andy
Super Member
I was just listening to someone from the CHP on the radio, and they said that even though the fine is small, it comes to something like $120-$150 after all the extra charges like court fees.
Cell phone texting while driving?
- Thread starter chillwolf
- Start date
I was just listening to someone from the CHP on the radio, and they said that even though the fine is small, it comes to something like $120-$150 after all the extra charges like court fees.
In the UK I think I am right in saying the fine is £60 ( = ~$100) + 3 points on your licence (12 points and you are automatically banned from driving).
Add to that that you are supposed to declare such offences to your vehicle insurer (many don't) who then obligingly charge you an increased rate the next time you renew - and for the next 4 years ! 4 years is the length of time the offence remains on your licence.
Oh, and for those who don't declare - their insurance could be voided.
Add to that that you are supposed to declare such offences to your vehicle insurer (many don't) who then obligingly charge you an increased rate the next time you renew - and for the next 4 years ! 4 years is the length of time the offence remains on your licence.
Oh, and for those who don't declare - their insurance could be voided.
chillwolf
"Play 'em off!"
This it what they should be doing here in the USA! :yes:
kx250rider
REAL TVs have TUBES!
But, the problem is, a lot of people don't want to take that responsibilty in to account when they are driving!
Exactly the point... Those people expect laws to protect them, and it isn't going to happen, just as you point out that drunk driving laws don't work when people just keep on driving drunk. What would work better, is if they just warn all drivers "You can do whatever you want at the wheel, but if you drive irresponsibly by ANY measure, you WILL lose your license if it causes an accident, and you WILL go to jail if you drive with a revoked license". The way it is now, you just get your car impounded if you get caught without a license, then the next day, you go on Craigslist and buy another one for $500 and keep driving. Obviously drunk driving must remain a separate crime; I'm referring to eating, drinking (soda, et al), shaving, texting, watching TV, reading, or even being with your girlfriend/boyfriend while the car is moving, as I've seen done. Make people THINK before the act. Don't think for them, hoping they'll act on it.
Charles
fotno
Lunatic Member
A few thoughts... I hope they're salient.
I'm certainly not in favor of legislation for its own sake. The current laws are difficult enough for the officers to enforce, and everyone knows it. But ticketing people for breaking a law is only part of the reasoning behind new legislation.
Many, many people who are currently using cell phones in moving cars will cease to do so to avoid a ticket, or just because they don't want to break the law. Just as many people who never wore seatbealts, do so now that it is illegal not to. Will it stop it altogether? No, but it'll help; and every driver that quits, lessens the likelihood of accidents, and saves lives.
Inattentive Driving is against the law, but most of the time offenders are not prosecuted for Inattentive Driving but for individual infractions: Running a stop sign, exceeding a safe speed, etc. If these laws are passed, I can guarantee that dash mounted cameras, and pole cameras will be used to prosecute offenders. So that a driver running a stop light in full view of a LEO or traffic camera, will not only receive a ticket for the stop light/sign, but for talking or texting while they do it. Likely receiving a predetermined stiffer penalty.
Hands free vs talking to a passenger -- A couple of things to think about:
When a person is engaged in a phone conversation, they are often at the mercy of a topic that requires a great deal of attention. They're discussing problems at work, technical issues, money troubles, personal conflict, or being issued commands that they must concentrate on and remember. While the same may be true of a conversation with a passenger, the major difference is that the passenger is actually in the car as well, and has their own personal safety to worry about, and will often cease talking when the situation around them warrants it. Not to mention that conversations with a passenger, may be focused on what both parties are observing outside the car as it moves. With a phone call, the person on the other end of the line is largely clueless about what the driver is dealing with, and may choose a particularly inappropriate moment to demand the full attention of the driver.
Personally, I feel that what would be most effective is not new legislation but to use technology (which is at least partly responsible for the problem) to help with the solution. How hard would it be to build a circuit into a cell-phone that will not allow it to be used in a moving car, with a huge penalty for anyone found defeating the device?
I'm certainly not in favor of legislation for its own sake. The current laws are difficult enough for the officers to enforce, and everyone knows it. But ticketing people for breaking a law is only part of the reasoning behind new legislation.
