Texting fine high enough to ask questions…
In the other thread about Toledo City Council passing the texting ordinance, Ron made a very astute comment that I think should be pointed out:
I am going to guess that when internet providers start getting text messaging subpoena from municipal courts, they are not going to drop everything and for a lack of a better phrase, get right on it. And I am not sure that a municipal court would even have the authority to order such an onus from interstate providers. Texting offenses would be of a minor character and have a relatively short statute of limitation and the cases might collapse without the complete cooperation from the internet people. Toledo once had an ordinance which prohibited anyone from painting the wings of sparrows and trying to sell them as canaries. That ordinance must have been important to someone too.
When you then discover how much the fine is going to be for those caught texting? WTOL as one example:
A first offense is a minor misdemeanor that comes with a $150 fine.
But a second offense is a third degree misdemeanor with a $500 fine and up to 60 days in jail.
Getting caught a third time is a first degree misdemeanor, a $1,000 fine and up to 6 months in jail.
It’s pretty clear that one of the first things will be how can the City actually prove someone was texting without documentation from the cellphone provider. If someone claims they are sending an email or dialing a phone number, or using gps on their phone, or checking to see who just called, how the officer is going to be able to determine if that person is texting, then prove that in court? Should be interesting to watch…I also wonder how the City expects people to even know about this new law, we’ve seen in previous situations regarding trash pick up how many did not read the papers or watch television. Signs will have to be displayed at the entrance of the City on every road to let out of town visitors know that it’s illegal here, we can’t logically expect even Toledo residents to be aware of the new law let alone those who don’t live here..
It apparently does absolutely no good
November 27th, 2009 at 1:38 amwhatsover to add laws for everything
when they are not enforced any way!
I don’t believe in texting! Enforcing it is another matter, Are the police really going to stop everyone they see? Don’t think so. Their responce time to some calls are 2hours late, or not at all! Depends on neighboorhood! If The City can’t collect for red light fines are they really going to get people to pay for texting? Apparently not.
November 27th, 2009 at 7:47 amJail time for texting? The jails are over booked now. They have early release community service, slap on wrist now. Where are they going to put all these people who text after first offence?
November 27th, 2009 at 8:03 amI love how stupid this law is. In the eyes of the text messaging study proponents, what is the diff between texting and emailing? Not that I want emailing banned, but it’s essentially the same, with unlimited space for emailing.
November 27th, 2009 at 9:12 amUhm the better law would have been NO holding cell phone while driving.. that would been much smarter. Now as the law is written ONE can chatter on the cell phone and drive with one hand on the wheel….
Makes no sense….
November 27th, 2009 at 10:36 amThis law will be very difficult to enforce. It’s typical “feel good” legislation.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:35 pmI think they should ban all cellphone use while driving. What do you think people did before cellphones. They waited until they got home to phone.
November 27th, 2009 at 5:29 pmGerald,
I don’t follow your logic. B/c something was done one way ten years ago and technology has advanced since then, we should make laws that takes us back a decade?
Are accident rates higher since the spread of cell phones?
November 27th, 2009 at 5:57 pmThere are a lot of stupid unenforceable
laws from all the decades before now.
In fact you can find and read many of
them on the internet.
It was then and is now just a waste
of time and discussion to put uneforceaable laws on the books when
more important and enforceable are needed.
They do not enforce many of the laws
November 27th, 2009 at 10:52 pmthat are on the books!
One way that a voracious city government can screw you over for more money for the same or less services, is to either add fines to the schedule of offenses, or to increase those that exist.
And that way is very easy to “sell” to the public since people generally don’t care what happens to anyone charged with a crime.
November 27th, 2009 at 11:14 pmMany people that commit crimes just get
November 27th, 2009 at 11:25 pmplea bargains and do not get what they
deserve!!
I agree with DD BOOTS, so many laws, so many crimes and sometimes no time!
November 28th, 2009 at 10:50 amWhat about sexting? That’s still legal right?
November 28th, 2009 at 1:36 pmAs long as you don’t do it in your car after December 31st and it’s not on school property and it’s consenting adults.
November 28th, 2009 at 1:41 pmMikey brings up a good point – inadvertently or not.
Sexting the latest plague to be infecting our young people, and I haven’t heard anything of it in the longest time.
It was all over our local news for longest time for a while, with the news coaching parents on how to parent – so helpful they are.
November 28th, 2009 at 2:06 pmIn the great state of California, talking on your cell phone is illegal while you’re driving. They’re still not sure if that has caused a decrease in accidents or not, but I know for me, it certainly helps my concentration and mobility to not be holding a phone while I’m driving. So, for common sense (and because I live in CA and don’t want to face the legal consequences), I don’t talk on the phone or text and drive.
I don’t like “nanny laws” any more than the next person, but I don’t want one more distraction sending another vehicle directly into my vehicle. My common sense is not shared by everyone else on the road.
They’ve seen a rise in people talking on the phone and driving again in CA because complacency has set in. It makes money for our bankrupt state (maybe) and hopefully deters some people from using their phones while driving, so I’m not too bothered by a step up in enforcement again. If you have to make an important call – pull over, or just use a hands free device. The car-mounted ones are better than those ear-pieces, and some GPS units even have them built in; plus, they’ll connect to your phone automatically when you get in the car most of the time, so there’s nothing to hunt for. Whether it’s the law or not, it’s more safe for you.
November 29th, 2009 at 1:08 pmI love thinking of politicians…
Pass more laws to cover laws already on the books.
Simple solution, you wreck, its proven that texting while driving is the cause of the accident, ticket the person with… failure to control vehicle.
how hard is it to use laws already on the books…
you kill somebody in a wreck while texting, vehicular homicide.. hey its easy…
foolish politicians, waste all those trees for duplicate laws…. Gaia is crying…
December 2nd, 2009 at 9:26 pm