backtop


Print 33 comment(s) - last by Reclaimer77.. on Dec 29 at 6:17 PM

Getting caught texting while driving will cost California drivers starting next month

The state of California has already banned driving while talking on a cell phone without the use of hands-free technology, and sending text messages while driving is next to be banned.  The new law prohibiting adults from texting and driving goes into effect on January 1, 2009.

Prior to the law banning text messaging, a driver believed to be text messaging could only be pulled over if they were violating a different traffic law at the time.  But now, drivers believed to be reading or writing a text message can be cited by police.

"This new law applies to electronic wireless communications devices used to manually communicate with any person using text-based communication, including, but not limited to, communications referred to as a text message, instant message, or electronic mail," according to the California DMV web site.

The minimum for the first infraction is $20, but the total fine can be tripled after court and administrative costs are added into the base fine.  Each subsequent offense will cost drivers $50 or more.

In July, the California law forcing drivers to go hands free also banned text messaging for people under the age of 18.

It's unknown how police will differentiate when a driver is looking at their phone for directions, which could prove to be an interesting if people attempt to fight texting tickets.

Despite the need to use Bluetooth or other hands-free technology, it's still very common to see drivers with a phone up to their ears.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Slippery slope
By Lord 666 on 12/26/2008 9:25:47 AM , Rating: 2
1. Age discrimination for the hands free law banning under 18 but not setting an upper limit as well?

2.
quote:
But now, drivers believed to be reading or writing a text message can be cited by police.
and
quote:
It's unknown how police will differentiate when a driver is looking at their phone for directions
How would a police office be able to tell if you were reading something versus hitting the ignore call button or getting driving directions without reviewing the actual phone? Wouldn't that need a warrant to go through the text history?




RE: Slippery slope
By Bateluer on 12/26/2008 10:10:52 AM , Rating: 2
You know, if your phone rings while you're driving, or dings with a text, you don't have to answer it or pick it up, right? There's no need to hit the ignore call button or anything else.

If you need your phone for directions, get a dash mount. Or a length of double sided tape.

And yes, I would think that law enforcement would need a warrant to go through your texting history just as they would need a warrant to do though your normal call records.


RE: Slippery slope
By Mitch101 on 12/26/2008 12:26:21 PM , Rating: 2
I am always amazed a the more expensive the car the lack of a hands free device.

I see more 45K drivers with the phone to their ear than those with 4K cars with a bluetooth sticking out of theirs.


RE: Slippery slope
By ThePooBurner on 12/26/2008 12:48:57 PM , Rating: 4
That's because we didn't spend 45K on a car so we have money to buy the bluetooth with. ;)


RE: Slippery slope
By Denithor on 12/28/2008 9:30:10 PM , Rating: 2
Actually that's because the 45k cars have the Bluetooth built in. Hardwired mic, the speakers switch from stereo to phone when a call is accepted, very slick. This is standard in even cars from a couple of years back, my girlfriend's 2006 M45 is a perfect case in point.


RE: Slippery slope
By omnicronx on 12/26/2008 4:59:37 PM , Rating: 3
In Ontario Canada they banned all cell phone use while driving, regardless if of what you are doing with it. This way the law is pretty much black and white, either you where using your phone, or you were not. Why they would even limit it to texting use is beyond me, as there is no real way to prove it, especially if you see the cop pulling you over, you just merely don't have to send the message, and presto.. no records.


RE: Slippery slope
By glitchc on 12/26/2008 10:56:32 PM , Rating: 2
This ban is not yet in effect. It is still passing through Parliament. Perhaps early in the new year, it will become law.


However...
By Fnoob on 12/26/2008 9:14:43 AM , Rating: 3
Doing your makeup while eating a footlong and simultaneously receiving a BJ is perfectly legal.




RE: However...
By amanojaku on 12/26/2008 9:17:21 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Doing your makeup while eating a footlong and simultaneously receiving a BJ is perfectly legal.

Actually, it's just plain weird if you read it again...


RE: However...
By Mitch101 on 12/26/2008 12:20:57 PM , Rating: 2
I keep telling her the lipstick is only going to come off again.


RE: However...
By ThePooBurner on 12/26/2008 12:48:17 PM , Rating: 3
Hey, hermies need love too...


RE: However...
By Fnoob on 12/27/2008 8:24:54 AM , Rating: 3
One word : "California"


Free pass to pull anyone over without prob cause
By irev210 on 12/26/2008 9:46:38 AM , Rating: 4
This is awesome. "I thought he was using an electronic device, that's why I pulled him over"

Just another thing to get hassled for driving.




