[andyt]

Lemmy Lemmy:

No. This is a photo-op; a public relations move, nothing more. The cops already have the laws they need to deal with distracted drivers. They just need to start enforcing the laws they've already got. Driving while distracted is careless driving. Call it what it is. We don't need a careless driving law and a bunch of laws for each specific breed of careless driving. We don't have a charge of "murder" and separate charges for "murder with a knife" and "murder with the lead pipe in the conservatory".

I agree. It's the same with half our laws. Governments response to a problem is to "get tough' with some new law, but they won't enforce it any better than the law already on the books. And this law exempts hands free sets, which have been shown to be equally distracting to hands held.

[Yogi]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Yogi Yogi:

Long overdue! Yes there are a multitude of laws which cover the various instances of 'driving while distracted. This new law brings them all together.

No. This is a photo-op; a public relations move, nothing more. The cops already have the laws they need to deal with distracted drivers. They just need to start enforcing the laws they've already got. Driving while distracted is careless driving. Call it what it is. We don't need a careless driving law and a bunch of laws for each specific breed of careless driving. We don't have a charge of "murder" and separate charges for "murder with a knife" and "murder with the lead pipe in the conservatory".

The interview was on the radio, so I didn't see any 'photo op'! Actually, haven't seen anyone giving interview on tv about this though of course it has been reported on a lot.

What this new legislation does is to lump 'all distractions' under one law, which apparently will be 'vigorously enforced'. Particularly if the driver is involved in an accident while 'distracted'. General use of a hand-held cell cell-phone use is however, at this time, still exempt! Go figure. But, if it is proven, by witnesses or phone records that 'you' were indeed talking on your cell at the time of the accident, you will be charged for that as well.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Yogi Yogi:

Long overdue! Yes there are a multitude of laws which cover the various instances of 'driving while distracted. This new law brings them all together.

No. This is a photo-op; a public relations move, nothing more. The cops already have the laws they need to deal with distracted drivers. They just need to start enforcing the laws they've already got. Driving while distracted is careless driving. Call it what it is. We don't need a careless driving law and a bunch of laws for each specific breed of careless driving. We don't have a charge of "murder" and separate charges for "murder with a knife" and "murder with the lead pipe in the conservatory".

I think the difference is, unlike various ways to murder someone, you need to spell out WHAT the potential distractions are to some drivers since everyone is going to have a different definition of what may or may not actually constitute dangerous driving.
So is it really a case of creating new laws, or simply a case of adding new issues under the current law?
It seems to me that there are still a number of drivers that connect careless/dangerous/reckless driving only with alcohol and/or speed.

[Brenda]

So they are going to fine me for putting on mascara, eyeliner and foundation while driving and talking to someone on my cell, yelling at the kids who are fighting in the back and drinking coffee? Ridiculous...

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Nahh not you Brenda, yer special

[Lemmy]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

I think the difference is, unlike various ways to murder someone, you need to spell out WHAT the potential distractions are to some drivers since everyone is going to have a different definition of what may or may not actually constitute dangerous driving.

And I say anyone that's so dumb that they have to have that spelled out for them is too dumb to be given a drivers' license in the first place. I say get rid of ALL the driving laws EXCEPT careless driving. We really only need one law. You drive in any careless manner, you get a ticket. Do it twice, you lose the privilege. K-I-S-S. I referee hockey like that. If it's a penalty, it's a slash or a highstick. It's been YEARS (maybe a decade) since I called a trip or an elbow.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Lemmy Lemmy:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

I think the difference is, unlike various ways to murder someone, you need to spell out WHAT the potential distractions are to some drivers since everyone is going to have a different definition of what may or may not actually constitute dangerous driving.

And I say anyone that's so dumb that they have to have that spelled out for them is too dumb to be given a drivers' license in the first place.

And yet, they still drive while distracted anyway, even AFTER you spell it out to them. So who are the dumb ones? The ones that need it spelled out for them, or the ones that have already had it spelled out for them but figure it don't apply to them cuz, in their tiny little minds, they are such awesome drivers?

I mean, we don't REALLY need a drunk driving law since it would fall under dangerous/reckless/careless driving anyway. And yet, even though it's been spelled out for DECADES now, it's apparent that too many drivers still don't know HOW to spell.
However, I'm certainly not going to argue that without proper and effective enforcement, it don't matter what laws they make.

[Yogi]

Brenda Brenda:

So they are going to fine me for putting on mascara, eyeliner and foundation while driving and talking to someone on my cell, yelling at the kids who are fighting in the back and drinking coffee? Ridiculous...

Yup! These are some of the activities that are being specifically targeted.

As previously mentioned, taking a drink off your coffee, talking on the cell, or talking to other passengers is still permitted, unless such activity is deemed to be the cause of an accident or 'careless driving. ie; going thru a red light whilst doing any of the aforementioned will also result in a ticket over and above the penalty for driving thru a red light even if it doesn't cause an accident.


I say " BRING IT ON"! I hope the cops really start nailing these morons!

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Yogi Yogi:

Brenda Brenda:

So they are going to fine me for putting on mascara, eyeliner and foundation while driving and talking to someone on my cell, yelling at the kids who are fighting in the back and drinking coffee? Ridiculous...

Yup! These are some of the activities that are being specifically targeted.

As previously mentioned, taking a drink off your coffee, talking on the cell, or talking to other passengers is still permitted, unless such activity is deemed to be the cause of an accident or 'careless driving. ie; going thru a red light whilst doing any of the aforementioned will also result in a ticket over and above the penalty for driving thru a red light even if it doesn't cause an accident.


I say " BRING IT ON"! I hope the cops really start nailing these morons!

It's not the cops I worry about so much enforcing it, as I am the judges that will be dropping cases because of a retarded technicality that has no real bearing on the case.

[Brenda]

I was pretty sure I was sarcastic...

[Yogi]

Brenda Brenda:

I was pretty sure I was sarcastic...

Oh!

[ASLplease]

Brenda Brenda:

So they are going to fine me for putting on mascara, eyeliner and foundation while driving and talking to someone on my cell, yelling at the kids who are fighting in the back and drinking coffee? Ridiculous...

you let your kids drink coffee?

[raydan]

ASLplease ASLplease:

Brenda Brenda:

So they are going to fine me for putting on mascara, eyeliner and foundation while driving and talking to someone on my cell, yelling at the kids who are fighting in the back and drinking coffee? Ridiculous...

you let your kids drink coffee?

No wonder they're fighting in the back.

May I suggest camomile tea?

[Benn]

Easy tickets then, just sit outside the Timmies drive through exit and nab them as they pull out, coffee in one hand and cell phone in the other while reading the paper.

[bootlegga]

ASLplease ASLplease:

I agree that $172 dollars isn't enough, but I'm pissed at how many fines are in the $500 or higher range. when a person is taking home less than 40k after taxes, someone ought to have his balls cut off to suggest that a $1200 speeding ticket - where no harm was done - is reasonable.

The answer is easy, don't break the law and you won't pay the fine. Guess how many $1200 speeding tickets I've gotten on the Banff - Lake Louise highway, even though I drive it a couple times a year? ZERO. Signs notifying drivers of that law are posted throughout the province, even on secondary highways, so ignorance of the law is no excuse either.

That safety law that you bitch about so much was instituted because some dumbass was driving at highway speed and rammed a police cruiser, sending the officer in it across the QE 2 highway, through the ditch and across the other side of the highway, killing him. How did this happen? He was writing a speeding ticket for someone else and was rear-ended a guy in a 5 ton truck.