A blog about News.
About editorials


Member Since:
June 23, 2006
Last Signed In:
October 09, 2008
Profile Views:
8070
Blog Views:
110746
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Those were mighty pricey bricks
Open season on campaign theft
No on Proposition 7
How does Interstate 7 sound?
Quit posturing and get it done
Modified bailout must go forward
Tonight’s debate must go forward
Safety must be top concern
Interior giving away millions
Vote NO on Proposition 2
Archives
June 06
July 06
August 06
September 06
October 06
November 06
December 06
January 07
February 07
March 07
April 07
May 07
June 07
July 07
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
October 08
More Archives
June 06
May 06
April 06
March 06
February 06
January 06
December 05
November 05
October 05
September 05
August 05
July 05
June 05
May 05
April 05
March 05
February 05

Blog Roll


Ask The Californian
Editorials
Entertainment
Eye of Bakersfield
Faith Forum
Fired Up!
Inside Sports
Neighbors
Right Thinking
Sound Off
Talk of the Town
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


editorials - > Editorials -> Demand hands-free cell phone use
Demand hands-free cell phone use
PUBLISHED 9-1-2006

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger shouldn’t hang up on a bill that would require drivers to use a hand-free device if they want to use a cell phone in a car.

He should sign SB1613 by Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto.

The governor has said in the past that something needs to be done about the problem of drivers being distracted while talking on the phone, but has not endorsed a legislative solution.

But the time to equivocate on the issue has long since passed. Years of public outrage about inattentive drivers and long experience with accident statistics show Simitian’s bill is needed.

The bill would impose a fine of $20 for the first offense of driving while holding a phone in hand, and $50 fines for subsequent violations. There are exemptions for emergency situations and a few other highly specialized situations.

Several factors make Simitian’s bill a good one:

• Cell phone use is all but universal, but only about one-third of drivers use a hands-free system. A study by the National Conference of State Legislatures showed that 70 percent of all motorists use a cell phone while driving.

• California Highway Patrol statistics — as well as studies all across the nation — show that cell phone use is a continuing and increasing factor in accidents.

• The same CHP statistics show conclusively that the vast majority of cell-phone related accidents  involve drivers without hands-free devices. Only 30 of the more than 800 cell-phone related accidents during 2004 involved drivers who used a hands-free system.

That statistic blunts claims by critics that any use of a phone while driving is distracting enough that all cell phone use should be banned.

Opposition to the bill within the legislature for the most part centered on the “nanny state” argument — that government should stop regulating individual behavior.
 
But huge numbers of laws  — from banning driving while drunk to local dog leash laws — are designed to protect the vast majority of responsible citizens from those who are careless or irresponsible.

Hands-free devices have plummeted in cost since cell phones first became popular and are universally available. If someone can afford the service, he can afford to equip and use it properly.

Simitian has been pursuing this legislative issue for nearly six years. Laws similar to his already have been enacted in many states. During those years, Simitian has amended it to answer critics’ objections.
 
Finally, his efforts to require hands-free devices has passed the Legislature. It is time for the governor to sign it.
Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by editorials on Thursday, August 31, 2006 at 05:52 PM
Report a Violation
Viewed 287 times
3 comments from 2 users

1

posted by anonymous on Sep 1, 2006 at 07:53 AM
After $50.00 for the second offense, I think an officer with a tattoo (;>p) should have the authority to shove the cell phone into the mouth of the user leaving the antenna sticking through the lower lip and call it a lip piercing.  Sign the bill Arny or "It'll be back"
posted by ProgressivePete2 on Sep 1, 2006 at 09:28 AM
I actually feel a bit more distracted when using a headset. I am not the type that likes to chat on the phone whenever I drive, but If I do get into a sticky situation, I can just drop the phone, and the distraction is gone. I think we have more of a problem with people that don't drive well whether they're on a cell or not. It's a daily occurance to have someone drift into my lane especially when going around a curve in the road. I think the driving test should be much more strict. Currently it focuses more on the rules of the road than things like handling, or merging onto the freeway.
posted by anonymous on Sep 1, 2006 at 10:34 AM
The dual laned right hand turn from northbound Gosford to eastbound Truxtun is a turn I have to make 5 days per week.  It amazes me how many people cut in front of me trying to get into the far right lane when the one they were in also turns right.  So I decided to start staying in the left of the two right turn lanes.  Invaribly, about twice a week, some moron that has just cut in front of someone in the right lane (leaving me space to move forward one more car length) will then swing back into the fast lane as they make the turn nearly forcing me onto the center divider.  Better than 1/2 the time they are talking on a cell phone.
1

Leave a Comment
Ground Rules for posting comments:
  • No profanity or personal attacks.
  • Please comment on the subject of the post itself.
If you do not follow these rules we will remove your comment. Please keep it civil.

To protect users from spam, please enter the text from the image on the left.
   

Our readers recommend: