Cell Phone Bill Is A “Feel Good” Bill, Restricts Freedom
Jul 8th, 2010 by thatsElbert
Yesterday morning, Governor Markell held a big ceremony at AAA Mid-Atlantic’s corporate headquarters in Wilmington, showing off his signing of the freedom-restricting bill, banning cell phone use while driving.
Quoting from the Delaware House of Representatives House Majority Caucus press release:
Sponsored by Rep. Darryl M. Scott, House Substitute 1 for House Bill 229 goes into effect 180 days from signature – January 2, 2011. The comprehensive statewide restriction requires drivers to use a hands-free device to talk while driving and also prohibits text messaging, sending or reading e-mails or browsing websites while the vehicle is in motion. Delaware also becomes the 30th state to prohibit texting while driving with the signing of this law.
We already have laws that deal with distractions while driving. These laws are redundant.
Another quote from the press release:
“Some people objected to it saying: ‘Well, people do lots things in the car that are distracting. They listen to the radio; they talk to passengers; they eat,’ ” said Sen. [Karen] Peterson, D-Stanton, the bill’s chief Senate sponsor. “But I’ve never almost been run over by someone eating a Big Mac, but I have been almost hit a dozen times in the past year by someone talking on a cell phone.”
More than likely we can fill our comments with stories of folks nearly “run over” by drivers trying to dress, put on makeup, comb their hair, etc. and probably even while putting away that Monster Thickburger.
This law punishes those of us who use extra care while driving and using our phones. Maybe simply enforcing existing laws and an aggressive public service campaign would encourage proper use of the cell phone in the car.
Another quote:
“Texting and using a hand-held cell phone while driving are a threat to public safety, and the 2010 AAA Mid-Atlantic poll found that 95 percent of Delaware drivers agree,” said Ronald W. Kosh, AAA Mid-Atlantic Vice President of Public and Government Affairs AAA Mid-Atlantic.
Did their members think that a law targeting the ban of cell phone use was the proper way of dealing with the situation?
Maybe a campaign something of this nature would have dealt with the problem:
It’s a feel-good bill that it’s sponsors can use to campaign on in the fall. It’s a bill that restricts freedom.
Generally, Socialist-Democrats are money-grubbing totalitarians. First of all, is anyone out there so incredibly stupid as to think that legislators care about your safety? No, they care about your money. Secondly, what do these fiscally irresponsible chumps know about safety? Have you ever seen these pathetic people? Do you really want them telling you what is safe or unsafe?
In tough economic times, most individuals and businesses cut back. These irresolute saps spend more. Can anyone say ‘Greece?’
People who support the Socialist-Democrats and their agenda are essentially cattle who need to be led around by the nose; pathetic, helpless, big-government, anti-American nose-ring chattel.
Freedom is a natural right. Everyone is entitled to freedom up to the point where it infringes on the rights of others. Some idiot texting, or dialing, places me in an unsafe condition and therefore infringes on my rights. At that point they have forfeited the right to be stupid by using their cell phone while driving. It is a situation that is better codified, rather than drag every police officer into court to testify why they felt that driver was distracted. I do agree that it is no worse than the drivers we see shaving, eating, putting on makeup, brushing their hair, and reading.
So to Mr. Pro….if you agree cell phone talking while driving is as bad as shaving, putting on make-up, …you forgot eating thatBig Mac, why wouldn’t you support having laws against THOSE things?
It’s not the TALKING on the cell phone that’s the problem. We have passengers in our cars all the time and we TALK to them, using our mouths and also driving, kind of like chewing gum and walking.
It’s using one hand to drive as the other holds the cell phone to the ear or keys in a number…I can’t even get my head around texting while driving.
Kinda like using one hand to….lesse…eat a Big Mac, run the shaver over the face….why not have a law to make driving with only one hand while using the other for other non-driving tasks illegal.
Cause driving and cell phone laws are cool and liberals are nothing if not so cool you turn to ice in their presence. They care less about safety and such but they like to look like they do.
and somehow, someday….they’ll figure out a way to tax cell phones for all the costs they cause to prosecute driving and cell phone cases…..don’t doubt me.
We don’t need a law banning texting while driving. We need harsher penalties for those who do it. We don’t need the government to tell us not to do these things we need a return to moral clarity where we recognize unsafe driving is detrmintal and we cannot stand for it.
