> Regulators have long-since become a bunch of career busybodies [...] I want it to stop. [...] I support "hands-free"/anti distraction traffic laws. Zero cost
That's a regulation, and it costs police resources to enforce it. Stop contradicting yourself.
If that's how you truly feel, please move out into the wilderness and completely cut yourself off from society. If you want to live in society, then you have to put up with the rest of us actually caring about making things safer for the average (or below-average) driver, not just you, the apparent perfect driver who will never end up in a car crash, ever, because of course you have perfect control over everything around you, including the actions of all the other drivers on the road.
Absolute rubbish.
My life has never been improved by government regulators spending my money for me on automotive things that they think I can't live without.
Not seatbelts, not car seats, not airbags, not crumple zones, CERTAINLY not CAFE standards, not eliminating diesel passenger cars, et cetera, et cetera, ET CETERA.
LEAVE ME ALONE. If I want to risk my and my family's lives in the equivalent of a 40's era jeep, then shake your head at my foolishness, and laugh at my demise, if such turns out to be the case.
Regulators have long-since become a bunch of career busybodies looking to justify their existence by spending my money.
I want it to stop.
Having said that, I don't think humans are capable of the balancing act necessary to watch both your cellphone and the road. So I support "hands-free"/anti distraction traffic laws. Zero cost, greatly increased traffic safety. And that's the real cause of the increase in these kinds of fatalities.
So, "No, I'd rather not (further) increase the cost of road transport by adding a bunch of expensive new anti-underdrive regulations to the existing too-heavy burden of vehicle regulations. We should aggressively enforce anti-cellphone/anti-distracted driving laws instead."