CA cell phone law
- Thread starter Tom
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
caltex
Well-known member
I recall reading in the local California paper the other day where although it would be illegal for the under 18 folks to talk on their phones it wasn't illegal to text. According to the website you referenced, they can't text either. I hope that's the case.
I also read where they were speculating that if you caused a fatal accident while using the phone illegally, you could be charged with manslaughter. That should get everyone's attention.
I also read where they were speculating that if you caused a fatal accident while using the phone illegally, you could be charged with manslaughter. That should get everyone's attention.
JerArdra
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2005
- Posts
- 1,814
Tom,
For my own safety from someone else hitting me I am pleased with the law. Several studies have shown that using a cellphone while driving is close to DUI. I hope Nevada does it too.
JerryF
For my own safety from someone else hitting me I am pleased with the law. Several studies have shown that using a cellphone while driving is close to DUI. I hope Nevada does it too.
JerryF
papahog
Well-known member
I have hands free Bluetooth enabled Garmin GPS. Talking on it is almost as bad as using a hand held.
Ron
Moderator Emeritus
I also like the cell phone law and would like to see it enacted in all states. However it isn't going to do much good unless they strongly enforce the law. DWI is a good example of lack of enforcement. Here in Montana there are cases where drunks are up on DWI charges for the 10th time and as far as I am concerned that is ten time too many.
Just last March and 86 year old lady was hit and killed while walking in a cross walk with a green light. I have heard from two witnesses that the lady driving the truck that hit her was talking on the cell phone and went around the corner like she was going to the races. No information has been released as to what charges, if any, was filed nor has the name of the driver that hit her been released. Sad situation.
Just last March and 86 year old lady was hit and killed while walking in a cross walk with a green light. I have heard from two witnesses that the lady driving the truck that hit her was talking on the cell phone and went around the corner like she was going to the races. No information has been released as to what charges, if any, was filed nor has the name of the driver that hit her been released. Sad situation.
OP
OP
Tom
Administrator
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Posts
- 51,932
Ron,
Something I see regularly at the local elementary school is young moms dropping off their kids, then driving out of the school parking lot without even slowing down, while talking on their cell phone. Although I'm usually driving slow past the school, I've still had to brake to avoid a collision with one of the "concerned parents".
Something I see regularly at the local elementary school is young moms dropping off their kids, then driving out of the school parking lot without even slowing down, while talking on their cell phone. Although I'm usually driving slow past the school, I've still had to brake to avoid a collision with one of the "concerned parents".
bross
Well-known member
Here in New Jersey it costs you $180.00 if you get caught using a cell phone while driving. It started out as a secondary offense that you could only be cited for if you were stopped for something else, but now they can pull you over and cite you if they see you. Its helped a lot on the highways. You don't see near as many people doing stupid things while driving and talking on the phone. For out of staters that aren't familiar with the law it's a real surprise when they get pulled over right at the state line toll both. Welcome to the garden state. 
Ron
Moderator Emeritus
Tom said:
No doubt in my mind that cell phone use while driving is NOT a good mix and should not be allowed. I think a $200 fine for first offense would be reasonable with more than double that for second offense and so on.
Alaskansnowbirds
Site Team
I guess I'm in the minority here but I think these laws are nothing more than something put into law so some politician can pat him/her self on the back and say see what I did.
If there is a law against holding a cell phone in your hand, why isn't there a law against holding anything else in your hand while driving?
It isn't the fact that you are holding something in your hand that is dangerous. It's the fact that your MIND isn't on your driving. It is just as dangerous talking on a hands free cell phone as it is talking on a hand held cell phone.
There is only one way to stop this. If the phone is moving more than say 10mph, the GPS in the phone shuts it off. That would go over like a lead balloon.
If there is a law against holding a cell phone in your hand, why isn't there a law against holding anything else in your hand while driving?
It isn't the fact that you are holding something in your hand that is dangerous. It's the fact that your MIND isn't on your driving. It is just as dangerous talking on a hands free cell phone as it is talking on a hand held cell phone.
There is only one way to stop this. If the phone is moving more than say 10mph, the GPS in the phone shuts it off. That would go over like a lead balloon.
Carl L
Moderator Emeritus
A person picks up a cell phone, thereby removing one hand from the steering wheel. Now the iijit dials a number on the phone, thereby removing his/her eyes from the road and concentrates on a fiddly task for at least few seconds.: one second at 30 mph is 44 feet. Say 7 seconds to dial a 10 digit number (I timed it). That is 308 feet without looking at the road -- make that 616 feet at 60 mph.
