Cellphones & the justice system.

What a mixed bag. I have a cell phone. I kinda like it. I don't use it often, but I like the option. Mine also has a camera. I like to think I am going to get a picture of the truly remarkable things I see everyday, but unless I either have it poised and ready, or a girl decides to flash me longer than normal, I don't get too many pics with my phone cam. However, this is just to say, I don't hate technology, and I don't hate cell phones.

Cell phone use is out of control. Do I mean that too many people are using them? No, I don't. I mean that too many people are using them poorly. If you don't agree with me, then you are part of the problem.

For those of you who agree and are not part of the problem, killing someone for poor cell phone use should be legal. By poor use I mean poor manners. While I hate loud cell conversations in movie theaters and restaurants, or people walking around completely oblivious to their surroundings, the worst are people driving while talking. I don't really notice those of you wearing headsets driving poorly, it is invariably the person trying to drive, talk and manage a handset. Whichever kind of quadtard it is, either the walking kind or the driving kind, certain updates need to be made to our judicial system in order to handle these types of cases.

Before you do away with the cell phone offender you must select 12 people who agree with you that who you want to do is fine. These 12 people will come to court with you, after the fact, when you are charged with murder. They are your preselected jury. The court will then proceed to select its own jury. The prosecution will make its case, then defense will make its case. The Juries will deliberate. Both juries will deliberate separately. When decisions are reached, both juries will come and read their verdicts. If your preselected jury doesn't agree with the court appointed jury, then under the Lester clause*, the juries will enter a battle royale', hand to hand combat, in which the verdict will be decided by which jury is still standing at the end. So, pick your jury wisely.

Really, this accomplishes 2 separate goals. One, I am pretty sure it would cut back on frivolous cell use. When you know that anyone who already has a standing jury ready to go can legally cap you for making a left against the light because you're were too busy discussing which outfit you should get your dog for Halloween, you might think twice. Or, you might be chaff what needs separating from the wheat. Either way really is fine with me. The second, awesome, collateral goal accomplished under this new law, personal fitness. Tomorrow you could get a summons to jury duty. That means inside the month, you could be fighting an elite fighting force that hates frivolous cell phone use with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns. I would like to think that the threat of a fight to the finish would find out society slimming down the fat, bulking up the muscle, and becoming somewhat easier on the eye in the process. Eat and drink and tomorrow you will die. Lift and train, and you might live to see another day!

*There's no exact wording of the "Lester clause", just her bog. Shallon thought up the fighting part, which is a great idea, so I am siting my source.