It includes stiffer penalties for those on probationary and junior licenses, but your point is valid, nobody can successfully text and drive without distraction regardless of age.
It can't merely penalize younger drivers just because the numbers of people who text skews younger right now. Those demos will shift into the older age groups as time goes on and people will become more tech-savvy. It makes no sense to make a law that will be outdated in 5 years. I voted no for that reason--everyone needs to be ticketed irregardless of age.
I am afraid that the Genie has been let out of the bottle and it is too late. Texting is so ingrained into people's brains, the death penalty would not stop drivers from texting while driving. The only thing that will stop this now is for the auto manufactures to install a electronic device that will disable this function while the car is running.
One could argue that drinking is so ingrained into people's habits that no penalty of any sort would keep people from drinking and driving.
But that would be a very poor argument.
Texting has been shown to detract from attention to the road, regardless of how ingrained it is into people's habits - and when you pull out onto the road, you have tacitly agreed to keep as much control of that 2,500+ pound missile as possible. Penalize any who text (or email, etc) while driving. Penalize those on probation appropriately.
I've found that there are two things that (usually) make people 'behave'. 1) Their freedom, and 2) Their money.
Mr. Hunt suggested that technology be used to disable the TWD (texting-while-driving). That's all well & fine, but I'm not sure how the vehicle will distinguish between a driver texting and a passenger texting (which should NOT be a crime). Who know's? We've come a long way in technology, so possibly there is a way.
Until that time, I also believe that, if the consequences are harsh enough, texting-while-driving can be reduced. Please note: I said reduced, not eliminated. No matter what you do, there will always be someone to do the wrong thing.
Because of DWI laws, and sentences for same, I honestly believe that there are LESS people out there driving drunk (than there would have been, if those laws/sentences didn't exist). But, as we all know, people still do it. We have 360-million people out there, so that leaves a lot of room for stupidity/uncaring.
When I started driving, 'muscle cars' were just coming to market. Bought one myself. And had a good time. But, somewhere in the back of my mind, I always KNEW that, should I get a ticket for speeding, I could always pay the fine. Sure, back then, a $50 fine was quite hurtful, and (just once) I got a speeding fine of $150. That was 8 days of 'take-home' pay for me (and my insurance got cancelled, too). That's when I decided it wasn't worth it to speed. My 'lifestyle/behavior' wasn't sustainable - not at THAT rate.
Back to texting. If you make the fine 'unsustainable', I honestly believe it will cut down on such behavior. What's the current fine for TWD? $75? Maybe $100, or even $150?
Try making the 1st offence $2000 (no plea bargaining, no reduction). 2nd offence, $5000 and 6-months in jail. 3rd and more, double each time. Think that might grab a LOT of people's attention? I do! Will it stop everybody? Of course not. But it will (I believe) REDUCE the problem.
LOL Ed. maybe you have an idea there to make you the next Batavia Millionaire.... Develop a device that parents can put into a car that jams cell phone signals while the car is in gear. Mecanics can install them for parents and boom. Instant piece of mind LOL (at least for that particular danger) I can see it being the next great infomercial on Ion.... Cha Ching
Hello Ed, I agree with your statement "No matter what you do, there will always be someone to do the wrong thing." I like your fine ideas but, it will be under scrutiny and challenged in court by those oh so special people, a.k.a. lawyers. Look at the traffic light cameras in Rochester, NY. There is a lawyer who is trying to sue the City and State saying the cameras are unconstitutional (Again another bogus constitutional claim). He also claims that, the owner of the vehicle is unjustly served with a traffic violation ticket when someone else is operating their vehicle. What happen is this lawyer's son was operating daddy's vehicle and ran a red light at an intersection and daddy was issued the ticket as the owner. If I was the father I would make my child pay the fine and let that be a lesson. Even the lawyer acknowledged that, the tickets put no points or raises your insurance rates and that it is just a $50 fine. This lawyer claim that, the issue has to do with the vehicle and not the operator. Which I view it as the operator since; the operator controls the vehicle through the red light. Unless the car is like Inspector Gadget? Go Go Car, run red light!
The sad fact is that, most people who text and drive think that, they are too good of a driver and/or it will never happen to them. People are always in a hurry and even I am guilty of being hurry. How many times have you travel down a road no one behind you but, some asshole coming off a side street runs the stop sign and pulls in front of you? They may not cause you to lock your brakes but, definitely causes you press hard on your brakes to avoid an accident. Then sometimes that, individual also, goes slower than the speed limit. I witness the other day a minivan traveling south on RTE 237 run the stop sign and flashing red light at the intersection of RTE 33. He caused a vehicle traveling east on 33 to lock their brakes and to swerve to avoid a collision. Fortunately for that driver I was slowing to turn south on 237 so, they had space to maneuver. I followed the van and reported the driver since; he kept drifting over the center line. Do not know the outcome but, it was an elderly male (70ish). There is a song out that states, "I am in hurry to get things done. Oh I rush and rush until life is no fun! I think that best describes today's drivers.
