Are you for or against a Bill that would give police the right to confiscate your cell phone in the event of an automobile accident, in order to determine if texting may have caused the accident.

Confiscating seems a bit extreme. I see no reason why an officer shouldn't be able to glance at a phone if he has reason to believe the phone played a role in the accident, though. 

Eh... actually, if a person caused an accident, does it really matter why they did? They're liable regardless.

Absolutely not for or absolutely not against?
-

Against.
If I were to have a car accident and I knew I was not the distracted driver, I would more likely surrender my phone to prove it, so I don't see the necessity of the bill.
If a driver doesn't voluntarily provide his or her phone as such proof, the suspicion exists . . .

~

Against.  I don't trust the process.

The Supreme Court ruled that was unreasonable search and seizure about two years ago.

They will need a search warrant to look through your phone.

Same as roadblocks to see if you have been drinking. That has been shot down due to no probable cause to stop you.

That can be verified by carrier records..............no need to confiscate the phone.  The only reason to confiscate the phone is to find out what was being said in the texts.  That's nobody's business and not relevant to the question:  Was the driver texting at the time of the accident?   Should content actually be needed the cops can get a warrant.  

Against.

sounds good to me, people shouldnt be texing while driving