Advocacy & Safety - California bans Cell phones for Teen drivers

Hooray for AHNOLD!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070914/ap_on_re_us/teen_drivers_cell_phones

"A law signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Thursday will require those teens to put down all cell phones and other electronic devices while driving. Older drivers will be able to use hands-free devices but minors won't enjoy that luxury — in part because of the popularity of text-messaging among teens."

My only concern is will it be enforced and how strictly will it be enforced.

eeeehhhhh no. not NEARLY strong enough punishment.
Should be:
First Offense: Electronic device smashed
Second Offense: Electronic device and face smashed
Third Offense: EXECUTION!

but that's just me and my sadomasochistic mind.

Now if only we could make another class license for suv drivers. Thus making them take a different drivers test. But really, I do love it when they crank a hard right out of the left lane across three lanes of traffic, into my path while on the phone, then flip me off! Good times for big trucks. =/

Excellent and well-considered legislation. Good work, Governor Schwarzenegger! :beer:

I think in Jersey it's $200 for at least the first time, if not every time, and it's for everyone. I tend to think we have enough (or too many) laws on the books already, but anything that will help people shut up and drive is a good move IMO.

And at 18, you become magically more able to text, download ringtones, talk, dial, etc., that you were at 17.

Mind you, any country that regards 16 and 17 year olds as mature enough to drive is certifiably bonkers

OK, it should apply to drivers of all ages, and the fine is too low. However, this is a fabulous pragmatic start at a solution to a huge problem.

Good start, Governor Schwarzenegger. Now, are Kulongoski and Gregoire listening?

And at 18, you become magically more able to text, download ringtones, talk, dial, etc., that you were at 17.

Mind you, any country that regards 16 and 17 year olds as mature enough to drive is certifiably bonkers

Not that I disagree with you, but just wondering, what are the ages for drivers over there?

As much as I hate people -- of any age -- gabbing on their cell phones in the car, at the store, and just about anywhere else, I have to take a Libertarian stance against this law. There are already laws against driving while distracted. They just need to be enforced. Adding new laws to cover every concievable annoyance and irritation is a bad road to take, IMO.

As of today, effective Oct.20, all drivers are prohibited from text messaging while driving in the City of Phoenix:

http://www.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/0919phx-textmessaging-ON.html

City of Phoenix of course does not mean the Valley of the Sun )or Phx-metro) which includes many other cities like Tempe, Chandler, Mesa, Gilbert, Scottsdale, etc.

9/20 edit: Here is more detail
http://www.azcentral.com/community/tempe/articles/0919phx-textmessaging-ON.html

Fines of up to $250 plus $210 in surcharges.

Al

Mind you, any country that regards 16 and 17 year olds as mature enough to drive is certifiably bonkers
I disagree with this. I don't think all 16 year olds are capable of driving safely, but I've never been citied for anything and I got my permit at 15 years of age. Driving isn't incredibly complicated as long as you're not allowing things to distract you, and you know the rules of the road as well as the limits of your vehicle. I don't think most teenagers are capable of dedicating their full attention to the road, but certainly many aren't any more dangerous than your average driver.

bro this chit is ageist...ban everyone or dont ban anyone.

WTF teenagers? Soccer moms drive hella worse

Well teens have the darn cellphones glued to their heads so I can see why they are targeted. I can't understand why anyone needs to talk so much on any type of phone. I talk for 2 minutes and I have to get off the darn thing.

thats silly. My impressions are the worst offenders are soccer moms.

Great news. Yes the fines are a bit low. But keep in mind this law helps immensely in the case of accidents as well. Before if a teen caused an accident due to cell phone use it was bad, but not illegal. Now if it is determined that the cell phone contributed it can be a harsher punishment as well.

-D

bro this chit is ageist...ban everyone or dont ban anyone.

WTF teenagers? Soccer moms drive hella worse

Teens don't vote. Soccer moms are the holy grail of voter blocs.

Well teens have the darn cellphones glued to their heads so I can see why they are targeted. I can't understand why anyone needs to talk so much on any type of phone. I talk for 2 minutes and I have to get off the darn thing.

dont stereotype...I've seen businessmen guys and soccer moms GLUED to their cellphones during rush hour traffic 5pm driving like maniacs.

