No texting while driving in NY.

Thank you!

It was always a second class infraction, cops couln't pull you over for it but add it to some other reason to yank you. As of yesterday it's a primary offense. $150 fine and 3 points on your license and they can stop you on that alone.

Local news last night showed a State Police task force in unmarked SUVs targeting this. One woman was pulled over on TV that has been ticketed three times already.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/thumbs_down_on_texting_q0futPdNZjkdA4WUX98d5H

good law. Here's hoping that FL follows suit.

Great. I hope more similar laws are to follow.

While I am against texting while driving. I am against this law and cell phone laws. All states that I'm aware of have reckless driving laws. Enforce them! If someone is using their phone/texting/iPod/laptop/makeup/sex toy/etc. and driving recklessly then they get a ticket.

The law does not penalize drivers using an electronic device or a GPS that is fixed to a surface inside the vehicle.

So it is automatically safer if I have the phone mounted to my steering wheel??? Mount the laptop to my dashboard and I'm good to go, surf to my hearts content because it's not handheld?

I seem to recall that NYC could ticket you for even opening a phone while driving.. even for something as innocent as checking the time?

In reply to Hocrest:

I agree. Cell phone use while driving should be considered reckless driving. It's only a matter of time before states start adopting laws banning the use of these devices, most likely with the exception of hands free devices. I would strongly support that as I feel the cell phone is possibly man-kinds worst invention. Since when did everyone become so important that they need to constantly be on the phone?

"I thought I saw a phone" is now probable cause regardless of whether or not they exhibit any sort of sloppy driving behavior? What is next - "Your honor, he looked like a black guy so we assumed there were drugs in the car". Oh, wait... NJ already does that

Seriously - I agree with the rest. Reckless driving had it covered. It is just another way to recover the losses from budget cuts.

I don't think texting drivers necessarily need to be driving recklessly to be dangerous. They may be staying in their lane, and while traffic is flowing normally they're okay. What happens when traffic suddenly stops while they're looking down?
Texting while driving has been proven to be more dangerous than driving drunk, whether you are driving recklessly or not. It's a stupid thing to do and should be against the law regardless of how a person is controlling their vehicle at the particular moment a cop sees them. I'm generally for less laws, less Governement, etc... But this is a law that needs to be, IMO. And I personally think any use of any cell phone should be illegal. When you are only hurting yourself that's one thing. When you are putting others in danger that's another thing. I drive 84 miles a day on crowded freeways. The things I see...Idiots are everywhere, and they need laws to make up for their stupidity.

bravenrace wrote: It's a stupid thing to do and should be against the law regardless of how a person is controlling their vehicle at the particular moment a cop sees them

It is already illegal to be reckless.

I was aguing that we didn't need a new law - not that anyone could safely type on a keyboard while driving. I do, however, have a voice command phone that I can hold in one hand and say:

"Text wife" "Stuck in traffic I'll be a few minutes late" "send"

And never take my hands off the wheel or my eyes off the road. Technology has already covered the need to use your eyes or thumbs... and legislating common sense has never worked. It is already illegal to put on lipstick, eat, drive barefoot, drink coffee, read the newspaper...etc. It seems like a silly token of a law designed to generate lost revenue for the state of NY rather than keep the highway safe.

MA$$hole wrote: I feel the cell phone is possibly man-kinds worst invention. Since when did everyone become so important that they need to constantly be on the phone?

I hate it when you are in the restroom at work and the guy in the stall next to you is jabbering away on the phone while doing his business... no thanks, nobody wants to hear you grunt, fart, or flush.. you are NOT that important

mad_machine wrote: I hate it when you are in the restroom at work and the guy in the stall next to you is jabbering away on the phone while doing his business... no thanks, nobody wants to hear you grunt, fart, or flush.. you are NOT that important

On the other hand... I kinda like the idea of doing all of my irritating, unnecessary meetings while E36 M3ting.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote:

bravenrace wrote: It's a stupid thing to do and should be against the law regardless of how a person is controlling their vehicle at the particular moment a cop sees them

It is already illegal to be reckless. I was aguing that we didn't need a new law - not that anyone could safely type on a keyboard while driving. I do, however, have a voice command phone that I can hold in one hand and say: "Text wife" "Stuck in traffic I'll be a few minutes late" "send" And never take my hands off the wheel or my eyes off the road. Technology has already covered the need to use your eyes or thumbs... and legislating common sense has never worked. It is already illegal to put on lipstick, eat, drive barefoot, drink coffee, read the newspaper...etc. It seems like a silly token of a law designed to generate lost revenue for the state of NY rather than keep the highway safe.

And I was saying that the reckless driving law doesn't cover it, because you don't have to be driving recklessly to be potentially dangerous. Did you read my post?

could put it under the DUI rules.. it is driving under the inflence of some sort

In reply to bravenrace:

You implied that by the nature of just doing it that you were reckless. That, then, is reckless driving, no?

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: In reply to bravenrace: You implied that by the nature of just doing it that you were reckless. That, then, is reckless driving, no?

I think he's trying to piont out that the current reckless driving law may not cover texting while driving. It all depends on how that particular law is written.