Many, many people who are currently using cell phones in moving cars will cease to do so to avoid a ticket, or just because they don't want to break the law. Just as many people who never wore seatbealts, do so now that it is illegal not to. Will it stop it altogether? No, but it'll help; and every driver that quits, lessens the likelihood of accidents, and saves lives.
Inattentive Driving is against the law, but most of the time offenders are not prosecuted for Inattentive Driving but for individual infractions: Running a stop sign, exceeding a safe speed, etc. If these laws are passed, I can guarantee that dash mounted cameras, and pole cameras will be used to prosecute offenders. So that a driver running a stop light in full view of a LEO or traffic camera, will not only receive a ticket for the stop light/sign, but for talking or texting while they do it. Likely receiving a predetermined stiffer penalty.
Hands free vs talking to a passenger -- A couple of things to think about:
When a person is engaged in a phone conversation, they are often at the mercy of a topic that requires a great deal of attention. They're discussing problems at work, technical issues, money troubles, personal conflict, or being issued commands that they must concentrate on and remember. While the same may be true of a conversation with a passenger, the major difference is that the passenger is actually in the car as well, and has their own personal safety to worry about, and will often cease talking when the situation around them warrants it. Not to mention that conversations with a passenger, may be focused on what both parties are observing outside the car as it moves. With a phone call, the person on the other end of the line is largely clueless about what the driver is dealing with, and may choose a particularly inappropriate moment to demand the full attention of the driver.
Personally, I feel that what would be most effective is not new legislation but to use technology (which is at least partly responsible for the problem) to help with the solution. How hard would it be to build a circuit into a cell-phone that will not allow it to be used in a moving car, with a huge penalty for anyone found defeating the device?
Thanks Fotno. That's the type reasoning I was asking about before. I'm pretty far removed from a psychiatrist and have no idea how the brain actually works so I'm looking for insight there.
It would be easy to do on a technical level. However, how do you distinguish whether it's being operated by the driver or by a passenger? If you just keep all cell phones from working in motion then you're penalizing the guy who's on the train to work trying to get ahead of the day or the girl on the bus home that's slowed to a crawl in a traffic jam trying to call her parents to let them know she'll be late.
KeninDC
Hazy Cosmic Jive
Currently illegal and possibly unsafe.
Jamming cellphones is illegal. A special permit is required from the FCC even to test such capability.
Mobile network operators, using either GPS technology or triangulation, can locate you within approximately 100 feet. Disabling this life-saving technlogy would be unwise.
Ken
fotno
Lunatic Member
Jamming is of course, currently illegal; but if the use of the phone was made illegal in certain circumstances, devices designed to disable the phone from being used illegally could be allowed for within the legislation.
Personally I'm fed up with having a nice night out with my wife, ruined by some jackass who can't stop discussing business (in a super loud voice) long enough for us to enjoy our time together. I'd be all for jammers in restaurants and movie theaters!
What I'm talking about is built in sensor (within the phone itself) that disables the device from sending data as long as the phone is being used in a illegal manner, such as by the driver of a moving car. I don't know if it's even feasible, but I would think it worth exploring.
Personally I'm fed up with having a nice night out with my wife, ruined by some jackass who can't stop discussing business (in a super loud voice) long enough for us to enjoy our time together. I'd be all for jammers in restaurants and movie theaters!
What I'm talking about is built in sensor (within the phone itself) that disables the device from sending data as long as the phone is being used in a illegal manner, such as by the driver of a moving car. I don't know if it's even feasible, but I would think it worth exploring.
Bstable
Super Member
Interesting read fotno. I agree with the difference between talking to a passenger, and talking on a phone. How many times has a driver had the passenger keep them out an accident because the passenger was looking down the road and the driver was not.
One other note. I have noticed that people on cells (distracted) make sudden stops or turns. They NEVER use that thing called a turn signal since they have no arms left to flip it on. Cars were not designed to be driven with ONE hand. ...and if you are driving a manual transmission .... :scratch2:
One other note. I have noticed that people on cells (distracted) make sudden stops or turns. They NEVER use that thing called a turn signal since they have no arms left to flip it on. Cars were not designed to be driven with ONE hand.
...and if you are driving a manual transmission .... :scratch2:
chillwolf
"Play 'em off!"
A special paint has been developed that will block cell phone signals. It has been tried in a movie theater and it does work.
markdi
Natural born thread killer
Most new cell phones have gps.
