- #3519 of 3688
-
Re: [p0926]
by boaz47
-
Dec 24, 2008 (5:32 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: p0926 (Dec 24, 2008 5:06 pm)
Always was a distraction and there was "always" a law to address it. Driving while distracted. Much like DUI covers more than beer.
|
- #3520 of 3688
-
Re: [boaz47]
by steve_ HOST
-
Dec 24, 2008 (6:38 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Dec 24, 2008 5:32 pm)
Passage of a new law often has an educational component that can supplement ordinary educational efforts. It also eliminates the argument that texting or talking isn't a distraction where there's no specific law on the books. And it should make it easier for the person hit to recover damage since there's one more ticket the miscreant driver should receive in the event of an accident.
All of which assumes that cell phone drivers should be singled out. If you don't think so, you need to lobby your legislature and fund some accident studies. I bet you could get some seed money from Verizon and the rest. 
|
- #3521 of 3688
-
Re: [steve_]
by boaz47
-
Dec 24, 2008 (9:06 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Dec 24, 2008 6:38 pm)
Don't need to lobby, I don't text and Bluetooth is legal. And why bother if they aren't enforcing the first law or the second law? It isn't like they don't have other things to do. And a $20.00 ticket hardly seems worth it when a parking ticket generates more. I don't do a lot of things that can get me ticketed for distracted driving. However in the Law nothing is elemenated just because you received a Ticket. That is what lawyers are for.
If they didn't enforce driving while distracted laws what made anyone feel they would enforce cell phone laws? Like I said if you aren't enforcing one law witting a second law isn't going to light any fires under anyone. But that is now already proven so why bother? Now cars even come with cell phones installed. Programs like on star will make calls for you and ask you questions while you drive. The law hasn't deterred people form using cell phones at all. Now they simply use them hands free. Funny thing is the police are still taking their hands off the wheel to talk on their radios and commercial drivers can still use hand held push to talk cell phones. Yep, it is so dangerous for a 4000 pound car but a 80,000 pound truck is perfectly safe using a hand held. wasted ink. But who really cares? You can simply write another law to cover the first two or three laws no one care to enforce. You cell if the cell phone law was valid couldn't they just remove the distracted driving law? And if the distracted driving law was enforced would they need a cell phone law? By the way Merry Christmas to all.
|
- #3522 of 3688
-
Re: This whole thing [nippononly]
by kdshapiro
-
Dec 25, 2008 (6:20 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Dec 23, 2008 6:15 pm)
Technially you are partially right. If one if reading a text, looking down, with their phone at waist level, technically they aren't texting. But the cop will notice the head looking down rather than at the road.
|
- #3523 of 3688
-
Re: [steve_]
by kdshapiro
-
Dec 25, 2008 (6:28 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Dec 24, 2008 6:38 pm)
Maybe to appease the anti-law crowd, all driving laws should be eradicated from the books and replaced with one distracted driving law. I'm okay for that as long as the range of fines go from minimal to maximal with the police having the ability to write the ticket as they see fit and the court system accept it.
|
- #3524 of 3688
-
Re: [kdshapiro]
by steve_ HOST
-
Dec 25, 2008 (8:51 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: kdshapiro (Dec 25, 2008 6:28 am)
Well, then you lose the education component. Folks in here are well versed, but Joe Public may not know that his driving capacity is hammered by simply talking on a cell. Passing a new, specific law together with the occasional headline about someone getting tagged for texting can change make those people aware of the risks.
Cops generally go to driving school and truckers have CDLs that are, in theory, tougher to get. But yeah, that kind of stuff needs to be dialed back a bit too.
The last time I pulled up at an intersection next to a cop, the officer was engrossed in his laptop. Six people could have run the red light and he never would have noticed. 
|
- #3525 of 3688
-
Re: [steve_]
by boaz47
-
Dec 25, 2008 (9:32 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Dec 25, 2008 8:51 am)
This isn't rocket science. Lets take someone's favorite law when compared to this issue, DUI. They don't have to have a specific law dealing with scotch and another for beer and another for wine. The general DUI will cover the whole thing. Now if people drive under the influence of Pot, coke, or crack do they have to have a specific law? Or does DUI cover it. How about prescription pills? You guessed it they don't need a specific law. So lets suppose they, the police, decide it isn't worth their time to enforce. I am not suggesting they do but just suppose. Would it do any good to pass a law against Pot? Would it do to pass a specific law against beer? And here is a kicker, we now have a local education campaign on TV to assist the CHP in the enforcement of suspected DUIs. Guess what they are asking people to do? You guessed it, call the CHP or dial 911. They are asking the average untrained joe or joey to pick up their cell phone and call to report suspected DUI. Did you get that? DIAL 911 or whatever the local number for your CHP might be. Do you see a contradiction here? Someone in here has insisted dialing and talking on a cell phone is "worse" that driving under the influence and the CHP is asking people to call and report the supposed less evil? It isn't just California either, I have seen the signs along the road in Arizona, New Mexico and Colorado. What educational message does that send?
|
- #3526 of 3688
-
Re: [boaz47]
by steve_ HOST
-
Dec 25, 2008 (9:51 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Dec 25, 2008 9:32 am)
The implied message is to safely pull over to the shoulder, stop, and call. 
|
- #3527 of 3688
-
Re: [steve_]
by boaz47
-
Dec 25, 2008 (6:22 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Dec 25, 2008 9:51 am)
I toss the fertilizer flag. The implied message? The operator will ask questions that you can't answer from the side of the road. we all have listened to 911 calls on TV.
|
- #3528 of 3688
-
Re: [boaz47]
by steve_ HOST
-
Dec 25, 2008 (6:53 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Dec 25, 2008 6:22 pm)
Ouch - well, hopefully that'll be the last one of those flags I get this year. I'm running out of floor space. 
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views 
