NJ Wants "Strictest Cell Phone Law" in the Country

[chanel]

State Sen. Richard Codey (D-Essex) introduced a bill earlier this month that would suspend the licenses of three-time offenders of the state’s ban on driving while talking or texting on a handheld device. A parallel bill was proposed in the lower house on Monday by Assemblywoman Annette Quijano (D-Union).

The bill would keep the current fine of $100 in place for the first offense, but increase it to $250 the second time and $500 the third time, in addition to the suspension.

N.J. senator proposes bill suspending driver's license after 3 cell phone violations | NJ.com

Comments?

 

[Gremlin-USA]

State Sen. Richard Codey (D-Essex) introduced a bill earlier this month that would suspend the licenses of three-time offenders of the state’s ban on driving while talking or texting on a handheld device. A parallel bill was proposed in the lower house on Monday by Assemblywoman Annette Quijano (D-Union).

The bill would keep the current fine of $100 in place for the first offense, but increase it to $250 the second time and $500 the third time, in addition to the suspension.

N.J. senator proposes bill suspending driver's license after 3 cell phone violations | NJ.com

Comments?

For Texting I agree with this.

For talking, it is a little overboard.

.

 

[FA_Q2]

No problem. Apparently people can't simply PULL OVER FOR FIVE MINUTES to talk on the damn phone. It is not that hard.

 

[xotoxi]

State Sen. Richard Codey (D-Essex) introduced a bill earlier this month that would suspend the licenses of three-time offenders of the state’s ban on driving while talking or texting on a handheld device. A parallel bill was proposed in the lower house on Monday by Assemblywoman Annette Quijano (D-Union).

The bill would keep the current fine of $100 in place for the first offense, but increase it to $250 the second time and $500 the third time, in addition to the suspension.

N.J. senator proposes bill suspending driver's license after 3 cell phone violations | NJ.com

Comments?

Sounds good to me.

If the law forbids driving while texting or speaking on the phone, then the law should be enforced.

No one's rights are being violated by this law.

 

[chanel]

How about three speeding ticket or other moving violations?

 

[George Costanza]

Never mind the fact that studies have clearly shown that talking on a cell phone while driving has little or no effect on the driver's ability to drive safely.

Be all that as it may, we have the no talking-no texting law here in California. I have a guy doing 32 months in state prison right now for violating this law. How could something like that happen?, I hear you cry. Here's how:

Our Genius is doing a number of things, all at the same time. He is driving. He is talking on his cell phone while so doing. He is carrying a quantity of methamphetamine in his shirt pocket. He has a strike prior. And he is doing his driving/cell phone talking/meth possession in the presence of a police officer who observes same and pulls him over. Game over.

 

[FA_Q2]

Never mind the fact that studies have clearly shown that talking on a cell phone while driving has little or no effect on the driver's ability to drive safely.

Be all that as it may, we have the no talking-no texting law here in California. I have a guy doing 32 months in state prison right now for violating this law. How could something like that happen?, I hear you cry. Here's how:

Our Genius is doing a number of things, all at the same time. He is driving. He is talking on his cell phone while so doing. He is carrying a quantity of methamphetamine in his shirt pocket. He has a strike prior. And he is doing his driving/cell phone talking/meth possession in the presence of a police officer who observes same and pulls him over. Game over.

Where did you get that insane impression?
Cell Phone Safety While Driving

In July of 2005, results from a study of drivers in Perth, Australia conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety were published. The outcome indicated that if you use a cell phone while driving, you are four times more likely to have a serious accident. The study also declared that using a hands-free phone or device didn’t improve driving safety.

http://www.aaafoundation.org/pdf/CellPhonesandDrivingReport.pdf

In analysis focused specifically on driver
inattention (Klauer, Dingus, Neale, Sudweeks, & Ramsey, 2006), the researchers reported that driver involvement in secondary tasks contributed to 22% of all crashes and near-crashes in the study. Comparing the frequency of specific secondary tasks at the time of crashes and near-crashes to their frequency during a random sample of periods of normal driving during which no crashes or near-crashes occurred, the researchers found that the secondary task that resulted in the greatest increase in the risk of being involved in a crash or near-crash was reaching for a moving object. Reading and applying makeup while driving were both associated with more than tripling of the odds of being involved in a crash or near-crash. Eating was associated with a 57% increase in the odds of being involved in a crash or nearcrash. Dialing a hand-held device was associated with nearly triple the odds of being involved in a crash or near-crash, and talking or listening to a hand-held device was associated with about a 30% increase in the odds of being involved in a crash or near-crash. Dialing hand-held devices was found to have been a contributing factor in 3.58% of crashes and near-crashes, and talking/listening on hand-held devices was a contributing factor in 3.56% of crashes and near-crashes. Both dialing and talking/listening on handheld devices contributed to significantly greater percentages of crashes and near-crashes than did any of the other secondary tasks that were studied—even though some of the other secondary tasks were associated with higher risk—because drivers dialed and talked on cell phones much more frequently than they engaged in most other secondary tasks.

There is obviously no basis in the claim that cell phone use has little to no effect on driving. Texting is far worse as well.

Also, how can you claim that you have a client doing 36 months for violating this law? That is a gross misrepresentation in general. I would venture that he got CAUGHT because of this law and is doing 36 months because of possession of methamphetamine.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Never mind the fact that studies have clearly shown that talking on a cell phone while driving has little or no effect on the driver's ability to drive safely.

Be all that as it may, we have the no talking-no texting law here in California. I have a guy doing 32 months in state prison right now for violating this law. How could something like that happen?, I hear you cry. Here's how:

Our Genius is doing a number of things, all at the same time. He is driving. He is talking on his cell phone while so doing. He is carrying a quantity of methamphetamine in his shirt pocket. He has a strike prior. And he is doing his driving/cell phone talking/meth possession in the presence of a police officer who observes same and pulls him over. Game over.

Where did you get that insane impression?
Cell Phone Safety While Driving

In July of 2005, results from a study of drivers in Perth, Australia conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety were published. The outcome indicated that if you use a cell phone while driving, you are four times more likely to have a serious accident. The study also declared that using a hands-free phone or device didn’t improve driving safety.

http://www.aaafoundation.org/pdf/CellPhonesandDrivingReport.pdf

In analysis focused specifically on driver
inattention (Klauer, Dingus, Neale, Sudweeks, & Ramsey, 2006), the researchers reported that driver involvement in secondary tasks contributed to 22% of all crashes and near-crashes in the study. Comparing the frequency of specific secondary tasks at the time of crashes and near-crashes to their frequency during a random sample of periods of normal driving during which no crashes or near-crashes occurred, the researchers found that the secondary task that resulted in the greatest increase in the risk of being involved in a crash or near-crash was reaching for a moving object. Reading and applying makeup while driving were both associated with more than tripling of the odds of being involved in a crash or near-crash. Eating was associated with a 57% increase in the odds of being involved in a crash or nearcrash. Dialing a hand-held device was associated with nearly triple the odds of being involved in a crash or near-crash, and talking or listening to a hand-held device was associated with about a 30% increase in the odds of being involved in a crash or near-crash. Dialing hand-held devices was found to have been a contributing factor in 3.58% of crashes and near-crashes, and talking/listening on hand-held devices was a contributing factor in 3.56% of crashes and near-crashes. Both dialing and talking/listening on handheld devices contributed to significantly greater percentages of crashes and near-crashes than did any of the other secondary tasks that were studied—even though some of the other secondary tasks were associated with higher risk—because drivers dialed and talked on cell phones much more frequently than they engaged in most other secondary tasks.

There is obviously no basis in the claim that cell phone use has little to no effect on driving. Texting is far worse as well.

Also, how can you claim that you have a client doing 36 months for violating this law? That is a gross misrepresentation in general. I would venture that he got CAUGHT because of this law and is doing 36 months because of possession of methamphetamine.

Did this study compare the accident rates of people talking on a cell phone and talking to a child in the back seat?

 

[FA_Q2]

Never mind the fact that studies have clearly shown that talking on a cell phone while driving has little or no effect on the driver's ability to drive safely.

Be all that as it may, we have the no talking-no texting law here in California. I have a guy doing 32 months in state prison right now for violating this law. How could something like that happen?, I hear you cry. Here's how:

Our Genius is doing a number of things, all at the same time. He is driving. He is talking on his cell phone while so doing. He is carrying a quantity of methamphetamine in his shirt pocket. He has a strike prior. And he is doing his driving/cell phone talking/meth possession in the presence of a police officer who observes same and pulls him over. Game over.

Where did you get that insane impression?
Cell Phone Safety While Driving
http://www.aaafoundation.org/pdf/CellPhonesandDrivingReport.pdf

In analysis focused specifically on driver
inattention (Klauer, Dingus, Neale, Sudweeks, & Ramsey, 2006), the researchers reported that driver involvement in secondary tasks contributed to 22% of all crashes and near-crashes in the study. Comparing the frequency of specific secondary tasks at the time of crashes and near-crashes to their frequency during a random sample of periods of normal driving during which no crashes or near-crashes occurred, the researchers found that the secondary task that resulted in the greatest increase in the risk of being involved in a crash or near-crash was reaching for a moving object. Reading and applying makeup while driving were both associated with more than tripling of the odds of being involved in a crash or near-crash. Eating was associated with a 57% increase in the odds of being involved in a crash or nearcrash. Dialing a hand-held device was associated with nearly triple the odds of being involved in a crash or near-crash, and talking or listening to a hand-held device was associated with about a 30% increase in the odds of being involved in a crash or near-crash. Dialing hand-held devices was found to have been a contributing factor in 3.58% of crashes and near-crashes, and talking/listening on hand-held devices was a contributing factor in 3.56% of crashes and near-crashes. Both dialing and talking/listening on handheld devices contributed to significantly greater percentages of crashes and near-crashes than did any of the other secondary tasks that were studied—even though some of the other secondary tasks were associated with higher risk—because drivers dialed and talked on cell phones much more frequently than they engaged in most other secondary tasks.

There is obviously no basis in the claim that cell phone use has little to no effect on driving. Texting is far worse as well.

Also, how can you claim that you have a client doing 36 months for violating this law? That is a gross misrepresentation in general. I would venture that he got CAUGHT because of this law and is doing 36 months because of possession of methamphetamine.

Did this study compare the accident rates of people talking on a cell phone and talking to a child in the back seat?

This study, no. Others have and most distractions come out to about the same. The difference with cell phones is the frequency and length of use. They are involved in far more crashes because of this. They did compare it to eating and applying makeup, both of which were grater distractions yet cased far fewer accidents. Another point is that when conversing with someone in the passenger seat they provide a second set of eyes that sometimes see things on the road that you miss because you were distracted with the conversation. Phone conversations do not have this fallback.

 

[HUGGY]

We have a similar law in washington... It went into effect 6/8. It is now a primary cause to be ticketed. I see dozens of people on cell phones every time I drive. People in Seattle are just ignoring the law.

 

[FA_Q2]

We have a similar law in washington... It went into effect 6/8. It is now a primary cause to be ticketed. I see dozens of people on cell phones every time I drive. People in Seattle are just ignoring the law.

That will change as more and more are fined the 150 bucks and realize just using speaker phone will solve it. In WA though, your license is not suspended on repeat occasions as far as I am aware.

 

[Madeline]

State Sen. Richard Codey (D-Essex) introduced a bill earlier this month that would suspend the licenses of three-time offenders of the state’s ban on driving while talking or texting on a handheld device. A parallel bill was proposed in the lower house on Monday by Assemblywoman Annette Quijano (D-Union).

The bill would keep the current fine of $100 in place for the first offense, but increase it to $250 the second time and $500 the third time, in addition to the suspension.

N.J. senator proposes bill suspending driver's license after 3 cell phone violations | NJ.com

Comments?

I've already had one accident using the damned thing. I rear ended a truck at slow speed because I was distracted. I have a terrible dilemma now because the car isn't running smoothly but if I take the cell, I know know know I will fiddle with it at a red light or answer it if it rings. I'm just not disciplined enough. I get bored, think it is safe and then find my attention divided...and believe me, driving here requires attention.

I think this is a fine idea. There are probably more people like me and IMO the ban should include talking (or texting, if it is possible) using a hands-free device.

 

[Madeline]

Never mind the fact that studies have clearly shown that talking on a cell phone while driving has little or no effect on the driver's ability to drive safely.

Be all that as it may, we have the no talking-no texting law here in California. I have a guy doing 32 months in state prison right now for violating this law. How could something like that happen?, I hear you cry. Here's how:

Our Genius is doing a number of things, all at the same time. He is driving. He is talking on his cell phone while so doing. He is carrying a quantity of methamphetamine in his shirt pocket. He has a strike prior. And he is doing his driving/cell phone talking/meth possession in the presence of a police officer who observes same and pulls him over. Game over.

George, I find it hard to believe the studies have shown that talking on a cell has little effect on one's ability to drive. Can you provide a link or two? I must be the odd one out....sometimes I cannot even bear the radio to be on if driving is especially hard.

I'm sorry about your client, but three years seems fitting to me for the meth. That drug scares me very badly.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Where did you get that insane impression?
Cell Phone Safety While Driving
http://www.aaafoundation.org/pdf/CellPhonesandDrivingReport.pdf
There is obviously no basis in the claim that cell phone use has little to no effect on driving. Texting is far worse as well.

Also, how can you claim that you have a client doing 36 months for violating this law? That is a gross misrepresentation in general. I would venture that he got CAUGHT because of this law and is doing 36 months because of possession of methamphetamine.

Did this study compare the accident rates of people talking on a cell phone and talking to a child in the back seat?

This study, no. Others have and most distractions come out to about the same. The difference with cell phones is the frequency and length of use. They are involved in far more crashes because of this. They did compare it to eating and applying makeup, both of which were grater distractions yet cased far fewer accidents. Another point is that when conversing with someone in the passenger seat they provide a second set of eyes that sometimes see things on the road that you miss because you were distracted with the conversation. Phone conversations do not have this fallback.

My personal opinion is that people who get distracted driving get distracted no matter what. I used to drive down the street leaning over and searching through the glove box for the map, or whatever else I thought I needed. Those people who have accidents using cell phones would probably have accidents without cell phones. Despite all the studies I believe statistics show that the rate of accidents has not significantly increased since I was driving with my head up my ass.

 

[chanel]

Texting is dangerous but more people are texting instead of talking because its harder for a cop to see. If talking wasn't a primary offense, I believe less people would text.

I see nothing wrong with stiff fines and points on your license. But suspension? When people lose their license, they often lose their job. This is just another example of the nannies in NJ trying to "one up" the rest of the country.

 

[martybegan]

If you are dumb enough to keep doing it after 2 tries, then you should lose your liscence. I would do it only for about 10 days or so. just enough time to make the person miserable on mass transit all the time, or force em to use up some vacation.

Laws like this are in the catagory of "protecting the least capable members of society from themeselves," similar to firework bans. Plenty of people to can talk and drive, hell I only lose about 5 mph when i do it, but alot of people cannot handle it or any distraction while driving, and hence the law.

 

[editec]

State Sen. Richard Codey (D-Essex) introduced a bill earlier this month that would suspend the licenses of three-time offenders of the state’s ban on driving while talking or texting on a handheld device. A parallel bill was proposed in the lower house on Monday by Assemblywoman Annette Quijano (D-Union).

The bill would keep the current fine of $100 in place for the first offense, but increase it to $250 the second time and $500 the third time, in addition to the suspension.

N.J. senator proposes bill suspending driver's license after 3 cell phone violations | NJ.com

Comments?

A coworker of my X died because she was talking on her cell phone while driving.

The good news is that she got to say goodbye to her husband before she died in her car.

Lucky him, huh?

She was talking to him when she blew though the intersection and so he got to enjoy the entire accident with her telephonically.

And the even better news is that their 4 month baby, who was ALSO in the car, wasn't hurt, so now Daddy gets to raise her by himself.

Talking on cell phones and driving don't mix, folks.

That woman had everything to live for -- a beautiful baby, a loving husband, and she was about to start law school, too.

Now she'd dead.

 

[ConHog]

Anyone stupid enough to be busted three times probably doesn't need to be behind the wheel anyway. Buy a blue tooth headest, they're like $50.

Sorry George, but you obviously lied when you claimed your client is doing 36 months for talking on phone while driving. He did 36 months for having meth in his possession. otherwise he wuold have received a ticket and that's it.

 

[Intense]

Never mind the fact that studies have clearly shown that talking on a cell phone while driving has little or no effect on the driver's ability to drive safely.

Be all that as it may, we have the no talking-no texting law here in California. I have a guy doing 32 months in state prison right now for violating this law. How could something like that happen?, I hear you cry. Here's how:

Our Genius is doing a number of things, all at the same time. He is driving. He is talking on his cell phone while so doing. He is carrying a quantity of methamphetamine in his shirt pocket. He has a strike prior. And he is doing his driving/cell phone talking/meth possession in the presence of a police officer who observes same and pulls him over. Game over.

I was almost going to suggest he get a better lawyer. Don't set yourself up like that. Never liked that prior strike law, too arbitrary in connecting the dots. It's livelihood, not a game. Not too bright, though.

 

[Madeline]

You could be right about the frequency of accidents, Quantum Windbag. I've had a driver's license for like 35 years, and it seems to me every five to ten years I have a wreck. Never anything serious, thank God. ATM, I am overdue so if you are planning a visit to Cleveland, beware.

*Laughs*