Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

After 6 months, drivers ignoring cellphone ban [WA]
Seattle Times ^ | 1/02/2009 | Bob Young

Posted on 01/02/2009 1:17:29 PM PST by sionnsar

Cindy Baker-Williams held a "Hang Up and Drive" banner over Aurora Avenue North in Fremont when Washington's handheld cellphone ban for drivers began on the first of July.

She and her family hoped the new law would change drivers' behavior.

It did at first. "The initial trend we saw was less people talking," said Baker-Williams.

Then cellphone use started creeping back up, said Sgt. Freddy Williams of the State Patrol, who has carried on his own informal off-duty study of driving-and-talking.

He can't think of another law that's been flouted quite like this one. "I've seen people walk out of their house and before they put their car in gear, they're talking on the cellphone," he said.

...

The public appears to support a tougher law. A statewide poll by Pemco Insurance in June, just before the new law took effect, showed 60 percent of Washington drivers wanted to make a handheld cellphone ban a primary offense.

But Douglass knows state lawmakers took seven years to move the current law from initial proposal to passage. And it took 16 years for the state's seat-belt law, implemented as a secondary offense in 1986, to become a primary offense in 2002.

...

(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: cellphoneban; cellphones; nannystate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-178 next last
To: sionnsar

What always gets to me about these laws is that the landmark study that was done
said that a driver on the cellphone was just as impaired as a drunk driver, and that
having a hands-free device MADE NO DIFFERENCE in the level of impairment.
Yet the politicians cite the first part of that study and ignore the second part
when they write laws that mandate the use of hands-free devices,
giving the driver a false senses of safety by doing so.
To me it’s like saying that cigarette smoking is dangerous and having a filter
does not make it any less dangerous, put then passing a law
that makes unfiltered cigarettes illegal.


21 posted on 01/02/2009 1:33:44 PM PST by Repeal The 17th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bicyclerepair
Mad Skills!


22 posted on 01/02/2009 1:34:28 PM PST by the_devils_advocate_666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar

I’ve noticed an increase in cell phone use by drivers in California also.


23 posted on 01/02/2009 1:34:49 PM PST by BookmanTheJanitor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillT

Well, just four days ago I was sitting at a red light street crfossing and whent he light turned to green arrow turn signal for the lane to the left of me, a car went through and turned. Then the light turned green for my lane. I was not lead footing because I had groceries on board I didn’t want spilling all over the indise of the cab, so I was easying through the intersection when out of the corner of my right eye, I spotted a car whizzing down the hill that could not stop—so I did, immediately, spreading groceries on the floor fo the truck cab, and as the car flashed past the front of my truck at well over 40 mph, the female driving the vehicle was locked to a cell phone in her left hand. She didn’t even apply the brakes, just whizzed on through the intersection and away! She was lucky I stopped, because her little car would have accordioned against my 4x4 Off Road F150 front right wheel!


24 posted on 01/02/2009 1:34:55 PM PST by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JennysCool

The problem is that we’re not dealing with a question of someone having the right to merely endanger themselves here, but others also.


25 posted on 01/02/2009 1:35:29 PM PST by Dan Middleton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek
...it comes from drivers not paying attention to driving because they're talking on the phone.

And the law against talking to passengers in your car?

26 posted on 01/02/2009 1:36:50 PM PST by PBRSTREETGANG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

This is not a left or right issue. I was rear ended badly by someone on their cell phone! They have done studies that have shown how drinking is almost as bad as driving while having a couple of drinks!
From my experience, I really never paid attention to the road when I used to talk on my cell while driving!


27 posted on 01/02/2009 1:37:49 PM PST by DoneWithDems
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar
Eliminate the cell-phone law.

Eliminate all seat belt laws.

Eliminate all smoking restrictions.

Let the people be free, take responsibility for their own choices, and mind their own business if they're not hurting anyone else.

28 posted on 01/02/2009 1:38:36 PM PST by Lexinom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JennysCool
The reason freedom is fast disappearing in America is that seemingly every potentially dangerous human behavior now has a law passed against it. Or will have.

