Thoughts on the No Texting Bill

[bigcraig]

Personally, I'm opposed to these anti cell-phone / texting bills.

They're nothing but feel-good legislation that doesn't do anything to really curb the problem.

See, the problem isn't texting or talking on the phone.

The problem is distracted driving.

Why unfairly and illogically single out just a few behaviors?

Fiddling with radio - distraction
dealing with kids in back seat - distraction
eating - distraction
drinking - distraction
shaving - distraction
putting on makeup - distraction
reading - distraction
GPS programming - distraction


Yet legislation only focuses on a few politically correct distractions, but leaves all others alone.

No, officer, I wasn't texting. (I was following my phone-based GPS...)

No, officer, I wasn't texting. (I was catching the Top 10 Plays on Sports Center...)

I think that I would be in favor of some tough anti-distracted-driving legislation (perhaps), but anything that singles out texting is intellectually dishonest. Period.

-J-

This is EXACTLY my thoughts.

Thank you for saving me the effort of typing it all out.

 

[J man]

With a lot of these new phones, just to dial a # you have to type it out on the screen. It would make it look like you are texting even if you are not.

 

[right winger]

Personally, I'm opposed to these anti cell-phone / texting bills.

They're nothing but feel-good legislation that doesn't do anything to really curb the problem.

See, the problem isn't texting or talking on the phone.

The problem is distracted driving.

Why unfairly and illogically single out just a few behaviors?

Fiddling with radio - distraction
dealing with kids in back seat - distraction
eating - distraction
drinking - distraction
shaving - distraction
putting on makeup - distraction
reading - distraction
GPS programming - distraction


Yet legislation only focuses on a few politically correct distractions, but leaves all others alone.

No, officer, I wasn't texting. (I was following my phone-based GPS...)

No, officer, I wasn't texting. (I was catching the Top 10 Plays on Sports Center...)

I think that I would be in favor of some tough anti-distracted-driving legislation (perhaps), but anything that singles out texting is intellectually dishonest. Period.

-J-

Amen

 

[Pocketman]

It does not meet the definition of a portable device.

It's less than obvious how typing on a docked PC is not distracting. Not trying to make an issue of another police "exception" it just seems contrary to the intent of the law.

 

[Brian S.]

Politicians only pass laws like this because of perception. They make themselves look good for the sheep and there are very few who will oppose it.

 

[nate1865]

There are already laws for breaking traffic rules and causing accidents. Enforce those.

If someone can do something and drive safely they should be free to do so.

 

[spec4]

There are already laws for breaking traffic rules and causing accidents. Enforce those.

If someone can do something and drive safely they should be free to do so.

\\Problem is, a lot of people can't "do something" and drive safely. I've stayed out of this until now, but i must say: if this law lowers the chance that some closwn will plow into me, I'm for it. Ive been rear ended three times, once really bad. If those three individuals had been paying attention, it wouldn't have happened.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Isn't rear ending someone already illegal?

Of the three that hit you, how many were texting?

We need to start an INGO contest: drive around with a toy phone. Pretend to text, when the officer pulls you over, you take a photo of the officer with the toy phone.

First place wins a gun.

 

[spec4]

Isn't rear ending someone already illegal?

Of the three that hit you, how many were texting?

We need to start an INGO contest: drive around with a toy phone. Pretend to text, when the officer pulls you over, you take a photo of the officer with the toy phone.

First place wins a gun.

I don't know what the first one was doing, she was in a Caddy bearing down at me while I stopped for a light. I had no chance to get out of her way. Never said a word to her, she was whining that I shouldn't have been stopped at a red light.

Number two, I'm again stopped at a light and saw he coming. She had her visor down and was putting on makeup. Slammed into me. I did tell her that shw wouldn't have hit me if she was watching the road. She didn't want to hear it.

Number three, stopped on a two lane because the car in front of me was turning left. Saw her coming up on me and she was on her cell pohne. She got out and said she didn't see me until it was too late. At least she was honest.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The new bill does nothing to address the circumstances of all three of your wrecks.

I hope more people will carry toy phones in the future.

 

[IndyMedic]

The problem with these laws is correct enforcement. I think a law to stop distracted driving would be great, but as stated by many other people there are to many distractions and it is to hard to catch people in the act.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What if instead of giving the government yet another opportunity to levy a destination tax, insurance companies provide sanctions for those that do foolish things such as text and drive?

Why is our first reaction to go running to the government to "fix" things?

It won't get fixed and we won't like how the government messes it up.

 

[superjoe76]

Should just ban idiots from the road, period! I was stuck behind this woman, swerving back and forth between the lines going a good 10 under the speed limit. When I finally got to go around, she was reading a novel! She was actually holding a book in her hand and reading it while driving.

 

[Pocketman]

Most sensible people refrain from texting, reading books, etc. while driving. Heck, with the other nuts on the road we need all the attention we can to the road. Another attempt to legislate against stupidity.

 

[Fish609]

This is my biggest issue with this law:

Fifth, make a behavior too expensive and the behavior will be reduced. A $500 fine for texting is significant. A court case to oppose it will begin with a $1,000 retainer for an attorney, additional fees to the court, extensive time to complete the process, etc.


First off, how can you enforce such a law? Everyone in this country pretty much has a cell phone. If they divert their eyes for a second do you give them a ticket?

Second, how can you expect a 16 year old driver or an unemployed person to field a $500 ticket or a $1000 retainer?

Third, "here is your ticket because I don't like you, prove me wrong." Not only is it unenforceable it is undefendable.

I think we all agree that texting and driving is irresponsible and dangerous but putting this weight on the back of the LEO and citzenry is not a step in the right direction.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

I think we all agree that texting and driving [STRIKE]is[/STRIKE] CAN BE irresponsible and dangerous

Fixed that for ya. Just because YOU cannot spend 2 seconds glancing at a screen while you drive, doesn't mean that others cannot. Do billboards cause you to careen over cliffs?...

The people who are the problem are those who txt INSTEAD of driving. They shift full effort & attention to something other than driving, instead of simply diverting surplus attention when it is available. If you disagree that there is such a thing as "surplus attention" while driving...frankly...you're a massive accident waiting to happen the next time you sneeze or adjust the heater.

 

[Redemption]

Won't stop me and I'll never get caught. Guess this law goes in the pile of "I couldn't give a **** less about laws".