California's upcoming 1-2-punch against distracted driving [Telecom]

" Calif bill boosts fines for illegal cell phone use " " Cell phones are causing fewer accidents since California " outlawed the use of handheld devices behind the wheel, but " the senator behind the law says too many people are still " driving distracted. " " A bill by Sen. Joe Simitian would create a bigger deterrent " to keep drivers from texting or using a cell phone without " a handsfree device. " " "While I think compliance is pretty good, there's room to " save even more lives and avoid even more collisions," said " Simitian, D-Palo Alto.

{article continues at following URL}

and

" A Cellphone Fine, Billed as Small, Is No Longer That " " What started as a quest for safer driving could soon turn " into a new revenue stream worth tens of millions of dollars " to state and local governments. A bill working its way " through Sacramento could sharply increase the penalties for " driving while using a handheld cellphone, fines that some say " are already deceptively higher than had been expected. " " The ban was instituted in July 2008, and six months later, " texting while driving was similarly prohibited. Only hands- " free talking is now allowed. " " Senator Joe Simitian, Democrat of Palo Alto, wrote both bills, " which include modest fines of $20 for a first offense and " $50 for the second. Mr. Simitian said the low penalties made " it possible to get the measures passed. " " "It was easier than it would have been had the fines been " higher," he said. " " Easy? Even with the low fines, it took six years. " " But as those who stood before Judge Susan J. Greenberg in the " San Mateo County courthouse one day last week learned, the " fine was never just $20. Additional assessments on behalf of " courts, cities and counties multiply the costs of traffic " tickets by $26 for every $10 of the base fine. With other " fees, the total swells to $114 to $143 for a first offense. " " The California Highway Patrol issued 137,056 cellphone " citations in 2009. Analysts say counties and municipalities " traditionally issue an equal number, bringing the total to " nearly 275,000 ? a possible $31 million collected.

{article continues at following URL}

Reply to
Thad Floryan
Loading thread data ...

The only way to stop usage of cell phones by drivers while holding them is to increase the fines to a few thousand dollars, anything under that will have no effect. I see hundreds of people each day using phones as I drive around. I stay as far as I can from them.

-- The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) 2010 I Kill Spammers, Inc., A Rot in Hell. Co.

Reply to
Steven

Why not take their car away from them, revoke their license, and give them 10 years in prison?

Reply to
Sam Spade

Give the police more reasons to take cars and you will have some agencies setting up road blocks and taking every car that comes through with a cell phone on board even if it not in use. And I spend 2o plus years as a Reserve Sheriff. Revoking the drivers license is fine with me, 10 years in Prison would have to make it a Felony.

Reply to
Steven

Dunno about 10 years, but treating it ("it" = distracted driving texting or using a cellphone) as a felony makes perfect sense given the studies which show such distracted driving exhibiting properties akin to DUI (alcohol or drugs).

What bothers me more is how DUI is frequently handed here in California as hardly more than a speeding violation in that repeat offenders (recividists) are allowed to continue driving after the arrest and conviction -- it's just a matter of time before their luck runs out and *B*A*M* a fatal accident. I see far too often in the local papers where some DUIers are reported to have had 10+ prior DUI convictions. It's been awhile so my memory is fuzzy on this, but when I drove in Europe (mostly Germany and France) there was only one chance: get caught DUI and never, ever be able to drive again. We need that level of enforcement and sentencing everywhere.

Reply to
Thad Floryan

This is getting way off subject now.

I have a car hands free, but don't use it while driving.

I agree is should be treated the same as a DUI, that is if it cause injury; a few years ago a driver was convicted because he ran into a van full of kids, he did get 10 years.

Some 40 years ago a girl friend was killed by a drunk driver who had at least 10 DUIs', he kept on getting slapped on the hand for it. I got involved because she was had my service card in her purse, responding units thought she was a wife of a police officer. This guy still got off with just under a year in jail, by the way, the judge who heard the case had a bright red nose, one guess what his problem was? I did everything I could to get him off the bench, he died a couple of years later.

We don't need more laws we need for them to be inforced.

Reply to
Steven

On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:20:22 -0700, Thad Floryan wrote: ........

I like the place that has traffic fines as a proportion of annual income.

IIRC a Nokia big-wig got caught a few years ago and was find hundreds of thousands of dollars for a traffic offence under this method.

-- Regards, David.

David Clayton Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a measure of how many questions you have.

Reply to
David Clayton

A few hours in lockup would scare an otherwise law-abiding citizen into not doing it again.

Reply to
Adam H. Kerman

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.