Page 18 THE VILLADOM TIMES III • October 6, 2010 fender. Most people can’t do that, and nobody should try. Should we reduce or eliminate the Draconian laws against DWI because some alcoholics can operate cars safely under adverse conditions? I don’t think so. We could probably lighten up on road stops trolling for tickets because they are arguably unconstitutional unless there is an observed moving violation, but giving people a tacit license to drink and drive would be a serious error in favor of wanton carnage and overwhelming property damage. The best solution would be to downgrade the penalty for questionable cases: someone who just came from a reception, pulled over on suspicion after a tip from a business colleague who wants his job, and registers a positive breath test. In my opinion, that should be covered by a fine. We should substantially upgrade penalties in cases of collisions and injuries. Nobody has the right to cause two serious drunk driving accidents. The first accident that causes an injury should terminate the license – for life. It’s tough if the guy can’t hold a job. Employment isn’t a license to kill. Give him five years if there’s nothing but property damage to another vehicle, and two years for trees, unless they die. Enforcing DWI is about enforcing safe driving. It’s not about raising revenue for police departments and judges or reviving Prohibition. To my knowledge, no Islamic terrorist has ever been arrested for a DWI, but they have already killed a lot more than 31 people, many of them our friends and neighbors. Total abstinence from liquor – mandated in the Koran, but not the Bible – does not necessarily make you a perfect person. Driving under the influence of alcohol kills and injures people and wrecks cars, though some few people may be able to handle it. It should be discouraged, and punished. Cell phone chatter while driving also kills and wrecks cars. It should also be punished. The 31 people killed in car phone accidents would fill a large classroom or council chamber, but the injuries from 10,787 collisions would probably fill Valley Hospital multiple times over. The matriarchy may want to stamp out DWI because most drunk drivers are guys, though some women do it, because they’re afraid someone will kill their kids while drunk driving, or perhaps their kids will kill someone else while drunk driving. Good thought. The tattered remnants of the patriarchy, however, would like to stamp out chatterbox driving because those of us who walk across roads now and then car don’t enjoy getting run over. Just over the weekend, my wife and I had taken off in the car to do some shopping. On Rock Road in Glen Rock, a middle-aged man walked out between parked cars about 20 feet from the crosswalk. Since the pedestrian has the right-of-way, I stopped the car and, when he looked at me, I waved him across. He waved back to acknowledge my chivalry. I may not look like a gentleman, but I do a great impersonation of one sitting behind the steering wheel. As he walked out into the road, a woman who was driving while talking on the cell phone almost hit him. Her bumper stopped about two feet from where he would have been, except that he was fast enough on his feet to jump backward. Words were exchanged. I will not repeat them. I got to be the good guy in this story. That doesn’t happen often. I could have stopped if I had been coming from the opposite direction, as the woman was, but not, perhaps, if I had been distracted by a phone conversation. Whatever the woman in the near-impact car was talking about is none of my business. The fact that her conversation put her driving at risk is everybody’s business. Cell phones and driving do not go together -- not because some people can’t handle the cell phones and drive safely, but because not everybody can handle them and drive safely. I strongly suspect that many people can’t. Texting is a no-brainer. Statistically around the nation, texting while driving is three times deadlier than DWI because you have to take your mind and your eyes off the road while you text. I’m not so important that I can jeopardize somebody else’s life, or even destroy their car, because I need to turn road time into office time. Dear reader, you aren’t that important either. Flattery is not part of my repertoire, and there is no more excuse for texting than there is for speeding while you are plastered. They are equally lethal. Texting may make people feel important, or self-important, but when other lives are at risk, it’s a bad habit. If you want to risk your life, don’t fasten your seatbelt. That is a plain constitutional issue. Morally speaking, the only life you have to save or lose is your own. But if you want to type in your car, hire a chauffeur, or pull over and do it from the side of the road or from a parking space. The other drivers or pedestrians you don’t kill won’t thank you, because they’ll never encounter you -- except as a responsible driver they see from a safe distance. But their burial costs or hospital bills won’t cost you the house. The other day, I had one of the most astounding friendly arguments of my life. I found myself defending strict enforcement of the law as opposed to liberal leniency. My opponent was a police officer. I won’t reveal my worthy opponent’s name, and I