Cell phone law raises other questions

New York Gov. George Pataki last week signed into law a ban on talking into hand-held cell phones while driving. It passed the state legislature with overwhelming bipartisan approval, and a poll shows 87 percent of New Yorkers back the legislation. Next on the agenda: a ban on singing along with the radio.\nIt's really quite absurd. The data simply do not support the theory that talking on a cell phone impairs one's ability to safely maneuver a couple of tons of steel through the streets. A recent AAA study, which looked at more than 32,000 traffic accidents between 1995 and 1999, found that cell phone use accounted for only 1.5 percent of distraction-related accidents. By comparison, fiddling with the radio dial caused 11.4 percent of said accidents.\nHell, adjusting the air conditioning brought about roughly twice as many.\nWhy stop with cell phones? Why not ban smoking in the car? Or drinking coffee? Or putting on makeup? Or talking to the person in the passenger seat?\nWhy not ban eating take-out fast food during rush hour? Why stop with a ticket and a $100 fine? Why not raise it to a class D felony if the perpetrator is caught with extra ketchup packets?\nMoreover, the ban in question boasts fewer teeth than an Appalachian hilljack -- it doesn't actually ban talking on a cell phone while behind the wheel. Under the new law, it's perfectly acceptable to talk over a speakerphone or through a headset. Considering that most cell phone manufacturers long ago branched out into accessories, I'm sure New York's public servants had a rough time selling this to the lobbyists.\nIt seems fairly obvious that the distraction lies in carrying on a conversation while trying to navigate the roads. So in effect, this legislation only requires that one keep both hands on the wheel. \nI suppose it won't be long before the police will be able to pull you over for slouching in your seat. Really, mandatory seatbelt use is bad enough. Requiring someone to wear a seatbelt is basically like criminalizing suicide. Think about it.\nOf course, New York's legislature shouldn't necessarily shoulder all of the blame -- its hands were tied. Earlier this year, several counties established their own bans on handheld cell phones, leading to confusion over a patchwork of laws. \nAnd the political will existed for such legislation, even though it'll have a negligible effect on traffic safety. It just seems to be one of those senseless yet politically popular ideas -- like the flag-burning amendment that comes up in Congress whenever enough lawmakers have grown weary of the people's business.\nAnd its popularity is understandable. Most of us dislike the cell phone set, even if we ourselves yammer on the accursed things all the time. After all, the phenomenon has reached plague-like proportions, bringing out the curmudgeon in all of us.\nAnd don't get me wrong -- I'm as curmudgeonly as anyone. It wouldn't take long to sell me on a mandatory life sentence for anyone who neglects to shut off his cell phone while in a movie theater or at a restaurant.\nWhen I see a slickly dressed urban professional in Chicago or San Francisco yapping away in a sushi bar over a Heineken, I have no trouble accepting that. While he doubtlessly uses it mostly for inane chatter, at least he appears to have some legitimate reason to own one in the first place.\nOstensibly, his job requires working out of the office and keeping abreast with the latest developments -- whether financial or with some client. Plus, he lives in a major metropolitan area where the pace of life rivals a stock car race.\nBut nowadays I constantly pass by vacuous blond bimbos with cell phones plastered on their ears while they walk to class. My first thought on such an occasion is that she's probably not even gainfully employed. \n"And like, we were with Todd… And like, we got soooo trashed… So then Dan starts giving us all this crap… And I was like, 'yeah.'"\nThen I realize that she has no marketable job skills whatsoever -- she can't even speak English. So since when did these bleached-out halter-top morons become so important that they need to be immediately reached at any time, day or night? After all, these are the geniuses that keep tanning salons open in the summer.\nOne would assume that idea is to snuff out any sort of intelligent thought that would normally occur over the course of a five-minute walk. Or maybe it's just conceit or social status.\nIt certainly isn't anything pragmatic. It would be hard to imagine such an individual even finding work as a waitress—after all, that requires communication.