A bill banning drivers under 18 from using cellphones passed the California Assembly today. It doesn’t even allow hands-free device use. The Highway Patrol asked for, and got, the offense classified as a secondary infraction, which means you can’t get pulled over simply for breaking this law.
We don’t quite understand this bill because talking on your cellphone is unsafe at any age, even though we all do it. The only thing we can think of is that the bill’s author, Joe Simitian, is on a quest to, piece by piece, effectively outlaw cellphones in cars all together. This July another one of his bills went into effect, which required all California drivers to use hands-free devices when chatting it up on the road.
Assembly OKs teen-driver cell phone ban [Mercury News]
(Photo: Getty Images)
More From Consumerist
-
San Francisco Suburb Bans Smoking In All Multi-Family Homes, Whether Rented Or Owned
-
San Francisco Restaurant Flips The Bird To California Foie Gras Ban
-
California Lawmakers Move Forward With Homeowner Bill of Rights
-
L.A. City Council Votes To Repeal Ban On Medical Marijuana Dispensaries
-
Court Says California Cities & Counties Can Ban Pot Shops
@B: Plus AARP (and similar groups) would shoot down anything that targets the elderly.
(some of them definitely do need to be taken off the road)
long list of comments here, but as with all other areas concerning motorized traffic (cars on roads) in this country. Proper and adequate regulation has a bit of a lag time in being addressed and fully implemented from when the technology was initially introduced.
case in point. seat belts. not so much the legalization of being forced to wear them, but the mandatory inclusion of them in the production process.
Concerning seatbelts…I always wear mine and my kids are ALWAYS in the proper seat and fully buckled before moving an inch. However, I completely disagree with having a law requiring seatbelts, at least for non-minors. Require people to care for their minors, ok, fine. However anyone old enough to vote or die for this country is old enough to decide for themselves if they want to kill themselves by not wearing seat belts.
The cell phone thing…don’t get me started. As previously mentioned…HANG UP AND DRIVE!
I’ve seen drunk teenage girls drive better than a 50 year old man using a cell phone.
@catnapped:
had this conversation with a co-worker just yesterday. I’m not all about nanny state, but really, old people just don’t always realize what a danger they are to themselves and other drivers on the road…the latter being of my most concern.
i think that as soon as someone retires to drawn on social security benefits and/or is above age 65 they should be required to pass a vision and driving test every year. I think with this program it should be offered at a reduced cost or no-cost to the elderly(which are often on fixed income/poor). Elderly people’s condition can dramatically degrade in short amounts of time and can pose a pretty serious risk to other drivers on the road. reduced cost public transportation services should be offered on an as needed basis.
@spinachdip: @Whoa: I was still waking up when I posted so I could have been more thorough. Yes, spinachdip, I definately think we should stop prosecuting serial killers.
Obviously, I realize this could prevent some accidents but it seems like there is less of a stigma to driving with a cell phone as opposed to driving drunk (or even alcohol in general).
There’s a pretty good number of people who get in a car and think, “But I can drive fine with a buzz so that law doesn’t apply to me.” I have to guess the number of people who think “But I can drive fine while talking” is at least double, if not triple that.
I understand why the motives behind it but I guess I just sort of roll my eyes at the cost and effort that go into it because I don’t see it making a significant impact on accidents. Hopefully, I’m wrong.
@killavanilla:
Seeing as how Cesar Chavez, co-founder and leader of the United Farm Workers, has been dead for almost 15 years, I don’t think he’s looking to take over California and crush his critics in the media.
Could you be thinking of HUGO Chavez?
@HeyHermano:
“There’s a pretty good number of people who get in a car and think, “But I can drive fine with a buzz so that law doesn’t apply to me.” I have to guess the number of people who think “But I can drive fine while talking” is at least double, if not triple that.”
You make a good point, there is a stigma attached to drunk driving. But keep in mind, that stigma wasn’t always there. “One for the road” was an acceptable concept and there was no such thing as a designated drive. It took decade for the perception of drunk driving to go from “stupid” to “criminal”.
@killavanilla: “I mean, the US could save billions of dollars in earmarks and budgetary spending usually reserved for California.”
You do realize that California pays vastly more in Federal taxes than we get back? We put in billions more than is spent on us. We make money for the rest of the states to spend. Illinois is in the same boat, but don’t pretend that the budget we receive is somehow costing the rest of you money; if we left, we’d have more money to spend on ourselves and the rest of the US would have left for their budgetary earmarks.
@Morgan:
though very true, most of the rest of the country does wish california would break off into the ocean and float away.
@acambras: Wow. I missed that (I tend to tune out spittle-flecked ranting after the first couple of lines). Tho I like the idea of a zombified Cesar Chavez arising and eating the brains of agribiz execs, how mortifying (to KillerVaniller) to not know the difference btn Hugo & Cesar. Good catch!
Considering in NY state we just had 5 teens killed in a car because the driver recieved a text message and was reaching for her phone to answer it this is a good law and should be passed, what sucks is even though it will probably be passed it won’t actually be enforced, NY state supposedly has a ban on cell phones while driving too but it seems every other soccer mom with a van of kids is always talking on their phone no matter what.
