disputing electronic device bylaw (LEO replies only please)

[Spidey]

the law states

214.1 In this Part:

"electronic device" means

(a) a hand-held cellular telephone or another hand-held electronic device that includes a telephone function,
(b) a hand-held electronic device that is capable of transmitting or receiving electronic mail or other text-based messages, or
(c) a prescribed class or type of electronic device;

"use", in relation to an electronic device, means one or more of the following actions:

(a) holding the device in a position in which it may be used;
(b) operating one or more of the device's functions;
(c) communicating orally by means of the device with another person or another device;
(d) taking another action that is set out in the regulations by means of, with or in relation to an electronic device.

Prohibition against use of electronic device while driving

214.2 (1) A person must not use an electronic device while driving or operating a motor vehicle on a highway.




As per my case. I just received a ticket on Lougheed and WIllingdon. The Integrated Traffic team have been camping out there all month, so I KNOW not to be stupid enough to use my phone and or anything there.

This morning as I was heading West bound on Lougheed and Willingdon, my Ipod gets wedged between my pasenger seat and centre console. As I come to a stop, I pull it out, look for scratches and put it back on my console. A Cop pulls me over and gives me a ticket. I told him my situataion and he says his hands are tied and that there is a zero tolerance for any electronic device in my hand, period.

reading the bylaw, I can't figure out if it applies to my situation. It is not about the money, and if Skidmark and the rest of your LEO's say that you would have done the same and ticketed me in that situation, I am going to pay up and own up to my mistake. I just find it a bit harsh. Again, I am not making any excuses. If what I did was illegal, I will pay for it.


Thanks for your guys' time.

[fsy82]

You Ipod doesnt have a telephone function.

[Spidey]

Originally Posted by fsy82

You Ipod doesnt have a telephone function.

I know, but I thought his "(c) a prescribed class or type of electronic device;

" would fall under all electronics in general. Also, the cop told me NO electronics allowed. Phones, ipods etc... I need clarification on this from LEO's that actually know. My ipod is a nano and does not have any phone functions or email functions.

[ajax]

Also your ipod was hooked upto your stereo right? I'm curious about this as well as I use my ipod all the time and I'm guessing that its just like using my car stereo to press next and etc.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Spidey]

Thing is, my radio is touch screen and controls all the functions of my ipod... i am going to write a letter to the integrated road safety unit and see.

[sho_bc]

You answer your own question in your post

Originally Posted by BlueG2

the law states

214.1 In this Part:

"electronic device" means

(a) a hand-held cellular telephone or another hand-held electronic device that includes a telephone function,
(b) a hand-held electronic device that is capable of transmitting or receiving electronic mail or other text-based messages, or
(c) a prescribed class or type of electronic device;

"use", in relation to an electronic device, means one or more of the following actions:

(a) holding the device in a position in which it may be used;
(b) operating one or more of the device's functions;
(c) communicating orally by means of the device with another person or another device;
(d) taking another action that is set out in the regulations by means of, with or in relation to an electronic device.

Prohibition against use of electronic device while driving

214.2 (1) A person must not use an electronic device while driving or operating a motor vehicle on a highway.


As I come to a stop, I pull it out, look for scratched and put it back on my console.

[skidmark]

Prescribed electronic devices

3 (1) The following electronic devices are prescribed for the purposes of paragraph (c) of the definition of “electronic device” in section 214.1 of the Act:

(a) electronic devices that include a hands-free telephone function;

(b) global positioning systems;

(c) hand-held electronic devices, one of the purposes of which is to process or compute data;

(d) hand-held audio players;

(e) hand microphones;

(f) televisions.

(2) In subsection (1), hand microphone means a communication device consisting of a hand-held unit that

(a) is both receiver and microphone,

(b) is operated by a push and hold-to-talk function, and

(c) allows for oral communication, but not for the transmission and receipt of oral communication at the same time.

[Spidey]

Thanks Skidmark. The list you replied with was the clarification I needed. I'll be paying the ticket tomorrow.

[Rich Sandor]

You were stopped, you picked it up, and you put it away.

It would have been unsafe for you to leave it where it could fall on the ground, as it may have gotten stuck under your gas or brake pedal, and caused an accident.

I spoke to a retired traffic court judge about this earlier and they said they would consider overturning the ticket if they heard that argument.

Bear in mind: This section of law was written as a knee-jerk reaction to an overwhelming tide of electronic devices being used while driving. It was written somewhat in haste, and no law is ever written perfectly the first time around.

Look at it like this: If your wallet had fallen down, and you picked it up to put it away so that it doesn't get stuck under the brake pedal, you would not have gotten a ticket. Why does the type of object change whether or not you get a ticket? It shouldn't.

[Spidey]

..

