You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
It's not. It's illegal to have anything in the windshield blocking your view. That technically includes fuzzy dice hanging from the mirror, too.
Don't stick the TReO sticker on your windshield, it may obstruct your view.
Don't stick municipal parking decals on your windshield, it may obstruct your view.
Don't stick commercial vehicle decals on your windshield, it may obstruct your view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigzz786786
I got a ticket once at a red light intersection of 3 and Westminster. The cop walks up and says I'm not allowed to use any electronic device will driving. I told him I'm just changing the song on my head unit(2005 SL with aftermarket head unit). He still gave me a ticket even tho I explained to him that control talk didn't exist back then. Went to court 9 months later. Judge threw it out.
Don't operate the turn signals. They allow communication with other drivers after you operate the device with your hand.
It is also not securely fastened because it can flip up and down while driving.
Only voice activated turn signals are allowed.
Don't operate the horn. It allows communication with other drivers after you operate the device with your hand.
It is also not securely fastened because it can turn around while driving.
Only voice activated horns are allowed.
You can be charged for distracted driving for simply having a phone sitting loose in a cup holder playing music, no interaction with the device needed! Figure that one out. Can I pick my nose or scratch my scrotum? Am I going to get pulled over for scratching my ear?
Sometimes the laws really do go to far, and in this case we do have the police to blame for asking for increased enforcement powers. While the OP was wrong to be holding up his iPad, it calls into question the inconsistency of the laws. Can I read directions from a paper note? What about all the bus drivers I see reading the newspaper while stopped at a light?
Maybe taking a sip from my coffee mug while stopped at a light will be illegal soon too.
I've never once allowed myself to be distracted by something in my car to the point I've ended up tuning out what's going on outside, yet I'm at risk of being charged for distracted driving every time I drive. Figure that one out.
you want some cheese with that whine?
The reason the electronic device law came into effect is because it has become an issue. Just like drinking and driving, not every who commits the offence causes an accident or injury to themselves or other people, but the risk is definitely there. Like I said before, would you guys rather be dinged 368 dollars for a Driving without due care and attention fine, or 167 for using an electronic device while driving? For those complaining about the latter please PM me your licence plate so if I ever pull you over for using your cell phone, I will be sure to give you a ticket for section 144.
Sure blame the police again for these laws being in place. Maybe if you 5% of the things first responders did, your tune would be slightly different. Brain splatter from the result of a collision due to a drunk driver. A fatal T bone at an intersection because the driver was talking on his cell phone (but of course they were not distracted.. it was another uncontrolled factor that caused the accident).
Like I said before, would you guys rather be dinged 368 dollars for a Driving without due care and attention fine, or 167 for using an electronic device while driving?
The former because in that case the onus is on the officer to prove that the action was actually creating a significant enough of a distraction to cause a problem.
This would avoid the bogus tickets that are handed out for moving your phone while stopped at a light or punching an address into the GPS.
I don't think for one moment that it's acceptable for drivers to be yapping on the phone, typing an email, etc... while *operating a moving vehicle*. But right on cue you bring up extreme cases like brain splatter to justify enforcement action against trivial acts such as moving a phone off a pile of coins or keys in the cup holder because it's rattling and making noise.
People getting warnings and fines because they're trying to recover their wallet before it disappears out of reach between the seat and console or changing the station on an aftermarket head unit are just a couple of perfect examples of how the police are taking the spirit of these regs too far.
Futzing around with stuff while operating a moving vehicle = dangerous.
Moving something (Christ, not even USING it, just moving it) while stopped =/= dangerous.
Oh, the next time I see something that is worthy of calling the police I'll just ignore it. After all, the police say I should leave my phone out of reach in the trunk because I'm somehow incapable of making appropriate judgement calls regarding its use.
You know how when a police officer does something highly questionable in the public's eyes and you say that we shouldn't paint all cops with the same brush, that there are many good, honest officers, etc...? Well, do us a favor.. don't paint all drivers with the same brush.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/
The former because in that case the onus is on the officer to prove that the action was actually creating a significant enough of a distraction to cause a problem.
This would avoid the bogus tickets that are handed out for moving your phone while stopped at a light or punching an address into the GPS.
I don't think for one moment that it's acceptable for drivers to be yapping on the phone, typing an email, etc... while *operating a moving vehicle*. But right on cue you bring up extreme cases like brain splatter to justify enforcement action against trivial acts such as moving a phone off a pile of coins or keys in the cup holder because it's rattling and making noise.
People getting warnings and fines because they're trying to recover their wallet before it disappears out of reach between the seat and console or changing the station on an aftermarket head unit are just a couple of perfect examples of how the police are taking the spirit of these regs too far.
Futzing around with stuff while operating a moving vehicle = dangerous.
Moving something (Christ, not even USING it, just moving it) while stopped =/= dangerous.
Oh, the next time I see something that is worthy of calling the police I'll just ignore it. After all, the police say I should leave my phone out of reach in the trunk because I'm somehow incapable of making appropriate judgement calls regarding its use.
You know how when a police officer does something highly questionable in the public's eyes and you say that we shouldn't paint all cops with the same brush, that there are many good, honest officers, etc...? Well, do us a favor.. don't paint all drivers with the same brush.
we don't paint all drivers with the same brush.. how many people are let off with warnings in a given day? probably more people than ones that receive tickets... you just don't hear about those because you only hear about people who bitch and complain that they were "unjustly" given a ticket.
You only hear about people who bitch and complain that they were "unjustly" given a ticket.
Good thing I didn't bitch and complain, but rather asked for clarification for something I was not aware of. Probably helped that I have seen more blood and brain splatter then most officers can claim to.
Not really relevant, I agree, butI figured that if you can drag that in to try and make you point, why shouldn't I use it also?
Except you kinda do. And so does the ministry of justice who is undoubtedly supported by police departments that want ever increasing powers to crack down on trivial offences. (Jamie Graham wanted to impound phones for a week as a penalty. Seems a little extreme for not even using your phone, no?)
Bringing arguments like brain splatter into the argument makes it pretty clear that you're grouping me with the same sort of people who have no control over their impulses to pick up a phone and text about dinner plans while navigating their car through traffic.
As written, the law is a knee-jerk attempt to deal with the very real problem of cell phone use while driving. It needs simplification and re-focus.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/
Dear God, this forum REALLY needs a FAIL button...
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry
Except you kinda do. And so does the ministry of justice who is undoubtedly supported by police departments that want ever increasing powers to crack down on trivial offences. (Jamie Graham wanted to impound phones for a week as a penalty. Seems a little extreme for not even using your phone, no?)
Bringing arguments like brain splatter into the argument makes it pretty clear that you're grouping me with the same sort of people who have no control over their impulses to pick up a phone and text about dinner plans while navigating their car through traffic.
Uhhh... you and OP are the ONLY ones who've mentioned "brain splatter" in this thread.
Now who's grouping whom?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
You can be charged for distracted driving for simply having a phone sitting loose in a cup holder playing music, no interaction with the device needed! Figure that one out. Can I pick my nose or scratch my scrotum? Am I going to get pulled over for scratching my ear?
__________________
oOoOooOOo what does this space do
-2018 BMW F30 340i M Performance Edition - Current
-2016 BMW F32 435i MPPK - Traded
-2011 BMW E92 335i - SOLD
-2009 Chrysler Sebring Convertible - SOLD
Good thing I didn't bitch and complain, but rather asked for clarification for something I was not aware of. Probably helped that I have seen more blood and brain splatter then most officers can claim to.
Not really relevant, I agree, butI figured that if you can drag that in to try and make you point, why shouldn't I use it also?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry
Except you kinda do. And so does the ministry of justice who is undoubtedly supported by police departments that want ever increasing powers to crack down on trivial offences. (Jamie Graham wanted to impound phones for a week as a penalty. Seems a little extreme for not even using your phone, no?)
Bringing arguments like brain splatter into the argument makes it pretty clear that you're grouping me with the same sort of people who have no control over their impulses to pick up a phone and text about dinner plans while navigating their car through traffic.
As written, the law is a knee-jerk attempt to deal with the very real problem of cell phone use while driving. It needs simplification and re-focus.
I was stopped at a red light, and while waiting, read a bit on my ipad. Which, since I am posting here, obviously led to a ticket. Officer explained that using an electronic device, for whatever purpose, while in the car is prohibited. When I pointed out that I was simply reading, he stated that even if this had been a paper book, it would still be illegal.
Is this accurate? Is standing at a red light operating the motor vehicle? And does an ipad that cannot communicate without wifi fall under "a prescribed class or type of electronic device"?
You realize the police are enforcing these types of laws because most people lack common sense. Reading an iPad at a red light? Come on... what is so important that you couldn't wait until you got to your destination.
You realize the police are enforcing these types of laws because most people lack common sense. Reading an iPad at a red light? Come on... what is so important that you couldn't wait until you got to your destination.
This would avoid the bogus tickets that are handed out for moving your phone while stopped at a light or punching an address into the GPS.
But you aren't allowed to punch an address into the GPS. You are only allowed if it is voice activated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry
Oh, the next time I see something that is worthy of calling the police I'll just ignore it. After all, the police say I should leave my phone out of reach in the trunk because I'm somehow incapable of making appropriate judgement calls regarding its use.
You are allowed to call 911 if you are in immediate danger or you see a situation warranting calling 911 even if you are driving.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry
Am I going to get pulled over for scratching my ear?
Funny you should mention this. I read of someone being stopped for scratching his ear cause the cop behind couldn't tell and basically from his POV saw him putting something against his ear. Don't remember if he actually got a ticket or if the cop determined that he wasn't using his phone.
You realize the police are enforcing these types of laws because most people lack common sense. Reading an iPad at a red light? Come on... what is so important that you couldn't wait until you got to your destination.
After thinking about it, I agree.
As I mentioned, I see the logic in the law, and I admit I was in the wrong. Not sure how I can state this more clearly, and it seems obvious that it doesn't matter, since it won't stop some of the people here from making their silly remarks that they cannot hold in.
For those who simply answered and gave information, my thanks. For those that cannot resist and have to act like immature children, no problem, I have kids, so this is nothing new.
But you aren't allowed to punch an address into the GPS. You are only allowed if it is voice activated.
No, you're not. So people changing the radio station get charged because the cop couldn't tell what function they were bringing up on the system. Those voice controlled systems are often more distracting while driving than typing in an address while stopped at a light. Again, a knee-jerk law that doesn't take enough into consideration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wing_woo
You are allowed to call 911 if you are in immediate danger or you see a situation warranting calling 911 even if you are driving.
Pretty hard when the phone is locked in the trunk like the police tell us to do, because.. you know, we're all incapable of having it sitting next to us without using it.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/
You really should try reading (and having someone explain the parts you don't understand) both the whole thread, and the whole post. That would save you posting nonsense and sounding like an idiot.
On the other hand, if you don't mind making a fool of yourself, why should I care?
You really should try reading (and having someone explain the parts you don't understand) both the whole thread, and the whole post. That would save you posting nonsense and sounding like an idiot.
On the other hand, if you don't mind making a fool of yourself, why should I care?
You really should try reading (and having someone explain the parts you don't understand) both the whole thread, and the whole post. That would save you posting nonsense and sounding like an idiot.
Ah, yet another problem. In the grownup world, you actually earn money, not whine to daddy that you want some.
This thread is really going downhill, isn't it? It started with me asking clarification about things I was not aware of (which obviously does not excuse breaking the law), and as many such forums, quickly escalated to personal attacks and sarcasm.
Ah, yet another problem. In the grownup world, you actually earn money, not whine to daddy that you want some.
This thread is really going downhill, isn't it? It started with me asking clarification about things I was not aware of (which obviously does not excuse breaking the law), and as many such forums, quickly escalated to personal attacks and sarcasm.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
