Cell-phone law tough enough? Ask New Jersey (NJ Police say WA State law is toothless)

The Everett Herald (Washington State) ^ | June 30, 2008 | Yoshiaki Nohara

[Stoat]

Washington is poised to make driving while talking on hand-held cell phones illegal.

New Jersey has already been down this road.

The cell-phone ban for Washington will start Tuesday and will be similar to a New Jersey law that went into effect in 2003.

Washington's law makes it a secondary offense. That means police must find a driver committing another violation such as speeding before stopping drivers for holding a cell phone up to their ear.

New Jersey's law also began as a secondary offense.

State officials there found the law toothless and difficult to enforce, said William Cicchetti, president of the New Jersey Police Traffic Officers' Association.

"It didn't make any impact at all," Cicchetti said.

Each month, New Jersey troopers and police issued about 1,500 tickets. This year, New Jersey stiffened its law, making it a primary offense, or one where they can pull over drivers solely for talking on a cell phone. And the change was immediate.

Since March, police are issuing an average of 11,600 tickets per month in New Jersey, a state of about 8.7 million people. New Jersey officials say it will take more time to find out whether law makes their highways and roads safer. Still, the law needed to be expanded to make drivers obey it.

 

[Stoat]

My apologies for the severe editing of this article...this was done in order to remain in compliance with Free Republic's posting requirements for this news source.  Please see the original article's page for the full story.

HeraldNet Cell-phone law tough enough Ask New Jersey

Readers may also be interested in this previous, related FR thread:

Cell-phone-driving ban takes effect July 1 in Washington (Washington State)

[sionnsar]

New Jersey officials say it will take more time to find out whether law makes their highways and roads safer. Still, the law needed to be expanded to make drivers obey it.

And if it doesn't, don't expect them to reverse it. This is a one-way road for them...

[sionnsar]

Say WA? Evergreen State ping

FReepmail sionnsar if you want on or off this ping list.

Ping sionnsar if you see a Washington state related thread.

[microgood]

It is all about the money.

[Paleo Conservative]

WA State law is toothless

But what if your cell phone has blue tooth?

[Stoat]

But what if your cell phone has blue tooth?
 

Then you're not an offender....for the time being  :-)

[Clemenza]

The main reason they made it a primary offense is due to R-E-V-E-N-U-E. The MVC did studies showing the large amount of people talking on their cellies, especially out of staters (NJ being a major “drive through” state), and then calculated how much revenue they were losing by not having it as a primary offense.

[xDGx]

OK, I have to step up and defend New Jersey.

um.

give me a minute.

gotta be something good about Jersey.

um.

kinda stumped here.

lemme get back to yall...

:D

[BurbankKarl]

The one in CA has teeth. CHP says they will start pulling people over at midnight tonight.

[Clemenza]

Hot women.

Great food.

No tax on clothing or shoes.

[Conservateacher]

In Spokane the meth addicts prowl the “night” with impunity. I have been a victim several times and had thousands of dollars worth of tools and equipment stolen. Never to be recovered. My son’s have had their cars stolen 5 times. I want the police to stop this instead of waiting at every street corner to ticket someone who is going a little over the speed limit, talking on a phone, not wearing a seat belt or not wearing a bike helmet. But then, there is no profit for them in solving these crimes.

[Stoat]

The one in CA has teeth. CHP says they will start pulling people over at midnight tonight.

From the Everett Herald article:

Of the places with a statewide ban, only Washington state makes it a secondary offense, said Jonathan Adkins, a spokesman for the Governors Highway Safety Association, which represents highway safety offices nationwide.

In Washington, drivers face a $124 ticket for violating the ban. They can still use hands-free devices such as earpieces, wireless headsets and speakers. By comparison, California's fines are much lower at $20 for the first violation and $50 for subsequent violations. While adult drivers can talk on a hands-free device, drivers under 18 can't use a cell phone whether it's hand-held or hands-free.

There are no age restrictions in Washington.

[Stoat]

Hot women.

Great food.

"sigh"

<<<gassing up the stoatmobile for a trip to the Garden State

(((snicker))

Hot women.

Great food.

[Malsua]

New Jersey officials say it will take more time to find out whether law makes their highways and roads safer

It isn't. I still see people yapping away with their heads tilted to the side and going 10mph or more under the speed limit or aggressively tailgating and weaving in and out of lanes.

[BurbankKarl]

There will be no $20 tickets...court fees and other surcharges raise the first ticket to more like $100.

I am sure there will be stories about the first tickets issued.

[rawhide]

With headset and especially bluetooth cellphones readily available, there is very little reason to be caught holding your cell phone while driving.

[nmh]

People are just sneakier with it.

In NJ you still see, people holding their cell phones,talking and driving ALL THE TIME.

It doesn’t bother me.

Studies have confirmed that it’s not cell phones that cause accidents. It’s stupid. It’s just the LEFT wanting to control you.

[Stoat]

There will be no $20 tickets...court fees and other surcharges raise the first ticket to more like $100.

Thanks very much for clarifying that point, which had seemed quite odd to me.  Considering the administrative costs involved, I thought it would be a money-losing proposition to be pulling people over for a $20. fine.

I am sure there will be stories about the first tickets issued.

It will definitely be an entertaining circus to watch.

There will be no $20 tickets...court fees and other surcharges raise the first ticket to more like $100.

Thanks very much for clarifying that point, which had seemed quite odd to me.  Considering the administrative costs involved, I thought it would be a money-losing proposition to be pulling people over for a $20. fine.

I am sure there will be stories about the first tickets issued.

[jonrick46]

I saw a clip from one of the authors of Washington State’s Cell Phone Ban. She said it was just the first step. They will be looking into other measures.

Such measures include all cell phone conversation. They cite research that says that just talking on a cell phone interferes with the visual focus required to safely drive a car. This implies that all talking interferes with visual focus. I wonder if listening to the radio is included? That would eliminate Talk Radio from the automobile. Will they install microphone monitors that detect talk. Will these monitors be picked up by police radios?

Banning cell phones is the first step.

[Stoat]

The main reason they made it a primary offense is due to R-E-V-E-N-U-E.

Agreed.  If they were truly interested in reducing traffic accidents they would ban all cellphone use in vehicles, even handsfree use.  Handsfree phone use can still be extremely distracting.