Senate toughens Wash. cell phone driving law (Washington State; to be a primary offense)

KOMO - news / AP ^ | February 5, 2010 | RACHEL LA CORTE

[Stoat]

OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - The Washington state Senate has taken action against distracted drivers, passing a measure Friday that makes it easier for police to ticket people who are driving while either texting or talking on a cell phone without a headset.

On a 33-15 vote Friday, the Senate passed a bill that makes it a primary offense to be caught holding a cell phone to your ear while driving, or to be reading, writing or sending text messages. That strengthens the state's current secondary offense law, which only slaps drivers with an extra fine if they are pulled over for another infraction, such as speeding.

(edit)

[Stoat]

Under the bill, police could immediately pull over someone for texting or talking without a headset and give them a $124 ticket.
 

[Stoat]

The bill passed Friday also outlaws any cell phone use by a driver with a learner's permit or an intermediate license, which is given to drivers under 18 years old.

The measure now heads to the House for further consideration.

[pnh102]

I see Washington state is short on funds.

[Siena Dreaming]

Hawaii just put a similar law into effect.

They're hiring more cops too so they have more manpower to bring in this particular bacon.

[hoagy62]

Based on my personal observations from driving from Tacoma to Renton and back every day along I-5, the State Patrol alone could make a MINT if that law passes.

Just IMAGINE what the cities and counties could do! Heck...they may have just solved the state’s budget crisis! /sarc

[shadeaud]

So will I get a ticket if I hold my transitor radio up to my ear while I drive

[paul51]

easier than raising taxes. soak the drivers. After all, it’s for their safety. /s

[Stoat]

I see Washington state is short on funds.

Well, I did hear a blurb on the radio this morning saying that there is a deep concern over falling revenues from gas taxes....due to the popularity of  high-MPG vehicles, and they are looking for new revenue streams......

Of course, cutting waste, useless programs and corruption is never considered....

"sigh"

[Jack Hydrazine]

Women Hit Hardest!!!!

LOL!

[Stoat]

Women Hit Hardest!!!!

LOL!

Oh lawdy...I hope that you have a particularly effective flamesuit ;-)

<<<<backing away to a safe distance

Women Hit Hardest!!!!

LOL!

[1rudeboy]

Under the bill, police could immediately pull over someone for texting or talking without a headset and give them a $124 ticket.

I think $124 is cheap, seeing that if you are involved in a traffic altercation with me "while texting or talking" I will KICK YOUR ASS.

[MaxMax]

Have they outlawed women Farding yet?

[Stoat]

I can see that this is going to be a lively thread ;-)

[Spirochete]

Women Hit Hardest!!!!

Oh, so true. Nowadays, I can rest assured that if I pull up next to a crazy or inconsiderate driver, its a woman on a cellphone.

[Spunky]

Personally I am for this law. My daughter was T-bowed by a woman who went through a red light talking on a cell phone.

It was a miracle my daughter wasn't killed. The emergency room doctor said he had seen 9 T-bows and 8 of them were killed and she was the 9 case he had seen.

[microgood]

I never use my cell phone when driving. However, now you will not be able to call your boss and tell them if you are stuck in a traffic jam.

They never allow for boundary conditions when passing laws- one size fits all and zero tolerance. Idiots.

[pissant]

Nanny state POS. I bet republicans went along with this horsesh*t too.

[canuck_conservative]

The way the law is worded, it’s only illegal if you’re actually driving - because combining the two is potentially dangerous.

So if you’re stuck in a traffic jam and the car is parked, you’re not driving, so it’s OK to use the phone. And hands-free units are still OK while driving.

(We just got the same law enacted here in British Columbia last month.)

[microgood]

So if you’re stuck in a traffic jam and the car is parked, you’re not driving, so it’s OK to use the phone. And hands-free units are still OK while driving.

Normally if you are in a traffic jam your car is in gear and your foot on the brake, so technically you are driving and they could give you a ticket.

[Stoat]

Personally I am for this law. My daughter was T-bowed by a woman who went through a red light talking on a cell phone.

It was a miracle my daughter wasn't killed. The emergency room doctor said he had seen 9 T-bows and 8 of them were killed and she was the 9 case he had seen.
 

Congratulations to your daughter for beating the odds....I was nearly killed after being T-boned by an uninsured kid who ran a red light at nearly 50mph.  I credit my oversized, shamelessly politically-incorrect fullsize stoatmobile for saving me with only minor injuries.

I don't believe that the kid was talking on a cellphone in my case, however.

Although I understand the source of your passions, I also tend to be wary of enacting laws based upon emotion, and particularly across-the-board laws that impact behaviors which can vary wildly from person to person, with varying skill and comfort levels and from situation to situation.

I never use my phone while driving....I let my voicemail take incoming calls and then pull over to a parking spot to return them.... but I'm very interested in the discussions surrounding laws such as this.

This sort of thing smells of being merely a revenue-generator, however, because using a headset is still legal.  Does it make so much of a difference as to whether a person is distracted or not whether they use a headset or hold the phone to their ear?  How about speakerphones in the car?  How about loud car stereos?  How loud does a stereo have to be before it constitutes a distraction?  The police listen to their radios while driving all day long, and they have to pay close attention to what the dispatcher and other officers say.

It seems to me that all of these are 'potentially' distracting, yet there are many people who can deal with one, some or all of these things and still operate their vehicles okay. 

 It's an interesting discussion, and a potentially slippery slope in my view.

Personally I am for this law. My daughter was T-bowed by a woman who went through a red light talking on a cell phone.

It was a miracle my daughter wasn't killed. The emergency room doctor said he had seen 9 T-bows and 8 of them were killed and she was the 9 case he had seen.
 

Congratulations to your daughter for beating the odds....I was nearly killed after being T-boned by an uninsured kid who ran a red light at nearly 50mph.  I credit my oversized, shamelessly politically-incorrect fullsize stoatmobile for saving me with only minor injuries.

I don't believe that the kid was talking on a cellphone in my case, however.

Although I understand the source of your passions, I also tend to be wary of enacting laws based upon emotion, and particularly across-the-board laws that impact behaviors which can vary wildly from person to person, with varying skill and comfort levels and from situation to situation.

I never use my phone while driving....I let my voicemail take incoming calls and then pull over to a parking spot to return them.... but I'm very interested in the discussions surrounding laws such as this.

This sort of thing smells of being merely a revenue-generator, however, because using a headset is still legal.  Does it make so much of a difference as to whether a person is distracted or not whether they use a headset or hold the phone to their ear?  How about speakerphones in the car?  How about loud car stereos?  How loud does a stereo have to be before it constitutes a distraction?  The police listen to their radios while driving all day long, and they have to pay close attention to what the dispatcher and other officers say.

It seems to me that all of these are 'potentially' distracting, yet there are many people who can deal with one, some or all of these things and still operate their vehicles okay. 

 It's an interesting discussion, and a potentially slippery slope in my view.