<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Austinist: News Bits!</title>
<link>http://austinist.com/2006/06/30/news_bits.php</link>
<description>All comments for News Bits!</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2009 Adam S</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2009 12:41:20 -0600</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>aschragin@gmail.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>aschragin@gmail.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>Tim</title>
<link>http://austinist.com/2006/06/30/news_bits.php#comment-229725</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://austinist.com/2006/06/30/news_bits.php#comment-229725</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:05:54 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;That cell phone one is obvious (although your link is broken). Not that it&apos;s going to change anything. I prefer riding on the bus. Makes me feel safer when that SUV in front of me can&apos;t choose a lane. Anyone who doesn&apos;t feel it&apos;s some god given right to talk on a cell phone while driving already knows this. I would much rather be out at 2am then at 5pm. It&apos;s striking the difference in driving ability. While waiting for the bus almost every day I get to see several drivers on cell phones almost plow into each other when a bus stops. Amazing. A bus stopping. That&apos;s a road condition you can&apos;t forsee.

The best part of the article is the counterpoint from a lobbiest. Not another study, but a lobbiest. Why in the world though do we allow lobbiest to be present in news articles? Is it news that the cell phone lobby likes cell phones? Of course he&apos;s going to say there are other distractions. Like reading!?! Why doesn&apos;t he pull out all the stops and point out that other activities such as Gynmastics, Sleeping, and Cooking while driving are dangerous?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
