[6o4__boi]

BC?s distracted driving laws just got a whole lot tougher | News Talk 980 CKNW | Vancouver's News. Vancouver's Talk (http://www.cknw.com/2016/05/09/bcs-distracted-driving-laws-just-got-a-whole-lot-tougher/)

https://twitter.com/CKNW/status/729744875067822080

VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – The province is getting tougher with people caught driving while distracted.

As of June 1st, those caught with a phone in their hand while behind the wheel in BC will have to pay a minimum of $543. This is the sum of an initial $368 fine (an increase from the existing fine of $167) and the $175 cost to pay off points against the licence.

Each offence will come with four penalty points, up from the existing three.

With a minimum ICBC Driver Penalty Point premium of $520, a second offence within one year will cost $888.

A fifth offence will cost $3,760; a 10th runs $14,520.

Transportation Minister Todd Stone says this can be a life-ruining habit that should be seen in the same light as drunk driving. He adds there are hundreds of tragic stories.

“An 18-year-old that was driving his car — and his parents were in a car right behind him — suddenly swerved into oncoming traffic, had a head-on and was killed right in front of his parents. It turns out, he was on his phone.”

Distracted driving will become a “high risk offence,” putting it at the same level as excessive speeding and driving without due care and attention.

“L” or “N” drivers will have their driving records reviewed after the first offence, with a possible prohibition of up to six months — longer for repeat offences. All drivers will be subject to a review after the second offence.

The superintendent of motor vehicle is also allowed to prohibit drivers based on referrals from ICBC or police.

The public safety minister says they will track behaviour following this increase and fines could rise again if police aren’t seeing a change.

[smoothie.]

I think its great...



...if they would catch the ones that drive and text more than the ones that do it while stopped at a red light.


And also ticket themselves for when they call on cellphones and typing on laptop

[lilaznviper]

^police are "trained" to do it.

I just don't get why we can't get "trained" as well if the police could.

[Sid Vicious]

these types of laws are made for the average person, you would not consider a police officer an average person by any means.

people on average can't even drive even without distractions, so if theyre texting as well all bets are off

[6o4__boi]

I wonder how many people will actually get suspended after the review

that $14,500 premium doe

:fuckthatshit:

[swiftshift]

$543.. will be a very expensive text message/phone call..

[Nlkko]

This is great. With all the tech these days (voice recognition like Google Now or Siri) you should be able to do a lot of stuffs hands free.

[68style]

^ easy for you to say when you're not trying to keep your side bishes on the low low

[meme405]

$543.. will be a very expensive text message/phone call..

Yes it is.

Still pretty cheap compared to the ~81 people who pay with their lives every year in BC.

I'm guilty of using my phone and driving, but I've gotten much better at avoiding it over the last couple years. I received one ticket for using my phone at a red light when the laws first came out, and since then I've learned and trained myself to pull over if it's important, or just ignore it.

Tons of technology out there to help with avoiding it to, I added one of my spare iPhones to my glove compartment and ran a cable into there, now it just sits in there and I can control my music from my head unit or steering wheel just like a CD, no more monkeying around with the Aux input and my phone changing songs, Bluetooth to connect for calls (I still avoid using it, but with work sometimes I gotta answer), and if I need navigation on my phone I just make sure to set it before I leave.

I do obviously still disagree with how cops are just taking the easy way out on enforcing this and just ticketing people at Red lights, but the lesson is there. You just have to be smart enough to learn it.

[FerrariEnzo]

Premium Penalty Points, this is a one-time payment when renewing insurance?

Damn
PEI $500-$1200
ON $490-$1000

PEI must have a lot of distracted drivers.. :lawl:

[Mr.C]

I'd be more in favour if they weren't going after people stopped at lights.

[Nlkko]

Try voice recognition feature on your phone. Pretty impressive. I tried it and its great. You basically just read like "go to home", "go to work", "go to xyz address", "dial (name)", etc.

[unit]

you still have to unlock your phone and have it on the home screen for you to say "ok google".

it's still interacting with your phone. easier to get away with but still illegal.

[MarkyMark]

Seriously after the tenth offence why not just a lifetime ban from driving? To the average person 15 grand is a real deterrent, but to a lot of people out there they can continue to pay whatever pennies it is to them and stay on the road being a danger to everyone. The amount of money you make should have no say on whether or not you get to keep driving.

[unit]

i don't even know why were talking about a 10th offence. i know it happened to some girl in richmond recently but they should just say after 3 offences its like 90 days suspension and any offences after are a year suspension.

[MarkyMark]

i don't even know why were talking about a 10th offence. i know it happened to some girl in richmond recently but they should just say after 3 offences its like 90 days suspension and any offences after are a year suspension.

I only commented on ten because they showed it on the chart but you're right, after 3 times within a certain amount of years it should be obvious that the punishment they have received isn't enough of a deterrent to change their ways, in which case a lengthy suspension is the way to go.

[AzNightmare]

:alone:

Guess I'm the only person that gets fucking annoyed when I get phone notifications during my drive, cause I'm in my zone when I drive, even at the red light. Gotta time those perpendicular yellow lights and get ready... :awwyeah:

When I'm listening to music with BT, and then my music keeps getting interrupted because I forgot to put DND mode, these assholes that "machine gun" msg while I'm driving, it's the worse.

[adambomb]

The most simple and cost effective solution to using all apps your phone has to offer while in your vehicle, without having to use voice recognition or a headset is to simply... pull over. :o

If you're on a side street and your phone rings, it should be no problem to find a safe spot to pull over. If you're driving a main roadway and some girl snapchats that pussy because its cool. Find a gas station or pull over into any parking lot and check your DM.

Using your phone in your vehicle while stopped in a parking lot or safely pulled over and not impeding traffic is not illegal. :toot:

[alex.w *//]

What if using phone on a cell phone holder, eye level , almost like changing radio stations or volume

[jackmeister]

I think at 5 times cost wise you're getting into IRP territory.....

that should be enough to suspend 30 days?

[DragonChi]

What if using phone on a cell phone holder, eye level , almost like changing radio stations or volume

This is legal. As long as your cellphone is secure to your car, you can use it.

I've seen people with cellphones attached to those suction cup cell phone holders.

[frozen]

Surprised by the amount of praises RS is giving to this new bullshit increased fine for distracted driving, and thinking that this will contribute to meaningful reduction in accidents from distracted driving.

I personally think most of these driving fines are nothing more than cash grab, including speeding tickets. Again, while I think it’s fucking stupid, unfortunately there isn’t anything that can be done because it is how the world operates. It’s always easy to tap into people’s emotions and give a story of a tragic death resulting from distracted driving to get more support for increased fines.

Do I agree that increased fine will likely reduce some accidents? Sure, but at what cost seriously? The fines for distracted driving are increased thanks to a minority of dumb fucking morons out there who get into accidents while talking on the phone due to a combination of 1) their inability to make proper judgment on when and under what road condition they should be talking on the phone, 2) a lack of physical coordination in which case they will just crash their car any way at some point even without talking on the phone and 3) sheer retardation.

Because of these morons, which I seriously think are a minority, the people who are capable of properly assessing the situation and making correct judgment when or when not to talk on the phone are increasingly penalized. These laws are fucking dumb because they do not consider the circumstance under which the driver is fined. It is simply “because you had a phone on your fucking hand, you get fined.” When visibility/weather condition is poor, road is narrow, and area is dense with tons of people around, it’s definitely not a smart choice to talk on the phone. But on a sunny day with excellent visibility, wide open road with no blind spots, and in an area with few people around, I don’t see any reasons why one can’t talk on the phone while driving. I have seen a number of cases where people are getting ticketed for this. One should never be TEXTING under any circumstances, but I fail to see how talking on the phone on certain occasions will increase the likelihood of accidents.

Also, how the fuck does going hands-free really make it safer? Do all of you driving with two hands always? Unless you are driving on some nasty terrain or on a snowy/rainy day, there isn’t a need to holding your steering wheels with two hands at all times if you are driving an automatic. If you are still driving with one hand and talking on a phone hands free, what difference does it make if someone is holding a phone with one hand and talking while driving with the other. And what’s with such strong emphasis on using electronic devices? What about bitches putting up make up? Idiots eating while driving?

This new increased fine for distracted driving is as stupid as saying driving slower will make roads safer. Just another over-simplified solution that does jack shit. Only time will tell whether it’s going to curb accidents resulting from distracted driving, but I, in the meantime, of an opinion that you can’t legislate fucking stupidity.

[Great68]

Fucktwats on their phone in traffic piss me off just as much as anyone else. I've been held up by them at red lights, I've been near missed by them.

But the only way I could ever support these penalties and laws is if they weren't so much your word against the officer's. We all know that 99% of the time judges will take the side of the cop, regardless if the cop misinterpreted what he saw or is simply lying.
There's been way too many stories of people who weren't actually using any electronic devices getting nailed and having absolutely no recourse.
There's no such thing as a crooked/bad cop right? Every single one out there is a perfect, model, law enforcement professional...

Eyes straight forward, hands at 10 and 2 every second you're in the car... yeah.

[MarkyMark]

How much of a problem are these crooked cops really though? I find it hard to believe any officer would pull you over and ticket you for being on your phone unless they were sure about it. I'm willing to bet the number of cops pulling that kind of shit is very minuscule compared to the people who lie and say they are the victim who did nothing wrong. There's just so many people speeding or on their phone out there, why would they have to pin shit on someone who's innocent?

[hal0g0dv2]

perfect!! Pull over if you need to check your phone. Nobody is that important that they need to check there phone while they drive

[Akinari]

Fucktwats on their phone in traffic piss me off just as much as anyone else. I've been held up by them at red lights, I've been near missed by them.

This.

I can't even count the number of times I've been behind some idiot who continues texting or browsing Facebook on their phone after the light turns green, completely oblivious, really pisses me off. The worst is when you're making a right turn from a side street and the person in front of you clearly has their head down looking at their phone while everyone in front of them has already driven off :rukidding:

What difference does using your phone at a red light have compared to using your phone while the car is not stationary? Are you not driving your car when you're at a red light? Are you not distracted when you're using your phone at a red light? Like how fucking hard can it be to just not fucking use your phone while you're driving you bloody phone addicts? I for one am very happy with the decision to increase the fines. People calling this another "cash grab" clearly don't know what distracted driving can do, compared to say, driving 10-20km/h over the speed limit and getting a speeding ticket, which is arguably much more of a cash grab.

Also, if you need to pull over to make a phone call or text, for the love of god don't just literally park your car in the middle of the lane and put your hazards on a la Richmond style, I've seen this happen more than enough it's just as terrible, where's the common sense?

[underscore]

If you're at a red light you're still in control of that vehicle, that means you need to be aware enough to move it or stop it from moving at all times.

There's been way too many stories of people who weren't actually using any electronic devices getting nailed and having absolutely no recourse.

Source?

[ImportPsycho]

What if using phone on a cell phone holder, eye level , almost like changing radio stations or volume

When stopped at red light, you can change music, enter addy to your navi, face your passenger and talk. But as soon as you glance at your phone, you are Murder!! Impound you car!!
Actually you also do all of these while moving and you still wouldn't get tickets.

[Akinari]

According to section 214.2 of the Motor Vehicle Act

Drivers with a regular licence are permitted to use hands-free cellphones and devices that can be operated with one touch or voice command, provided that the device is securely fixed to the vehicle or worn securely on the driver’s body

[ScizzMoney]

http://cdn.funnymeme.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Funny-memes-facebook-stop-light.jpg

[H.Specter]

http://cdn.funnymeme.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Funny-memes-facebook-stop-light.jpg
http://img.ifcdn.com/images/f16bdacb0272dae86110137290c8e48b5863c125211cf63028 5dfa2bebe80943_1.jpg

[tiger_handheld]

does this apply if i'm eating a big-mac while i drive with one hand?

[tiger_handheld]

This.

I can't even count the number of times I've been behind some idiot who continues texting or browsing Facebook on their phone after the light turns green, completely oblivious, really pisses me off. The worst is when you're making a right turn from a side street and the person in front of you clearly has their head down looking at their phone while everyone in front of them has already driven off :rukidding:

What difference does using your phone at a red light have compared to using your phone while the car is not stationary? Are you not driving your car when you're at a red light? Are you not distracted when you're using your phone at a red light? Like how fucking hard can it be to just not fucking use your phone while you're driving you bloody phone addicts? I for one am very happy with the decision to increase the fines. People calling this another "cash grab" clearly don't know what distracted driving can do, compared to say, driving 10-20km/h over the speed limit and getting a speeding ticket, which is arguably much more of a cash grab.

Also, if you need to pull over to make a phone call or text, for the love of god don't just literally park your car in the middle of the lane and put your hazards on a la Richmond style, I've seen this happen more than enough it's just as terrible, where's the common sense?


I agree with you.. but i'm going to be "that guy"...

how do you know someone is on their phone on fb/texting when you are behind them? do you have xray vision?

[MarkyMark]

does this apply if i'm eating a big-mac while i drive with one hand?

I think one big mac is acceptable, although a super sized coke in the other while you steer with your knee is pushing it.

[MarkyMark]

I agree with you.. but i'm going to be "that guy"...

how do you know someone is on their phone on fb/texting when you are behind them? do you have xray vision?

Sitting in my truck it's pretty obvious looking down at a dude in his car in front of me and his head constantly looks up and down every few seconds. It's either that or he's admiring his dick a little too much.

[GS8]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiCS8eCVIAQnYxZ.jpg

I wonder how many Mainlanders WANT that second offense?

[Hehe]

I don't think this would matter anymore in 10yr time.

Autonomous car technology is just around the corner. Seriously, I'd buy a fucking Chrysler Pacifica if that's the car to be. And I'd rock the LoL in a traffic jam

After that, this law would go into the category of "laws that don't make any sense"

[Soundy]

I personally think most of these driving fines are nothing more than cash grab, including speeding tickets.

This is the stupidest, most self-absorbed, retarded phrase ever, and people should stop using it or get a well-deserved punch in the face.

A "cash grab" is unavoidable. These kinds of tickets are 100% avoidable: don't break the law, and they don't get your cash. Simple.
:yuno:

[mb_]

Lol @ fines being a "cash grab"

[twitchyzero]

does this apply if i'm eating a big-mac while i drive with one hand?

i'd like to know too...does eating fall under distracted driving with the same fines?

[Timpo]

This is the stupidest, most self-absorbed, retarded phrase ever, and people should stop using it or get a well-deserved punch in the face.

A "cash grab" is unavoidable. These kinds of tickets are 100% avoidable: don't break the law, and they don't get your cash. Simple.
:yuno:if he was talking about speeding tickets, it's a cash grab because the limit is far too low for safety. We all know this.
I bet you speed every single day multiple times like we all do.

Texting on the other hand, it's just as dangerous as DUI.

[Jmac]

This.

I can't even count the number of times I've been behind some idiot who continues texting or browsing Facebook on their phone after the light turns green, completely oblivious, really pisses me off. The worst is when you're making a right turn from a side street and the person in front of you clearly has their head down looking at their phone while everyone in front of them has already driven off :rukidding:

What difference does using your phone at a red light have compared to using your phone while the car is not stationary? Are you not driving your car when you're at a red light? Are you not distracted when you're using your phone at a red light? Like how fucking hard can it be to just not fucking use your phone while you're driving you bloody phone addicts? I for one am very happy with the decision to increase the fines. People calling this another "cash grab" clearly don't know what distracted driving can do, compared to say, driving 10-20km/h over the speed limit and getting a speeding ticket, which is arguably much more of a cash grab.

Also, if you need to pull over to make a phone call or text, for the love of god don't just literally park your car in the middle of the lane and put your hazards on a la Richmond style, I've seen this happen more than enough it's just as terrible, where's the common sense?
It's annoying, absolutely.

These fines are being increased to make the roads safer, similar to how penalties for drinking and driving have increased. However, I'd wager the vast majority of tickets aren't going to hit the people who are endangering lives.

[geeknerd]

Hate these catch-all laws that are even catch all. Buy a car with a system that has facebook app. Problem not solved.

[Soundy]

if he was talking about speeding tickets, it's a cash grab because the limit is far too low for safety. We all know this.
I bet you speed every single day multiple times like we all do.
Don't do the crime, don't pay the fine, keep all your cash. Pretty simple.

If it's YOUR CHOICE to break the law, then it's your choice to pay the price when caught.

[Manic!]

What are governments going to do when cars start driving themselves. They are going to lose so much in revenue and cops are going to have so much more free time.

[Ch28]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiCS8eCVIAQnYxZ.jpg

I wonder how many Mainlanders WANT that second offense?

This might end up making Richmond tolerable to drive in again.

[Mr.Money]

i hope the new law applies to past offenders also....So this person can get fucked so hard in the ass.
:troll:
Police in B.C. hoping to revoke licence of driver with 14 distracted-driving tickets | CTV News (http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/motorist-racks-up-14-distracted-driving-tickets-but-continues-to-drive-1.2822755)

[rslater]

According to section 214.2 of the Motor Vehicle Act

I think I'm a little confused. So if I get a permanent holder that my phone sits in, I can touch it with my hand? Like I can accept a call, scroll through music, text etc much like I would on my nav screen?

[frozen]

This is the stupidest, most self-absorbed, retarded phrase ever, and people should stop using it or get a well-deserved punch in the face.

A "cash grab" is unavoidable. These kinds of tickets are 100% avoidable: don't break the law, and they don't get your cash. Simple.
:yuno:

You've been punched enough times in the head that your logic is failing hard. Your statement does not even consider the stupidity or validity of certain laws and what you are saying to people is just obey the law and don't get fined.

What I'm saying is that it's a huge fucking inconvenience in some cases to obey some law that was brought in with clear intention of increasing revenues.

Are you gonna keep saying the same shit if they deem that the current speed limit is a major factor in causing accidents and further lower it? Next up, we will fine you if we see that you are driving with one hand.

Guys, if you love getting raped and feel there aren't enough fines that surround you, by all means. BC isn't the first province to bring in distracted driving fines. There are other provinces which have this in place for longer. Why not post a study that actually shows there have been meaningful reductions in accidents after implementing such law? Some of your replies are so fucking simplistic it bothers me. It's like this law will save you from having to ever deal with people looking at their phone at a stoplight.

[stewie]

There's been way too many stories of people who weren't actually using any electronic devices getting nailed and having absolutely no recourse.


People lie...a lot...

Anyone who's gotten a ticket will try to justify the fact that they weren't on their phone when they know they were and they're just pissed that they got caught. I've been in a car with someone who got a speeding ticket...and yeah, he was speeding. A few days later I hear from a mutual friend how its bullshit that cops have nothing better to do than to give tickets to people doing 55kmph like **** did. Bull...shit! He was doing a lot more than 55 and telling people otherwise to make him seem like a victim. Just like all the distracted drivers do.

I'm in a truck, and you'd be surprised as to how many cars I can see into with a phone in their lap or holding it just a bit lower than their steering wheel to make it look like they're head isn't pointed down.

If I get a text while driving, fuck it. If its that important they can call me and I'll push the button on the steering wheel and answer the call.

[zulutango]

"What I'm saying is that it's a huge fucking inconvenience in some cases to obey some law that was brought in with clear intention of increasing revenues." Consider that 88 people were killed by distracted drivers in one year and DD is now the single major cause of fatal crashes....more so than impaired in the mid 50's.. maybe that has something to do with it...and not increasing revenues?

[frozen]

The absolute number 88 means anything to you honestly? Do you just consume whatever the shit you get thrown at?

There are increasingly more people on the road compared to 50's so I'm not sure how you are making sense of that 88.

I never denied distracted driving in general will not likely lead to more accidents. What bothers me is the oversimplistic way cash hungry govt comes up to solve it. What about Tesla owners? I've seen multiple occasions the distracted fuckheads playing with their giant screen in their car. You think reaching your hand to the screen AND looking at the screen figure out which buttons to press is safer than simply holding a phone and talking?

Oh boy, it's just so easy to say factor A causes B and implement a fine. And it looks like there are plenty out there who are willing to eat it. With govt continuing to increase the amount of fines, you better hope there will actually be reduction in accidents resulting from it.

[quasi]

^^

Unless I'm misreading what Zulutango is referring to by mid 50's is the number of deaths caused by impaired drivers compared to 80+ for Distracted Drivers. In other words DD causes more deaths then drinking and driving.

[quasi]

People lie...a lot...

Anyone who's gotten a ticket will try to justify the fact that they weren't on their phone when they know they were and they're just pissed that they got caught. I've been in a car with someone who got a speeding ticket...and yeah, he was speeding. A few days later I hear from a mutual friend how its bullshit that cops have nothing better to do than to give tickets to people doing 55kmph like **** did. Bull...shit! He was doing a lot more than 55 and telling people otherwise to make him seem like a victim. Just like all the distracted drivers do.

I'm in a truck, and you'd be surprised as to how many cars I can see into with a phone in their lap or holding it just a bit lower than their steering wheel to make it look like they're head isn't pointed down.

If I get a text while driving, fuck it. If its that important they can call me and I'll push the button on the steering wheel and answer the call.

I don't know about that, I've gotten plenty of tickets more then I'd like to admit and not once did I ever get a ticket I wasn't guilty of, that includes a DD ticket when the laws first came into effect. I always pay them right away have never fought them, I never argue with the officer either. Do you know why I pulled you over? Yes, I was going to fast or yes I was talking on my phone sorry about that. There has been times when being honest has gotten me off with a warning as well.

Those days of driving like a tool and getting loads of tickets are behind me, haven't gotten on in a lot of years knock on wood.

[6o4__boi]

I never denied distracted driving in general will not likely lead to more accidents. What bothers me is the oversimplistic way cash hungry govt comes up to solve it.

Oh boy, it's just so easy to say factor A causes B and implement a fine. And it looks like there are plenty out there who are willing to eat it. With govt continuing to increase the amount of fines, you better hope there will actually be reduction in accidents resulting from it.

okay, i'm as skeptical of government moves as the next guy but i've gotta ask, how would you solve it? What's a non-oversimplistic way that won't cost money that taxpayers will bitch and moan about to curb distracted driving?

[jlo mein]

Anyone know of hands free control options for an Android phone? I'm using a Nexus 5 still on Kit Kat. My old iPhone had a wireless remote that mounted to my steering wheel and I could change music tracks. Would like something similar for my Android but haven't found anything.

[Timpo]

What are governments going to do when cars start driving themselves. They are going to lose so much in revenue and cops are going to have so much more free time.

They can simply tax car owners by charging "Road Usage Fee" along with road maintenance fee, blah blah blah..

[Timpo]

Don't do the crime, don't pay the fine, keep all your cash. Pretty simple.

If it's YOUR CHOICE to break the law, then it's your choice to pay the price when caught.

Speeding isn't a crime. Sure it's against the rule, but it's not a crime like DUI, murder, robbery, arson, etc.

Speeding is under Motor Vehicle Act, not Criminal Code of Canada.
If you speed, you get a ticket, it's a regulatory matter. No criminal record or jail time will result from simple speeding.

I don't think anyone would complain if speeding tickets actually made sense.
To anyone's eye, it seems like they're setting speed limit artificially low so that they can generate revenue for speeding.

Again, the flow of traffic is the key. The speed limit needs to be set at 85th percentile like we all know. Not 0th percentile.

[underscore]

Anyone know of hands free control options for an Android phone? I'm using a Nexus 5 still on Kit Kat. My old iPhone had a wireless remote that mounted to my steering wheel and I could change music tracks. Would like something similar for my Android but haven't found anything.

I would assume a bluetooth device exists, just need to find it. I wouldn't mind having one too, sometimes I have my phone playing music on shuffle and the order it's picking songs is no bueno.

[6o4__boi]

https://www.amazon.ca/Bluetooth-Hands-free-Wireless-Streaming-BR-C8/dp/B019SIC7ZU/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1462903978&sr=8-8&keywords=bluetooth+car+hands-free+kit

something like that?

i'm assuming there are cheaper alternatives if you look around

[MarkyMark]

okay, i'm as skeptical of government moves as the next guy but i've gotta ask, how would you solve it? What's a non-oversimplistic way that won't cost money that taxpayers will bitch and moan about to curb distracted driving?

Why not just licence suspensions for repeat offenders? When you're sitting on the bus you have plenty of time to call or text.

Money is such an odd way of disciplining people. For those who don't have it then yes it may work, but for those who have lots of it why would they change their ways when just throwing more money at it makes the situation go away?

It should be an even playing field, and taking your license away is about as fair as it gets.

You can't call it a cash grab when they are just taking those drivers off the road.

[mikemhg]

Why wouldn't people think this is a cash grab? If you really believe anytime the province decides to up fees on offenses, much as they did with the drinking and driving law, and you think that increased funds doesn't come into the equation, than you are out to lunch.

If it wasn't a cash grab, and the province was serious about enforcing safety, than why not just suspend your license for x amount of days if you are caught? Wouldn't that be enough enforcement without the innate fees?

Let's be real here. I see more dangers with Mainland drivers who carry Chinese licences on the road than I do with people checking their phones at a red light. Do you see the province addressing that? Well of course not, ICBC wouldn't want to miss out on this insurance premiums on that N covered BWW 5 Series :)

I was also reading that ICBC subsidizes part of the salaries for Traffic Authority Police Officers aka Traffic Cops? Is this actually true? If that is the case, that definitely smells funky to me.

[6o4__boi]

Why not just licence suspensions for repeat offenders? When you're sitting on the bus you have plenty of time to call or text.


From my understanding, it looks like after the 2nd offence, the offenders are subject to a review which may or may not lead to suspensions.
1st offence = automatic review for L or N's
2nd offence onwards = automatic review for anyone regardless of license class

I'm pretty sure those reviews weren't around during this law's first incarnation. The question now is, at what point will the review panel suspend people as that standard has not yet been set and i don't think that's been outlined either. But I would assume (citing the overall perception of this issue) they will start issuing minimum suspension at 2nd offence that gradually grows in severity with each offence.

[stewie]

Cash grab or not, whats going to hit someone with a harder impact that'll leave a lasting impression and get the law imbeded into their brains:

A driving ban and a small fine

Or

A driving ban and a huge fine which will hit you where it hurts - your wallet

I honestly couldn't care less if the fine was a 1 year ban and a 1000$ fine. I don't use my phone while driving so I've nothing to worry about. A good portion of the time my phone is burried in my bag sitting on the back seat.

[7seven]

I don't have an issue with the increased fines, the previous fine wasn't much, at least with the escalating fines and review of your license with the 2nd offense, it might make some think twice. A combination of increasing fines and license suspension I think is good. I don't think license suspension alone, without a significant monetary penalty would work too well either as there are a number of people who will still drive without a license, a number of times I recall hearing people being caught driving without a proper license.



I was also reading that ICBC subsidizes part of the salaries for Traffic Authority Police Officers aka Traffic Cops? Is this actually true? If that is the case, that definitely smells funky to me.

I think you are confusing the Traffic Authority municipal constables with VPD officers assigned to the traffic section and enforcement unit. The Traffic Authority members are restricted peace officers not police officers, they essentially just direct traffic and deal with street closures for special events such as the fire works, marathons, filming, etc... To my knowledge Traffic Authority program is part of the VPD operating budget and event organizers pay fees/permits that cover having Traffic Authority members on site to close streets/direct traffic.

[MarkyMark]

The fact that the chart shows fines up to the 10th offence shows to me that they aren't planning on suspending licenses after a couple of infractions. While I agree that raising the fines are partly there to stop people from using their phone while driving, until it's shown that they are suspending people after 2-3 offenses then it's clear they want the extra revenue from it.

[6o4__boi]

The fact that the chart shows fines up to the 10th offence shows to me that they aren't planning on suspending licenses after a couple of infractions. While I agree that raising the fines are partly there to stop people from using their phone while driving, until it's shown that they are suspending people after 2-3 offenses then it's clear they want the extra revenue from it.

But I can argue that they only show the tenth infraction as a way to emphasize the premium effects, not necessarily to stipulate a suspension level.

The fact is that there now 10 levels and 10 steps a premium can rise. Anything beyond that is your personal interpretation of the facts available aka you see what you want to see.

[MarkyMark]

But I can argue that they only show the tenth infraction as a way to emphasize the premium effects, not necessarily to stipulate a suspension level.

The fact is that there now 10 levels and 10 steps a premium can rise. Anything beyond that is your personal interpretation of the facts available aka you see what you want to see.

A better way to emphasize things would be after the 3rd offense it just says:

4th Offense: Suspension 3 months
5th Offense: Suspension 1 year
6th Offense: Suspension 2 years

And so on...add a large find on top of the suspensions too. The whole "review" process sounds sketchy to me. It honestly feels like a way to let certain people (rich or connected) stay on the road while others get the shaft. It should be black and white regardless of who you are.

[6o4__boi]

I'm sure we'll be hearing from the media or user experience here. Wouldn't be surprised to see 3 month suspensions at 2nd or 3rd offence.

That kinda left me scratching my head as well...the mandatory review after 2 strikes and the vagueness of it. Seems like lazy policy making to me more than anything else though. Give it a year, then we'll see what the precedence and overall disciplinary trends are.

And if you find you're not satisfied with the information being released to the public regarding the application of the new law, you could always request under freedom of information so you can come to better conclusions.

[Mr.HappySilp]

I think on the 3rd time you get caught you should get suspend for 3months
4th time 6months
5th suspend for 5 years
Record reset every 2 years.

If you are suspend and got caught driving and using your phone you get suspended for life and this stays in your driving record across Canada. You have no idea how fines don't work on some of these rich people espeically rich kids. Is their parents money and really even if the fines are $1000 each is pocket change to them. The only way they learn is take away their right to drive. Remember driving is not a right is a privillage.

[Dragon-88]

Public shaming for repeat offenders is what I'm game for..

https://knappmannlaw.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/shame.jpg

[frozen]

Why wouldn't people think this is a cash grab? If you really believe anytime the province decides to up fees on offenses, much as they did with the drinking and driving law, and you think that increased funds doesn't come into the equation, than you are out to lunch.

If it wasn't a cash grab, and the province was serious about enforcing safety, than why not just suspend your license for x amount of days if you are caught? Wouldn't that be enough enforcement without the innate fees?

Let's be real here. I see more dangers with Mainland drivers who carry Chinese licences on the road than I do with people checking their phones at a red light. Do you see the province addressing that? Well of course not, ICBC wouldn't want to miss out on this insurance premiums on that N covered BWW 5 Series :)

I was also reading that ICBC subsidizes part of the salaries for Traffic Authority Police Officers aka Traffic Cops? Is this actually true? If that is the case, that definitely smells funky to me.

Finally someone with a sense vs. fuckwits simpletons roaming on this forum thinking the new increased fines will remove their daily annoyances of dealing with distracted drivers and save lives. Just a further evidence that government loves this type of cash grab because hey, how can you oppose a law that will save lives?

Why tiered fines too? Why not just increase the length of probation because that is very costly to the driver, actually much costlier to the driver compared to paying cash. But nah, govt doesn't want that because ideally they would love to have you keep driving the car and continue to pay increasingly higher fines.

[Timpo]

Given the fact that BC has pretty bad public transit system, losing a license can mean more than 3 months ban for joy ride for car enthusiasts.

People need car for work, pick up children from school, drop them off at swimming lesson, go buy groceries, etc.

Many people commute from Abbotsford to Vancouver to work.
If you drive that route every single day, and we know we all "speed" everyday multiple times, it would just be a matter of time til you lose your license.

Not advocating driving & texting, just saying that losing license could mean serious inconvenience for some people.

Since texting is just as dangerous as DUI, I can understand that.
What I still don't get is speeding ticket. For example, Marine Drive's speed limit is 50km/h, but the 85th percentile is 79km/h according to the YouTube video "Speed Kills Your Pocketbook".
So the speed limit of Marine Drive should be 80km/h instead of 50km/h if you're actually concerned about safety.
If you ever drive Marine Drive at 90km/h, you will get an Excessive Speeding ticket and your vehicle will be impounded. Which makes no sense.
Going 10km/h over the 85th percentile should not result in Excessive Speeding ticket($368) and vehicle impound.
But just because someone who works for the government that has no road engineering background decided to post 50km/h on Marine Drive, you will be labelled as high risk driver if you go over 10km/h over the 85th percentile.

[MarkyMark]

I feel like if you're getting multiple tickets a year then the problem is you. I've driven here over 15 years and generally go with the flow of traffic. I've gotten one speeding ticket (well deserved too) in my life. So either I'm just lucky, or the people who get lots of tickets just drive like assholes.

[dn53]

Friends have told me you can be ticketed for having your screen on & the phone mounted on the dash.

Is this true? I use my phone all the time for navigation but I don't touch it

[Nlkko]

Cash grab blah blah blah. Even if it's a cash grab, would you rather they just lobby some tax bill and give all of us the dick if they need revenue that bad? Then you can go on and on about ... "my tax dollar"?

I'd rather some idiots pay for my government bill thank you very much. If they stop texting while at it too, that would be great.

[DragonChi]

Wow, I swear I saw a PDF from a few years ago saying that if it's secured to your car, you can use it. Apparently not. Not even on ICBC's site does it say that. :(

Motor Vehicle Act (http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96318_06#section214.2)

I bet when they introduced seat belt laws, that was a cash grab too right?

[twitchyzero]

good thing I didn't install this yet

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GVaVoUvAuHE/VRvduhjcZXI/AAAAAAAAL68/xoXG5uxUVJ0/s1600/ap_pr01.jpg

[SSM_DC5]

Wow, I swear I saw a PDF from a few years ago saying that if it's secured to your car, you can use it. Apparently not. Not even on ICBC's site does it say that. :(

Motor Vehicle Act (http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96318_06#section214.2)

I bet when they introduced seat belt laws, that was a cash grab too right?

This is probably the thread you're referring to http://www.revscene.net/forums/629103-cell-phone-ban-whats-difference-between-cell-phones-mp3-players.html
The link in post #2 doesn't work anymore, but this link might be the same thing. http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/driving/publications/electronic-devices-while-driving.pdf

[hud 91gt]

I won't lie. I didn't touch my phone today.

[Timpo]

I feel like if you're getting multiple tickets a year then the problem is you. I've driven here over 15 years and generally go with the flow of traffic. I've gotten one speeding ticket (well deserved too) in my life. So either I'm just lucky, or the people who get lots of tickets just drive like assholes.

I think you're lucky, although I don't know how you drive.

When I was working at the place where daily highway commute was required, I got a few tickets a year, not aggressive driving or anything like that.

Cops like to hide at the end of open road or long stretch, where people will subconsciously speed due to straight line.

Then I quit that job, still kept driving daily, no tickets whatsoever.

[Timpo]

Cash grab blah blah blah. Even if it's a cash grab, would you rather they just lobby some tax bill and give all of us the dick if they need revenue that bad? Then you can go on and on about ... "my tax dollar"?

I'd rather some idiots pay for my government bill thank you very much. If they stop texting while at it too, that would be great.

That will never happen.

Even if they make violation ticket revenue 100 times more than last year, they won't waive/reduce your portion of tax.

[stewie]

If you ever drive Marine Drive at 90km/h, you will get an Excessive Speeding ticket and your vehicle will be impounded. Which makes no sense.
Going 10km/h over the 85th percentile should not result in Excessive Speeding ticket($368) and vehicle impound.
But just because someone who works for the government that has no road engineering background decided to post 50km/h on Marine Drive, you will be labelled as high risk driver if you go over 10km/h over the 85th percentile.

Do you think that roads formen/labors just randomly decide where/what sign goes on their own free will? The civil engineers at city hall do that, you know, the ones who DO have an extensive knowledge of road engineering. If you think you can do better, BCIT offers civil engineering, sign up and show them up. They've only got 10-20+ years experience, but I'm sure you'd be able to point out their flaws.

If you don't like it, go complain at city hall. But please, while there...don't ask for me because I'm far to busy trying to google how to do my own government job

[zulutango]

The absolute number 88 means anything to you honestly? Do you just consume whatever the shit you get thrown at?

There are increasingly more people on the road compared to 50's so I'm not sure how you are making sense of that 88.

I never denied distracted driving in general will not likely lead to more accidents. What bothers me is the oversimplistic way cash hungry govt comes up to solve it. What about Tesla owners? I've seen multiple occasions the distracted fuckheads playing with their giant screen in their car. You think reaching your hand to the screen AND looking at the screen figure out which buttons to press is safer than simply holding a phone and talking?

Oh boy, it's just so easy to say factor A causes B and implement a fine. And it looks like there are plenty out there who are willing to eat it. With govt continuing to increase the amount of fines, you better hope there will actually be reduction in accidents resulting from it.


Let me clarify what I posted...88 innocent people were killed by distracted drivers...54? (don't have the exact number....so "mid 50's") were killed by impaireds. As someone wha has personally investigated about 30 fatal crashes over the years...and thousands of less-than-fatal crashes. The first thing you MUST do is find out the causal factors for ther crash. The ICBC MV 6020 form you fill out as a crash identifies them, let alone the year-long fatals. The investigations positively identified the distracted drivers as causing the crashes. Doesn't get much better than that.

I teach drivers and riders how to safely operate motor vehicles for a living now and we spend a LOT of time talking about DD and the dangers. IMHO the fines are not big enough...after all, they are worse than impaired drivers. Seize the phone, fines of at least what impaireds get..$1000 plus, and a minimum one year driving prohibition. Use the roadside suspension process to handle this. But then, maybe I am considered prejudiced because I saw first hand what they do....and spend many hours a day observing first hand how people selfishly continue to ignore the danger of DD. BTW...yesterday alone my students and I had 2 close calls from distracted drivers. It just gets worse.

[Timpo]

Do you think that roads formen/labors just randomly decide where/what sign goes on their own free will? The civil engineers at city hall do that, you know, the ones who DO have an extensive knowledge of road engineering. If you think you can do better, BCIT offers civil engineering, sign up and show them up. They've only got 10-20+ years experience, but I'm sure you'd be able to point out their flaws.

If you don't like it, go complain at city hall. But please, while there...don't ask for me because I'm far to busy trying to google how to do my own government job

I think the vast majority of time they will automatically put 50km/h on the road that is not highway without even taking civil engineering into consideration.

If they actually have engineering background checked the 85th percentile speed, the speed limit should 80km/h on Marine Drive, not 50km/h. It's clear to me and I'm not even an engineer. This is nothing but a cash grab.
Also those engineers might be under political pressure to put 50km/h everywhere because of "speed kills" theme in North America.

Same as many 80km/h highways, the speedlimit should be 115km/h or something. Any major highways, the limit needs to be 130km/h or so.

[Timpo]

Let me clarify what I posted...88 innocent people were killed by distracted drivers...54? (don't have the exact number....so "mid 50's") were killed by impaireds. As someone wha has personally investigated about 30 fatal crashes over the years...and thousands of less-than-fatal crashes. The first thing you MUST do is find out the causal factors for ther crash. The ICBC MV 6020 form you fill out as a crash identifies them, let alone the year-long fatals. The investigations positively identified the distracted drivers as causing the crashes. Doesn't get much better than that.

I teach drivers and riders how to safely operate motor vehicles for a living now and we spend a LOT of time talking about DD and the dangers. IMHO the fines are not big enough...after all, they are worse than impaired drivers. Seize the phone, fines of at least what impaireds get..$1000 plus, and a minimum one year driving prohibition. Use the roadside suspension process to handle this. But then, maybe I am considered prejudiced because I saw first hand what they do....and spend many hours a day observing first hand how people selfishly continue to ignore the danger of DD. BTW...yesterday alone my students and I had 2 close calls from distracted drivers. It just gets worse.

Yeah distracted drivers are so dangerous. But everyone loves to blame on speed for everything.
It's the behaviour and other stupidity factor.

[Timpo]

Also ICBC does not take driver licensing seriously at all.

I know Japanese people/parents think ICBC is a joke.
I bet same as people form Germany and other countries as well.

When you want to get a license at other countries, you will be spending $3000-$4000. You must attend in-class lessons, they have designated closed track to drive before you can even go out on the road.
Also the entire instruction must be done by government authorized instructors.

It freaks parents from other counties out when ICBC tell kids "You can just ask your buddy(or his brother) to teach you, as long as he's 25 or older. And yes you guys can go practice on the road right away" which is a stupidest thing ever to their eyes.
Now ICBC complains about all the stupid drivers on the road and do all sorts of "campaign" and shit.

[unit]

i think our licensing system is too easy for sure, but i also think that paying 3-4k to get your license is a little crazy. you become a better driver through experience, not just courses and maneuvering on a closed track.

i think a better solution is having drivers take 3 tests, similar to our N and class 5 system, but with a third test. if you fail the first level obviously you have to take it again, but if you fail the second level you get dropped down to taking the first level again, and if you fail the third level you get dropped to the second level again. Also it would have to be done within the space of a year. no more of these N drivers holding onto their N for 5-10 years.

[AzNightmare]

As much as driving should be a privilege, ultimately, driving is a right.
Reason I say this is because people will revolt if it's too hard to obtain a license. And 75% of the people on the road today will fail those types of designated closed track tests. Once majority's not able to drive, they will complain and complain and eventually ICBC will get overthrown until driving becomes a right.

The system is broken and it's pretty tough to grandfather a new system in.

It's like trying to take guns away from Americans.

[MarkyMark]

Who's going to revolt? The teenagers trying to get a license? Foreigners who don't have one? The people who have them now are already grandfathered in and no one cares what a whiny 16 year old is going to say. I don't think anyone who already has a license cares about making it harder to get one.

[RRxtar]

not sure if this was brought up in this thread before the arguing started or not, but this is the part of the law that scares me.

From the RCMP website:

Definition

Distracted driving is a form of impaired driving as a driver's judgment is compromised when they are not fully focused on the road. Distracted driving qualifies as talking on a cell phone, texting, reading (e.g. books, maps, and newspapers), using a GPS, watching videos or movies, eating/drinking, smoking, personal grooming, adjusting the radio/CD and playing extremely loud music. Even talking to passengers and driving while fatigued (mentally and/or physically) can be forms of distracted driving.



So black and white, if a cop sees you on your phone, automatic ticket. What if a cop hears loud music? Sees you talking to a passenger? They can give you the exact same distracted driving ticket based on their opinion on you being distracted (or them having a bad day).

Giving traffic cops the power to make judgement calls with punishments the same as black and white offenses, I don't agree with that.

[MarkyMark]

I feel like if people aren't regularly ticketed already for offenses such as talking to your passenger (maybe when they look over at them for 30 seconds while driving like on TV), or loud music, then why would they start now?

[RRxtar]

because of this whole new 'cracking down on distracted driving' campaign

[vitaminG]

Let me clarify what I posted...88 innocent people were killed by distracted drivers...54? (don't have the exact number....so "mid 50's") were killed by impaireds. As someone wha has personally investigated about 30 fatal crashes over the years...and thousands of less-than-fatal crashes. The first thing you MUST do is find out the causal factors for ther crash. The ICBC MV 6020 form you fill out as a crash identifies them, let alone the year-long fatals. The investigations positively identified the distracted drivers as causing the crashes. Doesn't get much better than that.

people like to make the comparison between impaired and distracted driving. i feel that is pretty unfair.

- it is much easier to prove beyond a reasonable doubt a driver was impaired, versus whether they were "distracted" ie using the phone at the actual time of an accident.

- the enforcement aspect is much different, if you stop a driver at at a roadblock or pull them over they were drunk the entire time they were driving and would have been drunk the rest of the way. whereas a distracted driver at a redlight is only distracted at that one moment in time when it is exceedingly unlikely they would cause an accident.

i would be much in favor of a law that made a bit more sense and didnt punish someone who changed the song at a redlight like someone who was texting while overtaking a semi. much like the difference between a .05 and a .08

[Timpo]

i think our licensing system is too easy for sure, but i also think that paying 3-4k to get your license is a little crazy. you become a better driver through experience, not just courses and maneuvering on a closed track.

i think a better solution is having drivers take 3 tests, similar to our N and class 5 system, but with a third test. if you fail the first level obviously you have to take it again, but if you fail the second level you get dropped down to taking the first level again, and if you fail the third level you get dropped to the second level again. Also it would have to be done within the space of a year. no more of these N drivers holding onto their N for 5-10 years.
Just like Germany, Japan has a pretty strict standard when it comes to driving.
People are willing to pay $3,000-$4,000 for a driver's license.

Average training fee in Japan:
Manual: 303,903 yen ($3,589)
Automatic: 287124 yen ($3,391)

Price does not include school admission fee, licensing fee, etc.
If you fail/need additional training, the price will go up accordingly.

Approximate instruction hours
in-class instructions: 26 hours + exam
practical lesson: 34 hours + exam
*manual transmission typically takes extra 3 hours
^ This is a very rough idea and if you go to the school, they will give you more detailed breakdowns.

http://www.kds-net.jp/uploader/data/p1.jpg
http://miyagoas.com/images/mainImgBlock_img1.jpg
http://up.gc-img.net/post_img_web/2014/05/qX2DWexbrEHWR2s_12285.jpeg

[Timpo]

As much as driving should be a privilege, ultimately, driving is a right.
Reason I say this is because people will revolt if it's too hard to obtain a license. And 75% of the people on the road today will fail those types of designated closed track tests. Once majority's not able to drive, they will complain and complain and eventually ICBC will get overthrown until driving becomes a right.

The system is broken and it's pretty tough to grandfather a new system in.

It's like trying to take guns away from Americans.

This is exactly why we have more fatal accidents than Germany despite them having more high performance vehicles and Autobahn.

[Timpo]

not sure if this was brought up in this thread before the arguing started or not, but this is the part of the law that scares me.

From the RCMP website:

Definition

Distracted driving is a form of impaired driving as a driver's judgment is compromised when they are not fully focused on the road. Distracted driving qualifies as talking on a cell phone, texting, reading (e.g. books, maps, and newspapers), using a GPS, watching videos or movies, eating/drinking, smoking, personal grooming, adjusting the radio/CD and playing extremely loud music. Even talking to passengers and driving while fatigued (mentally and/or physically) can be forms of distracted driving.



So black and white, if a cop sees you on your phone, automatic ticket. What if a cop hears loud music? Sees you talking to a passenger? They can give you the exact same distracted driving ticket based on their opinion on you being distracted (or them having a bad day).

Giving traffic cops the power to make judgement calls with punishments the same as black and white offenses, I don't agree with that.

Distracted driving is illegal.

So using GPS and talking to a passenger is illegal? :suspicious:

[frozen]

The argument started when I called it a fucking cash grab followed by dimwits who thought the increased fine on distracted driving is justified and somehow will make life better. The dumbfucks seemed to have taken one of the following positions:

1. I don't use cellphone anyway so it won't affect me.
2. This new increased fines will rid of my problems dealing with distracted drivers.
3. It's a law so you better obey it or pay the price.

None of them have considered what the fuck it really means to be "distracted" and they think it just revolves around electronic devices. Once the numbskulls agree with and support any policy that prevents "distracted" driving, govt will have much easier time expanding their definitions.

God forbid any of you press any fucking buttons in your car while driving. Don't even bother talking to passengers, let alone even facing them. Keep your fking eyes straight and don't enjoy any scenery. Music? Audiobooks? Fuck no. Wanna complain? Don't because our study shows any form of distraction could potentially lead to higher rate of accidents. You can't find the study? No need to because general public doesn't give a shit and who wouldn't support a law that saves lives?

Some fucks support this increased penalty and talk like some saint who's never done anything that constitutes as a form distraction. Start crying once govt decides to reach into your pocket for fiddling with your car's infotainment system at a stop light, with underqualifed cops making the judgment.

[MarkyMark]

The distracted driving law is geared toward electronic devices. Sure there's a bunch of stuff lumped in with it, but let's be serious here, you're not likely going to get a ticket for turning the dial up on your radio just like you're unlikely to get a ticket for going 1km/h over the speed limit.

We're all going to hear fables of someone getting the biggest screw job ever "my buddies buddy got a ticket for just talking to his passenger" but in reality what cop is going to do that unless you did something stupid along with it.

[Hondaracer]

Meh..honestly it had to happen I don't care if it's a cash grab or not, the only way to hit idiots is in the wallet.

Literally -everyone- is on their fucking phones these days, I know I occasionally check it at lights etc but I've gone out of my way not to touch it while driving now. It is scary though how many people I see just cruising along with their face down in their phone. Somthing obviously had to be done

[unit]

once self driving cars becomes the norm we won't have to have this discussion anymore.
hopefully it's within our lifetimes.

[6o4__boi]

The argument started when I called it a fucking cash grab followed by dimwits who thought the increased fine on distracted driving is justified and somehow will make life better. The dumbfucks seemed to have taken one of the following positions:

1. I don't use cellphone anyway so it won't affect me.
2. This new increased fines will rid of my problems dealing with distracted drivers.
3. It's a law so you better obey it or pay the price.

None of them have considered what the fuck it really means to be "distracted" and they think it just revolves around electronic devices. Once the numbskulls agree with and support any policy that prevents "distracted" driving, govt will have much easier time expanding their definitions.

God forbid any of you press any fucking buttons in your car while driving. Don't even bother talking to passengers, let alone even facing them. Keep your fking eyes straight and don't enjoy any scenery. Music? Audiobooks? Fuck no. Wanna complain? Don't because our study shows any form of distraction could potentially lead to higher rate of accidents. You can't find the study? No need to because general public doesn't give a shit and who wouldn't support a law that saves lives?

Some fucks support this increased penalty and talk like some saint who's never done anything that constitutes as a form distraction. Start crying once govt decides to reach into your pocket for fiddling with your car's infotainment system at a stop light, with underqualifed cops making the judgment.

http://i.giphy.com/ToMjGpjpXMFPshSYGLm.gif

[Mr.HappySilp]

As much as driving should be a privilege, ultimately, driving is a right.
Reason I say this is because people will revolt if it's too hard to obtain a license. And 75% of the people on the road today will fail those types of designated closed track tests. Once majority's not able to drive, they will complain and complain and eventually ICBC will get overthrown until driving becomes a right.

The system is broken and it's pretty tough to grandfather a new system in.

It's like trying to take guns away from Americans.

Sorry is still a privilege. You can still live and go on your daily lives without driving. Lot's of people don't drive/can't drive. If it is a right then everyone should be able to drive and that means driving liscense should be handed out to you for free and everyone who lives in Canada can apply one without any test.

If you care for your privilege of driving then you will obey the law (somewhat) and not get your liscense suspended.

[Manic!]

once self driving cars becomes the norm we won't have to have this discussion anymore.
hopefully it's within our lifetimes.

It will happen in the next 5 years or less.

[originalhypa]

Meh..honestly it had to happen I don't care if it's
a cash grab or not, the only way to hit idiots is in the wallet.

I have to agree with you here.
While I still think it's draconian to fine someone $500 for looking at their phone at the stoplight, it's a necessary step to keep the roads safer.

Don't get me wrong, I still like to think that the roads are mine (so get the hell out of my way!). But there are a lot of folks on the roads these days. Add in a couple of aggressive or distracted drivers to the pack, and bad things are bound to happen. I wish I would have posted my dashcam video of me driving in Richmond a couple of weekends ago. Three near misses in the span of 5 minutes, and I'm driving a big grey truck! It was people who weren't looking, or were screwing around on their phones.

Most drivers on the roads are good and know how things work. This law isn't for those people. It's for the stupid teenage N driver chick who almost swerved into my lane yesterday. Civic vs Tundra in a head on? I think I know who's going to get hurt in that scenario. So if these crazy fines mean keeping her safe so her parents don't have to bury their daughter, then I'm all for it.

[Timpo]

Meh..honestly it had to happen I don't care if it's a cash grab or not, the only way to hit idiots is in the wallet.

Literally -everyone- is on their fucking phones these days, I know I occasionally check it at lights etc but I've gone out of my way not to touch it while driving now. It is scary though how many people I see just cruising along with their face down in their phone. Somthing obviously had to be done

Again, raising the speed limit "might" be the answer.
Look at Germany, higher speed limit, but people focus on the road more.

If everyone is going 180+km/h(just as an example) on the highway, how many people do you think will be looking down checking their Facebook/Instagram?

[Timpo]

I have to agree with you here.
While I still think it's draconian to fine someone $500 for looking at their phone at the stoplight, it's a necessary step to keep the roads safer.

Don't get me wrong, I still like to think that the roads are mine (so get the hell out of my way!). But there are a lot of folks on the roads these days. Add in a couple of aggressive or distracted drivers to the pack, and bad things are bound to happen. I wish I would have posted my dashcam video of me driving in Richmond a couple of weekends ago. Three near misses in the span of 5 minutes, and I'm driving a big grey truck! It was people who weren't looking, or were screwing around on their phones.

Most drivers on the roads are good and know how things work. This law isn't for those people. It's for the stupid teenage N driver chick who almost swerved into my lane yesterday. Civic vs Tundra in a head on? I think I know who's going to get hurt in that scenario. So if these crazy fines mean keeping her safe so her parents don't have to bury their daughter, then I'm all for it.

Don't automatically blame on teenagers.
a 32 year old adult can be posting facebook status a second before crash.
Driver posts Facebook update before dying in head-on collision - National | Globalnews.ca (http://globalnews.ca/news/1295731/driver-posts-facebook-update-before-dying-in-head-on-collision/)

[Hondaracer]

Again, raising the speed limit "might" be the answer.
Look at Germany, higher speed limit, but people focus on the road more.

If everyone is going 180+km/h(just as an example) on the highway, how many people do you think will be looking down checking their Facebook/Instagram?

Guarantee if the speed limit was 150 on HWY 90% of the people would still be on their phone.

People don't understand how to drive here. They are cruising in the left lane going 90km looking at their phone. The culture nor the infrastructure is here to support those speeds

[originalhypa]

Don't automatically blame on teenagers.
a 32 year old adult can be posting facebook status a second before crash.
Driver posts Facebook update before dying in head-on collision - National | Globalnews.ca (http://globalnews.ca/news/1295731/driver-posts-facebook-update-before-dying-in-head-on-collision/)


I'm not blaming teenagers, but they make up the bulk of driving deaths every year.
Not to mention, I did actually have an encounter with that girl yesterday, so personal experience and all. Combine with the fact that I have a teen, and when I was 17 I almost died in an auto accident. I've always loved cars, and surrounded myself with car people. But at my age, I've also seen the tragic side of cars and how bad things can turn out when you're not focussed on the road. My back is still screwed up from when I broke it at 17.

Injuries from car wrecks are the gift that keeps on giving. Like some shitty book of the month club.

But the story you posted really sucks.
:(

[unit]

It will happen in the next 5 years or less.

can't say i share your optimism.. i just can't see that type of tech being affordable or worked out properly in such a short time. i know there have a lot of successful tests but there's some complications that you just know are going to delay the rollout of these types of cars. insurance/liabilities, thoroughly tested real world saftey, new/changes in laws, etc... i'd be pretty happy to even see them for sale in the next 10 years. once they go for sale though, it's a sure thing that they're gonna sell like crazy.

[Manic!]

can't say i share your optimism.. i just can't see that type of tech being affordable or worked out properly in such a short time. i know There have a lot of successful tests but there's some complications that you just know are going to delay the rollout of these types of cars. insurance/liabilities, thoroughly tested real world saftey, new/changes in laws, etc... i'd be pretty happy to even see them for sale in the next 10 years. once they go for sale though, it's a sure thing that they're gonna sell like crazy.

It might not be affordable like available in a $30000 car but it will be here. Mercedes say they will have a car out by 2020 and Lyft will be testing self driving cars by next year. Lyft is an Uber competitor and has a 500 million dollar investment from GM.

[unit]

i'd rather buy a nissan micra cheap POS self driving car for 30k than a much nicer 30k decked out mazda 3. hopefully the tech makes its way down past the luxury car market and into the average consumer market soon. took a while for hybrid cars to do it, but now you can buy a nissan leaf for.......................fuck....just researched it.............32k (starting)

edit: who the hell would pay 40k after tax for a nissan leaf??

[AzNightmare]

The argument started when I called it a fucking cash grab followed by dimwits who thought the increased fine on distracted driving is justified and somehow will make life better. The dumbfucks seemed to have taken one of the following positions:

1. I don't use cellphone anyway so it won't affect me.
2. This new increased fines will rid of my problems dealing with distracted drivers.
3. It's a law so you better obey it or pay the price.

None of them have considered what the fuck it really means to be "distracted" and they think it just revolves around electronic devices. Once the numbskulls agree with and support any policy that prevents "distracted" driving, govt will have much easier time expanding their definitions.

God forbid any of you press any fucking buttons in your car while driving. Don't even bother talking to passengers, let alone even facing them. Keep your fking eyes straight and don't enjoy any scenery. Music? Audiobooks? Fuck no. Wanna complain? Don't because our study shows any form of distraction could potentially lead to higher rate of accidents. You can't find the study? No need to because general public doesn't give a shit and who wouldn't support a law that saves lives?

Some fucks support this increased penalty and talk like some saint who's never done anything that constitutes as a form distraction. Start crying once govt decides to reach into your pocket for fiddling with your car's infotainment system at a stop light, with underqualifed cops making the judgment.


Slippery slope fallacy...
:derp:

There's a big difference between idiots with their heads down on their phones vs. pushing buttons on the stereo or turning your head to enjoy the scenery...

[ImportPsycho]

While I still think it's draconian to fine someone $500 for looking at their phone at the stoplight, it's a necessary step to keep the roads safer.


That's right, instead of cops driving around to hit drivers on the phone while moving, pitch a tent under skytrain shade in hot summer and ticket those glancing at their phone while standing still at red light. Only idiots use their phones at red light. Smart ppl use their phone while moving and put it away as they approach red light.

[jdmhaze]

Only idiots use their phones at red light. Smart ppl use their phone while moving and put it away as they approach red light.

Yes of course, why don't we ask the people who have died from using their phone while moving, compared to those who were stopped at a red light. Then explain to me who the "smart" ones are.

[ImportPsycho]

Yes of course, why don't we ask the people who have died from using their phone while moving, compared to those who were stopped at a red light. Then explain to me who the "smart" ones are.

did I fail at sarcasm? :okay:

[Ch28]

Yes of course, why don't we ask the people who have died from using their phone while moving, compared to those who were stopped at a red light. Then explain to me who the "smart" ones are.

http://i.imgur.com/r6mHM09.gif

[frozen]

Slippery slope fallacy...
:derp:

There's a big difference between idiots with their heads down on their phones vs. pushing buttons on the stereo or turning your head to enjoy the scenery...

Don't tell me you think govt doesn't love slippery slope. However you spin it, it is a form of distracted driving. You seriously think taking eyes off the road and reaching out to press a button is safer than holding a phone?

You are aware that cops has the ability, and you can fucking bet the willingness, to issue you a ticket for just holding your phone right? There's absolutely nothing to stop them from expanding the definitions of distracted driving.

[Jmac]

i'd rather buy a nissan micra cheap POS self driving car for 30k than a much nicer 30k decked out mazda 3. hopefully the tech makes its way down past the luxury car market and into the average consumer market soon. took a while for hybrid cars to do it, but now you can buy a nissan leaf for.......................fuck....just researched it.............32k (starting)

edit: who the hell would pay 40k after tax for a nissan leaf??
I was asking my friend the same thing after he traded in his Jetta for one a few years ago.

Basically, it boiled down to:
1) He gets free parking at work with an electric vehicle as opposed to the $300/month I think he said he paid with the Jetta.
2) He gets free charging at work, which is enough to cover his daily commute both ways, as opposed to paying for diesel with the Jetta.

He figured it would save him around $400/month. Of course, that's a lot of months to make up the difference in purchase price.

[meme405]

http://i.imgur.com/r6mHM09.gif

GIF game on point as per usual...

:haha:

[jdmhaze]

did I fail at sarcasm? :okay:

Haha, my bad, sometimes its hard to tell on the internet :pokerface:

[Lomac]

Distracted driving is illegal.

So using GPS and talking to a passenger is illegal? :suspicious:

Inputting a new destination while driving, yes. Using an active screen to reference where you're traveling, no.

[corollagtSr5]

can't say i share your optimism.. i just can't see that type of tech being affordable or worked out properly in such a short time. i know there have a lot of successful tests but there's some complications that you just know are going to delay the rollout of these types of cars. insurance/liabilities, thoroughly tested real world saftey, new/changes in laws, etc... i'd be pretty happy to even see them for sale in the next 10 years. once they go for sale though, it's a sure thing that they're gonna sell like crazy.

Instead of owning one, it'll probably be more mainstream as a service vehicle like a taxi or car2go. You use your phone to locate one, have them ping your gps on your phone, car drives to you and picks you up, enter coordinates on the app for delivery, or voice recongnition for destination.

[hud 91gt]

Cash grabs for idiots who operate their phone while driving (I'm guilty, F&^*king idiot). Count me in. When I learn to be less of an idiot, other will be supplementing my tax dollars.

[originalhypa]

did I fail at sarcasm? :okay:

You suck!

:drunk:

[Timpo]

Inputting a new destination while driving, yes. Using an active screen to reference where you're traveling, no.

so adjusting the volume or changing the radio station would be illegal

[Galactic_Phantom]

You realize inputting an address on a navi system requires slightly more attention and time (more distracting) that turning a knob or holding down 1 button right?

[mr_chin]

“An 18-year-old that was driving his car — and his parents were in a car right behind him — suddenly swerved into oncoming traffic, had a head-on and was killed right in front of his parents. It turns out, he was on his phone.”

Hmm, I wonder how they know this.

Anyways, is it illegal to look at the shifter/cupholder/handbrake/your lap/your crotch?

If so, and you get pulled over and ticketed, are you instantly guilty if the cop shows up at your dispute?

The only stories I heard, where people get caught is when they set up a safety check or when an officer on a motorcycle catches you. Otherwise, it's pretty hard to tell if you're actually on your cellphone unless you're holding up your phone where it's visible and texting.

[Hondaracer]

Buddy got pulled over a couple years ago cause he had his hand resting on the door/window and his hand on the side of his head just resting his chin/face on his hand

Argued that he wasn't on the phone even though looked like he was and the cop let him off, dunno if you'd get off like that these days. I'd be fucking choked if it came to that

[6o4__boi]

not sure if true but I heard that cops have to be able to give a good detail of the phone use (ie. what the person was doing, what kind of phone, approximate duration of phone use, what they were doing on the phone when the officer determined they were in violation)

which means unless you get caught by a motorcycle cop pulling up next to you while driving, or at a red light, it's pretty damn hard to get nailed while driving.

Buddy got pulled over a couple years ago cause he had his hand resting on the door/window and his hand on the side of his head just resting his chin/face on his hand

lol i drive like that all the time and i've seen a cop look at me intensely when they drive beside me or when i'm stopped at a light. Have yet to be pulled over for it though.

[Hondaracer]

Should get a bright pink phone case, when you get pulled ask what color your phone case is, show em the pink and say bye bye

[corollagtSr5]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eOVpc4vQ1Bw

Watch out for distracted driving traps as your stopped at the stop light! You can obviously see In the video the driver is distracted!

[MarkyMark]

Should get a bright pink phone case, when you get pulled ask what color your phone case is, show em the pink and say bye bye

Yep the cop will just stand there with a blank stare as you peel out and leave him in a cloud of smoke.

[6o4__boi]

Shit just got real

https://twitter.com/chrisgailus/status/732657565771792384

[originalhypa]

Fucking $3000 scope with another thousand bucks worth of camera gear.

This reminds me of when the Richmond RCMP bought an escalade with dubs to combat street racing.
:lol

[unit]

they'll pay it off in an afternoons work

[Hondaracer]

At least they buy a vortex and not a fucking swarvoski or somthing

[ImportPsycho]

Shit just got real

https://twitter.com/chrisgailus/status/732657565771792384

Too funny!
They should get some drones now

[yray]

LOL
3k??

don't they sell that shit for 100bucks on ebay?

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/20-60x-60a-6000mm-Telescope-for-Nikon-D7200-D810A-D5500-D3200-D800E-D4-D5100-/222115981707?hash=item33b724e98b:g:jJgAAOSwubRXNKH A

[RRxtar]

that looks like a vortex viper HD 20-60X80. about $1500. plus a $50 neoprene cover.

[underscore]

What does that super-ultra-mega zoom lens run? The one dubbed the "creep lens" or whatever.

[originalhypa]

LOL
3k??

don't they sell that shit for 100bucks on ebay?


:lol

Srsly tho, top of the line vortex is upwards of $2800 before tax. You need top of the line if the law depends on it. Add in the camera and attachments, and we have a lot more than a $3k investment. Maybe even closer to $5k after tax.

https://www.vortexcanada.net/product/spotting-scope-razor-hd-20-60x85-angled/

That's still only about 10 tickets to pay off the cost of the scope. Another five tickets to cover the officers wage for the day. It's a good investment.

:ifyouknow:

[RRxtar]

It's a viper not a razor. You can see the green end of the barrel sticking out of the cover. :)

[originalhypa]

^
So now it's paid off after 3 tickets.
:lol

[vitaminG]

i actually really like this. a lot more effective than just nabbing people at lights. plus with the photo evidence theres not much to dispute.

[6o4__boi]

https://www.periscope.tv/w/1yoKMYOYyEOKQ

some moments had me like
:fulloffuck:

[frozen]

lol I hope you fucks will really like it seriously. Not sure if anyone listened to the news 1130 but the police who was being interviewed about their new toy can't seem to wait to ticket the fuck out of you. And as I have noted before, it's going to expand way beyond using electronics because "speaking to passenger" (exact quote from officer's mouth) was mentioned as qualifying for distracted driving. You can bet there will be more coming. There are just too many ways to identify a driver as being distracted.

Just wait until next time an officer uses their new toy to snaps a photo of you with your eyes not looking straight. Make sure you smile at the officer when he comes to you to hand you the $500 ticket because you were so fucking proud to support it.

[westopher]

Lol you are such a fucking spazz.
I have NEVER been given a ticket for something I didn't do. I bet you haven't either.
Just put your phone in the glovebox and I'd bet you a car you don't get a distracted driving ticket over the next year "by a power hungry cop."

[Timpo]

Near Mayfair Shopping Centre in Victoria

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEZjF1MJBDY

[Urrtoast]

Near Mayfair Shopping Centre in Victoria

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEZjF1MJBDY

How is the cameraman filming and driving ? ...... BrokeBack
someone catch a reflection?

[ImportPsycho]

Sweet ride: Richmond Mounties bust couple having sex while driving - NEWS 1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2016/06/08/richmond-driving-sex/)

"However, an electric device was not being used"

Well thank god for that!

So, fine is less if you are having sex while driving?
What if they were using dildo? That's electric device?

[Timpo]

i actually really like this. a lot more effective than just nabbing people at lights. plus with the photo evidence theres not much to dispute.

I don't know about that.

That scope thing only shows the front view.
Your arms and everything will be hidden.
I'd be pretty pissed if get ticketed for changing the radio station.

[jlo mein]

FYI for anyone wanting steering wheel mounted music controls, I bought this, hopefully it arrives soon.

Steering Wheel Wireless Bluetooth Remote Control FOR CAR Audio Vedio DVD GPS | eBay (http://www.ebay.ca/itm/121957931845)

[Nlkko]

I change music a shit tons of time on a daily basis, never got a ticket for it. Stop crying and change your panties.

[Timpo]

FYI for anyone wanting steering wheel mounted music controls, I bought this, hopefully it arrives soon.

Steering Wheel Wireless Bluetooth Remote Control FOR CAR Audio Vedio DVD GPS | eBay (http://www.ebay.ca/itm/121957931845)

yeah but a lot of people on the road aren't exactly car enthusiasts and some are still driving cars from 1980s or 1990s, cars that are made BEFORE smart phones came into the market and "distracted driving" was virtually non-existent.

when you go on a road trip, you look at the map and cops didn't ticket people for that.

[RRxtar]

I don't know about that.

That scope thing only shows the front view.
Your arms and everything will be hidden.
I'd be pretty pissed if get ticketed for changing the radio station.


"However, an electric device was not being used"

Well thank god for that!

So, fine is less if you are having sex while driving?




Id be pretty pissed if I got ticketed for using an electronic device when I was actually furiously masturbating

[Jmac]

Sweet ride: Richmond Mounties bust couple having sex while driving - NEWS 1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2016/06/08/richmond-driving-sex/)

"However, an electric device was not being used"

Well thank god for that!

So, fine is less if you are having sex while driving?
What if they were using dildo? That's electric device?
Dude works quick.

[Presto]

Langley Police handed out 145 tickets in one day. 200 and 64th is a regular spot where they've been hauling in distracted drivers for years. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. I wonder how many repeat offenders there were.

$37K in distracted driving tickets handed out in Langley in a single day - Langley Times (http://www.langleytimes.com/news/393623741.html)

Just one day after ICBC and police launched a month-long campaign to target distracted drivers, police wrote over 100 tickets in a single day in Langley for that very offence.

On Friday Sept. 2, Cpl. Greg Mainwood and his team, the Lower Mainland Integrated Road Safety Unit (IRSU), staged an operation to watch for distracted drivers.

Setting up in the area of Fraser Highway and 200 Street and at 200 Street and 64 Avenue, the five-officer team wrote more than 100 tickets to drivers who were using their cellphones while driving and another 43 to drivers who were not wearing seat belts.

Mainwood said it was the drivers who were pulling up to intersections while using their cellular phones who were were stopped.

“Many drivers were shocked to receive a $368 fine for using their phones,” said Mainwood. “Many others had excuses for why the phone was in their hands, such as playing music or checking the time.”

All of these drivers were approaching a busy intersection when observed on their device.

“Cellphones aren’t the only distractions in your vehicle,” Mainwood said.

“One driver had a medium-sized dog draped across his left arm and lap while he continued texting with his right hand as he approached the intersection. This driver was steering with his knee and no hands on the wheel.”

Police say drivers are still unclear about the role phones can play while they are driving.

“Drivers appear to be under the misinformation that picking up their phone to check text messages, change music or holding the phone to use the speaker phone function are not considered using their device,” said Const. Melissa Wutke, spokesperson for BC Traffic Services. “That is certainly not the case.

“Anytime you are holding your device in your hand, or when you are taking your eyes off of the road to manipulate buttons on that device, it is considered using the device and is subject to a $368 fine under the Motor Vehicle Act,” said Wutke.

Roadways are very dynamic environments with situations and circumstances that can change quickly. By taking your eyes off of the road for even a moment you increase the chance of a collision or accident, said police.

Drivers are reminded that any cellphone or electronic device in your vehicle must be fixed to the dash and the driver may only operate that device with one touch. Drivers may not watch the screens on those devices.

Graduated licence class 7 drivers, or those who are required to display an “L” or “N” on the vehicle, may not use any electronic device at all, including hands free or GPS.

[flagella]

"Drivers are reminded that any cellphone or electronic device in your vehicle must be fixed to the dash and the driver may only operate that device with one touch. Drivers may not watch the screens on those devices."

Someone remind me if this applies to your infotainment system?

[Lomac]

"Drivers are reminded that any cellphone or electronic device in your vehicle must be fixed to the dash and the driver may only operate that device with one touch. Drivers may not watch the screens on those devices."

Someone remind me if this applies to your infotainment system?

Well considering all infotainment systems are already permanently affixed to one's dash, I don't see why it's considered any different. How many of you use both hands to change a song or adjust the temperature in your car?

Pretty sure you wont get ticketed for turning on your heated seats at a red light.

[AzNightmare]

:facepalm:

People need to use their common sense in why these laws are in place.
Focus more on what's the campaign about rather than looking for loopholes in the system.

If you mount your phone on the windshield and use it as a GPS. That is OK.
If you mount your phone on the windshield and start texting, that is not OK.
Doesn't matter if you're texting with 1 finger, 2 fingers, all 5 fingers, etc.

[meme405]

and another 43 to drivers who were not wearing seat belts

People these days still aren't wearing seat belts? Seriously?

If we havnt been able to correct that in the last 30 years, how the fuck do you think you are going to solve distracted driving?

[RRxtar]

There's surprisingly still a lot of people who won't wear a seatbelt and openly claim they don't need one or that they are unsafe. Always a surprise to hear someone say it or read it. But they're out there

[jeedee]

“One driver had a medium-sized dog draped across his left arm and lap while he continued texting with his right hand as he approached the intersection. This driver was steering with his knee and no hands on the wheel.”

:fulloffuck:

[Inaii]

There's surprisingly still a lot of people who won't wear a seatbelt and openly claim they don't need one or that they are unsafe. Always a surprise to hear someone say it or read it. But they're out there

I don't wear a seatbelt for my driving, I wear it for the morons on the road that don't seem to understand the concept of driving a vehicle.

“One driver had a medium-sized dog draped across his left arm and lap while he continued texting with his right hand as he approached the intersection. This driver was steering with his knee and no hands on the wheel.”

:fulloffuck:

:lol that was my reaction too

[6o4__boi]

lol let's just not bother ticketing people who don't wear seatbelts

but void and null any injury claims that result from it and/or let the person win a Darwin award

like a comedian once said, fuck it, let's just go ahead and remove all the safety warnings on everything. Too many idiots in this world, we could use a reduction.

[FerrariEnzo]

I bet richmond would take the prize! LMAO

[unit]

i've been rear ended by a woman distracted by her dog before, and have also seen people with dogs on their laps while driving.

i like dogs as much as the next guy, but dogs should absolutely be separated from drivers in the car. If it was a baby in a driver's lap, this wouldn't even be an argument.

[meme405]

i like dogs as much as the next guy, but dogs should absolutely be separated from drivers in the car. If it was a baby in a driver's lap, this wouldn't even be an argument.

Totally agree. Many people who claim "My dog is like a child to me!" Well would you drive with your fucking child in your lap?

Every dog owner that ever even thinks about driving with their dog in their lap or front seat, just remember nobody is gonna feel sorry for you when you get in an accident and the air bag reduces your pet to a blood stain on your shirt. We will however all feel extremely saddened at how a harmless animal had such a shitty irresponsible owner.

[AzNightmare]

People these days still aren't wearing seat belts? Seriously?

If we havnt been able to correct that in the last 30 years, how the fuck do you think you are going to solve distracted driving?

Probably a bunch of fat fucks who feel seat belts are too tight and restrictive for their obese bodies.