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

[Grunthor]

I know a lot of our more libertarian minded FReepers may not agree but I am all for laws like this, having seen several times people driving dangerously, stupidly or both due to having a damned PHONE attached to their empty friggin’ head. You say you have a right to talk on the phone and drive? Fine, but I reseved the righ to shove that phone up your nose after you rear-end me.

[BurbankKarl]

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/cellularphonelaws/index.htm here is the CA rundown...

of note, text messaging is still legal for adults, and no phone or texting under 18.

[Stoat]

Banning cell phones is the first step.

Great Britain is using super high-res highway cams that can spot drivers using cellphones or doing a variety of other activities:

Great Britain New super-cameras will mean no hiding place for drivers who smoke, eat or use a phone

[Stoat]

text messaging is still legal for adults, and no phone or texting under 18.

Astonishing...particularly considering that most people I know that do texting typically use both hands on the phone and are looking down at the phone's screen while they do it.

CHP OFFICER: Sir, I noticed that you were driving without any hands on your steering wheel and looking down at your lap      while your vehicle was travelling at 70 mph.  Would you be so kind as to provide an explanation?

MOTORIST: Officer, I was engaged in a legal activity.

[NewJerseyJoe]

I could not tell you how many times I have seen NJ cops in their patrol cars, talking on cell phones.

In New Jersey we are subjects, not citizens.

[swarthyguy]

A similar ban in MA will EXEMPT cops, firefighters etc from the law. On duty or otherwise.

Yup, subjects, not citizens.

Here in MA, I still take other’s lives into my hands my driving, smoking and talking at the same time.

[NewJerseyJoe]

I am as far from a nanny-stater as you can get, but I have always approved of the NJ cellphone/driving law. The times when I have been cut off, almost hit, run out of the lane, or forced to a screeching halt by a driving cell talker are beyond count. I also don't like getting stuck on a single-lane, no-passing road for 10 miles behind someone who is so into his conversation that he doesn't realize he's driving 15 miles below the speed limit. All of this goes back to the mid-1990s, back when cellphones were bigger and a lot fewer people had them.

Of course, since the law in NJ never gets enforced, it's really a moot point.

[cva66snipe]

Well it can be said this way:
Attention! Welcome to the New World Order. Hail to the Glorious Leaders. You will do what we tell you when we tell you. You will be good citizens and report all offenders. We are your leaders and we know what is best.

Or this way

Aufmerksamkeit! Willkommen zur neuen Weltordnung. Hagel zu den prachtvollen Führern. Sie tun, was wir Ihnen erklären, wenn wir Ihnen erklären. Sie sind gute Bürger und berichten über alle Übeltäter. Wir sind Ihre Führer und wir wissen, was am besten ist.

But they're tyrants all the same. Meaning the Police Chiefs, Mayor's, and governors that think they still do not have enough {tools} control over our lives.

[Misterioso]

It is all about the money.

Whose money?

[Misterioso]

But then, there is no profit for them in solving these crimes.

I guess you are not a supporter of your local police.

[Misterioso]

Here in MA, I still take other’s lives into my hands my driving, smoking and talking at the same time.

Well, at least you're not talking on a cell phone. Thanks for your objectivity.

[swarthyguy]

I do, just turn on the speaker option and looks like you’re a madman yelling to no one. Other times, I hand hold the fone.

Great way to get people to give you the right of way.

They always let the crazy guy in front of them.

[BurbankKarl]

Well, they asked that of the legislator that introduced the bill....and they said that it was hard enough to get this passed, and that inserting that language would have killed it. I am sure it will appear down the line.

[olivia3boys]

I’m in CA and I know that it will be far more distracting for me to struggle to turn on the speakerphone feature and answer my phone instead of just flipping it open and answering it.

In CA you can dial a phone or whatever else, just not hold it up to your face I guess.

I find my 4 young children in the backseat far more distracting than my phone anyway. FAR more.

[386wt]

Driving on CA freeways is distracting. If I signal a lane change someone always comes up from behind and blocks me.

Then I was told by a friend that when you use signals on a freeway that means you are requesting either right or left blocking. I checked the DMV manual and whaddaya know, he is correct! Now I don't use my signals anymore. /s

[microgood]

Whose money?

Look at New Jersey. They went from 1,500 tickets a month to 11,600 when they made it a primary offense. To them, sucess = money.

Now they are dependent on the money and have to keep up the ticket writing.

It is kind of like speeding. If everyone went the speed limit, they would have to lower it.

Now if everyone starts using handless devices and they cannot give out any tickets, they will have to outlaw handless devices. Then if people stop using them, they will have to move on to cigarettes or eating.

[CurlyDave]

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

My wife, in preparation for this law bought a bluetooth headset and called me from it. Sounded like she was hollering in a tunnel.

She got another one and it won't pair with her phone.

I, on the other hand, cleverly went to Wally World, and got a little gadget that holds the cellphone on the end of a stick and fits in my cupholder. Put it on "speakerphone" and it works like a dream. Lo-tech wins every time.

[Misterioso]

Oooops. I guess I was wrong about the objectivity. /s

[Misterioso]

So traffic laws are all about income for the city? Or State? There’s a rationalization for you.

[Misterioso]

If it is about “revenue,” then why did it take so long for the legislation?