Of course, 69% of you just either closed the browser window or scoffed perturbedly at my blasphemy. That is the percentage of a recent poll that favored the ban. Well I guess you can put me solidly in the other 31%. I cringe when I see one of these signs.

But what of those "distracted driver" accidents? If only 1.5% was using on a cell phone, what about the other 98.5%? Well guess what I did this week. I looked at other drivers and what they were doing on the expressway. Taking my eyes off of the road, shame on me, but it was the only way to gather first hand evidence. Throwing in some personal past experiences, this is what I observed.
A guy picking his teeth. Eyes on the road, but, gasp, only one hand on the wheel. I give him 1%.
Some dude flipping through his apps. Ok, this falls into the "cell phone" category, but he wasn't talking nor texting. His was surfing with his eyes on his device. He gets 4%.
A dude scratching his head and rubbing his face. Tired? Probably trying to wake up/stay awake, BUT, that dreaded one hand on the wheel, and at least one eye on the road. 3% for driving tired.
A woman putting on makeup. Or women. This is the all time leader for observations in driving to Chicago every day for 20 years. Eyes, lips, cheeks, hair, eyebrows, the list is endless. All while staring into the mirror on the visor, which is further blocking their vision. They get a generous 11%.
The executive reading the paper. No, not in the back seat while the chauffeur drives him. I saw a guy off and on with the paper draped over the wheel, and reading glasses pinched on his nose. A solid 5% go to the readers.
Everybody eating. And I mean everybody eating everything. Generally, not too horrible of an offense, eyes are only for a second staring into the sauerkraut on the dog as you take a bite, one hand firmly on the wheel, at least before you grab the wheel with your knees so your free hand can pick up the sport pepper that just fell onto the floor mat. But eaters are guilty non the less, they get 4%.
Watching television. As scary as it is to imagine someone watching a movie while they drive, which alone would give them a good 15%, this is a true story. One day downtown, I asked a dude, whom we will call Carlo, if he could give me a ride home. We both live in the same town, 40 miles north. He agreed, and picked me up in front of the building. He darted out into traffic and headed to the expressway all while doing the following simultaneously: driving, hooking up a DVD player to his car stereo, and eating his late lunch. Not a sandwich or a dog, but a plate of lemon chicken from a Chinese place. I did offer to drive, but he politely told me he does this every day. All by his little lonesome, he gets 25%.
Well I am not going to add all that up, but I can tell you it's not 100%. Which brings me to my point. We can't possibly know or control all of the stupid things people will do while driving. Unless one of them has potential voter influence, then its full speed ahead, ramming yet another regulation up the rear ends of the rest of us who feel we are intelligent enough to make our own decisions. Politicians blow with the wind, and will back whatever gives them the best chance for re-election.
"Just get a Bluetooth!" you must be screaming from the boonies. Well I don't want to stick that thing in my ear. I can drive just fine with one hand. And therein lies the rub. If the argument is that you are distracted by talking on the phone, then the law should include a ban on lipstick, newspapers and Chinese food as well. But by saying "hands free" then the argument becomes that you need two hands on the wheel. And if that is the case, then I want a new driving test where I get a special designation proving I can drive with one hand better than some can drive with two. It's not the hands, it's not the distraction, it's the person.