Cager Hands Free Phone Requirements - Unintended Consequences?

[MotorinLA]

I was reading some more about the propose new Alberta Distracted Driving Law that, should it come to pass, will make it illegal while driving to – use a cell phone, texting, reading, writing, inputting information into a GPS or other navigational system, using a camera or video recorder, personal grooming, entering information into a laptop, playing a video game (yes it is happening!) and inputting information into an MP3 player or other audio or video device.

 

First infraction (after a driver education period) being talked about is $100 fine and 6-months probation plus 2 demerit points. Second infraction is $2000 fine and 1 year probation with 6 points. (In general 14 pts. in Alberta is go before a judge and prove why you should keep your license time.)

 

What will shake out of this in this fall’s legislative session is anybody’s guess, but that’s some pretty tough initial talk. Everybody is totally sick and tired of the distracted driver problem and all the noise about ‘personal rights to operate a vehicle however I want’ is just that – noise.

 

Now that sound like a good idea. A "catch-all" law would actually be more constructive than addressing all these issues individually.

 

Of course, there is already a catch all law in California, it’s called The Basic Speed Law. Safe speed for reading, programming GPS/phone/iPod/etc., calling on cell phone, texting, shaving, applying make-up = 0 mph. The problem is that some traffic judges buy into it and some don’t. Thus, all the new laws.

 

[Joy]

Right, though I have heard a few cases from friends and friends of friends who were given texting tickets when they were actually changing songs on their iPod (while at a light of course). They tried to fight it in court, but they got the wrong judge who didn't care what they were doing, the cop wrote them a ticket.

 

I've heard a few stories about texting tickets while actually driving but you have to be really clueless to get one. One is from a friend's sister and I'm not sure how she still has a license or is alive. I remember one year she totaled THREE cars by crashing them at 35-40 mph into several cars at a stoplight. Somehow she didn't see the stoplight or the stopped cars. One of the times a friend was in the car screaming "STOP!" and she just looked over at her friend and kept going and plowed into the cars. She is just utterly clueless and unaware.

[Ken H.]

Well, as long as I can still eat, drink, and brush my teeth, then I'm fine.

I think brushing your teeth falls under the catagory of personal grooming, but then YMMV.

[russell_bynum]

Right, though I have heard a few cases from friends and friends of friends who were given texting tickets when they were actually changing songs on their iPod (while at a light of course). They tried to fight it in court, but they got the wrong judge who didn't care what they were doing, the cop wrote them a ticket.

 

Yup.

[BailyD]

what did everyone ever do without all of these nifty do-dads? Just drive, it could be one of us or our family member that gets run over. I'm all for a "do nothing but drive law".

 

There are waaayyy too many people doing everything except paying attention to their driving. BTW, I usually catch the texters by riding my "BMW RT" alongside them taking quick glances in and making observations. EVERYDAY I can get one! (only while moving)

 

Look for the "texting bobble head" then move in close for a look.

[russell_bynum]

BTW, I usually catch the texters by riding my "BMW RT" alongside them taking quick glances in and making observations. EVERYDAY I can get one! (only while moving)

 

Look for the "texting bobble head" then move in close for a look.

 

Would that behavior fall under the "do nothing but drive" law?

[BailyD]

I think it would fall under the acting in the performance of my duties. Should I rear end someone it will be my fault though.

 

I haven't read any statutes lately that say you can't take a "quick glance" to either side. I suspect a driver who refuses to aware of his surrounding by staring straight ahead is as much a danger as the texters. This thought also includes the drivers who never take a "quick glance" in that nifty thing located on the top center of your windshield (in a car) OR the thing'ies attached both sides of your front fairing (motorcyle)

[Joy]

what did everyone ever do without all of these nifty do-dads? Just drive, it could be one of us or our family member that gets run over. I'm all for a "do nothing but drive law".

 

There are waaayyy too many people doing everything except paying attention to their driving. BTW, I usually catch the texters by riding my "BMW RT" alongside them taking quick glances in and making observations. EVERYDAY I can get one! (only while moving)

 

Look for the "texting bobble head" then move in close for a look.

 

It's really easy to find bad drivers that are doing dangerous things, but in the city where I currently live there are various "stings" and places where they put the cops to get a lot of tickets. There's one they do with a pedestrian, it's 8 or 9 cops and they write about 90 tickets in an hour. There are these 2 cops with one car that hide behind this gas station near my house and while I was filling up the two of them pulled over about 12 cars. They are there every weekday from 7-9 AM.

 

In the city that I used to live in (which has money and isn't broke) the police only wrote tickets to people who were doing things that were actually dangerous or when senior citizens who lived on a certain street thought everybody was going too fast and complained to the city. I liked this a lot better.

[MotorinLA]

what did everyone ever do without all of these nifty do-dads? Just drive, it could be one of us or our family member that gets run over. I'm all for a "do nothing but drive law".

