Yes, but as a practical necessity to make it possible for them to do their jobs, not to afford them immunity just for the sake of doing so.
Police conducting bitz on distracted drivers and cell phone users May 16-22
- Thread starter sundancekid
- Start date
Yes, but as a practical necessity to make it possible for them to do their jobs, not to afford them immunity just for the sake of doing so.
Police are unable to use a hands free bluetooth? Please explain why they need to hold the device up to their ear in order to do their job?
I can see situations where having a Bluetooth unit in an ear could cause issues to a cop doing his or her job. To start with, many may already have an earpiece for their portable body-carry two-way radio in one ear.
Now you want them to put a Bluetooth unit in the other ear? Ok. Let's say they do. Will you now complain that they can look at a computer screen in their car and you can't? How would you resolve that without adding even more impediments to them doing their job?
I won't complain about a computer screen because it is necessary for their job. I don't see why holding a phone is necessary when they could have it routed through their current in ear (if using a cell phone is essential to police work then the same in ear accessories as their radio should exist) or having it routed through the car speakers like most cars do these days.
Its about PR and when citizens see police doing the things they are telling others not to because it is very very dangerous it doesn't pass the smell test. Is it really that dangerous or is it really that necessary to talk while driving?
I've got a neighbour who's a real estate agent (an aging MILF, with the obligatory stunt parts installed) and everytime she backs out of her driveway, she's got her phone pasted between her ear and her shoulder. Doesn't matter if she's alone, got her kids in the car or is slathering on the war paint. It drives me crazy, considering that her kids play on the sidewalks and driveways along with other local little ones. I'm sick of reading her the riot act with regard to the law, never mind the blatant stupidity of it. The only thing I do now is shake my head and pantomime hanging up a phone...to which she gives me a flash of the installed porecelain pearlies, a mouthed sorry and goes on her merry way...only to resume her conversation when she thinks she's out of my eyesight. Her boy toy (a punk-*** home renovator) drives his POS pick up truck at warp factor nine everytime he shows up and also does so with a cell stuck to his head. Him at least, I can give proper ****, although it doesn't slow him down much or get rid of the phone. People who flaunt this law either a) don't give a **** and look at a ticket as the cost of doing business b) have not had a close call with another car, bike or pedestrian or c) are too stupid to foresee the potential for disaster. I can only hope that these two get pinched large in any one of the blitzes...it may save one life. I'm not an advocate of more laws, but the cell phone ban should carry the same punishment as DUI and/or Stunting as far as I'm concerned. Then maybe, just maybe the message would reach the ignorant masses.
If nothing else, the highways would be a lot less congested.
If nothing else, the highways would be a lot less congested.
Yeeeesh.....even eating behind the wheel can net you a careless driving charge.
http://www.wheels.ca/columns/article/795717
http://www.wheels.ca/columns/article/795717
How did they do their jobs before cell phones?
pre-rebuttal to the usual drivel response you will post: They don't NEED to be on the phone wile they are driving. They can pull off to the side of the road like every other motorist is required by law to do.
Numb
Well-known member
At the risk of getting yelled at by everyone and sounding like a troll, when I drive and talk on the phone I'm no more dangerous than if I was having a conversation with a passenger. Yes I think the law is a good idea and it defiantly makes the roads safer, a lot of people can't drive properly with 0 distractions let alone talk on the phone. But I am not one of those people, and I'm sure a lot the gtam members are not either. So my point is I don't feel like it's a big deal when I see other people on their phones, unless they obviously are not capable of doing both. I would never have the urge to tell a cop or tell them to hangup their phone if they seem to be in 100% control of their vehicle. But if they are doin stupid **** than yes they deserve every bit of it. Just my 2 cents
Numb
Well-known member
1 Radio? Which I assume they use while driving
2 if my safety depended on it I would hope they didn't pull over
bobjohnson
Well-known member
Most people cant do both. I can talk on the phone, eat a burger, and still drive my stickshift car. Most people cant even drive their automatic cars while doing nothing else. Hell, ive almost been run over three times this week by idiots on their phones, and its only tuesday. Its easier to just ban talking on cellphones than it is to selectively enforce it... How would a cop know the lady whos on her phone and appears to be driving safely isnt completely distracted and runs over a kid 2 minutes later?
Honestly, the phonecall can wait. No one who isnt already exempted is important enough to need to talk on the phone. If you (the royal "you") are so important that you absolutely have to take the call, your company should hire you a driver. The fact that they havent says a lot. And if its an emergency, there are exemptions already for that, but in any other case you are more than free to pull over and put the car in park if you absolutely have to take or make a phonecall while driving. I personally would rather be able to use my phone while driving, but since other people apparently cant, I dont mind the minor inconvenience of pulling over for 2 minutes to make a call.
This is one of the laws i actually wish was enforced more strictly because i see probably 20 people a day blabbing away on phones will driving, and the cops dont seem to give a ****. Considering the number of times ive been stuck behind someone going 20kmh under the limit or almost run over by one of those morons, if the law was actively enforced to the strictest measure i wouldnt have any issue with that.
kiwi
Well-known member
Yeah, sure mate. You're a top driver... Try diving a manual transmission and make a call... Quite tricky. When I sold my sporty manual transmission car and was forced to drive an automatic I couldn't believe how easy it's to do other things like talk on the phone, eat, drink etc while driving... But here, the lowest common factor wins.. So that's why they have these types of laws.
Btw - try watching that mythbuster episode where they compare phone drivers to drunk drivers.
Last edited:
sundancekid
Banned
You clearly feel very strong about this issue and I'm glad you support greater emphasis on enforcement. However, for a simple infraction a criminal charge or stunting is excessive for the crime. If the motorist is simply driving along and the police catch them in the act then the current penalty of $155, while lower than it should be, is acceptable. The only thing I'd change would be if you get busted a second time the fine should double, then triple on a 3rd offence within 3 years to $465.
If the person was using their cell phone and it causes injury or death to a pedestrian, cyclist or another motorist the charges should be more serious. We don't need to amend the law for police to assess more serious charges to someone who breaks the law I'm not sure if you read the article included when I started this thread:
“...yakking on a phone while driving can be dangerous, munching on a sandwich or fiddling with the radio dial can also be risky, said OPP Sgt. David Woodford.
If you’re not focusing on your driving and you’re doing something else — whether it be putting makeup on, which we’ve seen, or eating or drinking that coffee or changing the radio station… it can change that quickly in front of you that you cannot react properly and next thing you know, we have a rear-end collision,” he said.
Woodford recounted an incident Thursday morning in which a motorist was pulled over after he was spotted pounding the steering wheel with a pair of drumsticks. The driver was charged with careless driving." http://www.chfi.com/2011/05/12/opp-telling-us-to-put-down-the-cellphones/
In the event that a motorist causes death they can be charged with dangerous operation causing death which carries up to 14 years in prison; Criminal Code 249 (4). So you see, the current laws are sufficient to penalize individuals depending on the severity and circumstances of the crime.
The example you cited about your neighbour warrants the attention of the police. It's unacceptable that she and her boyfriend are endangering the lives of those innocent children and other residents. I encourage you to make a formal complaint with your local police (in your case Durham Regional I believe) and let them (at minimum) send a warning letter to her and the boyfriend.
If the front-line cops appear apathetic then you could always engage the community safety officers of DRPS or through Road Watch:www.roadwatch.ca/ReportSearchForm.aspx Typically the community policing officers are more inclined to listen to your concerns and help intervene where possible.
Numb if you talk on the phone w/o hands-free you are endangering other people and you (and everyone else who gets caught) deserve the consequences. By your own admission you cannot drive and talk without being distracted, but you aren't unique. Nobody can truly multi-task, our brains don't work like that; what we think is multi-tasking is temporarily changing focus from one task to another.
The same way they did their jobs before computers and other modern day tools. Not as efficiently. Call that drivel if you wish.
My issue is that we are being told by police that talking on the phone while driving is akin to drunk driving. We are told by police that anything from eating to adjusting your stereo knob is dangerous and grounds to be charged. The question is what training do police go through so that talking on the phone and looking at a computer screen while driving isn't dangerous? Are they immune to the distraction? Why?
Is it dangerous or isn't it? If the dangers are acceptable for police then there should be checks and balances to make sure they aren't taking liberties with personal calls while driving especially if they are going to tell the public how deadly it is. Why are personal cell phones allowed? If its business shouldn't it be on a police phone? Shouldn't the calls and usage be monitored the same way IT departments monitor what people do at work?
I love how when police are caught breaking the law the defenders say "They are only human just like you an me" but in every other aspect of their jobs they are considered better than other citizens. So which is it? Are they human like the rest of us and subject to the dangers of talking on their cells while driving or are they superhuman and immune to these human faults?
I do agree with the above stated supposition along with the ideology of your reply...however, this article flies in the face of the above stated theory.
http://www.thestar.com/news/article...e-worth-500-highway-traffic-act-says-yes?bn=1
sundancekid
Banned
joeboo said:
Get his plate number? You can report him here: http://www.roadwatch.ca/ReportSearchForm.aspx
Last edited:
