Clamping down on texting while driving

   A.J. Larson was killed last December in a car accident. Larson rolled through a stop sign on Clinton Street in West Seneca and into the path of a sanitation truck. Police say that Larson, 20, was text messaging -- checking or typing out a message on his cell phone -- just before the accident. It is a common form of communication, especially among young people.

   Kelly Cline, Larson's mother, is pushing for a state law against text messaging while  driving. Texting is more distracting to a driver than talking on a cell phone, which is illegal.

   Cline has no illusions that a law would stop everyone from texting while driving. But it would give some people pause, and it gives police a weapon in the fight.

   Although the danger of texting behind the wheel seems obvious, the message is not reaching a lot of people. Police say that text messaging contributed to the crash last June that killed five recent Fairport High graduates. Accidents involving texting drivers are mounting. I recently saw a young woman driving on Elmwood Avenue, one hand on the wheel, the other tapping out a text message.

   Cline had warned her son not to do it.

   Will a law help to curb the dangerous practice? What do you think?

   -- Donn Esmonde

Comments

[bob]

OK seriously, this is getting ridiculous. Teach the kids some common sense, and they wouldn't be doing the stupid s**t. Make texting illegal? What's next, drinking coffee in the car is against the law? Listening to the radio is a $100 fine?

Lay off the "make government control everything" so we don't have to teach our kids how to think approach. It is getting on my nerves. It is not society's fault, people fail at being parent and raise stupid kids.

And as far as Larson's kids... behold the power of Darwin!

[Neil]

Texting while driving is extraordinarily dangerous, every drivers primary attention should be focused on driving the vehicle. That said, it doesn't seem like the law against cell phone use has been enforced, effectively, and it would be harder still to enforce a law against texting. A better answer might be, required training of drivers regarding these hazards - periodically, say at licensing and at renewal time. The problem with Bob's Darwin theory, is that the texter might take out some non-texting innocents in the process.

[Chancellor Carlyle Roberts, II]

So, your kid does something really stupid and you want the government to make the stupid thing she did illegal? Whatever happened to people being responsible for their own actions and how is making it illegal going to change anything? It's already illegal to talk on the cell phone while driving unless you have a hands-free set-up (like the earpiece we often see people wearing), yet there are still numerous people, including some people who are supposed to be enforcing the law, gabbing away while holding the cell phone to their ear.

As Bob said, "What's next, drinking coffee in the car is against the law?"

[hate me now]

The major cause of accidents is operator error. Why not have laws reducing this?

Quick example, but the Audobon in Germany which has NO speed limit, is also one of the safest roads in the world! The reason is because it is ILLEGAL to be a distracted driver. that means a ticket if you are eating, drinking, smooking, texting, or talking on a cell phone. More rules for drivers+ less deaths. I know we should all take responisbility, and I agree with that, but personal responsibility only goes so far. I'm sure you wouls sing a different tune if it was your daughter, mother, wife ect. that was killed by someone who was texting and driving. That is where the problem lies my firneds, when the innocent pay for the sins of others. Texting while driving may be hard to enforce, it may be a petty law, but tell me what the good is by continuing to allow this? if something is that important pull over, and then continue on your way mildly inconvienced. However, if it saves just 1 life, isn't it worth it? Let's stop arguing the saving of lives and the cost to all of us (insurance related as well as loss of our dwindling youth in Buffalo) because we are slightly inconvienced.

[Chancellor Carlyle Roberts, II]

hate me now wrote: "I know we should all take responisbility, and I agree with that, but personal responsibility only goes so far. I'm sure you wouls sing a different tune if it was your daughter, mother, wife ect. that was killed by someone who was texting and driving."

Well, no, I wouldn't. The issue for me would be the driver of the other car, not what the driver was doing. It doesn't matter how the person was distracted, it only matters that the driver wasn't exercising the proper level of responsibility that comes with being allowed to get behind the wheel. So, no, I wouldn't be whining about how there needs to be all these laws against cell phones or text messaging or anything else. I would, however, be looking to see that driver charged with negligent homicide or with vehicular manslaughter. Again, though, it has to do with the individual behind the wheel and not the particular thing that they've allowed to distract them.

[Lydia Bezou-Hojnacki]

I just love reading all these comments about personal responsibility. A responsible person could care less if laws were enacted to force people into learning what's responsible behavior and what's not. Moreover, a responsible person would feel safer on the road, knowing there is a lawful deterrent to stupid behavior: No cell phone use, no texting, no TV, no newspaper reading, no drinking, no arguing, no turning around to have conversations with passengers, ad nauseam.

The stupids need laws. Responsible people can live with them easily--no skin off my back, my friend!

[Bob]

Lydia, we do not need laws to teach us common sense. I do not want my Amherst taxes funding cops looking for people texting, when people should know texting is something stupid to do. Some of us want little interaction and believe the government is not there to babysit us. I'd prefer the cops spend time dealing with issues pertaining to keeping the neighborhoods safe rather than wasting time giving some juvenile a ticket his parents are going to pay anyways. I do not want to live in a police state, and I'm sure the cops do not want to babysit the kids we parents failed to raise properly. If kids don't realize that they shouldn't be texting, then they don't deserve a license. It is your responsibility as a parent to see that through, not the law. You signed for them to have permission when they turned 16 to get a permit, you are responsible, not us taxpayers. No skin off my back when I own your house and 401k after your kid hits me.

[The Relocated]

Well since we've made Drivers Education a pay for class and limited it's access we're finding that people, especially younger drivers are not driving sensibly. How can that be? Driver's Education has always been in the communities best interest. Personally I'd like to see every student pass some drivers safety class before they get a permit. Unfortunately we consider such courses to be unessential electives and don't provide every student the opportunity to take it.

It's illegal to have objects in your window which could distract you. It's illegal to talk without a hands free headset. It should be illegal to text and drive. I can't think of anything more distracting than texting especially when you're driving a vehicle.

It's not about making a law against stupid people. It's about making laws that make sense. It's about time the law caught up a bit with technology so we can try to prevent fatalities from an unregulated issue. Spare me the sanctimony, when someone you know finds out thier kid was killed or injured because someone was distracted by texting while they were driving you'll cange your tune.