Say, it has a measure of what rekless means, and texting 90% of the time does not meet that measure of reckless. And since 100% of all texing is what seems to be desired to stop, then a new law would need written.

You and I may see texting as reckless, but in terms of the letter of the law, it may not be.

Michigan has it, doesn't stop anyone

I'm fully in favor of any law that cuts down on driver distraction involving cell phones. And while I agree that reckless driving should cover it, you have plenty of lawyers who may be able to parse some legal difference to get their client off.

Considering the "driving" I've seen (here in NJ), I think people that text & drive should face the firing squad.

In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:

I did and I didn't. You have to make the distinction between wreckless drving and the wreckless driving law. What I'm trying to say is that the wreckless driving law may not cover texting.

An example - Say you are texting going down the freeway. You aren't weaving or speeding or doing anything that can be considered wreckless by the definition of the law. So you are looking down/at your phone to text and suddenly the car in front of you slows or stops. You don't see it because your head is in your ass - I mean in your phone. You can't react quick enough and you hit the car in front of you.
So you weren't driving wrecklessly by any definition of the law, but your texting resulted in an accident anyway. That's why we need a law banning texting while driving.
Now, just to be clear, when I said "you" I didn't mean you yourself. And I see a difference between wreckless driving and the wreckless driving law. To get a ticket for wreckless driving, you have to be displaying some type of inappropriate driving. So if you are not, you won't be ticketed for wreckless driving. But if you consider that texting while driving is dangerous, then it can also be defined as wreckless.

So while I agree with you that driving while texting is inherently wreckless, I don't think the wreckless driving laws cover it sufficiently enough. So I think we do need a law against texting while driving. Does that make sense?

In reply to mad_machine:

That's when you deliberately make extremely loud disgusting noises. If the person on the other end of the call didn't already know, they soon will.

"That's covered by reckless driving," is a bit silly considering that pretty much any traffic infraction could be called "reckless". Running a red light - reckless. Tail gating - reckless. Speeding - reckless.

Trying to cover too many things under one law complicates things, and gives more arbitrary authority to police and judges. It also means that you can have different levels of punishment to fit different levels of crime.

There's also the prevention angle. The worst offenders of texting while driving probably don't consider their behavior reckless. They will probably only stop when they are told they are not allowed to do a specific behavior. Sure, the cops could still theoretically pull them over if they stray out of their lane, but then the cops are only allowed to react to their behavior after they've already endangered others.

What I don't like is the whole issue that you're not allowed to use a handset, but hands free is okay. Studies have shown that hands free does not reduce the level of distraction/risk. It is just the nature of a cell phone conversation that is distracting. Ham radio and CB conversations are legal, and apparently aren't as distracting. Same with in-car conversations. I think the deal is that with a cell phone, the conversation does not pause and you feel obligated to answer immediately. In car, passengers can tell when you're paying attention to something more important, and PTT radio you can pause as long as you need before answering.

MA$$hole wrote: In reply to Hocrest: I agree. Cell phone use while driving should be considered reckless driving. It's only a matter of time before states start adopting laws banning the use of these devices, most likely with the exception of hands free devices. I would strongly support that as I feel the cell phone is possibly man-kinds worst invention. Since when did everyone become so important that they need to constantly be on the phone?

At the same time, using your factory radio or GPS will become illegal.

Where do you draw the line?

I think they draw the line at "Judgement Call on distraction, but it's illegal to text while driving".

I can see where creeping Big Brotherism would cause concern, and I ask why a separate law is needed when one "reckless" law blankets everything else; but obviously some folks just don't get it.

Everyone here can cite examples of someone not paying attention and texting/talking while driving, but for those of you that think it's OK; here's motivation to stop; 3 points + $150 fine + Court Fees.

Dan

Why wouldn't texting be a judgement call, too, then?

Don't get me wrong, i'm certainly NOT for texting while driving, but it seems there's already loopholes in place that let you text while driving. (You've got an iPhone dash mount? No problem, text away!)

Salanis wrote: "That's covered by reckless driving," is a bit silly considering that pretty much any traffic infraction could be called "reckless". Running a red light - reckless. Tail gating - reckless. Speeding - reckless.

Regardless of how many laws you make - enforcement is impossible and arbitrary for anything going on inside a vehicle unless there is already an accident to place blame for. Are they going to waste tax payer money to access phone records to prove texting for a routine traffic stop? Anyone would just fight it and say the officer must have been mistaken as I was checking my watch to see what time it was. Then there is the need to search the phone or the records... blah, blah... etc. It is more likely that it will just be used as harassment of people they were looking for an excuse to stop anyway like seat belt laws or suspicion of intoxication, etc. There are already plenty of reasons to stop people.

If they wanted safety - they would ban the use of all distractions while driving like you pointed out. This law will help no one. In fact, it will be aggressively used for about a week and then forgotten.

92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: Why wouldn't texting be a judgement call, too, then? Don't get me wrong, i'm certainly NOT for texting while driving, but it seems there's already loopholes in place that let you text while driving. (You've got an iPhone dash mount? No problem, text away!)

I wonder if I can make a citizens arrest when I see a cop typing on the laptop they have mounted on the dash... or yapping into a phone. That would rock... except I'd be prosecuted for filming them to make my case... what with that being banned too. DOH!