Keep this in mind when driving your RV in California, minding your own business, and your cell phone rings. The new law of the land is here! You'll still be able to rear end another car while typing a text message using both hands...you can still dial the cell phone while drifting from lane to lane, you can also lay your phone on your lap using it as a speaker phone...but don't for God's sake dare hold it to your ear! Because if the police spot you on their way to a cell phone caused accident, they'll stop long enough to issue you a citation. Because the $25.00 fine you may be hit with could quickly balloon up to $150.00 with additional fines and court levies! And as you may know, our State is nearly bankrupt thanks to "I'll balance the budget" Spendennegger, I mean Schwarzenegger!
This well thought out bill is thanks to State Sen. Joe Simitian (send your cards and letters.....) despite 5 surveys by insurance companies and experts stating that the actual act of talking on a cell phone is the #1 cause of distracted driver accidents...not dialing. And using the text messaging feature is currently approaching the #1 reason for accidents among 18 to 25 yo drivers! Oh well, yet another reason to really wonder about California's future!
The preceding is a rant from a 55 year old Native Californian resident, so I'm allowed to rant every 20 or 30 years or so!
Many states and Cities have this same law, even with higher fines. With todays $$$ crunch, expect this act as only the tip of the money iceberg. Chicago has the same law.
Perhaps if our state (both the government and the taxpayers) saw fit to fund decent drivers ed programs in the schools, we wouldn't have all of these cell phone drivers. The courses I had to take way back in the dark ages left a permanent lesson with me: pay attention to your driving! Or else...
Michigan can top that by a child restraint law that goes into effect tomorrow. If the child is under 8 years old or under 4'9" they have to be in a child restraint seat or booster seat but, the law does not apply to school buses, state vehicles, commercial buses. Only private owner vehicles with a fine of $150 so if you plan on traveling into Michigan after tomorrow have the kids under 8 or 4'9" tall in a booster seat or child restraint seat because they can and will stop you.
mikehart92 wrote: Are you saying the bill should have never been passed or didn't go far enough?
Mike
I'll vote for doesn't go far enough. These days, each and every time someone cuts me off or pulls some other stupid maneuver on the road, they are ALWAY wrestling with a cell phone in one way or another.
Sometime just the act of trying to put on your hands-free gizmo while driving (because you didn;t put it on before starting out) is MUCH more dangerous than talking normally.
I use a Blue-Ant SuperTooth SPEAKERPHONE that clips on the visor. No wire, no fuss, always ready. One button push to answer, uses voice dialing for outgoing calls.
My friend really cracked me up on our last trip. She was driving and had to make a phone call. She dutifully put the ear bud in her left ear, then spent the entire phone conversation holding the phone in her left hand a few inches from her left ear.
I pointed this little anomoly out to her and she just didn't get it. She said she was using the hand free like she was supposed to. She was oblivious to the fact that holding the phone near here other ear IN HER HAND was totally defeating the purpose for safety. She made about a dozen other call the same way during the trip, still clueless. They call it "hand free" becuase the phone is NOT supposed to be in your hand, but on the STEERING WHEEL!
Common sense is supposed to tell us that if talking on the phone while driving is dangerous, then texting is MORE dangerous. Unfortunalty, some people will try to get away with whatever the law doesn't specifically forbid, no matter how dangerous it is. So much for common sense.
Several years back, New Jersey started posting signs along the highways saying "Wipers on, Headlights on. It's the law". So "common sense" would say that they are saying to turn you headlight on in poor visibility conditions.
But wouldn't you know it, there are an abundance of Bozos out there that figure if they turn their wipers off (using Rain-X), they can "legally" drive in pouring rain with their light off. Same goes for pea-soup fog, you don't need your wipers, therefor it's "okay" to drive with your light off.
Again, so much for common sense, The Darwin Awards are alive and well thinning out the defective gene pool (unfortunately, often taking the rest of us with them).
What these clods don't realize, is that the signs are not the entire law, just an "educational tool". The actual laws requires headlight during ALL limited visiblity conditions, wipers or not. This makes a good income stream for the State Police.
Paul (Mouse)
2007 Flagstaff Shamrock 17 Hybrid (heavily modified for boondocking and winter camping).
2007 Dodge Dakota Quad Cab, 4.7L HO engine, Factory tow package, Equil-i-zer WD Hitch, Prodigy brake controller.
Yamaha EF2400 Generator.
It's not well thought out, because there is movement already to a "distracted driver law" that covers anyone eating while driving, having a dog on their lap, using a laptop computer, shaving, putting makeup on in the rear view mirror, reading a book, talking on a cell phone, texting, PDA's, undressing/dressing while driving, etc. A general law that the Officer can interpret to cover the gamut of things an idiot can do while driving.
"Almost 80 percent of crashes involved some form of driver inattention within three seconds of the event, according to the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study, conducted by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration."
fordsooperdootydieselsmoker wrote: It's not well thought out, because there is movement already to a "distracted driver law" that covers anyone eating while driving, having a dog on their lap
I saw that one the other day. People must love their pets to death because that is what's going to happen to them if they wreck.
Offline
