http://www.beautifuldayimages.com/blog/2008/07/safer-california.html
Just the busybodies, do-gooders and greenys invading more of our lives. I wish we could outlaw stupid.
When I lived in the “big city” and had to commute every morning there was a guy on the freeway most mornings about the same time as me. He drove through traffic with his newspaper opened up on his steering wheel.
Common sense and patience will save more lives on the highway than all the so called safety features combined.
Hands-free mobiles in cars has been the law in Western Australia for quite a while. I agree with the comments made by previous respondents about its efficacy in reducing the road toll.
Anecdotal observation suggests the ban on hand-held mobiles is honoured more in the breach than in the observance. Anyone who actually gets caught can count themselves really unlucky.
If a breathalyser-actuated car (i.e, it won’t start if you’re over the limit) was mandated by law, I’d be all for it. Prevention is better than cure, and alcohol is the biggest single cause of auto crash injuries and fatalities in Australia.
Dave Healy said:
Hands-free mobiles in cars has been the law in Western Australia for quite a while. I agree with the comments made by previous respondents about its efficacy in reducing the road toll.Anecdotal observation suggests the ban on hand-held mobiles is honoured more in the breach than in the observance. Anyone who actually gets caught can count themselves really unlucky.
If a breathalyser-actuated car (i.e, it won’t start if you’re over the limit) was mandated by law, I’d be all for it. Prevention is better than cure, and alcohol is the biggest single cause of auto crash injuries and fatalities in Australia.
My son had a DUI conviction and had a breathalyser actuated device placed in his car. They’re not always acurate. Mouthwash can set it off. My wife sometimes had to drive his car and couldn’t get it to start and she doesn’t drink. And the problem with that became that while your doing that the device counts the number of times all this is happening and goes against you when they download it. It was funny and not-so-funny at the same time.
By the same token, hands free are outlawed in some states and not others. I don’t have a hands free, but I did get caught in a catch 22 type affair by pulling over to answer my phone and then got a parking ticket for stopping in a no parking zone.
Whether your hands are free or not, while your talking it’s still a distraction, your concentrating on the conversation and not what’s going on around you. I gotten behind drivers talking on a hands free phone and the whole time they’re going slower and slower and have no idea someone is behind them. Then again, I’ve had this conversation with other people that say your doing the same thing when you have a passenger in the car. True, but you also have another set of eyes in the car too. If you don’t catch a situation happening chances are they will and warn you…hopefully.
Like Dave’s says, I’ve never heard of anyone getting a ticket for using a cell phone where they should have been using a hands free. The police are free to use their judgement on what they consider a dangerous situation. …sometimes…
Personally I just consider it a “warm and fuzzy” law…it makes people feel better while not actually doing anything.
Virtually every police department in California declared “zero tolerance” and “no warnings” when the new law went into effect last week. They said that if they see you driving with a cell phone at your ear, you get a ticket.
The newspapers and TV newscasts reported (with some showing video) tickets being given on the first day. I don’t remember any other new law being enforced with such vigor in its first hours.
Meanwhile, some guy in the Sonoma County, just south of us, has publicly declared that he will continue talking on his hand held phone, as he only talks to his wife in order to get the grocery list. I assume he writes it down with his other hand, while driving with his knees. One can only guess that some bright police officer is watching along this guy’s route of travel!
I think there is enough actual data out there to show that there is an increased danger of being involved in an accident or at least incident while driving and using a cell phone. I don’t necessarily think that hands free phones will help that much. Several experts agree, saying only time will tell.
I’ve used headsets on all my phones for years, so the new law doesn’t change anything I’m doing. I did recently get a new Bluetooth ear piece for my cellphone and really like it. It’s Plantronics brand, $30 at Costco, and has 40 hours standby time and 6 hours talking. Really nice, comfortable setup!
Happy RRing,
Jerry
Mine only rings while driving.
New York passed a similar law a few years ago. Criticism was loud for the first month, but then people discovered that they could sip their lattes much easier without having to juggle the phone also, and the furor pretty much died off. Many former critics now applaud the law (though they have to set their Starbucks down so not to spill it while clapping). Colorado’s tried twice in the past 6 years to pass such a measure, both times falling short. Not surprising, since we also don’t have a helmet law for motorcyclists. (Though arguably, one law is a public safety issue, while the other is a personal freedom one.)
