Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And how is this new law going to save them in a way that existing driving safety laws already don't address?
Do cops today lack the authority to pull over distracted or unsafe drivers?
If anything, why not amend existing laws if they need more specificity and penalties around this new type of distraction?
It's a vague law and open to interpretation rather than an absolute. The law has an issue you can drive a truck through because it isn't enforced because it is tough to enforce. People ask to enforce laws but vague laws like this are hard to enforce even though cops have the authority to pull over a possible distract driver driving erratically.
So there is no victim. Potential (imaginary)doesnt count.
Why not? It's also good for the society. A 2011 government study showed 3,000 people died from texting while driving wrecks alone while a 2010 Reuters article cited a study that showed from 2001 to 2007, 16,000 deaths were attributed to cell phone use while driving. Say you are pulled over for cell phone use, that's for public good the same as pulling people for other routine traffic stops, the cop is doing it because they don't know if you will have a victim or not. Charging after the fact when there is a victim isn't working because as you've seen thousands die each year.
If the law doesn't include either action, no. As I've said with the existing law in particular with cell phone use, the wording is too vague and opens the doors for issues enforcing laws. A separate law for cell phones would clarify the law and make it easier to enforce. By that study, you'd agree that cell phone use is a problem when it comes to driving whether it is texting, reading a text or being on the phone. The law as it stands baring in several cities aren't enough of a deterrent for a social menace that causes healthcare costs to rise based on sheer numbers of accidents caused by cell phone use.
The point is that under a new cell phone law if a person looks down at something and a cop pulls them over and inspects their cell phone and sees that a text came in, that person would most likely receive a ticket for just glancing down.
What if your wife leaves her phone in your car and the cop thinks he sees you looking down at a phone. He pulls you over and tells you to unlock your phone, but you don't know the unlock key. How will you fight that ticket?
With a distracted or reckless driving law, it's based upon your actions in being a danger to others not just an assumption made by the cops. Additionally, those laws cover things like putting on makeup, messing with DVD's, etc.
It's a vague law and open to interpretation rather than an absolute. The law has an issue you can drive a truck through because it isn't enforced because it is tough to enforce. People ask to enforce laws but vague laws like this are hard to enforce even though cops have the authority to pull over a possible distract driver driving erratically.
So get rid of these vague laws.
Subjective enforcement of law breeds bias. Something you really don't want to see arise in an enforcement agency or justice system.
The point is that under a new cell phone law if a person looks down at something and a cop pulls them over and inspects their cell phone and sees that a text came in, that person would most likely receive a ticket for just glancing down.
And what is wrong if they caught doing something they shouldn't be doing in the first place?
What if your wife leaves her phone in your car and the cop thinks he sees you looking down at a phone. He pulls you over and tells you to unlock your phone, but you don't know the unlock key. How will you fight that ticket?
Easy, I wouldn't look down in the first place. If you don't break laws, you aren't likely to get charged with a crime.
With a distracted or reckless driving law, it's based upon your actions in being a danger to others not just an assumption made by the cops. Additionally, those laws cover things like putting on makeup, messing with DVD's, etc.
Distracted driving isn't enforced because it can't. I've seen drivers (as a passenger mind you) eat cereal or read the news paper while driving as well as on the phone or reading the phone and not get caught. The law isn't enforced at all. The issue is I see about 20 cell phone per every non cell phone distracted driver. I am all for people's rights but you have to remember operating a vehicle is your number one priority. Unless your job highly needs you to answer the phone, don't worry about it. When driving, I put mine on silent and no vibrate. Is that so hard for others to do? Common sense folks. If more people used it, many laws wouldn't need to exist or could be repealed (Missouri River steam ship racing law fir instance.)
What do you think?
Do we have too many laws and if so why?
Is it too many laws if we have to legislate specific problems not covered under existing laws on the books?
Yes, we have way too many laws. And BTW, the texting law could make driving more dangerous, not safer. People will continue to text, but now they will keep their phone out of sight which is more dangerous.
Distracted driving isn't enforced because it can't. I've seen drivers (as a passenger mind you) eat cereal or read the news paper while driving as well as on the phone or reading the phone and not get caught. The law isn't enforced at all. The issue is I see about 20 cell phone per every non cell phone distracted driver. I am all for people's rights but you have to remember operating a vehicle is your number one priority. Unless your job highly needs you to answer the phone, don't worry about it. When driving, I put mine on silent and no vibrate. Is that so hard for others to do? Common sense folks. If more people used it, many laws wouldn't need to exist or could be repealed (Missouri River steam ship racing law fir instance.)
Wouldn't it be best to also make car stereos illegal?
If a person takes their eyes off the road to change stations, that could result in a death. Since there is no way to monitor and prove if a person changed stations or not, wouldn't it be for the best to eliminate them?
Yes, we have way too many laws. And BTW, the texting law could make driving more dangerous, not safer. People will continue to text, but now they will keep their phone out of sight which is more dangerous.
Or do a simple thing I have said to do on this thread and actually do. PUT THE PHONE AWAY!!!! Is it really that important to get that text or answer that call right this minute in every single case?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez
Wouldn't it be best to also make car stereos illegal?
If a person takes their eyes off the road to change stations, that could result in a death. Since there is no way to monitor and prove if a person changed stations or not, wouldn't it be for the best to eliminate them?
Or do what I do, put it on and just leave it on or don't even turn it on in the first place. The problem is apparently as I said earlier the common sense is a problem. Unfortunately we have to remember that this great nation has both logic people and idiots and it's often because of idiots we need laws to protect logical person. I mean do we REALLY need an Arizona law barring firing a gun into the air knowing the bullet can come down a strike an innocent person? No but people have done it enough to cause that to be law.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