*finishing my thought from #4 after an accidental click*
We need to be penalizing drivers who cannot control their vehicles more harshly regardless of the reason. If the vehicle malfunctions as a result of poor workmanship we need to punish the manufacturer. If it malfunctions due to poor care we punish the owner. If the driver is too distracted we punish the driver. We must hold people accountable and not restrict the liberty of all people for the stupidity of a few.
Is it stupid and dangerous to drive and text? Yes, but it’s stupid and dangerous to do alot of things (like bungee jumping, shooting people out of human catapults and swimming with sharks) and we ought not legislate the participation in those activities.
I have no qualms with someone participating in activities where they can kill themselves such as those you referenced. I do have reservations regarding activities where they can kill me. While there is a limit to how smart we can be, there is no limit to how dumb we can be. Unfortunately I feel that those dumb activities that can harm others need to be regulated. There has to be some equilibrium between your libertarian viewpoint and public safety. It is great to say that society can punish those who harm others through their carelessness, but it may be too late for those killed or injured as a result of that carelessness. Do I feel that politicians enact laws with the purest of intentions? Not hardly.
Freedom is a natural right. Everyone is entitled to freedom up to the point where it infringes on the rights of others.
How does me not using a seatbelt, allowing smoking in my restaurant or lighting fireworks ‘infringe’ on your ‘rights?’
I was one of those affected by a drive texting while driving last year while I was cycling off rt 82 where I live near Ashland Nature Center. The driver was late to work and was texting a friend to have him punched in on the time clock.
He hit the rear tire of my bike and for 2 seconds I was Superman arms flung out trying to fly. Anyway, I hit the pavement with head, ribs, foot and hand injuries. Bike got clobbered pretty good also. Thankfully I was wearing a helmet and while liberals will accuse me of mental shortcomings there were no head injuries.
I was able to collect myself and call 911 to give a description of the driver and then I was off to the nearest aid clinic for X Rays and a lot of medical expertise.
The driver was caught and was prosecuted under the existing laws. Yes, I was affected but we do not need additional laws but strict enforcement of the laws we have.
Mike Protack
They don’t. I feel that you have every right to increase your odds of dying by not wearing a seatbelt. I don’t have to go to a restaurant that allows smoking. If you want to blow your hand off with fireworks, that’s fine. If your kid blows his hand off, you need to go to jail for a very long time. Those actions don’t infringe on me. Some jerk running me off the road while texting does. I don’t get a lot of satisfaction from him going to jail after my funeral.
Delaware has an existing statute for “inattentive driving”. In Title 21 of Delaware Code:
§ 4176. Careless or inattentive driving.
(a) Whoever operates a vehicle in a careless or imprudent manner, or without due regard for road, weather and traffic conditions then existing, shall be guilty of careless driving.
(b) Whoever operates a vehicle and who fails to give full time and attention to the operation of the vehicle, or whoever fails to maintain a proper lookout while operating the vehicle, shall be guilty of inattentive driving.
(c) Whoever violates this section shall for the first offense be fined not less than $25 nor more than $115. For each subsequent like offense occurring within 3 years of a former offense, the person shall be fined not less than $50 nor more than $230, or imprisoned not less than 10 nor more than 30 days, or both.
So, is driving while texting inattentive? Sometimes. Is driving while eating a hamburger inattentive? Sometimes. The law already exists. But this bill goes one step further… Using a cell phone is now a PRIMARY REASON to pull over a driver (as is not wearing a seat belt).
It is the new ability for a police officer to stop a law abiding citizen and blame it on “I thought I saw them on their cell phone.” that is the risk here. Inattentive driving is already covered.
My forecast: Delaware traffic accidents and fatalities will have no discernible reduction as a result of this law. Your fundamental right to be left alone, however, is at risk.
Thank You Charlie, You beat me to it. Also for the record I do see the difference between texting and talking on the phone.
On a somewhat related note, Did anyone see the Seinfeld episode where Kramer gets into an accident because he is distracted by a stuesque woman walking down the street not wearing a blouse and only wearing a bra?
Totally off topic….but Mike P’s post about Ashland Nature Center makes me smile.
This is run by the Delaware Nature Society, which I am a quasi-member via my affiliation with the National Wildlife Society. NWS is a liberal big piece of baloney but they have that Backyard Wildlife Habitat program, a concept which my conservative self adores. I am a Backyard Wildlife Habitat Steward and my yard is certified by the NWF as a Backyard Wildlife Habitat. The notion is that we should plant native plants, pollen bearing, fruit and seed plants in our own little eco-systems, make sure we’ve got some hedges for cover,maybe a birdbath or two…and boom, we’ve created our own little nature world for our children to grow up enjoying and learning from.
anyway, Abbotts Mill is a sister to Ashland and I just made a reservation for my granddaughter to go on a nature tour. FIVE BUCKS! It’s the best deal in town.
Granddaughter loves it…Ashland has these tours too. She doesn’t need big roller coasters or even rolling ocean waves to get great joy from life. A walk through Abbotts Mill, a beautiful place, guided by a nature expert, is one of her fave couple of hours.
One year they actually took the kids in the pond and had them fish with nets to see what they came up with. Next weekend they’re actually going to open the mill and show how they use to grind wheat and stuff.
One of the best tourist attractions in this state and so
little known.
Yeah, I’m a Conservative but I love my planet and don’t need to carry my own grocery bags to prove how freaking “green” I am. And I’m thinking my granddaughter knows more about nature than the spawn of any dope smoking liberal.
Dear Charlie,
Now off my nature rant, may I add two more points to your excellant post?
First, I re-iterate, somehow, someway, the libs are going to find a way to tax cell phones more. Cause it’s always about getting money out of private business and now, hey, we had to hire more cops to stop talking on the cell phone and driving and we need more money.
Second, I learned long ago that before sitting down and crafting any legislation that common sense can’t handle or said legislation will change little, to always consider that almost always, under some weirdo scenario somewhere on the planet, there will be caused some sort of shootout over the law being crafted, endangering both cop and enforcer and always consider this before putting it on the books.
I can kill someone else by bungee jumping
What if my rope snaps and I land on someone?
What if my catapult shoots me into traffic and I cause a 38 car pileup?
And what about the first responders that try to pull me out of the water when the sharks start to eat me?
EVERYTHING is dangerous to some end. Where do we draw the line? If it’s at the potential to injure someone else we never have a shot. The fact is that walking out your front door is a risk every day. If you’re not willing to take the risk, become a shut in. Otherwise accept that there are stupid people that do stupid things. These people MUSt be held accountable though. There can’t be anymore drunk drivers killing people and then getting out of jail in 3 years to do it again. There can’t be anymore morons texting while driving and sending you to the hospital and not being held legally responsible for their actions.
Charlie has pointed out that Delaware HAS a statute that deals with inattentive driving (as does almost every other state) and this law can be used as a sufficient source to place people who text while driving. If the punishment is too light for your liking, perhaps we open it up a bit at the maximum end to incorporate REALLY stupid things…like texting….
Incidentally, this new law might be age discriminatory and perhaps sexist as well as it will likely target teenage girls who are FAR more likely to text 24/7/365 than are say 80 yr old men. Besides, if Mike Castle has his way, this really won’t be an issue because the Feds won’t allow you to have an unrestricted drivers license until age 18.
“I can kill someone else by bungee jumping
What if my rope snaps and I land on someone?”
Evan is correct we definitely need legislation to outlaw bungee jumping in a car or near a roadway.
I still think we should outlaw very attractive women from walking down Rehoboth Avenue from June thru September.
TW…the same should go for riding bikes on sidewalks and boardwalks…man they can hurt someone!
And now I discover that TW wants to keep me from walking on the Rehoboth boardwalk between June and September.
What other freedoms will they take from me?
I’m curious. Are they saying that cell phone use while driving is inattentive driving, or are they saying that cell phone use while driving is a crime in and of itself, and will they charge you with both offenses, and is that legal for them to do ?
It would seem that they could charge you with both offenses. Any one else know?
I’m shocked to find myself in agreement with most of you on this
I’d like to replace this law with a law against idiotic driving. We give all drivers one of those suction arrow guns. If you see someone driving like an idiot, shoot the arrow at their car. If the police see a car with 3 or more arrows on it, give them a ticket for ID (Idiotic Driving)
On a slightly more serious note, how will an officer be able to tell if I’m texting or skipping a couple of songs on my MP3 player? Although I’ve been known to talk on the cell phone while driving, I find that searching for the fast forward button on my MP3 player or lighting a cigarette distract me more that my occasional cell phone use.
Those actions don’t infringe on me. Some jerk running me off the road while texting does…
I agree that texting should be banned- but, not phone use.
“And now I discover that TW wants to keep me from walking on the Rehoboth boardwalk between June and September.
What other freedoms will they take from me?”
You got me Pat!!!!!
Hey, if we are going to outlaw distractions I am going to go to the most prevalent ones out there!!!!