DB22

Here in California we have a new 2017 law, restricting even further, the use of cell phones in cars. Maybe other states have new laws, different laws and other restrictions but it seems to me that the car companies have created the issue.
The Audi, fortunately, allows Nav entries when the car is in "drive" which seems to me to be sensible but for cars that prohibit such use then the drivers turn to the cell phones. There is absolutely no use in having a Nav system that doesn't work when you are in the car - it's like not allowing you to turn on the oven when there is food in it.

Any law that restricts cell phone use is a good one, I think that "distracted driving" is the leading cause of dangerous driving and that it has surpassed "Driving under the Influence". In my experience, speed variations, particularly driving slow on freeways and unintended lane weaving is a good sign that the person behind the wheel is on the phone. I would even go so far to say that most of these offenders could not drive adequately without a phone yet alone while using one.

Nakedhoof

I agree that distracted driving has become the #1 reason for bad driving, and the signs are usually obvious. Of course, add people who are bad drivers to begin with, or simply incompetent, and you have to be really careful, and sometimes that doesn't help. I watched a guy rear end another vehicle, and he wasn't really slowing down, so obviously the next vehicle in line got hit, and possibly even a third. I didn't see much more than the initial hit, because I was focused on paying attention to the road in front of me. But in the few milliseconds that I watched this happen through maybe 20 degrees of peripheral vision, I saw several innocent people forced to be victims of someone's inconsiderate and dangerous behavior.

There's little doubt that someone went to the hospital, possibly with an injury that will follow them for the rest of their days. All because someone was focused elsewhere.

Driving is a serious business, but licenses to drive are casually given to people who probably should never drive. It's not going to change. The self driving car movement will stall as soon as someone gets killed, or someone figures out how to crack them. The powers that be keep it this way, because there is so much industry at stake. Body shops, repair shops, dealers, insurance carriers, you get he picture. It's always about money.

DB22

You forgot to mention the police - it's always about the money. They don't care less about safety, they, among others, keep telling us to slow down but they would be out of funds without tickets and speeding tickets are their largest source of income.
Bad driving is not illegal if it was then the roads would be empty.

Nakedhoof

Exactly. If they wanted to get bad drivers, they would have to work at it. Pulling people over for speeding is just revenuing, and it takes no effort.

DB22

A bit of a sidetrack here, my intention of my OP was to point out the lunacy of locking out the navigation system so that it makes people use cell phones and then they have to make laws to eliminate the use of cell phones.
You have to be a politician to understand the motives of legislatures decisions.

Tinbad

Ticket revenue goes to the city, not the police directly, otherwise a cop would be standing on every corner. I have never met a cop who actually enjoyed giving out a ticket. I'm sure that there are some who do or PDs that have quotas, but (at least here in US) revenue collection is not the polices primary job/how they get funding.

Also have you ever been to Europe? Speed cameras are literally everywhere. I used to get a ticket a month on average. When I moved to the US I was amazed how inefficient this 'revenue collection' is. I bet they can barely make up for what it costs to have the cop out on the street in the first place. How many people can a cop pull over in an hour? How much does it cost to have him on the road with all the gear, equipment, dispatchers, office clerks, etc.

Nakedhoof

Good points. As far as Europe goes, it takes a great deal of revenue to support the level of social services there, so that doesn't surprise me.