Skip to main content

Distracted Driving Laws are Insane

By Matthew Hayward


In a free society, there is no need for "distracted driving" laws. No law should exist that attempts to socially engineer society; we do not need laws that attempt to prevent crimes from happening, and we do not need pre-crime laws. We need to enforce rational laws and punish real crimes.

In today's Tri-City Herald article Put the phone down and pay attention, or get a ticket, we learn that the Washington State Legislature has again passed another emotionally driven bill that violates our basic human rights.

First, they tell us we are not allowed to make phone calls while holding the phone to our ear, and then they tell us we cannot text; now, this most recent "distracted driving bill," Senate Bill 5289, prohibits us from holding various electronic devices. 

We don't need more complex laws; common-sense laws should suffice. We don't need a law that addresses playing musical instruments while driving or reading a book, watching a movie, talking on the phone, drinking, or changing our clothes; we don't need any laws regarding what a person is doing while driving. All we need is a law that it is not legal to violate the rules of the road. It does not matter what you are doing when you violate the law; you violated the law, and that is what matters. 

If a person does not harm you or your property or cause you to be in danger, if you are not able to show damage, there is no excuse to claim a person's actions are objectionable. 

At some point, we must stop the overreaching of the nanny state. 

Related rants:
Our Maternal Government
Enemy of the Free Market Retires
Is there no end to the nanny state?




Labels:
Location: Olympia, WA, USA

Comments

  1. UnknownApril 22, 2017 at 11:52 AM

    I agree - when will it stop? !Next will be a heart rate monitor for when you get cutoff and it pisses you off, car will automatically pull to the side of the road till you calm down... sheesh

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

When Government Demands Papers We Refuse

 By Matthew Hayward  9/19/2025  The Supreme Court just paused a lower court order that had limited federal immigration stops in Los Angeles. That stay lets federal agents resume roving patrols and interior operations that critics say rely on appearance, language, job, or neighborhood to pick people for questioning.  This matters because it normalizes a posture of suspicion. Checkpoints miles inland and roving patrols turn movement inside the country into a condition to be earned rather than a freedom to be enjoyed. The government already claims expanded authority inside the 100-mile border zone. That claim, plus an open green light for stops based on appearance, is a recipe for arbitrary enforcement.  Philosophy of resistance John Locke told us that the consent of the governed is the foundation of legitimate power. When rulers invade life, liberty, or property, or when they become arbitrary disposers of people’s lives and fortunes, the social compact is dissolve...
1 comment
Read more

The National Guard Was Never Meant to Be a Federal Tool

By Matthew Hayward 7/13/2025 Let me say this clearly: the National Guard was created to defend the states, not to enforce the will of the federal government. It was meant to serve as a local militia—an armed extension of the people under the control of the state. The highest authority a Guard member was ever supposed to answer to is their elected governor, not a bureaucrat in Washington, not a federal agency, and certainly not a sitting president weaponizing military force on domestic soil. Yes, I know the laws have changed. I know the Montgomery Amendment, the National Defense Act, and the Supreme Court's decision in Perpich v. DoD rewrote the rules. But legal doesn’t mean constitutional. Gradualism doesn’t legitimize usurpation. You don’t get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What’s happening now—federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent—is blasphemous. It's an insult to the very spirit of the Constitution. The ...
Post a Comment
Read more

How the Drug War Killed Liberty

 By Matthew Hayward 10/25/2025 When the State Declares War on Behavior Earlier this month, President Trump ordered United States military strikes off the coast of Venezuela, killing alleged “narcoterrorists.” He later boasted, “ We’re just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. ” Those words should chill every American who believes in liberty. Fifty years after Nixon declared his war on drugs, it has evolved from domestic raids to international executions, all under the same failed philosophy that government violence can cure human vice. When the state declares war on human behavior, it always loses and takes the people down with it. Every prison cell, every overdose, every cartel bullet is a monument to the arrogance of government trying to legislate morality. Back in 1988, Ron Paul said it best on The Morton Downey Jr. Show: “You can’t legislate morality. You can’t force people to be better by passing laws. If you want to solve moral and social problems, y...
Post a Comment
Read more