By MrBlastman on 12/26/2008 9:52:15 AM , Rating: 3
Don't text and drive - then you'll get over it. ;)

I see jerks every day doing it. My most recent example - a girl decided to start texting in the middle of a 3 lane road and the second she picked up her phone she slammed on her brakes, slowing from 60 to 40 mph rapidly. It caused quite a stir with the drivers behind her while she, unaware to the world, gazed into the crystilline display of her portable communcation device.

I thought there was an accident in front of her at first... until I passed her and saw her using the phone.


By foolsgambit11 on 12/26/2008 4:58:52 PM , Rating: 2
I think the bigger concern being addressed by the OP is that California cops can just pull over, say, Hispanic or Black drivers. They can claim that they 'saw the driver looking into their lap, and thought they were texting'. Then, if the person shows a phone, they get a ticket. If the person says they don't have a phone, the cop has an excuse to search the vehicle.

(Of course, if you have nothing in the car, you have nothing to worry about.... I don't want to get into a law-abiding-citizens-have-nothing-to-worry-about conversation here. I just wanted to point out that there's a possibility for abuse in the system. If you trust cops to always use their powers for good, this concern won't hold water for you.)


By Reclaimer77 on 12/29/2008 6:17:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Don't text and drive - then you'll get over it. ;)


I think you are missing the point commie. This is yet ANOTHER law put on the books thats almost impossible to enforce. Just like public smoking bans. It does nothing to lower REAL crime rates, and is totally subjective. Also its an enforcement nightmare for officers who, are frankly, completely overwhelmed with nanny state social and behavior engineering doctrine when they should be free to STOP CRIME.

quote:
I see jerks every day doing it. My most recent example - a girl decided to start texting in the middle of a 3 lane road and the second she picked up her phone she slammed on her brakes, slowing from 60 to 40 mph rapidly.


So ? She's just a bad driver. Period. Before the cellphone existed people were driving bad. For all you know she ran over her own mailbox that morning just trying to back out of the driveway. WITHOUT being destracted by a device.


By Screwballl on 12/26/2008 11:53:28 AM , Rating: 2
If a cop watches you for more than a few seconds, they can usually tell if you are messing with the cell phone (or whatever portable device) or just glancing at it.
GPS on a phone? A quick look tells you what you need to know. Most have speaker voice commands so that the driver will not need to look at it for any reason (no, you do NOT have to answer every damn call and every damn text message).

If a cop sees you looking at a device for more than 5-10 seconds, he has reasonable suspicion to ticket you. Also remember that if they ask to see your cell phone, they have the right to press "messages", "sent messages", last received messages and look at the time of last sent or last drafted message. That is not invasion of privacy as they are not actually reading the message or getting into anything personal.

If you deny them to look, they can ticket you. Then it could go several directions.

When you show up to court to fight it, you can plead not guilty because you were getting GPS directions (and the drafted/sent message at that date/time will be long gone, deleted from the phone).

Then they can either:
A) drop charges and you just pay court fees which can vary from $26.50 (like here in FL) to several hundred dollars for just showing up. Many states do this so they can recoup the costs of "paperwork" and the judge having to take the time to look at your situation.

B) If they have reasonable suspicion that you are lying, then they can send a warrant to your cell provider for any phone communication at that time, be it a phone call, GPS or text message/email. If it gets to that point and they find you guilty then you not only pay the $50 ticket but also the thousands towards court costs and fees because you decided to fight it.


By TheSpaniard on 12/26/2008 11:42:23 PM , Rating: 2
you are right and wrong. if you turn over your cell phone they have the right to check when the last text was made/sent, however they can even read it at that point.

you however have the right to refuse to hand over your cell phone


Unfortunately you can't ban 'stupid'.
By ice456789 on 12/26/2008 11:05:15 AM , Rating: 3
What a sad state we are in when the gov't has to ban driving while texting (which is essentially driving with no hands and not paying attention). Are people so devoid of common sense that this has to be mandated? They should also ban driving while sitting on your head, driving while playing PSP, and driving with your feet while adjusting the passenger side mirror. Instead of nitpicking each offense, there should just be an umbrella infraction called "Driving While Stupid". Think of all the problems it would solve... half the drivers on the road now would not be driving. Accidents would be reduced by a huge amount. Traffic congestion would be gone. Mass transit would actually be used. Less gas would be consumed. Less pollution caused. Energy crisis; gone.