Now the ijit starts ratchet jawing on the phone. Precisely how much conscious attention is being given to the task of driving, especially in a city with traffic coming at you from all directions. I was damn near taken out by such an ijit in a Escalade in a shopping center parking lot who was ratchet jawing on a cell phone one-handng it on La Cienega Blvd just north of Venice Blvd, possibly the worst traffic knot on the west side of Los Angeles.
Not a moment too soon in my book.
Now the ijit starts ratchet jawing on the phone. Precisely how much conscious attention is being given to the task of driving, especially in a city with traffic coming at you from all directions. I was damn near taken out by such an ijit in a Escalade in a shopping center parking lot who was ratchet jawing on a cell phone one-handng it on La Cienega Blvd just north of Venice Blvd, possibly the worst traffic knot on the west side of Los Angeles.
Not a moment too soon in my book.
Buddy Tott
Well-known member
Strangely I agree with Alaskasnowbird's post...kinda.
IMO I would like anything and everything which distracts the driver from paying 100% attention to the task on hand - driving - to be a violation. I especially like the UK driving regulation of DWOC - Driving without (due) care and attention. Sure it's a catchall and many mortorists were / are convicted, following an accident, when there is insufficient evidence for any other violation accept HUA (Head up..you know where) i.e looking at a map, reading, picking something up off the floor, slapping the kids in the back seat etc. It's often not enforced prior to any collision unless it's obvious or flagrant but if inattention is the proximate cause of the accident and you are convicted, it goes on your driving and insurance record as 'points'. Just like in the U.S. - too many points and driving priviliges are withheld.
BT
IMO I would like anything and everything which distracts the driver from paying 100% attention to the task on hand - driving - to be a violation. I especially like the UK driving regulation of DWOC - Driving without (due) care and attention. Sure it's a catchall and many mortorists were / are convicted, following an accident, when there is insufficient evidence for any other violation accept HUA (Head up..you know where) i.e looking at a map, reading, picking something up off the floor, slapping the kids in the back seat etc. It's often not enforced prior to any collision unless it's obvious or flagrant but if inattention is the proximate cause of the accident and you are convicted, it goes on your driving and insurance record as 'points'. Just like in the U.S. - too many points and driving priviliges are withheld.
BT
papahog
Well-known member
bross said:Here in New Jersey it costs you $180.00 if you get caught using a cell phone while driving. It started out as a secondary offense that you could only be cited for if you were stopped for something else, but now they can pull you over and cite you if they see you. Its helped a lot on the highways. You don't see near as many people doing stupid things while driving and talking on the phone. For out of staters that aren't familiar with the law it's a real surprise when they get pulled over right at the state line toll both. Welcome to the garden state.
I believe the NJ law refers to hand held cell phone usage, not all cell phone use as stated above. I think you probably mean hand held and just left that part out. The NJ law permits cell phone use as long as it is hands free. Correct me if I am wrong.
papahog
Well-known member
As I stated earlier the hands free unit that I have is as distracting as talking with a hand held. I have missed turns, stop signs and off ramps talking on my hands free device.
If I get a call now it is my practice to let it go to voice mail and check that at the next stop, rest area, fuel stop or just plain wide spot in the road to stop. But that is just me because I do not need a wreck, especially one that I caused.
If I get a call now it is my practice to let it go to voice mail and check that at the next stop, rest area, fuel stop or just plain wide spot in the road to stop. But that is just me because I do not need a wreck, especially one that I caused.
Ron
Moderator Emeritus
I generally do the same when driving. If the call wasn't important enough to leave a message then I may not even call back when stopped.
John From Detroit
Well-known member
There have been several studies done that show that when one is talking on a cell phone it is very very highly distracting to the driver.. I've seen people get "Very animated" when talking on the phone.. and your mind, when talking on the phone, is in a vary bad place as far as driving is concerned unless you are very disciplined mentally. Note. I'm not that disciplined and I'm very disciplined mentally.
Now by comparison talking on a 2-way radio is perhaps 10% as distracting.
Some studies suggest talking to the person next to you, or in the back seat, can be nearly as bad as talking on the cell phone
And other studies have shown hands free... Does not really help much.
Yet there are many folks out there who drive one handed (Thus loosing control) holding that phone like it was glued to their ear (Think Robin Williams at the beginning of the movie "Hook")
I have sent troopers to clean up many an incident that very likely would not have happened if the party in the driver's seat had not been paying more attention to the phone than to the road.
Now: That said; is this law a good one? I don't know. Will it make a difference? Perhaps in the state treasury but as far as traffic safety is concerned.. I doubt it. Do I use my cell phone while driving.... Not often, but yes.. In both hands free and hand held mode. However if it's an involved conservation.. I park first.
Now by comparison talking on a 2-way radio is perhaps 10% as distracting.