Teens should be the least of your worries.

And at 18, you become magically more able to text, download ringtones, talk, dial, etc., that you were at 17.

Mind you, any country that regards 16 and 17 year olds as mature enough to drive is certifiably bonkers

Yeah but have you SEEN the driving tests around here? Drive around the block, merge onto a highway, exit the highway (1 exit later) back into a parking spot. Thank-you very much, you get 97%.

I think it's Sweden where you have to have a first aid course before even attempting the driving test. And when you take the test, you don't get to park a geo metro in the equivalent of a double wide handicapped spot. You get maybe 20cm on each side of the car and you have to squeeze into that.

Change the tests and watch the failure rate skyrocket. The ones who pass will truly know how to drive though.

Young drivers do get in the most fatal accidents.

Speaking of drivers' tests, why aren't there levels of license endorsement needed for driving different power and size levels of cars? In the extreme, why is the same license that qualifies one to drive a Chevy Aveo or similar rationally sized car a qualification to drive a Ford Excursion or BMW Z3? If you need a special endorsement to drive a motorcycle, where you usually can only toast yourself in a wreck, why not to drive bigger more powerful cars that can empower you to kill dozens? Just asking...........

Speaking of drivers' tests, why aren't there levels of license endorsement needed for driving different power and size levels of cars? In the extreme, why is the same license that qualifies one to drive a Chevy Aveo or similar rationally sized car a qualification to drive a Ford Excursion or BMW Z3? If you need a special endorsement to drive a motorcycle, where you usually can only toast yourself in a wreck, why not to drive bigger more powerful cars that can empower you to kill dozens? Just asking...........

Good point. Make it based on engine size. This would put all the road monsters into their own "heavy" category.

You should be able to back that into a parking spot using the side mirrors only. Most would fail that one right there.

dont stereotype...I've seen businessmen guys and soccer moms GLUED to their cellphones during rush hour traffic 5pm driving like maniacs.
.

Hahaha. Rush hour traffic? Driving like maniacs?

Rush hour (or rush day, as we have in LA), is performed at slow speeds. Probably the best time to use a phone while driving! :D

Now let's get rid of those drivers' window with the dark tint...

It's a start, but I do have reservations about only "teens" being banned. Perhaps this will lead to more though? Let's all hope!

... Brad

[QUOTE=1ply;5300811]
I think it's Sweden where you have to have a first aid course before even attempting the driving test. [QUOTE]

Interesting...

In CA, I had to take and pass a semester-long first aid course before I was allowed to take driver training. That's when we took it in high school...c1972.

...but I don't recall that my sons had to take first aid before their driver training (which is not in HS any more, you have to go to a private company).

Fortunately, they got first aid and CPR training in Scouts...

Well, we also need to ban putting on lipstick while driving, drinking bottled water while driving, tuning the radio while driving, conversing with a passenger while driving, looking at yourself in the rearview mirror while driving, munching on a BigMac while driving, and pretty much everything else while driving. Because what this country needs is lots more laws governing our lives to the smallest detail, even though there aren't enough cops to enforce even the general laws like "Don't drive while distracted".

Because what this country needs is lots more laws governing our lives to the smallest detail, even though there aren't enough cops to enforce even the general laws like "Don't drive while distracted".

No, we just need a minimum of GOOD laws. This (banning cell phones) is an example of a GOOD law.

If driving while yapping on the cell phone is the same as driving drunk, which most studies have shown to be true, do you then support the repeal of DUI laws? Please just pull over if you have to make a call. That little bit of courtesy would have saved the lives of 2 great friends of mine. :(

... Brad

Well, we also need to ban putting on lipstick while driving, drinking bottled water while driving, tuning the radio while driving, conversing with a passenger while driving, looking at yourself in the rearview mirror while driving, munching on a BigMac while driving, and pretty much everything else while driving.