won’t mention any incidents that might make his opinion incongruous. This is a purely philosophical debate. Minus his badge and gun, and my pocket full of pens and loose paper and library cards, we could be Socrates and Aristotle sitting in Athens while our wives sit at home telling the kids that we both talk too much and never do any work. The debate was sparked by a previous column in which I argued that too many people speed on residential roads – no disagreement on that one – and that texting is statistically three times worse than drunk driving in terms of causing accidents and the use of hand-held cell phones is just as bad or almost as bad as DWI. My opponent concurred that texting, like DWI, is a detriment to safe driving, but drew the line at the condemnation of car phoning. He said that some people could use hand-held phones with no real danger of collisions. He said a state statute proposed by former Acting Governor Richard Cody would deprive drivers of their licenses for three months and would levy a $500 fine after a third arrest for use of the phone while driving, even in cases where there were no other moving violations or evidence of alcohol, drugs, or bad vehicle maintenance. The numbers that led to what my friend thought was a rather Draconian punishment are available: Since 2002, New Jersey sustained 31 fatal accidents and another 10,878 collisions that stopped at injury or property damage. The number of cell phone arrests this year alone – due to defiance of state rules promulgated long before the rest of New Jersey caught up with Glen Rock, Ridgewood, and HoHo-Kus – was 1,821 for 2008. There is a real problem out there. Cynical as I am about statesmen above the local level, I hailed this proposed law as a masterpiece. My friend did not agree at all. He said that multi-tasking, including cell phone use, is a fact of life in the 21st century, and that the majority of Americans can operate a car and talk on the phone at the same time with no particular danger. We agreed that some people are lousy drivers and would continue to have accidents with or without phone use behind the wheel. We all know people who do it. Most gun owners never shoot anybody, and if they do, they usually shoot themselves. But extend that mostly-safe-cell-phoners argument a little further and see where it leads us. I had a friend who became a tissue-tolerant alcoholic. He had suffered some miserable luck and he started to soften the edges with doses of distilled liquor multiple times a day. When he wasn’t writing, he was driving a cab. I once booked him as a driver for an out-of-town trip and I was astounded to see that he kept a bottle next to the front seat. I mentioned this, but he said it was no problem. They all say this, but he got us through chaotic urban traffic and found a place he hadn’t been before with no trouble at all. He did this routinely, six or seven days a week, and never dented a Texting while driving and DWI: Both are lethal Ho-Ho-Kus The Ho-Ho-Kus Volunteer Fire Department will host its 2010 Open House on Sunday, Oct. 10, from 1 to 4 p.m. as part of National Fire Prevention Week. The Open House will feature activities for children, including tours of the fire trucks and target practice with a live fire hose. The event will take place at the Ho-Ho-Kus Firehouse at 52 Sheridan Avenue, adjacent to borough hall. The Open House will include fire safety activities, including a child safety trail featuring instruction on what to do in a fire emergency. Children who complete the various steps of the safety course will receive a junior firefighter badge, ribbon, and certificate. Kids who attend the Open House also will receive Ho-Ho-Kus Fire Department hats. Fire-safety education for adults will also be offered, including methods to douse a stovetop fire and a hands-on exercise to illustrate the proper use of a home fire extinguisher. The department’s fire safety trailer – a simulated dwelling – will be on site, enabling families to practice proper techniques to evacuate the home during a fire. Fire department sets October 10 Open House Demonstrations will include the Ho-Ho-Kus firefighters’ capabilities using the “jaws of life” to save victims of serious car accidents and other fire emergency simulations. “While this is a fun event, it’s also an opportunity for families to learn basic fire-safety steps, such as establishing home evacuation routes, testing smoke detectors, and preventing fires from starting in the first place,” said HoHo-Kus Fire Chief Donald Seltmann. “On the cusp of the department’s 100th Anniversary, the annual event also gives us a chance to thank the residents of Ho-Ho-Kus, who support us generously, enabling us to protect the town backed by the best training and equipment available.” The day’s event will include coloring books, prizes, and an opportunity to have a photo taken with Sparky, the HoHo-Kus Fire Department mascot. Cider, doughnuts, popcorn, balloons, and rub-on tattoos also will be available. Since 1911, the Ho-Ho-Kus Fire Department has been fully staffed by professionally trained volunteers who protect lives and property. Just as you are reading this ad, others are reading your ad. The Villadom TIMES is Your Neighborhood Newspaper Newspape ADVERTISER: Call 201-652-0744 today for more information