There's too much emphasis on texting while driving. I see more people driving like sh*t for no reason at all than I do people driving like sh*t because they're texting or yakking on the phone. Yeah, texting while driving can be dangerous, but there are a lot more people on the road that just plain can't drive.
John: Traffic light cameras serve only one purpose: Revenue Generation. Check out the numerous and ubiquitous stories of municipalities and their contractors SHORTENING the length of yellow lights to increase the take.
Doug: Holding the individual responsible for the consequences of their freely chosen behavior is reactionary and possibly a violation of the "ist" and "ism" and "ic" protocols put in place by our betters. Sorry to cause you to lose sleep, but this is progressive america and you need to be sensitive to the feelings of the Elite.
"“It’s not okay for people to do this,” Cuomo said at the bill signing in Manhattan. “It’s not fun; it’s not cool. If you’re in a car with someone who’s talking the cellphone or texting, you have to let them know it’s not okay.”"
This is what passes for thoughtful and intelligent argument in support of a bit of legislation in this day and age?
If a member of prince andrew's staff is reading, please pass this thought along:
Nobody texts, calls, writes, draws, talks, does their make-up, builds a ship in a bottle, performs heart surgery, reads the paper, eats breakfast, clips their toenails, bathes the cat or does anything bloody else while driving because it is "cool" or "fun".
They do it because they THINK it is MORE important than piloting the two tons of steel and plastic which is under their supervision and direction. Address THAT, you dumb ass... You might save a life or a hundred.
prince andrew's voice is like nails on a blackboard to begin with, but when, in addition, he decides to sound like Mr. Mackey (Drugs are bad, mKay..), or any other idiotic teacher from your childhood who was trying to be "real" and "with it", I just feel like puking.
This phraseology just bothers me more and more as I think about it. Does being "cool" and "fun" drive HIS decisions and actions to the point where he is irresponsible and dangerous to the Rights of others?
I gotta tell ya', Doug. I know you got Kyle's sarcasm in the first post, but that comeback, *Knucklebump*, was royal. I might have to plagarize that (if I can remember it for more than a day - old age, you know?).
Why would this texting ban
Why would this texting ban just target YOUNG drivers? I voted NO only because it should target ALL drivers regardless of age.
It includes stiffer penalties
It includes stiffer penalties for those on probationary and junior licenses, but your point is valid, nobody can successfully text and drive without distraction regardless of age.
It should target ALL drivers
It should target ALL drivers for texting, not just the younglings!!
It can't merely penalize
It can't merely penalize younger drivers just because the numbers of people who text skews younger right now. Those demos will shift into the older age groups as time goes on and people will become more tech-savvy. It makes no sense to make a law that will be outdated in 5 years. I voted no for that reason--everyone needs to be ticketed irregardless of age.
I am afraid that the Genie
I am afraid that the Genie has been let out of the bottle and it is too late. Texting is so ingrained into people's brains, the death penalty would not stop drivers from texting while driving. The only thing that will stop this now is for the auto manufactures to install a electronic device that will disable this function while the car is running.
One could argue that drinking
One could argue that drinking is so ingrained into people's habits that no penalty of any sort would keep people from drinking and driving.
But that would be a very poor argument.
Texting has been shown to detract from attention to the road, regardless of how ingrained it is into people's habits - and when you pull out onto the road, you have tacitly agreed to keep as much control of that 2,500+ pound missile as possible. Penalize any who text (or email, etc) while driving. Penalize those on probation appropriately.
I've found that there are two
I've found that there are two things that (usually) make people 'behave'. 1) Their freedom, and 2) Their money.
Mr. Hunt suggested that technology be used to disable the TWD (texting-while-driving). That's all well & fine, but I'm not sure how the vehicle will distinguish between a driver texting and a passenger texting (which should NOT be a crime). Who know's? We've come a long way in technology, so possibly there is a way.
Until that time, I also believe that, if the consequences are harsh enough, texting-while-driving can be reduced. Please note: I said reduced, not eliminated. No matter what you do, there will always be someone to do the wrong thing.
Because of DWI laws, and sentences for same, I honestly believe that there are LESS people out there driving drunk (than there would have been, if those laws/sentences didn't exist). But, as we all know, people still do it. We have 360-million people out there, so that leaves a lot of room for stupidity/uncaring.
When I started driving, 'muscle cars' were just coming to market. Bought one myself. And had a good time. But, somewhere in the back of my mind, I always KNEW that, should I get a ticket for speeding, I could always pay the fine. Sure, back then, a $50 fine was quite hurtful, and (just once) I got a speeding fine of $150. That was 8 days of 'take-home' pay for me (and my insurance got cancelled, too). That's when I decided it wasn't worth it to speed. My 'lifestyle/behavior' wasn't sustainable - not at THAT rate.
Back to texting. If you make the fine 'unsustainable', I honestly believe it will cut down on such behavior. What's the current fine for TWD? $75? Maybe $100, or even $150?
