Ugh. No reasonable suspicion that a law is being broken–just pulled over, “Your papers, please…and are you buckled?”
Franklin, Paine, et. al. are spinning in their graves.
Sounds like the same law they have in NYS.
And I’ve seen people being pulled over who were using their cell phones. If the cop sees you using your phone they’ll pull you over. It’s the same if they see you drinking a beer.
@Triedaq "I was rewarded with a free traveling mug…"
LOL, that says it all ! Cars have so many drink holders you wonder whether Pepsi or Starbucks were part of the design team. Caffeine overload in morning rush hour. If that isn’t a recipe for “road rage”…
"Franklin, Paine, et. al. are spinning in their graves "
And here I thought our founding fathers didn’t have the “privy” of driving cars on undivided two lane roads with closing speeds of over 110 mph ( sum of 55 plus 55) mere feet from one another. I learn something new every day.
Laws like this have the best intentions, but fail to address the real problem. It doesn’t matter why you’re driving like an idiot. It only matters that you’re driving like an idiot. So make driving like an idiot illegal, and that will capture all of the problems under one umbrella.
As it stands now, I get a big fine if I hold a cell phone and drive perfectly, but a minor infraction if I hold a cheeseburger in one hand, a soda in the other, drive with my knees, and weave back and forth between 2 lanes.
That strikes me as stupid.
unreasonable search of a carriage, or a car, what s the difference?
Some people have trouble generalizing, @wesw. Reasonable suspicion that a law is being broken is supposed the minimum legal standard for pulling somebody over.
@shadowfax - If you make driving like an idiot illegal then you will solve all of our traffic problems since the vast majority of drivers I have seen lately would be doomed under the new law.
@bloody_knuckles That’s the general idea, yes. I’m tired of cops targeting specific features of moronic driving like speeding, cell phones, even DWI. Pull over everyone who’s driving like a moron even if they don’t have a cell phone, aren’t speeding, and aren’t toasting you with a can of beer. I’ve personally done ridealongs with cops who pulled someone over for weaving all over, administered a field DWI test, the guy passed, and they let him go. Why?! He was still driving like a dangerous idiot! The pedestrian he runs over and kills isn’t going to care whether he was drunk or not - the guy’s still just as dead.
I can see it now:
Judge; "So what is the next case…driving like a moron ? That will be a fine of $250. Driving like an idiot is $500 and just being indiscriminately dumb without evil intent, just $50. So, how does the jury find the accused ? "
Jury; " We don’t know your honor. We are all ‘dumbfounded’ by the whole idea. "
Judge: " in that case, each jury member is fined $50"
^Try “distracted driving,” dag. Should be punishable, as is, irrespective of why you’re distracted. “Too busy eating a ham sandwich” ought to be the same as “too busy talking on a phone (that must be grasped to use).”
Special laws that exacerbate the penalty associated with distracted driving, depending on the minutia of why you were distracted, are asinine.
Nice strawman, though!
Mean, in our state that (distracted driving) is on the books. Driving to endanger used to be an all inclusive term that could be used for years. In reality I was just making light of the “phraseology” when there are times behavior is really the only thing that can be punished.
I have a real problem pulling people over for what is perceived to be the faulty actions of the driver ( holding a cell phone) when in reality, it’s how the car is driven. When a cop pulls a car over, the explanation has to be exactly relative to the car’s behavior to have a chance of passing muster. The wheels passed the center line “x number of times in y number of minutes” has a lot better chance of rationalizing pulling someone over then “driving like an idiot” or holding a coffee latte in the left hand while negotiating a corner. No one, IMHO, should get pulled over who successfully shows responsible driving regardless of what we “think” the driver might be doing. It becomes a Pandora’s box otherwise.
Studies have repeatedly shown that conversations with a person far away take more of your brain than if the person is nearby. Probably because you involuntarily put yourself into a space with the person you’re talking to. I know I do it. If I know where they’re calling from I’m visualising being in that space. If I don’t we seem to occupy an indefinite space that is neither here nor there. Someone sitting right next to me is slightly distracting, but I’m used to talking to people I’m not facing. It’s only seriously distracting if they talk with their hands.
It would be interesting to see what a guy at work would do when he’s driving a car and his girlfriend/wife isn’t there with him.
He’s constantly on his phone all day at work. He’s texting his gf/wife, who works on a different line not 100 feet from our line. She even comes over to visit him on breaks and when she can get away from her line. Not 2 minutes after she is gone, he’s back on his phone texting her again.
We have a no cell phone policy at work, but, like the rules of the road, it gets violated all the time.
“He’s constantly on his phone all day at work. He’s texting his gf/wife, who works on a different line not 100 feet from our line. She even comes over to visit him on breaks and when she can get away from her line. Not 2 minutes after she is gone, he’s back on his phone texting her again.”
Many years ago, I had a co-worker who spent–probably–at least 1/3 of each work day on the phone with her husband. As the others in the office often puzzled, “What could they possibly find to talk about when they get home?”
Seriously–If you have spent much of your day talking with or texting your gf/bf/wife/husband, I have to assume that there is a lot of silence in the house after getting home. And, of course, this also leads to the inevitable question of how good a job somebody is doing if they spend so much work time on personal calls.
Studies have repeatedly shown that conversations with a person far away take more of your brain than if the person is nearby.
Can you link to this, @MarkM?
It’s an interesting concept, and I’d actually consider revising my opinion that “cellphone conversation = f2f conversation” if the evidence is compelling. Of course, I’d counter that a cell phone allows me to schedule the conversation for low-workload moments, whereas a f2f conversation happens whenever the yum-yum in the passenger seat decides to open her mouth.
VDC: I can almost picture them sitting on the couch beside each other texting one another.
I also know of a couple out there that not only work on the same line, but also work in the same area all day everyday.
with ‘muscle memory’ and knowing where your mouth is, and where the cup holder is, shouldn’t be a problem drinking a cup of coffee as it doesn’t need the attention a cell call does.