 

There are waaayyy too many people doing everything except paying attention to their driving. BTW, I usually catch the texters by riding my "BMW RT" alongside them taking quick glances in and making observations. EVERYDAY I can get one! (only while moving)

 

Look for the "texting bobble head" then move in close for a look.

 

It's really easy to find bad drivers that are doing dangerous things, but in the city where I currently live there are various "stings" and places where they put the cops to get a lot of tickets. There's one they do with a pedestrian, it's 8 or 9 cops and they write about 90 tickets in an hour. There are these 2 cops with one car that hide behind this gas station near my house and while I was filling up the two of them pulled over about 12 cars. They are there every weekday from 7-9 AM.

 

In the city that I used to live in (which has money and isn't broke) the police only wrote tickets to people who were doing things that were actually dangerous or when senior citizens who lived on a certain street thought everybody was going too fast and complained to the city. I liked this a lot better.

 

The fact that these police officers were writing that many tickets, must mean that there are a lot of people not obeying the traffic laws at that location. I don't understand your objection to this activity. Do you feel that everyone should only be given tickets for certain violations? Which violations? The ones you deem unsafe?

 

I pull over the guy who's speeding and he tells me, "Why don't you go write one of those cell phone tickets instead, now that is an unsafe violation!" I pull over the guy who's talking on his cell phone and he tells me, "Why don't you go write a speeding ticket instead, now that is an unsafe violation!" Nobody want's to admit that the violation they are committing is "unsafe".

 

When individuals are allowed to make judgement calls about what is safe and unsafe, we get into a very hazardous area. If you take personal judgement out of the equation, it becomes safer for everyone. Contrary to your thinly veiled accusation that tickets are only issued to create revenue, they actually make the roads safer for everyone.

[onmyrt]

what did everyone ever do without all of these nifty do-dads? Just drive, it could be one of us or our family member that gets run over. I'm all for a "do nothing but drive law".

 

There are waaayyy too many people doing everything except paying attention to their driving. BTW, I usually catch the texters by riding my "BMW RT" alongside them taking quick glances in and making observations. EVERYDAY I can get one! (only while moving)

 

Look for the "texting bobble head" then move in close for a look.

 

It's really easy to find bad drivers that are doing dangerous things, but in the city where I currently live there are various "stings" and places where they put the cops to get a lot of tickets. There's one they do with a pedestrian, it's 8 or 9 cops and they write about 90 tickets in an hour. There are these 2 cops with one car that hide behind this gas station near my house and while I was filling up the two of them pulled over about 12 cars. They are there every weekday from 7-9 AM.

 

In the city that I used to live in (which has money and isn't broke) the police only wrote tickets to people who were doing things that were actually dangerous or when senior citizens who lived on a certain street thought everybody was going too fast and complained to the city. I liked this a lot better.

 

The fact that these police officers were writing that many tickets, must mean that there are a lot of people not obeying the traffic laws at that location. I don't understand your objection to this activity. Do you feel that everyone should only be given tickets for certain violations? Which violations? The ones you deem unsafe?

 

I pull over the guy who's speeding and he tells me, "Why don't you go write one of those cell phone tickets instead, now that is an unsafe violation!" I pull over the guy who's talking on his cell phone and he tells me, "Why don't you go write a speeding ticket instead, now that is an unsafe violation!" Nobody want's to admit that the violation they are committing is "unsafe".

 

When individuals are allowed to make judgement calls about what is safe and unsafe, we get into a very hazardous area. If you take personal judgement out of the equation, it becomes safer for everyone. Contrary to your thinly veiled accusation that tickets are only issued to create revenue, they actually make the roads safer for everyone.

 

Isn't it fair to say that the LEO is making a judgement call too ?

 

It's obvious that LEO's are NOT stopping drivers for ALL violations, just the ones that they deem MORE serious.

My point is, even the LEO makes a determination as to the degree of seriousness, and then decides to act, or not.

 

I understand that an LEO cannot possibly react to every traffic violation that he witnesses.

 

I see drivers commit all kinds of illegal maneuvers while driving well with eyesight of an LEO with no repercussions.

Tale gating, speeding, floating stop signs, running red lights, illegal lane changes, just to name a few.

 

So maybe the questions your hearing from folks are legitimate.

[BailyD]

Maybe the officers are just showing mercy? Discretion is an important part of traffic enforcement. The totality of the circumstances involved in the particular violation may indicate whether or not a summons is warranted.

[Ken H.]

Isn't it fair to say that the LEO is making a judgement call too ?

They're paid (and trained) to.

 

 

[upflying]

 

I see drivers commit all kinds of illegal maneuvers while driving well with eyesight of an LEO with no repercussions.

Tale gating, speeding, floating stop signs, running red lights, illegal lane changes, just to name a few.

 

So maybe the questions your hearing from folks are legitimate.

 

Most car cops are 911 call responders and report writers. If you see a cop ignore an obvious traffic violation it's probably because they are enroute to a call. We call it "on-view or self-intiated activity". It becomes tunnel vision when you are busy.

Motors are the ticket robots in most LEO agencies.

