It's not the same at all. Deaf people drive because the benefits to them outweigh the risks. However, a person will all their senses choosing to block on of them out is stupid. A person with all their senses will be more aware of things going on than someone missing their hearing.
That's one of the most backward examples of logic I've seen on OcUK in weeks. Which is really saying something.
"Deaf people drive because the benefits to them outweigh the risks".
Bravo.
I have excellent hearing, and I drive a car because the benefits to me outweigh the risks too. Same reason I drink water and breathe shared oxygen, and fly on an aeroplane to go to faraway places.
In an ideal world every single person in control of a 2 ton metal road bullet would have full command of each of their senses. But this isn't an ideal world.. So we legislate accordingly.
You either allow people with a decreased situational awareness to use the roads. Or you don't. And I know 4-5 people who are either partially or totally deaf and have far better driving records than the people that I know who drive with full situational awareness.
So how do you decide?. And are headphones a distraction in their own right? (like a car radio, or a loud engine, or a noisy passenger?), or just the loss of a sense?. Are we banning deaf people from the roads?.. Or are we going after distractions. If we're going after distractions, then I want your kids banned from the back of your car. And the noisy passenger. And I want adverts and signs on the side of the road banned. And any kind of in-car interactive buttons and switches and so on. Car stereos, etc. No point banning one distraction and leaving a hundred others.
"a person will all their senses choosing to block on of them out is stupid"
If you're going to outlaw being stupid, we're going to need more prisons..