Strictly speaking, that's the case here, too (excepting handheld mobile devices, where the law is clear). The quote within the quote above is simply my opinion which, I'll admit, is a firm one. As I mentioned earlier, MN law is vague on that issue, instead appealing - one assumes - to the driver's better judgment. In an accident, any legal ramifications of distracted driving would probably come after the fact; if there's no accident or other clear violation arising out of it, as far as I can tell it doesn't appear that such driving is grounds for enforcement action beyond, possibly, a discretionary warning at most. In that regard, the often tricky balance between personal freedoms and public safety remains intact. Opinion of course is divided, but the typical social response around here to distracted driving is one of firm disfavor. Practice, however, is probably another reality.pancelticpiper wrote:"whistling at a stop is up there with texting or putting on makeup"
and none of these are moving violations here.
Such is the ubiquity of mobile devices and the futility of getting people to put them down, that the law here concerning driver use has just recently undergone a revision to allow for voice interchanges only, so long as operation is strictly hands-free; anything else remains subject to prosecution. It goes into effect in 2 months. We'll see how that goes.
I'm probably going to have to learn how to go hands-free, myself; my dear sister has this habit of calling me when she knows I'm on the road to family get-togethers, bless her heart.