[MotorinLA]

 

I see drivers commit all kinds of illegal maneuvers while driving well with eyesight of an LEO with no repercussions.

Tale gating, speeding, floating stop signs, running red lights, illegal lane changes, just to name a few.

 

So maybe the questions your hearing from folks are legitimate.

 

Most car cops are 911 call responders and report writers. If you see a cop ignore an obvious traffic violation it's probably because they are enroute to a call. We call it "on-view or self-intiated activity". It becomes tunnel vision when you are busy.

Motors are the ticket robots in most LEO agencies.

 

Mr. Roboto says, "Thank you for the clarification". :smile:

[MotorinLA]

Isn't it fair to say that the LEO is making a judgement call too ?

 

It's obvious that LEO's are NOT stopping drivers for ALL violations, just the ones that they deem MORE serious.

My point is, even the LEO makes a determination as to the degree of seriousness, and then decides to act, or not.

 

I understand that an LEO cannot possibly react to every traffic violation that he witnesses.

 

I see drivers commit all kinds of illegal maneuvers while driving well with eyesight of an LEO with no repercussions.

Tale gating, speeding, floating stop signs, running red lights, illegal lane changes, just to name a few.

 

So maybe the questions your hearing from folks are legitimate.

 

Most motors will cite for any "hazardous" violation (a violation that can be assigned as a Primary Collision Factor in a traffic collision, i.e. most "moving" violations) they see, so I don't think you're making a good point here. My judgement as a Motor Officer also does not create a hazardous condition in itself, so you are kind of comparing apples and oranges with your argument.

 

But we digress from the original post...

[russell_bynum]

When individuals are allowed to make judgement calls about what is safe and unsafe, we get into a very hazardous area. If you take personal judgement out of the equation, it becomes safer for everyone.

 

Wow.

 

Just wow.

[MotorinLA]

When individuals are allowed to make judgement calls about what is safe and unsafe, we get into a very hazardous area. If you take personal judgement out of the equation, it becomes safer for everyone.

 

Wow.

 

Just wow.

 

You have to remember we have to account for the lowest common denominator. Drivers with poor driving skill unfortunately often think they are good drivers, thus you have to set general guidelines that apply to everyone to obtain the desired result.

 

The police is present to preserve the wellfare of the public, not the individual. If you don't like it, move to a country where traffic laws are not as stringently enforced. By the way, these countries tend to have much higher collision rates, but I'm sure that's coincidental.

[johngugel]

Like many that have posted here I try to take total responsibility for my safety. I make assumptions based on the vehicle and/driver.

 

In a "no cell phone" state maybe all vehicles should have a visable signal indicating the driver is talking on the phone. How about a big rotating light attached to the roof!

[upflying]

In a "no cell phone" state maybe all vehicles should have a visable signal indicating the driver is talking on the phone. How about a big rotating light attached to the roof!

 

We already have that cell phone in use safety feature on the roof of some cars.

[MotorinLA]

In a "no cell phone" state maybe all vehicles should have a visable signal indicating the driver is talking on the phone. How about a big rotating light attached to the roof!

 

We already have that cell phone in use safety feature on the roof of some cars.

 

And that's the reason I always try to pull over to use my cell phone while working. Whether you're making an official capacity call, which is exempt from the cell phone law or not, it just looks crappy.

[BailyD]

See my earlier post about reporting it. If the photographer takes the time and energy to "take" the photo, why not do something with it beside complain about the police (via their posted photograph on the internet)? What more would they need as far as proof goes?

 

Bob, I'm assuming you found this somewhere and did not take the picture yourself.

[upflying]

The cop on a CF photo was stolen from a website somewhere.

On this topic, I have a funny cell phone story to share.

Today, I pull a guy over for holding a CF up to his right ear. He also failed to move when the light turned green. Driver (I will call him John) and sole occupant spontaneously tells me it was an "emergency call". (hand held cell calls while driving are legal in Ca if it's an emergency..such as dialing 911)

I ask about the emergency. John tells me he was talking to a friend (I will call her Jane) who was having a seizure and he "did not know what to do". I suggested calling an ambulance for Jane. John agrees with my suggestion.

I ask John for Jane's address. John replies,"I don't know it, I had a learning disability in school". (standard canned response for avoiding responsibility for your actions) He does know generally where Jane lives. At that point I sense deception and a lie. I grab his DL and walk back to my scooter where I sign him up for an award.

I return to John and ask how Jane is doing. He doesn't know. I ask John to call Jane. Phone rings to someone but there is no answer.

John tells me Jane's full name, age and phone number. John signs the ticket and leaves.

I call the neighboring LE jurisdiction and give them information about Jane who allegedly is having a seizure. They have records in their data base which identifies where Jane lives. I ask them to conduct a welfare check to see if Jane is ok.

About 15 minutes later, LE agency dispatcher calls me back. Jane is fine and John had been lying to me.

As LEO's learned long ago, never believe anything you hear and only half of what you see.