[zulutango]

If you disputed the VT you will have a chance to explain the circumstances. Unless there is a minimum penalty mandated for the offence the JP has the option of reducing the fine. Something to consider. IMHO a VT for this should not impact your application, specially if the circumstances are given.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by BlueG2

Thanks Skidmark. The list you replied with was the clarification I needed. I'll be paying the ticket tomorrow. I just hope this blemish won't hurt my RCMP application.

The "device" part may be satisfied, but the "use" part hasn't. As zulu says, probably worth disputing.

[Spidey]

Thanks for all those who have replied and given their advice.

[sebberry]

I'm confused as to how pressing a physical button (next track) on my MP3 player sitting in my cup holder is any different from pressing a physical button on my car's stereo.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by Soundy

The "device" part may be satisfied, but the "use" part hasn't. As zulu says, probably worth disputing.

"use", in relation to an electronic device, means one or more of the following actions:

(a) holding the device in a position in which it may be used;

He picked it up. He was holding it in a position that could allow for its use.

Just like issuing a drunk kid at a party with a 24hr ADP simply because he was in posession of his car key, but not driving his car.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by sebberry

I'm confused as to how pressing a physical button (next track) on my MP3 player sitting in my cup holder is any different from pressing a physical button on my car's stereo.

The law was written that way just because they wanted to fry YOUR brain.

[skidmark]

Originally Posted by BlueG2

I just hope this blemish won't hurt my RCMP application.

Probably not. I remember our first day in driver training in Regina. One of my troopmates was recognized by the instructor. Stuart had just joined and the instructor had just been transferred in. Seems one of the last things that the instructor had done at the old posting was ticket my troopmate for a driving infraction.

[Phil@rise]

I thought if you were stopped you could operate such electronics?

[Spidey]

Originally Posted by skidmark

Probably not. I remember our first day in driver training in Regina. One of my troopmates was recognized by the instructor. Stuart had just joined and the instructor had just been transferred in. Seems one of the last things that the instructor had done at the old posting was ticket my troopmate for a driving infraction.

lol, what are the chances... btw skidmark, are you still an active member, or are you retired?

[Spidey]

Originally Posted by Phil@rise

I thought if you were stopped you could operate such electronics?

not true.. unless your car is parked off the roadway, then you are allowed to use. I got a warning from an RCMP officer, when I picked up my phone to read a text at a red light. I am not going to have even a coffee mug in my arms reach anymore. I can't afford anymore type of Traffic infractions!

[zulutango]

And on the reverse to what Skidmark said....my driving instroctor for the 2nd half of training turned out to someone whose family I had met. I was an Aux Cst before joining and we had chased a guy on a dirt bike all around the sideroads of Conception Bay South ( Nfld)...Foxtrap & Kelligrews. As the rider headed into the yard of a house at high speed, we stopped behind him. I bailed out of the passenger door of the PC and chased the rider inside the house, saw his boots disappear under a bed & yanked him out & arrested him. Turned out that he was the younger brother of my driving instructor. On top of that, my brother had hung around with a bunch in Moncton NB....one of which turned out to be my instrutor's wife. Made for an interesting second half of training. Cost me a lot of coffee and pie at Smittys to keep getting whacked with the clipboard for "mistakes" in my driving.

[Spidey]

LOLOL. so who are the members on this board that are regular members with the RCMP? I didn't know there was more than sho bc and skidmark...

getting off topic here. lol

[Soundy]

GOT STICKIES???

Originally Posted by BlueG2

LOLOL. so who are the members on this board that are regular members with the RCMP? I didn't know there was more than sho bc and skidmark...

getting off topic here. lol

http://www.revscene.net/forums/moder...s-t487709.html

(I think that needs to be updated!)

Originally Posted by BlueG2

lol, what are the chances... btw skidmark, are you still an active member, or are you retired?

Skidmark

As of January 5, 2006 I am retired with just over 25 years of service with the RCMP.

[slammer111]

Originally Posted by sebberry

I'm confused as to how pressing a physical button (next track) on my MP3 player sitting in my cup holder is any different from pressing a physical button on my car's stereo.

That's the stupid part.

Basically the same rules apply as speeding.. "don't get caught".

That's the problem with these laws. They criminalize the majority of drivers. With the exception of a couple, pretty much everyone I know uses an mp3 player in their cars.

[parm104]

Whatever happened to mens rea LOL. If only peoples intentions were considered in cases like this rather than just the acts. I know the law is getting tougher on cases like this because of people who abuse the system/people who blatantly break the law.

In a case like this, it is unfortunate because your intention was not to use the device in any way. That being said, I think the playing field should be evened out by banning other activities while driving. Electronic devices are only a small aspect of the safe driving scene. SMOKING should be banned as well. It's just as easy to be distracted with a cigarette in your hand. Not only are you distracted with something in your hand, but also with something that has to be disposed of and ensured that you don't get burnt by it.