On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 02:51:57 GMT, Garry
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

And of course we never had any accidents before cell phones. And the
cops are good enough they can use a cell phone,police radio and a
computer while driving 100 plus mph with out the red lights on.

No they're not. That's a separate issue, that I agree needs dealing
with. Police breaking the law with impunity is bad. But it has nothing
to do with whether Joe average should use a phone in a car.


I totally fail to see the big difference between current cell phones
and mobile phones in the past.

Cell phone, mobile phones. There _is_ no differnce in this case. It's
ths situation.

Along with CB radios, Ham radios,
Business radios, passangers ect.

I have never had a Ham or CB radio in a car on a road.......no! I lie.
I did use a CB once, when trying to find out what was happening from
somebody watch the vehicle. I have had several mobile and cell phones.
I have resisted using them while driving since I had one. many many
people do not. When they do they are often seen driving badly,
entirely because of the phone.

It's a matter of numbers, not type.

Its just something to focus blame on.

It's an obvious form of distraction that can be controlled wihout a
disproportionate crushing of rights. The examples such as passengers
and babies are _possibly_ comparable. But they are _impossible_ to
stop.

Do you agree with drink-driving laws? Why?

There is a HUGE amount of money to be made from people using cells
more and more, in cars and out. That amount of money usually _talks_
to gov'ts. But many gov'ts are taking up the cudgel on this one. What
possible reason would they have to do so unless they had a pretty fair
idea it was dangerous (paranoia aside)?