I had a USPS mailman with a walking route that used a handsfree headset to work a 2nd job. Not sure what he was selling, but I overheard him close a deal while he had me sign for a package. It never seemed to affect his productivity, and I definitely respect the hustle.
Which obviously has nothing to do with the issue of people talking over headsets (and inevitably diddling their devices on occasion) while driving a large and less than nimble vehicle at high speeds.
Under state-level "distracted driving" laws, it is illegal in most of the US to use a cellphone in your hand while driving. For novice drivers, any cellphone use while driving is also illegal in most of the US (including hands-free).
So? That's an ad populum fallacy. Remember when plenty of places thought smoking cigarettes everywhere was normal?
In addition, laws often contain compromises for feasibility. I expect many jurisdictions permit hands-free conversations partly because it's difficult to prohibit them.
If you want to argue that phone-conversations while driving are safe compared to quiet driving, you should be pointing to experiments rather than popular belief.
Surely everyone is aware that driving while speaking on the phone is distracting. My partner occasionally tries to have an inane conversation about nothing while driving and I always cut it short.
I think that the main problem is if they were in the car with you then they'd be able to modulate the conversation in line with parts of the drive which are more or less demanding. It's much harder to do this successfully on the phone.
Huh? I think their meaning was pretty clear, but here's an artisanally-decompressed paraphrasing:
_________
If the delivery-person is walking, the potential impact of being distracted by their phone conversation is negligible. In that case, I sympathize and respect their efforts to conduct two jobs at once.
However the situation is very different when operating a delivery vehicle, where errors have a greater impact. In that context, their multi-tasking is no longer something to respect, but instead recklessness that should be condemned.
This is especially true if it leads to the death of a pedestrian, which might be a serious crime known as manslaughter.
Again, I am not that user. Insofar as I have "umbrage", it's that I don't think anything should need this much explaining.
> hustling via hand free driving
I believe that their concern is over dangerous driving, which includes but is not limited to cases where it is being caused by "hustling" with a hands-free device.
Okay we have to stop with this "huh???" nonsense. You knew what he meant, stop trying to make people seem unreasonable (yes, that is the purpose of this "huh?" even if you don't realize it)
