I feel like the paper map comparison is a red herring. Most people who are in favour of the UK’s rule against ‘interacting with a device while driving’ would probably also say you should pull over before messing with a paper map too; it’s probably just much harder to legislate for that (or maybe less necessary because people do that so rarely). No one is arguing that using a paper map while driving is safer.

Not that I necessarily support the legislation, I lean pretty libertarian, I just don’t take your argument that it’s ‘obviously’ safer to let people use phones in their cars because otherwise they’ll use paper maps. That’s just not what happens. What actually happens is either they interact with their phone more briefly and surreptitiously to avoid detection by police, or they just pull over and interact with their phone at the side of the road before getting going again. Either way I suspect the law has the desired effect of reducing the amount people are distracted while driving.

I agree that GPS makes finding where you are easier but it's a fallacy to pretend maps are hard to use. Anyone with an IQ above room temperature should be able to locate themselves on a map. It's only when you become so oblivious to your surroundings because you only know how ot listen to the GPS that this seems difficult...

It can take quite a lot of time to figure that out. If you see Street name and number, sure, with index you will find it. But slowly.

And when you don't see no named sign, it takes a lot more time to find the place on map.

Locating yourself on a map while stationary and locating yourself on a map while operating a 3 ton vehicle at speed and looking for a particular turn are quite different things.