he is responding to, or the service technician receiving technical instructions or scheduling arrangements being made, or any of the other hundreds of legitimate needs and even conveniences we now enjoy with the cell phone. Try to find a pay phone along the roadway today.
Ok, so you decide that you can live with the loss of that convenience. Remember the ninety-four percent of accidents NOT caused by cell phone use while driving? Do you believe that the special interests and the legislators are going to stop trying to reduce accidents when the one cause of six percent of accidents is now out of the picture? What are they going to go after next? What convenience of driving are you willing to give up next? How about the radio in your car? You know that has already been targeted. Maybe you won’t mind a daily commute or a six hour road trip in total silence, but I will. Then the resulting increase of accidents due to drivers dozing off from the monotony and the lulling effects of road noise will come to the attention of those who are looking out for our interest and our safety. But remember, it’s all worth it if even one life is saved or one accident avoided. Just a little freedom sacrificed for the sake of added safety. What happens when they have gone through every possible driving related potential distraction in the interest of making driving accident free and there are still accidents? As long as there is the remotest possibility of an accident occurring, someone is going to go after that cause and create legislation to remove it as a danger.
You know how the news programs handle it. The microphone in the face of the random man on the street. “What do you think it will be like not to be able to use your cell phone while driving?” Rather than the timid replies I keep hearing such as “well, it will be an adjustment to make”, or “I won’t like it but if it saves lives, I’m ok with it”, I want to start seeing the American people looking straight at the camera and saying to their elected officials who are proposing these insane measures, “If you value your position in government, you’ll think twice about such idiocy. You pass such a law and your political career is ended.”
Folks, maybe this means nothing to you and it’s ok to let the freedoms you now have be eroded away by new law after new law being passed every day. Not one new law is designed to give you more freedom. Every law passed is by nature a cut into your freedom. You’re either going to accept it and go about your business or you are going to do something about it. With your vote you put these people in positions of power. You intended them to represent your best interest and they are not. What are you going to do about it?
I am one who refuses to “forward to everyone in your email address book” anything which comes my way by email consisting of the usual junk scares, threats and hoaxes from unknown origins. This message is not from an unknown origin. I created it and I am identifying myself as the source so take it from there. I don’t care if this thing reaches a million or more Americans. Maybe a few out there will have the courage to do something about the problem. Maybe a few will face up to their state or federal legislators and say, “no, you aren’t going to pass such nonsense and if you do, I’ll remember your name come reelection time and I’ll make it my business to assure you are out of a job come election time.”
It’s not just about the question of cell phone use while driving. That is just one symptom of a problem which has gotten totally out of hand. If the term “We The People” means anything at all, perhaps it’s time we began to make it real and if that means a grassroots effort to return the role of government to the people’s business, then let’s start it.
Dan W. Dooley