Some studies suggest talking to the person next to you, or in the back seat, can be nearly as bad as talking on the cell phone
And other studies have shown hands free... Does not really help much.
Yet there are many folks out there who drive one handed (Thus loosing control) holding that phone like it was glued to their ear (Think Robin Williams at the beginning of the movie "Hook")
I have sent troopers to clean up many an incident that very likely would not have happened if the party in the driver's seat had not been paying more attention to the phone than to the road.
Now: That said; is this law a good one? I don't know. Will it make a difference? Perhaps in the state treasury but as far as traffic safety is concerned.. I doubt it. Do I use my cell phone while driving.... Not often, but yes.. In both hands free and hand held mode. However if it's an involved conservation.. I park first.
Dave Stringham
Well-known member
I am anxious to see how much or often they inforce the new law.....I would expect that in the beginning they will be fairly gung ho over it and then of course if involement with a teenage driver another reason to pull them over and go through the curfew laws etc. I do support this law, its amazing how much people seem to be in la la land when talking on the phone and trying to drive.
Last year California enacted a law that said if your wipers are on you lights need to be on.....I see people all the time driving around without lights and pouring rain but never see any pulled over even if the police are in front of them.......I think that this is a great law but wasnt thought through particularly well because the police dont want to get out in the rain to write a ticket for you not having your lights on. It may have a more severe effect if in an accident and the police are out in the elements already.
Last year California enacted a law that said if your wipers are on you lights need to be on.....I see people all the time driving around without lights and pouring rain but never see any pulled over even if the police are in front of them.......I think that this is a great law but wasnt thought through particularly well because the police dont want to get out in the rain to write a ticket for you not having your lights on. It may have a more severe effect if in an accident and the police are out in the elements already.
Mike (ex-f-221)
Well-known member
We have that law in Germany for a few years. And I think, it's ok.
But: hands-free cell phone operation - which is allowed in Germany and will be allowed in California, as Tom said -, is not a solution. Why? Because not only dialing a number draws off the attention but also concentrating on a business call.
Sometimes I observe that I didn't know anything about the traffic of the last minute after talking hands-free with a cell phone.
But: hands-free cell phone operation - which is allowed in Germany and will be allowed in California, as Tom said -, is not a solution. Why? Because not only dialing a number draws off the attention but also concentrating on a business call.
Sometimes I observe that I didn't know anything about the traffic of the last minute after talking hands-free with a cell phone.
PancakeBill
Well-known member
John
I will often drive and have a microphone, but I am a trained amateur. 2m conversation is not distracting like a teen on a cellphone. (G)
Seriously, there is a difference, I have done both. I try not to use it much, and based on where I am I make judgements. 301 between work and home is a straight no traffic road. Rt 4 is not. Heavy traffic, less likely to take a call.
Thing is, if you ticket celluse, how about coffee use? How about CD changing use? How about a sandwich use? How about a kid talking in the back? Thre are so many distractions that I don't believe cell phone usage should be singled out. How about if there is an accident, check for usage, if there is, no insurance. Spilled coffee? distraction. Half eaten burger with mustard on the breath? Distraction. Half applied eye makeup? Distraction.
I will often drive and have a microphone, but I am a trained amateur. 2m conversation is not distracting like a teen on a cellphone. (G)
Seriously, there is a difference, I have done both. I try not to use it much, and based on where I am I make judgements. 301 between work and home is a straight no traffic road. Rt 4 is not. Heavy traffic, less likely to take a call.
Thing is, if you ticket celluse, how about coffee use? How about CD changing use? How about a sandwich use? How about a kid talking in the back? Thre are so many distractions that I don't believe cell phone usage should be singled out. How about if there is an accident, check for usage, if there is, no insurance. Spilled coffee? distraction. Half eaten burger with mustard on the breath? Distraction. Half applied eye makeup? Distraction.
John From Detroit
Well-known member
Bill, As I said a 2-way radio is perhaps 10% as distracting as a cell phone... Like you I've driven with a radio in the ride for a long long time, I'm used to it and it's part of the background tasks. If it distracts me at all it's gross navigation (IE: I miss my exit) Where as the cell phone can cause me to loose track of traffic around me.. Very dangerous.
That is the difference.
Even after 40 years of 2-way radio operation, multiple radios in some cases.. I find the cell phone way, way too distracting when I'm driving any but very short conservations.
Example of short conservation:
"Hello,, I'm on my way. See you in 30 minutes or less" {click}
That is the difference.
Even after 40 years of 2-way radio operation, multiple radios in some cases.. I find the cell phone way, way too distracting when I'm driving any but very short conservations.
Example of short conservation:
"Hello,, I'm on my way. See you in 30 minutes or less" {click}
carson
Well-known member
A short conversation is conservation of speech. ;D
