Coming soon from your concerned Austin City Council-a ban on texting while driving + 3 foot bicyclists buffer zone (Howe: home, cabin)

[mlassoff]

I find it outrageous that people look to the government to protect them from every danger with new laws, and want their neighbors to experience larger and more aggressive fines for breaking these laws... but don't want the government to make sure that the private insurance companies provide their neighbors with healthcare.

Everyone hates congress, but keeps reelecting THEIR congressman...

[eepstein]

OMG, Austin will NEVER pass a cell phone or text banning bill. It is FAR FAR too conservative. Do you remember what happened when the city tried to pass a no-smoking ordinance?? About the entire city was up in arms...heck, i thought there would be rioting. Now we all know that about 90% of austin citizens are smokers, but OMG???? It's all about civil liberties people and the vasy majority of the population in this area not wanting the big government telling them what they can and cannot do.

MARK MY WORDS. There will be NO CELL PHONE or TEXTING ban in this little town!!!!

No way in hell.

Originally Posted by satxguero

While i agree with giving bicyclists safety and space should the city ban texting while driving?

Ban on texting while driving to be discussed Thursday (http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/2009/08/25/0825texting.html - broken link)

[oldtoiletsmkgdflrpots]

[quote=CptnRn;10466575. Do we really need a new law to address these things?[/quote]



We do only if they take the money from the tickets and build bike ways. I say go for it. Ticket, ticket, ticket and build bike ways. The only way to really get to people is through the pocketbook eh?

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by oldtoiletsmkgdflrpots

We do only if they take the money from the tickets and build bike ways. I say go for it. Ticket, ticket, ticket and build bike ways. The only way to really get to people is through the pocketbook eh?

Build bike ways where in downtown ? There's no room left.

[woodinvilleguy]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

This 3' law would apply to bicyclists also would it not? So if there is already a line of cars next to the gutter stopped at a traffic light, it would be illegal (if it isn't already) for a bicyclist to pass them all in the gutter and pull to the head of the line wouldn't it? Each car passed would be a separate offense.

Gee wouldn't that be something to see bicyclists wait for their turn like every other vehicle on the road, wouldn't that be something?

Many of us already do!

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by eepstein

OMG, Austin will NEVER pass a cell phone or text banning bill. It is FAR FAR too conservative. Do you remember what happened when the city tried to pass a no-smoking ordinance?? About the entire city was up in arms...heck, i thought there would be rioting. Now we all know that about 90% of austin citizens are smokers, but OMG???? It's all about civil liberties people and the vasy majority of the population in this area not wanting the big government telling them what they can and cannot do.

MARK MY WORDS. There will be NO CELL PHONE or TEXTING ban in this little town!!!!

No way in hell.

Yes, I remember. The city DID pass a no-smoking ordinance. Then, when a compromise was reached, and private business owners were required to ban smoking in their establishments UNLESS they jumped through hoops and got a license as a smoking allowed establishment and posted on the door that they were such so that anti-smokers would know that and could vote with their dollars elsewhere, this was entirely unacceptable to the anti-smoking crowd who threw tantrums until the very reasonable compromise that allowed everyone to have a choice was overturned.

I thought the compromise was brilliant, and I thought the tantrums and the overturning of it exposed the objection to smoking for what it really was - nothing to do with not wanting to personally be exposed to cigarette smokoe, everything to do with making everyone else make the same choices they did.

[nomore07]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

I thought the compromise was brilliant, and I thought the tantrums and the overturning of it exposed the objection to smoking for what it really was - nothing to do with not wanting to personally be exposed to cigarette smoke, everything to do with making everyone else make the same choices they did.

Good point! In the end it had more to do with politics and control than exposure to second-hand smoke. One business owner told me that the 'exception' required purchasing an overpriced ventilation system from a specific vendor which had arrangements with the city. Follow the money...

[nomore07]

Originally Posted by mimimomx3

Ah, so enforcing the present laws is not working.

What makes you think that enforcing texting laws will work? It will be just another law to break. Even the Statesman article today said that enforcing the texting ban will be nearly impossible.

We don't need more laws- we need to enforce the ones we have.

There is too much disagreement over whether texting while driving is considering dangerous, so it's not enforced. It's not enforced until someone causes an accident - kind of pointless then.

Does anyone know if APD is even permitted to ticket for reckless driving caused by cell phone use? Sometimes (selective) enforcement is a matter of department policy or orders from superiors.

[orbius]

Where were some of you when the Austin Gestapo decided it could forcibly draw blood from citizens without their permission? That seems like something to get angry about, banning texting while driving not so much.

[Jennibc]

Originally Posted by orbius

Where were some of you when the Austin Gestapo decided it could forcibly draw blood from citizens without their permission? That seems like something to get angry about, banning texting while driving not so much.

Never heard anything about it, must have been in Seattle.