Try making the 1st offence $2000 (no plea bargaining, no reduction). 2nd offence, $5000 and 6-months in jail. 3rd and more, double each time. Think that might grab a LOT of people's attention? I do! Will it stop everybody? Of course not. But it will (I believe) REDUCE the problem.
LOL Ed. maybe you have an
LOL Ed. maybe you have an idea there to make you the next Batavia Millionaire.... Develop a device that parents can put into a car that jams cell phone signals while the car is in gear. Mecanics can install them for parents and boom. Instant piece of mind LOL (at least for that particular danger) I can see it being the next great infomercial on Ion.... Cha Ching
Hello Ed, I agree with your
Hello Ed, I agree with your statement "No matter what you do, there will always be someone to do the wrong thing." I like your fine ideas but, it will be under scrutiny and challenged in court by those oh so special people, a.k.a. lawyers. Look at the traffic light cameras in Rochester, NY. There is a lawyer who is trying to sue the City and State saying the cameras are unconstitutional (Again another bogus constitutional claim). He also claims that, the owner of the vehicle is unjustly served with a traffic violation ticket when someone else is operating their vehicle. What happen is this lawyer's son was operating daddy's vehicle and ran a red light at an intersection and daddy was issued the ticket as the owner. If I was the father I would make my child pay the fine and let that be a lesson. Even the lawyer acknowledged that, the tickets put no points or raises your insurance rates and that it is just a $50 fine. This lawyer claim that, the issue has to do with the vehicle and not the operator. Which I view it as the operator since; the operator controls the vehicle through the red light. Unless the car is like Inspector Gadget? Go Go Car, run red light!
The sad fact is that, most people who text and drive think that, they are too good of a driver and/or it will never happen to them. People are always in a hurry and even I am guilty of being hurry. How many times have you travel down a road no one behind you but, some asshole coming off a side street runs the stop sign and pulls in front of you? They may not cause you to lock your brakes but, definitely causes you press hard on your brakes to avoid an accident. Then sometimes that, individual also, goes slower than the speed limit. I witness the other day a minivan traveling south on RTE 237 run the stop sign and flashing red light at the intersection of RTE 33. He caused a vehicle traveling east on 33 to lock their brakes and to swerve to avoid a collision. Fortunately for that driver I was slowing to turn south on 237 so, they had space to maneuver. I followed the van and reported the driver since; he kept drifting over the center line. Do not know the outcome but, it was an elderly male (70ish). There is a song out that states, "I am in hurry to get things done. Oh I rush and rush until life is no fun! I think that best describes today's drivers.
There's too much emphasis on
There's too much emphasis on texting while driving. I see more people driving like sh*t for no reason at all than I do people driving like sh*t because they're texting or yakking on the phone. Yeah, texting while driving can be dangerous, but there are a lot more people on the road that just plain can't drive.
John: Traffic light cameras
John: Traffic light cameras serve only one purpose: Revenue Generation. Check out the numerous and ubiquitous stories of municipalities and their contractors SHORTENING the length of yellow lights to increase the take.
Doug: Holding the individual responsible for the consequences of their freely chosen behavior is reactionary and possibly a violation of the "ist" and "ism" and "ic" protocols put in place by our betters. Sorry to cause you to lose sleep, but this is progressive america and you need to be sensitive to the feelings of the Elite.
*Knuckle Bump*
*Knuckle Bump*
Oh yeah well I got just one
Oh yeah well I got just one thing to say to you all,
JD shots and peanutbutter cookies.....
carry on.
"“It’s not okay for people to
"“It’s not okay for people to do this,” Cuomo said at the bill signing in Manhattan. “It’s not fun; it’s not cool. If you’re in a car with someone who’s talking the cellphone or texting, you have to let them know it’s not okay.”"
This is what passes for thoughtful and intelligent argument in support of a bit of legislation in this day and age?
If a member of prince andrew's staff is reading, please pass this thought along:
Nobody texts, calls, writes, draws, talks, does their make-up, builds a ship in a bottle, performs heart surgery, reads the paper, eats breakfast, clips their toenails, bathes the cat or does anything bloody else while driving because it is "cool" or "fun".
They do it because they THINK it is MORE important than piloting the two tons of steel and plastic which is under their supervision and direction. Address THAT, you dumb ass... You might save a life or a hundred.
prince andrew's voice is like nails on a blackboard to begin with, but when, in addition, he decides to sound like Mr. Mackey (Drugs are bad, mKay..), or any other idiotic teacher from your childhood who was trying to be "real" and "with it", I just feel like puking.
“It’s not fun; it’s not
“It’s not fun; it’s not cool."
This phraseology just bothers me more and more as I think about it. Does being "cool" and "fun" drive HIS decisions and actions to the point where he is irresponsible and dangerous to the Rights of others?
Is this some sort of projection on his part?
I gotta tell ya', Doug. I
I gotta tell ya', Doug. I know you got Kyle's sarcasm in the first post, but that comeback, *Knucklebump*, was royal. I might have to plagarize that (if I can remember it for more than a day - old age, you know?).