In addtion to what BAC has said, in my direct observations text messaging is far more distracting/engrossing than these activities you list above. People texting often get 'lost' in the activity to a level one just doesn't see when taking a sip from a bottle or a munch from a burger.

Al

Well, we also need to ban putting on lipstick while driving, drinking bottled water while driving, tuning the radio while driving, conversing with a passenger while driving, looking at yourself in the rearview mirror while driving, munching on a BigMac while driving, and pretty much everything else while driving. Because what this country needs is lots more laws governing our lives to the smallest detail, even though there aren't enough cops to enforce even the general laws like "Don't drive while distracted".

I agree more laws!!!!!!
Who needs liberty?

The point is that driving distracted is already illegal.

And before this takes the typical A&S "let's make it personal" turn, I HATE cell phones and don't own one.

The point is that driving distracted is already illegal.

And before this takes the typical A&S "let's make it personal" turn, I HATE cell phones and don't own one.

I own one and I drive with one but I wont say it's not distracting.

Hell I've been more distracted talking to someone else in the car

Maybe even moreso if I try to read the paper while on the way to work.

I think it's pretty individual. As a paramedic I often found myself on the phone with the hospital, on the radio with dispatch, a Thomas guide in my lap, and sirens blasting in my ears, while driving around at 90 MPH. This was certainly distracting, but I still managed to pay attention to the road. This is not meant to make me out to be some kind of superdriver, but to point out that some folks are capable of multitasking better than others. For every cell-gabbing idiot I see doing 25 in a 50 zone and drifting into other lanes, there are sure to be dozens of others who are capable of having a quick, needed conversation while still driving safely.

I can't find AZ laws about distracted driving. What keywords should I search for?
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ArizonaRevisedStatutes.asp?Title=28

I did find this:
"28-963. Television prohibition
A person shall not drive a motor vehicle equipped with a television viewer or screen or any other means of visually receiving a television broadcast that is either:
1. Located in the motor vehicle at any point forward of the back of the driver's seat.
2. Visible, directly or indirectly, to the driver while operating the motor vehicle. "

I don't know. The new cell phone law concerns California, where "distracted driving" is already a ticketable offense.

I don't know. The new cell phone law concerns California, where "distracted driving" is already a ticketable offense.

Of course, but there is a (US) statewide momentum gaining for laws like this. Doesn't make sense to start a thread about each and every state.

Can you provide the text of the CA distracted driving law?

Al

Why not take this entire thread and post it in the car-bashing/motorist-sterotypes-loathing forum where it belongs? It certainly has nothing to do with bicycling safety or advocacy.

Why not take this entire thread and post it in the car-bashing/motorist-sterotypes-loathing forum where it belongs? It certainly has nothing to do with bicycling safety or advocacy.

It does have to do with road user/driver safety. It is not as you point out an issue unique to cyclists. In fact the biggest push for new laws in this area is coming from motor vehicle drivers. Given this, bicycling advocacy need not make this a priority and/or expend much energy on it as a bicycling advocacy issue.

Al

ovoleg, I still say it's teen drivers that you gotta watch out for the most. That's what I observe around here every day anyway.

Why do we need new laws? Don't we already have laws that say if you cause an accident because of negligence then you are at fault and deserve punishment? Isn't killing someone with a vehicle by your negligence a clear cut manslaughter?

These are somewhat rhetorical questions as I know there are plenty of examples where these laws aren't followed by prosecution and law enforcement; I guess what I'm saying is, why don't our legislatures just tell prosecutors and law enforcement to enforce laws the way they are written. Stop allowing for consideration of things like "how torn up" over the incident the criminal is and other such silliness.

ovoleg, I still say it's teen drivers that you gotta watch out for the most. That's what I observe around here every day anyway.

Great logic

Great logic

I don't know about the logic, but the 'driver involved in fatality' data supports this for 17 and under drivers.

Al

I don't really know what Ovoleg's problem is, but I'm sure he really knows what he is talking about.:rolleyes:

Ovoleg's problem seems to be that he drives while talking on the cellphone and doesn't like being told it's dangerous.

We had a girl here in CO. die when she smashed into the back of a trash truck while texting. Not good. I agree with this law.