Ban on Plastic Bags

Austin recently banned plastic shopping bags, and therefore people must start getting used to bring their own reusable bag or be charged.  I know this is a bit of a hassle, especially when you aren’t used to doing that, but I really think it is the best thing to do.  I agree with this because I believe we need to take steps to protect and conserve our environment.  This will only be possible by implementing laws that will getting us all moving in that direction.  Sure, we are going to have to take an extra step and bring our bags with us, but in the end it will be better for our planet, and at essentially no cost to us.  I think we need to focus on what is important and not what is easiest for us.  Our children we see us striving to make a difference for our environment and in turn future generation may appreciate it and continue that.  I think the law must enforce this because otherwise nothing will get done, we will do nothing to help our environment, in fact I think more needs to be done.  Maybe enforcing the no litter laws that don’t seem to be enforced ever.  I know we can’t agree on everything, but if the sole reason people disagree with the plastic bag ban is because they will have to bring their own bags, then that is simply not good enough and we must understand that this is important this is for our future generations and what can be expected of them if we can’t even bring our bags happily in an effort to make Texas just a little bit cleaner.

Support ban on texting while driving

I read an editorial in statesman.com about banning texting while driving. While I had my own opinion  on the issue prior to reading this, but I learned some facts I didn't know.  The intended audience was Texans. I believe the authors were credible in that they consist of several individuals who are part of an informed editorial board that have varying opinions.

The argument in the article was supporting a ban on texting while driving.  They claim that texting while driving is reckless, kills hundreds of people each year, and enforcement by law should be done in an effort to decrease these incidents over time.  The board states that Rick Perry, has in previous years vetoed this bill and is probably going to do it again, claiming it is "micromanagement of government".  The board disagrees because it claims that it that were true, he would not have signed the bill for young drivers under 18. The board states that in an effort to save lives this law would be beneficial stating that, overtime, laws effect will grow and it will become second nature to most drivers.  Rick Perry says, "Texting while driving is irresponsible and reckless, " but yet doesn't want a law to enforce this because its micromanagement of government?  Why do we have law against drinking and driving? This is a great point they make?  It makes no sense to me.  I completely agree with the authors.  I think texting while driving is extremely distracting and probably causes hundreds of accidents and death a year so why not create a law to help discourage people from doing so, just like we do for drinking. I don't think anything terrible could come from doing this.  Although I agree with the authors point, I also like the way they provided some facts that didn't necessarily help them.  For example, they say in a study they "found a slight increase in collision claims after texting bans where passed."  This is believed to be because people began to hide their phone and be more decrete in an effort to text, so the distance between their eyes and the phone increased, causing them to spend less time looking at the road.  The authors claim this is only temporary, as people get more and more used to to this law, this will happen little.  Overall, I think the board did a great job informing readers of this legislation, and giving us all the  facts.