The article written by Peter Roff titled “Don’t Ban Driving with Cell Phones,” explores the idea of banning cell phone usage while driving by the Federal Government. This particular article is on the proposed law from the U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood in 2012. Today, there is some form of cell phone ban while driving in all 50 states. For example, texting while driving will warrant a ticket across the entire United States. Some states have not banned any other form of cell phone usage while driving but most of the more populated states have implemented further restrictions. These restrictions are State laws and not Federal laws. Peter Roff uses all three forms of rhetorical persuasion (ethos, logos, and pathos) in his article to change the outcome of this proposed law. Peter Roff starts his article by discrediting U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. He brings up the fact that for years prior to the proposed law LaHood has said he would not ban cell phone usage while driving. Roff then describes distracted driving and how cell phone usage is not the only problem. He makes a great argument that the problem is already being addresses by multiple agencies. Educating the American people is the next argument which leads into using funds from various driving campaigns is better spent for this type of education. The author then attacks the law itself by citing it as a “preemptive law.” The last point Peter Roff makes is that it is wrong to