As a resident of Minnesota (aka the "Nanny" state) I am not at all surprised at this law. The reports from local MSM state that this was aimed at cracking down on teens who text while driving.

I see passage of this law par for the course at the capital. (IE hurry up and rush bills through before the public knows what hit them)

Right now with fuel prices up, regular police patrols through most neighborhoods slim to none, I imagine that this will be enforced as an "after the fact" violation. Meaning that when an accident occurs and someone dies, the surviving responsible party can then be hit with a criminal misdemeanor of "TWD" which will open the doorway in the future of escalating this into a felony.

Both the phone and the phone company maintain records of calls & texting. Most insurance investigators these days will check those records & compare them to the time of the crash, looking for someone to lay blame to.

Really? They can do that? Do the insurance investigators get a subpoena? Telecom companies aren't allowed to just give out info about customers to anyone who asks.

A ban on Texting while moving seems like a good idea to me. I mean, no eyes on the road, one hand on the wheel, and mind elsewhere? I've done it, and I'm probably less safe in such cases than if I'd had about 4 beers. At least with the beers I'd be watching the road. But I do think you should be allowed to do it when at red lights or stuck in traffic not moving. That is now the only time I do it.

As for this woman in the picture, even if she put down her phone she'd still be distracted by all the crap hanging from her mirror.

I'm just not a big fan of the current trend towards outlawing cell phone use while driving

Me neither. Particularly because cell phones are used to report crimes or other emergencies where landlines or stationary cell phone use is not available.

That would take encapsulate almost any infraction the horsesh!t drivers these days could possibly do.

Or am I underestimating legislatures' need to pass ineffective and meaningless laws for no reason other than publicity?

BINGO!!! The propensity of governments to Big Mother asymptotically approaches infinity.

I'm a legislative attorney in a northeast state that is currently considering this option. In fact, I drafted a bill calling for texting, emailing, etc, while driving to be a secondary offense...getting beyond the practical enforcement issues, I'm just not a big fan of the current trend towards outlawing cell phone use while driving...what's next? no radio?

And perhaps I'm being naive, but couldn't people crashing due to this behavior simply be busted for reckless driving? Or am I underestimating legislatures' need to pass ineffective and meaningless laws for no reason other than publicity?

“represent only a tiny fraction of all such crashes in Minnesota that year—less than 0.4 percent of all crashes in each category.”

How the heck can they know that? If Minnesota drivers admit, "It was my fault officer because I was texting.", they sure are more honest than drivers around here.

My insurance agents have always cautioned me to never admit to anything (unless I'm testifying under oath) and that if I do admit something, it will be counted aginst me in my premium payments or result in my insurance being dropped altogether. I presume the same rules apply most places.

The state ought to have some burden to demonstrate the risk before enacting such an infringement on people’s liberties.

We have a default right to do whatever we please on public roadways? Which amendment was that?

Now 0.4 percent of accidents sounds like a very minor fraction, and it is, but outlawing texting comes at an equally small cost because it will only be enforced as a secondary offense (mostly because that's the only way it can be enforced).

Sure it would be better to pass a law that prevents 90% of accidents, but any such law would be extremely costly and invasive. If outlawing texting on paper alone drops the related accident rate from 0.4 to 0.2, then the cost/benefit analysis would make it worthwhile.

Can you please explain how someone would be texting with their phone while holding said phone to their ear?

I'm conflating texting with calling, obviously, but both are in the same category: Seemingly dangerous but without much statistical evidence to back that up.

You raise an important point, though: It's much harder to catch someone texting.