So you are against drunk driving laws?

29 posted on 01/02/2009 1:38:58 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Der neuen Fuhrer: AKA the Murdering Messiah: Keep your powder dry, folks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DoneWithDems

This law is NOT silly. I was badly injured when some illegal rear ended me because she was too consumed with her telephone conversation!
I cannot believe you guys are making this a bipartisan issue!


30 posted on 01/02/2009 1:40:14 PM PST by DoneWithDems
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

My driving philosophy is that I assume that every other car on the road is trying to kill me.


31 posted on 01/02/2009 1:40:32 PM PST by don-o (My son, Ben - Recruit training at Parris Island from October 20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DoneWithDems

opps...partisan. lol


32 posted on 01/02/2009 1:40:38 PM PST by DoneWithDems
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: PBRSTREETGANG
And the law against talking to passengers in your car?

It is a different part of the brain. The part you use for talking on the phone is the same part as the one you use for driving your car. The brain can't do both and so the ability to drive is significantly impaired.

33 posted on 01/02/2009 1:40:41 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Der neuen Fuhrer: AKA the Murdering Messiah: Keep your powder dry, folks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar
The last time I used a cell phone while driving was on the way from my house to a Wal-Mart. About a 15 minute drive.

When I got to WM, I thought about the drive I just made. I didn''t remember a thing.

Since then, I've never used a cell phone while driving.

34 posted on 01/02/2009 1:40:46 PM PST by SGCOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: omega4179
"Whats up Lib?"

freedumb2003
Since Nov 8, 2002

Yes, freedumb has a different opinion than you, so clearly he's spent six years here as a sleeper agent waiting for his opportunity to troll on the issue of hang-up-and-drive-laws, the stinkin' MOBY!

35 posted on 01/02/2009 1:40:59 PM PST by Dan Middleton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar

all of them? nah. it’s like drunk driving... you always have the few stray ones no matter what.


36 posted on 01/02/2009 1:41:07 PM PST by Ancient Drive (will)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillT

It’s a matter of keeping the whole class after school because of the actions of one idiot. Not the behavior of a sane nation.

What’s even more hilarious is that all the laws have pretty much been written many times over. If you cause an accident by inattention of ANY KIND you can ALREADY get hit with an innattentive or reckless driving charge.

SPECIFYING the inattentive activity just keeps legislatures in business. It’s like that ridiculous policy of spending days of legislative activity and raising all kinds of fanfare naming a piece of legislation after someone when the LAW ITSELF has already been on the books for years.

Pandering, in other words.

“Lawmaking” is a make-work project for dullards and confidence artists.


37 posted on 01/02/2009 1:42:03 PM PST by JennysCool (Internet Powerhouse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
You could make a case that, given hugely increased penalties (e.g. mandatory 5-year minimum prison sentence for any non-fatality accident caused while under the influence), you could eliminate such laws. Would make people think before doing such a dumb thing!

That's obviously extreme, but there are shades of gray in between.

38 posted on 01/02/2009 1:42:26 PM PST by Lexinom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lexinom
Let the people be free, take responsibility for their own choices, and mind their own business if they're not hurting anyone else.

And when they kill or maim someone? Let them be? Allow behavior that is actively harmful to others continue? Allow people to fire guns randomly in the air? I mean, we don't want the Nanny State interfering with your right to shoot your firearm whenever you want, right?

39 posted on 01/02/2009 1:42:44 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Der neuen Fuhrer: AKA the Murdering Messiah: Keep your powder dry, folks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Lexinom

“Let the people be free, take responsibility for their own choices, and mind their own business if they’re not hurting anyone else.”
Other people are being hurt by people talking on their cell phones while driving! Yes, let people be free BUT ban cell phones while driving. For the tenth time I was hurt because someone wouldn’t get off of their cell phone while driving!


40 posted on 01/02/2009 1:42:48 PM PST by DoneWithDems
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-178 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson