Cellphone Law

I still see it all around me. It has been almost a year since CA began enforcing a law restricting handheld cellular phone usage while driving. The "texting" loophole was later closed. So how the hell is a cop to enforce this law? My guess is that they don't. Just today I witnessed a young gal glancing down at her lap repeatedly while at a stoplight. Another, older woman, was blatantly yakking away with the phone up against her left ear, the one facing out the window for the world to see (but perhaps invisible to law enforcement). I had to pass a vehicle yesterday that was going questionably slow, only to find a woman carrying on an animated conversation on her phone. Sure, people will hedge their bets against getting caught... no different than breaking other traffic laws I suppose, but this one's harder to detect and probably why they do it.

I am no fan of phones, which leaves me with a feeling of being left out on (figuratively) giving a finger to the Man. I now make up for that by proceeding through red lights when clear, perform rolling stops, speeding, and sex when I can get it.

Obama's Crack

Um, as in "crackberry", the appropriately coined term for the addictive Blackberry communications device. I know, this is old news. On one hand I applaud the President for being technologically hip; on the other, I feel it underscores the depth of this indulgence. I really don't know how well the security experts will be able to protect the data that will be flowing in and out of the Presidential Blackberry, and providing a set of rules for its usage is a joke. Obama said, "they're going to pry it out of my hands", perhaps subtly paying homage to the late Charlton Heston's line about prying his guns from his cold, dead hands. If only Obama felt as dearly about firearms as he does his precious crack.

The Blackberry and other communications devices have become quite the addiction for many people, and the bane for many others. Consider me one of the latter, as I find it irksome to hear the yakking in all sorts of public places, and the inattention that it causes while driving.

At least Obama is being chauffeured while he's glued to his.

Digital Delay

I'm pretty much fed up. We truly live in a nation of idiots (for lack of a better term). The buzz in the Obama administration is to push back the February 17th deadline for analog-to-digital TV conversion so that the lolligaggers will have a chance to catch up. Helllllooo? There was plenty of advance notice that this was coming (what was it, a year of advertising?). People. People who ignore taking any action until the very last minute. Homework given a week in advance that are completed the night before it's due. CA passes a hands-free-cellphone-while-driving law in January 2007 with the condition that it will not go into effect until 1.5 years later, in the summer of 2008, to allow ample time for drivers to purchase the proper devices to comply. Yet, the 6 months that followed still resulted in 46,000 citations issued for violation of that law. Oh, and how about a state budget that is chronically late year after year?

I think an appropriate motto for America as we near the end of the first decade in the new millennium is this: "why do today what you can put off until tomorrow?".

Easing the Deficit

Here's one idea to help toward getting some cash back into the state's coffers: raise the traffic fine to $351 for the recently enacted law prohibiting cellphone use while driving (unless it's hands-free). I see plenty enough drivers out there who continue to yak away. Let's say each officer can cite 20 drivers daily. Have 1,000 officers do this and that's 20,000 citations. This will amount to over $7M per day, $35M per week... you get the picture.

Texting and Driving

Enforcement of the hands-free cellphone (while driving) law in California took effect this past July. Yay. However, the folks who pushed through this bill a year-and-a-half earlier left a loophole wide open which did not place restrictions on text messaging while driving. I have heard that this was intentionally done to ensure that the bill would pass... that it did, and now our governor has signed a bill to close said loophole. I mean, texting while maneuvering a 3,500 pound mass of rolling steel (glass, rubber, plastic and other bits) at speed, in the middle of traffic?

I have said this before about the cellphone law, and I'll say it again about the texting law: how effectively will this be enforced? I've witnessed many who still blatantly have their cellphones pressed to their ears, and no doubt texting will also continue (after January 1, 2009 when the law takes effect). The side effect to introducing new laws is that it increases the number of scofflaws.

I suppose I'm picking my battles here (living in a glass house), but as a motorcyclist who has to share the road with larger vehicles, I would like that those drivers focus their attentions on driving and not these petty distractions.

Text, Not Voice

A law passed in January 2006 will take effect on July 1, 2008, prohibiting people from talking on handheld cellular phones while driving in California. The solution is to use the cellphone's speakerphone feature (if available), or a hands-free headset (wired or wireless). Oh yes, another option being to abstain from using the phone altogether.

However, the law does not preclude anyone from using the cellphone to send and receive text messages. Hmm. The lawmakers want to make sure your lips and ears are not preoccupied, but will allow your eyes to be diverted from the road? Thumbs too? Last I checked, the thumbs were part of the hand, as in "hands-free". Yeah, makes a lot of sense.

Look Ma, No Hands!

It still irks me to sit in traffic and witness the large number of drivers who have cellphones pressed against their heads. It leaves only one hand free for controlling the vehicle. "So what?" you say? "Same can be said when holding that burger, or applying the mascara, or lipstick, or while shaving". But you see, those activities are no-brainers and not distracting like engaging in a telephone conversation.

What about distractions by conversing with passengers in the car then? Well, you got me there. At least the front seat passenger can potentially aid in traffic awareness; just find some way to audibly suppress and segregate the back seats. Or ride solo, like I usually do.

Introducing law that requires hands-free cellphones is a step in the right direction (effective in July here in Cali), but I've said this before and I'll say it again: how the hell are the authorities going to widely enforce this law?

Ineffectively, is my guess.

O Lord...

...won't you buy me a Mercedes-Benz?

I was ready to get on board my motorcycle at a local hardware store when I heard the big crunch yesterday. Looks like a fancy M-B hit a passing Honda Accord while maneuvering around the parking lot. Since I did not witness the collision as it happened, I would not have been able to offer much help.

I could offer my opinion however. The M-B appeared to have pulled out of its parking spot by moving forward between two concrete blocks (angled parking, in opposing directions). Since other cars were parked in adjacent spots, one has to proceed cautiously due to limited visibility. Actually, the proper way to exit the parking spot is to pull out in reverse, all the while making sure it is clear behind you (but I too am guilty of pulling forward across the parking spots). The Honda clearly had the right of way and could not have seen the M-B dashing out between parked cars.

What was the M-B driver thinking? What's the excuse, "I didn't see the Honda"?

That was the excuse used by a 24-yr old woman over a week ago when she pulled out of a driveway onto a large 4-laned street (posted 40mph). The newspaper article wasn't clear whether a 30-yr old motorcyclist on his way to work either hit her, or was hit by her. Either way, he's dead. Moreover, she killed him while behind the wheel with a suspended license, and as far as one friend is concerned, that should be considered premeditation.

My observation is that the drivers do not bother to look, and is why they "didn't see" the other vehicle. There's also preoccupation with things other than driving (eating, cellphone conversation, others in the vehicle, etc.). I would really like to know if the M-B driver was busy yakking on the cellphone... I'd almost bet money on it.

For all the money people (who can) spend on fine German wheels, the M-B did not fare well in the collision. About two-thirds of the front grill on the left side was crushed in by at least a foot. The Honda's right front corner ate it, but I think it won out in the mishap. I'm guessing that the M-B driver has deep pockets, since it couldn't be cheap to put everything back all nice and pretty.

At least noone died in this one.

On the Books

I'm talking about new laws in effect, or about to become law.

We're in the middle of several storm systems (today being a brief lull... more rain to come this evening). While driving home from work on a couple of occasions, I noticed that not all the cars on the road have their headlights turned on. This is relevant because California law stipulates that this is required if you are using your windshield wipers. I may have been guilty on occasion, only because my headlights turn on automatically depending on the ambient light conditions (if the sensors determine that it is dark enough).

Of course, the alternative is to not bother using the wipers while your headlight remains turned off. I don't believe it is law requiring the use of wipers when it's raining cats and dogs.

Since this seems to be the type of frivolous law that would be difficult at best to enforce, I wonder how law enforcement personnel are to handle the many potential abusers when the hands-free cellphone law goes into effect this July? I am all for any means to get people's attentions back to driving rather than occupying themselves with distractions. I'd like to see data collected that may determine cellphone usage as possibly contributing to accidents, and slap on stiffer penalties for the indiscretion.

Another law on the books here in California makes it illegal to toss burning objects from a moving vehicle. The verbiage is probably a euphemistic attempt to acquiesce those yoyos who insist on tossing their cigarette butts out the window. Cops seem to be exempt... and could be why this law is (IMHO) rarely enforced, if at all.

There should be a law that outlaws laws that are either nonsensical or difficult to enforce.

Mobile Phones

Have you noticed the great number of cellphone callers behind the wheel these days? (Or perhaps you're one of the guilty ones). What is it with the need to be yakking constantly while driving? Can anyone tell me what driving was like before cellphones became so prevalent?

(and if you can, you may be dating yourself).

Jam Session

I've been reading much lately about cellphone jammers, and that prices are beginning to become affordable for the consumer market. Previously, only larger enterprises were able to afford these devices which disrupt cellphone signals, purportedly used by restaurants and movie theaters where cellphone conversations are a nuisance. Emergency telephones are available away from other patrons.

Problem is, these devices are also considered illegal. Cellphone transmissions ride a segment of the airwaves that are governed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and in effect it'd be a federal crime to disrupt or inhibit the calls. Cracking down on the little guys will be a lot more difficult than going after the big boys.

Oh wouldn't it be nice to have one of these thingamajiggers! That, and of course the one that changes traffic signals.