I still wonder about the cops that talk on cell phones while driving. They must be specially trained.
@Morgan: How about the Red States? Surely such paragons of self-reliance, small government, lower taxes, anti-nanny-state Republican residents such as them must contribute more to Washington than they take back. I mean, if they didn’t, wouldn’t that make them hypocritical welfare queens?
Why stop at cell phones?
What does this have to do with the China and/or poisoned food/toys/tires/clothing/freedom/labor/water/trade agreements?
I blame rap music for what ever this story is about.
@trai_dep: I’m glad you asked that, Jimmy! On average, Red States do take back more money than they pay in.
@gibsonic: I’ll keep that in mind next time I hear someone from out of state complain that foreign countries hate America even though we give them so much aid. Then they can explain why they hate California even though we pay for so much in their states, and the mystery will be solved.
Yay for California! I love living in this state..seriously!
@cde:
Having a conversation with somebody in the car isn’t exactly the same as using one hand to hold a phone to your ear while trying to drive a car, use the turn signals, etc.
@Morgan:
sometimes…just sometimes…we could care less about your money.
Cell phone usage in cars should be banned, period, unless one is using a headset.
I am constantly shocked when 70-80% of the people that I pass by on a given day have their damned phone glued to their ear. It’s just…insane. People are so flippant about it, and it’s just as bad as drunk driving. Worse because it’s just so accepted. I guess these people are addicted to phones like drunks are to alcohol?
There is simply, absolutely, no excuse. Period.
@Chicago7: Not only that, talking to someone who’s in the car requires less attention than talking to someone on the phone. Not to mention that a passenger would have at least some awareness of the surroundings. Your mom in Wisconsin won’t be able to tell you, “Hey, watch out for the tree!”
@gibsonic: The mystery is solved!
Oh, and I realize anti-cell phone laws are hard to enforce, but if they find that a driver was on the phone at the time of a fatal accident (shouldn’t be hard to check, call records and all), I hope a prosecutor has the balls to charge the driver with vehicular manslaughter.
@gibsonic: Sure you say that NOW, but who’s going to pay for your $half-billion Bridges to Nowhere or for protecting your annual Soy Bean Parade from the Jihadis?
You don’t care about Blue State money, call your congressman NOW. Demand your state lives within its means and stop being a nelly welfare queen.
Handfree devices do *not* lessen the chance you will get in an accident. It is the conversation on the cell phone, not the fiddling with the device that has been shown to cause loss of awareness of the road and accidents.
@trai_dep: Agreed. Minnesota: suck it up and pay for your own damned bridge. Alaska: don’t even think about it.
Hate sending your firefighters off to California during the summer? Move out of the path of tornadoes and hurricanes, and ABOVE FREAKING SEA LEVEL (I’m looking at you, New Orleans). Murdering foreigners by the hundreds of thousands and some of the relatives decides to take revenge? Uh, sorry, no California greenbacks for you. And don’t forget the California Armed Forces. GL carrying on the Crusades without California $$, without our ports (goodbye US Navy), etc.
Familiarize yourself with the words of the founding fathers. Washington had some interesting things to say about foreign affairs, geographical distinction, and partisan politics.
It’s disgusting how divided the nation has become.
@acambras:
*blushing*
yup.
Sometimes I’m a monkey….
@spinachdip: Anti-cell phone laws aren’t hard to enforce; no more than seat-belts. In my state just not visibly wearing a seat-belt is enough to get you pulled over. And it’s a hell of a lot more obvious when you are driving down the road who has a cell in their hands. I’m paying attention to the road, but it’s hard not to notice when only every fifth driver DOESN’T have a little machine held up to the side of their heads.
@adamwade: True, though what I meant to say was that all cell phone use while driving should be banned, but those Bluetooth thingies are hard to spot.
@KILLAVANLLA:
I was not the on who suggested California be voted out of the Union but I don’t think it would hurt us. Seriously. You don’t think you need us? The food here is no good? And the entertainment industry is going to flee? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha.
Every heard of Silicon Valley? California tech innovation continues to make YOUR life better.
Ever hear of the San Joaquin Valley? The Imperial Valley? The Coachella Valley? The California agricultural industry is worth over 32 billion dollars. Where do you think that produce you enjoy all winter comes from? Citrus. Table grapes. Table Vegetables. Almonds. Walnuts. Pistachios. (Yes, we have some nuts in California) Flowers-to wear in your hair. We make more cheese than Wisconsin. We grow decidedly more than strawberries here. And while I also appreciate the wines of Chile, New Zealand and Australia, (as well as Washington and Oregon, both blue states, thank you) the wines of California tend to be superior if more expensive.
How about Yosemite Valley? California tourism is a 75 billion dollar industry and do you know why? We have things to see and do here. We have GREAT people. I work in the hotel industry and am told frequently how nice the people are. I also LOVE the fact that I don’t have to smell cigarette smoke EVER when I go to a restaurant.
As for our politics, we gave you Reagan AND Pelosi. We’ve had Jerry Brown and Arnold as governor. We are not stuck on one political party or philosophy but care about ideas and results. We cross party lines when necessary and tend to believe in progress and having government do the will of the people. ALL the people.
As for being an ignorant youngster, I am neither. I am probably old enough to be your dad. Has your mom ever been here?
I really don’t mind if you don’t ever want to come here again. It will be one less Midwesterner taking our tee times in February in Palm Springs. Enjoy the sub-zero temps this winter. I’ll be having fun in the sun…with the rest of the Golden State.
And I won’t have to worry about getting slammed by some teenager talking on their cellphone while I’m driving.
@killavanilla:
Oh yeah, one more thing. There was a Chicago native who left the midwest to move to California for the women. He’s somewhat of an expert on the subject of beautiful women.
Maybe you’ve heard of him.
His name is Hugh Hefner.
California wants to ban everything. You can’t even drink beer on the freaking beach! Regarding California women, you guys can keep your plastic, if that’s what you like. I like women who can talk without drooling.
@Mr. Gunn: Your vast knowledge of our women is impressive. I assume you’ve sampled, otherwise you’d just be talking out of your rear.
And the alcohol! How can you possibly have a good time in public without the consumption of alcohol? How will you organize a beach bum fight without winos? How will you get in the sack with some of our made-in-china women without some liquoring up? This is madness!
/sarcasm
Handheld bans do more harm than good. As has been mentioned, it’s the conversation that causes the cognitive distraction. Yet when the government bans handheld use, but allows headset use, it leaves people with the mistaken impression that they are “safe” because they are using a headset.
It’s a neat solution for politicians, because it allows them to be seen as “doing something” by going after that image we all love to hate – the person who just cut you off while obviously holding a phone – without upsetting the powerful cellular lobby.
@spinachdip: It is already illegal to drive while distracted. Studies are UNCLEAR as to talking on a phone is as dangerous as driving while messing with a GPS, or talking with a passenger, dealing with kids, changing CDs, searching for a tune on your MP3 player.
My point is that you can’t outlaw stupidity. And it does effect the people who CAN talk and drive safely… And they do exist. I have been accident and ticket free for 18 years. I talk on my HAM radio when driving all the time. Truckers do the same thing all the time too.
Why not outlaw something that makes a difference like outlaw police from using their MDT terminals while they drive. My local police wrecks 3 cars a month because some dip-shit cop was on the computer while driving.
Do we need every single area of our lives legislated? Why stop there? Let’s make 9pm bed times mandatory for everyone! Let’s make all kids go to the dentist.. oh they already did that. Let’s mandate annual hearing tests for all kids… opps they did that too. Let’s outlaw Foir Grois (sp)… oops did that too. Let’s pass law that all new state buildings have to be up to Fung Shui standards… Fuck they did that too!!
@Mr. Gunn: “You can’t even drink beer on the freaking beach!”
Tee hee. At least we have a beach.
@killavanilla:
Moreso since Chavez hasn’t seemed interested in “investment” in the US.
He offered us several billion barrels of oil for free to distribute to the poor, after all. Of course, we rejected it. And millions of fixed and lower-income people were unable to pay their $300+ fuel bills in the past several winters.
@RvLeshrac:
Err… that should be *monthly* fuel bills.
@spinachdip:
I don’t think these laws would be that hard to enforce. Just post a cop on almost any busy street and start writing tickets. It’s every 5th car!
100 people or so get a ticket and word would get out, and people would get hands-free phones.
@Chicago7: Yeah, but my point, which I didn’t make very clear, was that ALL cell phone use should be banned, since using a hands-free device doesn’t make dialing and driving significantly safer.
@jwissick: Actually, studies have generally been pretty clear that cell phone’s effect on driving is as bad as, if not worse than drinking. And based on your response, it would logically follow that you would be against laws against drinking and driving as well. If that’s the case, then theres not much point in continuing this discussion, of course.
But of course, cell phone conversations do require more attention from the brain than talking to another passenger, changing the radio, talking on CB radio, or trying to calm the kids.
You’re right, you can’t legislate against people’s stupidity and you can’t protect people from their own stupidity. But I’ll be damned if we didn’t protect ourselves from other people’s stupidity.
But really, it has to be nice not having to come up with cogent points when you can just spout liberal-panic talking points and substitute logic with strawmen and imaginary slippery slopes.
They should ban all cell phones all of the time unless you are using them in your own home. They are a nuisance to everyone around the person using it.
Or they could just pass a law that states if you cause an accident you lose your license for 10 years. I bet a lot of people would stop doing things that are distracting. Ive been driving 20 years and NEVER caused an accident because I PAY ATTENTION when I drive
Ban everything! Why not? Make murder against the law and that will stop it, right? All we do is ban, ban, ban… The GPS in a car is more distracting than a cell phone, lets ban that…
Keep putting up fences, banning, regulating and make everything a felony. That will fix everything including our liberty…