A lot of them have gps navigation.
So there could be a circuit that could detect that the cell
phone was moving over 5 mph on a road - not a train track
and disable all distracting operation.
for older or non gps phones.
I bet that the cell tower systems could be programmed to sense that a cell phone is in motion - then deny service
while the phone is in motion.
Car passengers and might suffer from no service but
train riders, bus riders -etc would not have a problem.
Bus and trains could emit a signal - blue tooth - that would enable the phone to operate in motion.
Or something like that
The technology exsists - right now - to solve this problem.
A lot of them have gps navigation.
So there could be a circuit that could detect that the cell
phone was moving over 5 mph on a road - not a train track
and disable all distracting operation.
for older or non gps phones.
I bet that the cell tower systems could be programmed to sense that a cell phone is in motion - then deny service
while the phone is in motion.
Car passengers and might suffer from no service but
train riders, bus riders -etc would not have a problem.
Bus and trains could emit a signal - blue tooth - that would enable the phone to operate in motion.
Or something like that
The technology exsists - right now - to solve this problem.
Last edited:
bsujeep
Go Boise State!!!
I will have to disagree with this as has been my person experience and have no data to back it up. I find that talking on a phone (hands free only) tends to keep me more attentive to driving as it actively engages me in some way.
When on long drives by myself I will call different people and talk to them to stay awake, for me it works. I also find that talking to a passenger is personally more distracting as I try to look at them when I talk. Don't have to see anyone on the phone.
Placing those calls takes no more attention away then changing stations on the radio.
Just my $.02
KeninDC
Hazy Cosmic Jive
What about a kidnap/carjacking victim in the trunk trying to call the police or relative? Do you really want that handset jammed?
This actually happened (no jamming, of course, just a distressed and ultimately murdered victim) and was the impetus for current FCC regulations requiring automatic location identification (ALI) technology in mobile phones.
I'm skeptical that there can be a technical solution in light of how hard it is sometimes to even connect a call. I could be, and often am, wrong.
Ken
This actually happened (no jamming, of course, just a distressed and ultimately murdered victim) and was the impetus for current FCC regulations requiring automatic location identification (ALI) technology in mobile phones.
I'm skeptical that there can be a technical solution in light of how hard it is sometimes to even connect a call. I could be, and often am, wrong.
Ken
Ausjoe
Super Member
Well you can ban texting, you can try to ignore the problem, you can provide education programs to discourage texting, or you can provide severe criminal and civil penalties against anyone who can be proven to cause a collision, injury or death while driving distracted. For whatever reason.
I have no problem with the first or third but believe in holding people responsible for actions which hurt others so probably most in favor of the last.
To me it is negligent homicide to kill someone with a motor vehicle whether DWI, texting, or talking to someone in the back seat. If you don't wanna pay the price don't do it. If you do and get caught don't whine about the jail time. Or money it costs you.
I have no problem with the first or third but believe in holding people responsible for actions which hurt others so probably most in favor of the last.
To me it is negligent homicide to kill someone with a motor vehicle whether DWI, texting, or talking to someone in the back seat. If you don't wanna pay the price don't do it. If you do and get caught don't whine about the jail time. Or money it costs you.
markdi
Natural born thread killer
Unless the car is fiberglass or something.
I do not think a cell phone will work very well in a car trunk.
the faradays cage effect or something like that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage
Anyway If I kidnapped some one I would take their cell
phone away from them before I put them in the trunk.
there are situations where seat belts and airbags cause more harm than good.
wait - its comin to me - I got it
make the phone always able to call 911 even when it is moving - this solves a lot of issues.
call of duty 4 is callin me back - ha ha
I do not think a cell phone will work very well in a car trunk.
the faradays cage effect or something like that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage
Anyway If I kidnapped some one I would take their cell
phone away from them before I put them in the trunk.
there are situations where seat belts and airbags cause more harm than good.
wait - its comin to me - I got it
make the phone always able to call 911 even when it is moving - this solves a lot of issues.
call of duty 4 is callin me back - ha ha
KeninDC
Hazy Cosmic Jive
Commerce is certainly part of the debate.
Good idea re: 911 always works/ no jamming. In fact, 911 on a handset with no provider/contracts will usually work.
Ken