Every now and then I may write on something about which I have no firm opinion. This is one such matter. (By the way, even when I do that, the fact is that I have to start somewhere, but I am willing to be persuaded to another position by the Word of God.).
The congressionally chartered National Safety Council is calling on a total ban on cell phone usage while driving, likening the practice to driving drunk, in terms of its fourfold increased risk of crashing.
Several factors incline my sentiments toward the safety council's ban: (1) I have a friend whose friend's 2-year-old daughter was killed in her car seat when a person fiddling with his cell phone ran a red light; (2) I do not own a cell phone; (3) I think that the sixth commandment, "Do not kill," broadens out to cover risky behavior.
On the other hand, at least one factor inclines my sentiments away from the safety council's ban: a distaste for yet more government encroachment on personal choices.
As to my aforementioned pro-ban leanings:
Regarding No. 1, I concede that it's probably not good policy to base law on anecdotal experience. On the other hand, sometimes personal experience affords one a valuable perspective or insight that one was blind to when a matter remained in the realm of abstraction.
Regarding No. 2, my sentiments against cell phone usage in cars are easy to maintain when I do not own one, and therefore have no vested interest. The question, of course, is whether my cell-lessness renders my judgment clearer or less clear.
Regarding No. 3, I still think it is incumbent on us to avoid harm to life when we are reasonably able to. Does cell phone deprivation in cars meet the "reasonableness" threshold?
But I still don't like the government in my car.
What do you think?