The fact is, thought, that the laws (New York’s and California’s) don’t cover the most distracting aspect of cell phone usage–text messaging. The New York law was drafted before text messaging was available. The California legislation doesn’t address text messaging. The officer has to observe distracted behavior if you’re texting in order to issue a citation. That’s no different than any other activity which falls under distracted driving statutes.
When you get right down to it, the law is all sound with little fury. If you’re caught, you get a $25 fine and no points. I’ve gotten more expensive parking tickets. It’s enough of a law to where the politicians can say they’re doing something, but not enough of one to actually do anything. (In other words, typical legislation.) Attach a real penalty to it, and you’ll get more attention.
Later,
K
The California legislature is currently working on a bill that will ban texting while driving. I imagine it will pass with little opposition.
BTW, the new CA handsfree cellphone law also has a provision that prohibits folks under 18 from using a cellphone while driving, handsfree or not.
Some younger drivers object to both of the above prohibitions, but most older drivers are okay with them. As I previously wrote, no big to me, as I spend much of my day with either a headset or earpiece on, driving or not. Just a lot easier to work that way.
I do agree with Kevin: The fines are small enough that some will just take the chance of getting caught. Steeper penalties would probably get better results.
Happy RRing,
Jerry
I dunno. Most states speeding fines are pretty steep. Doesn’t slow many down. Then they’re double the fine in a work zone. Doesn’t slow many people down either. and a that’s WITH points and a hefty fine.
Try sitting on the side of a busy interstate and see what the drivers are doing inside their cars. Pretty tough to do with tinted glass and a fraction of a second to look. Some side windows are so dark you can’t see in while standing beside the car.
One thing I have noticed is patrolmen who approach the passenger side instead of the drivers side. I see that alot anymore.
Like Kevin mentioned, they’re just “warm and fuzzy laws” to make people feel better.
Let them make laws. Keeps them from messing up more important things 
Tom Ruby said:Please, what more is there for them to mess up?
Let them make laws. Keeps them from messing up more important things :D
Hey Folks,
listening to this discussion, makes me aware how great it is to have no cel phone and how much easier live is since i drink zero alcohol. In the past 12 Years i got one fine for not wearing the seatbelt, it means to me that if you comply with the law, there are no problems. I am sure that all of us know, most of the time when we drive we are safe, and talking on a cel phone would be no problem. But all of us know that there are those moments where you have to react to avoid an accident, and in such moments every millisecond counts. Talking on a cel phone in such moment might makes the difference if you end up in a accident or not.
how ever, it makes no sens to me, why California has so much trouble with cel phones and driving, most of the time you are stuck in traffic anyway.
Think global Pius
Quote:I dunno. I think that's a myth perpetuated by Californians to keep people from moving there. Last time I drove in LA, the only difference between me and the Daytona 500 (besides being on the wrong coast) was that I wasn't talking to a pit crew. Bumper to bumper, yeah. But moving at 80 mph! ;)
... most of the time you are stuck in traffic anyway.
Quote:Oh, they'll find something... They always do. That's why we give them these easy carrots to chew on. Keeps their teeth short so they don't go chewin' on the furniture. :D
... Please, what more is there for them to mess up?
Later,
K
Nobody’s life liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session.
Steve Featherkile said:What liberty or property are these laws infringining on?? There isn't an amendment that gives you a right to drive. You don't have a "right" to drive it's a priviledge as long as you follow rules. Follow the rules you drive, don't follow them and you can talk on your cell phone when walking or on the bus.
Nobody's life liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session.
The laws don’t do far enough to protect the other drivers and pedestrians.
Gee, Mark, did you have a bad day?
My comment was a follow-on to Kevin’s comment about giving them carrots to chew on so they don’t go chewing on the furniture! :lol:
Maybe you should lay off the caffeine…
or at least , turn the page and keep up…
Me, I say anyone who does or says anything I don’t like should be strung up on the nearest tree. I might run out of convenient trees fairly quickly …