Become a digitalPLUS subscriber. 99¢ for 4 weeks.
News Opinion Readers Respond

Use technology to prevent cellphone-related crashes

The front-page article by Pamela Wood about the prosecution of a young girl whose alleged texting while driving caused a fatal accident highlights a major failure by our elected leaders ("Crash fatality case could be Arundel first," Oct. 14). The article focuses on a 2011 change in the law that makes it easier to levy heavy fines and jail time for a person whose texting causes a fatal car accident. Prosecutors, defense attorneys and state legislators weigh in with opinions about the difficulty of proving this charge or that charge and the lack of justice for the victims' families when sometimes a $500 fine is the only consequence for taking someone's life.

Unfortunately, the prosecutors, state legislators and even the victims' families are completely missing the point. Stiffer penalties won't prevent these types of accidents and the tragic loss of life that too often results. Why not? Because most teenagers and even many early 20-somethings are just plain dumb, dumb, dumb! They can see horrendous tragedies all around them, sometimes even to close friends, and still think it can't happen to them. They think they are capable of texting and driving safely even though others are not. Of course, not all teenagers think this, but take a poll of parents of teenagers and you'll likely find overwhelming agreement. So the deterrent effect of these laws is minimal at best. Prosecutors may get more convictions bolstering their careers, legislators can campaign on a heartstrings issue and garner more votes, and victims' families may feel that justice is done, but in the end we've made criminals out of otherwise law-abiding young persons and we've prevented few if any deaths.

The only thing that can truly prevent these types of tragedies is disabling cell phones while a car is in motion. The technology already exists for smart phones, and no doubt could be developed for other phones as well. Legislators need only pass a law mandating the use of this technology. No doubt there will be some pain in implementing this statute. The technology would probably disable passengers' phones as well as the driver's, and it's possible that implementation would require some action by the phone service providers, which might cost consumers a bit of money. But this is small price to pay for the lives that would be saved.

For our legislators not to act when they have the means to save lives with a relatively small cost to the consumer would be the height of irresponsibility. They have passed laws making the use of phones while driving illegal, but the fact that they are virtually impossible to enforce renders them but a cruel joke. What's worse, the politicians had to know the laws were unenforceable even before they were passed. The only purpose of having the laws would seem to be to support prosecution after a tragedy has occurred. But this helps no one. Not the deceased and not the innocent young girl sitting in jail for three years.

The longer we go without a statute imposing a technological mechanism to enforce the laws prohibiting cell phone use while driving, the more innocent lives will be lost. The blood of every one of those lives is on the hands of our legislators for knowingly passing unenforceable laws when the means of enforcement was available to them. It's time for our legislators to "man up" and correct their fatal blunder.

Pat Hennessy, Woodbine

Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Arundel texting crash highlights concerns with manslaughter law
    Arundel texting crash highlights concerns with manslaughter law

    One witness attests in police reports to seeing Elizabeth Meyers texting on her phone as she pulled into traffic on Route 3 in Gambrills. Cellphone records, according to authorities, show a phone call and three text messages between Meyers and her mother at that time.

  • Torture robs us of our humanity
    Torture robs us of our humanity

    The CIA's torture tactics were employed in the belief that the ends justify the means, but in reality they make us no better than those we fight and rob us of our humanity ("Report condemns CIA over torture," Dec. 10).

  • Where's the outrage when an officer is shot?
    Where's the outrage when an officer is shot?

    The Rev. Al Sharpton appeared on C-Span last Saturday in advance of his protest rally in Washington and said he doesn't discriminate when he protests shootings.

  • What about Pa. manure?
    What about Pa. manure?

    On an almost recurring basis lately, The Sun has devoted itself to bringing to everyone's attention the Eastern Shore poultry industry's polluted runoff flowing into the Chesapeake Bay ("Larry Hogan has a chance to be a green governor," Dec. 13). Attention should be directed to the Amish...

  • Unaffordable care in Bel Air
    Unaffordable care in Bel Air

    I am 59 years old, have been a practicing family physician for 30 years and I can't wait to pay my new health care premium for 2015. This past year, I paid $680 a month for my wife and me with a $5,400 deductible. With the Affordable Care Act, in 2015, I will be paying $700 a month with a...

  • Chicken industry threatens all other bay businesses
    Chicken industry threatens all other bay businesses

    Dan Rodricks' column on Gov.-elect Larry Hogan and the Chesapeake Bay missed an important fact: Mr. Hogan's pro-poultry industry comments and pledges are actually deeply hurtful to most Eastern Shore businesses ("Larry Hogan has a chance to be a green governor," Dec. 13).

  • Md. needs outpatient commitment
    Md. needs outpatient commitment

    The article by Meredith Cohn, "Involuntary treatment for the mentally ill in Maryland" (Dec. 10) and your editorial, "Refusing treatment" (Dec. 11), are very accurate. I know because I have had to deal with my son's refusal to take any medication for many years. He is psychotic and very...

  • Outpatient commitment law is crucial
    Outpatient commitment law is crucial

    In response to The Sun's recent editorial, "Refusing treatment" (Dec. 11), what disability rights groups omit when they say that "assertive community outpatient services" are better than outpatient civil commitment for the seriously mentally are the following sad and enduring facts.

Comments
Loading