RE: Unfortunately you can't ban 'stupid'.
By forumlurker on 12/26/2008 11:12:28 AM , Rating: 2
Great Minds (with common sense) must think a like. [See my post above].


By mihai on 12/26/2008 3:43:03 PM , Rating: 2
However, it takes a real genius to realize that by clicking "Post Comment" above becomes below.


By foolsgambit11 on 12/26/2008 5:09:15 PM , Rating: 2
It's true - isn't it the law that you have to have both hands on the wheel virtually all the time? (Exception for a second or two for driving-related activities like shifting/adjusting mirrors). If it's not, then it would be a good catch-all law. If it is, I know this has never been seriously enforced - smoking while driving would be a violation, too.

For a poster elsewhere, arguments about 'freedom' are trumped by the fact that your freedom in these circumstances may infringe on others' rights (like to life). Additionally, driving is a privilege, not a right. So freedom takes a back seat.


By Shadowdust on 12/29/2008 10:45:49 AM , Rating: 3
It really is a sad state. I would really like to understand the reasoning that went through these numbnuts heads when the original cell phone law came out. "Oh I can't talk on my cell phone without a hands free device, that sucks. Wait, the law didn't say anything about texting though, hmmm....." It irritates me that rather than simply being considerate and driving safely, stupid people would rather devote whatever little intelligence they have to finding loopholes in laws to continue their inconsiderate and unsafe behavior. :(


Be funny if....
By Darkk on 12/27/2008 4:44:10 PM , Rating: 2
Would be funny if the cop sent you a text message saying, "Pull over, you're about to be cited."




RE: Be funny if....
By Denithor on 12/28/2008 9:35:19 PM , Rating: 2
Funny yes, but also called entrapment.


Does it even matter?
By Pneumothorax on 12/26/2008 10:09:23 AM , Rating: 2
Driving around my local southern CA neighborhood, I've already spotted at least 40% of the soccer mom's driving with the phone to their ears. If that ban can't be enforced, this one won't be either.




Common Sense
By forumlurker on 12/26/2008 11:00:41 AM , Rating: 2
It's very sad that laws like this even need to be made. Anyone who cares about their saftey or saftey of others should know better than to take their hands/eyes off the road while driving just to text ILMURLABITIMMHAC




Legislate! Legislate! Legislate!
By HostileEffect on 12/26/08, Rating: 0
By Don Tonino on 12/26/2008 11:49:38 AM , Rating: 2
So striving to have lower casualties due to bad driving habits is now a freedom limitation? No one is saying you can't drive wherever and whenever you want, as long as you drive the proper way. And don't come telling me that you should be free to drive and kill yourself if you want to, I couldn't care less - it's about the innocents ones who are caught up in a road crash because of someone else driving drunk or with his/her mind and hands on a mobile.


Low penalty
By Trikat on 12/26/2008 6:04:30 PM , Rating: 2
"The minimum for the first infraction is $20, but the total fine can be tripled after court and administrative costs are added into the base fine. Each subsequent offense will cost drivers $50 or more."

I kind of wish the subsequent offense payment is a little more complicated, such as after three offenses the driver will have to pay up to $100 from there on.
$50 isn't really a big deal to a good deal of people and upping the penalty due to numerous offenses seems more... normal.




What about dialing?
By Davelo on 12/28/2008 5:37:57 PM , Rating: 2
I use a bluetooth handsfree to take and make calls while driving during work. I often have to manually dial the numbers which means taking my eyes off the road for a few seconds. I only do it when I know it's safe, not in high traffic conditions.

Isn't this almost the same as texting? Can I get a ticket for doing this? I live in Calif.




Another BULL!#$$ law.
By icanhascpu on 12/29/2008 2:56:27 PM , Rating: 2
Pardon my french.

Another law to help the declining middle class. Awesome. Do any of you think anything makiing over 60+k a year is going to give a crap about this law? If anything its more fun now trying not to get caught. 20$ is nothing.

Make it 50$ flat out first offence and a further explanation that if they are caught again, it will be double, and most importantly they will be required to do 6 hours of community survice. THAT is the ONLY way to get people to stop doing this sort of thing. Poor or rich, no one likes to pick up trash on their weekend.

Beautify the city, fill the coffers, make the streets a little bit safer. What the F*** are our law makers doing? It almost seems like they dont care about safety, and are encouraging people to do this but at a monthly fee of how many times you get caught!




"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki