FL Texting while Driving Ban to start in Oct

[com_op_2000]

See this article:
http://www.wesh.com/news/politics/t...tt/-/11788048/20323898/-/u08vjjz/-/index.html

 

[gmeh1]

See this article:
http://www.wesh.com/news/politics/t...tt/-/11788048/20323898/-/u08vjjz/-/index.html

While I definitely applaud this, I am very unhappy that is a secondary offense. I think it should be primary and heavily enforced. I would also like to see a cell phone ban (headsets only), I cannot even count the number of times I have almost been creamed by some fool on the phone.

 

[OKW Lover]

Doesn't FL already have a "driving while distracted" law?

 

[Metro West]

While I definitely applaud this, I am very unhappy that is a secondary offense. I think it should be primary and heavily enforced. I would also like to see a cell phone ban (headsets only), I cannot even count the number of times I have almost been creamed by some fool on the phone.

 

[Paging Tom Morrow]

I cannot think of one good reason why the start of this law should be delayed until October.

 

[Lewisc]

I cannot think of one good reason why the start of this law should be delayed until October.

Unless I'm missing something Florida doesn't have a hands free requirement for voice calls and will still allow drivers to text at a red light.

 

[retlaw_yensid]

I cannot think of one good reason why the start of this law should be delayed until October.

Laws typically can't take effect right away because things have to updated (ex: law books).

 

[Paging Tom Morrow]

Laws typically can't take effect right away because things have to updated (ex: law books).

IMO, this is not a good reason. The purpose of the law is to save lives. Delaying the start for administrative reasons puts additional lives at stake.

 

[Jmacsmom]

IMO, this is not a good reason. The purpose of the law is to save lives. Delaying the start for administrative reasons puts additional lives at stake.

I may be in the minority but I don't view laws like this as being preventative but being a means to administer punishment to offenders. I don't think someone who texts and drives today will stop tomorrow or next week because there is a new law, regardless of the amount of media exposure it receives. Maybe I'm too cynical.

 

[Cricket2]

I may be in the minority but I don't view laws like this as being preventative but being a means to administer punishment to offenders. I don't think someone who texts and drives today will stop tomorrow or next week because there is a new law, regardless of the amount of media exposure it receives. Maybe I'm too cynical.

That's what they said about seatbelt laws back when they were introduced too. It has to start sometime.

 

[Missytara]

In DE, we have no texting and using cell phones while operating vehicles. You can use hands free for cell phones, but I still see it as a distraction. While you see an accident happening in front of you, the person on the other end of the line does not and continues to talk, only further distracting you.

What befuddles me is that there has been laws on the books for years; it is called inattentive driving.

Really, nothing is that important to text or call someone when you are operating a vehicle.

 

[gmeh1]

Unless I'm missing something Florida doesn't have a hands free requirement for voice calls and will still allow drivers to text at a red light.

No, they don't have an hand's free law, unfortunately. They will still allow drivers to text at red lights even with this new law.

 

[gmeh1]

In DE, we have no texting and using cell phones while operating vehicles. You can use hands free for cell phones, but I still see it as a distraction. While you see an accident happening in front of you, the person on the other end of the line does not and continues to talk, only further distracting you.

What befuddles me is that there has been laws on the books for years; it is called inattentive driving.

Really, nothing is that important to text or call someone when you are operating a vehicle.

 

[gmeh1]

That's what they said about seatbelt laws back when they were introduced too. It has to start sometime.

 

[gmeh1]

IMO, this is not a good reason. The purpose of the law is to save lives. Delaying the start for administrative reasons puts additional lives at stake.

I agree with you, but, the reason stated here does make some sense. IMHO, the rewriting of the laws could be expedited. And, if the present FL. Legislature actually cared about the impact of the law, they would have made it primary, not secondary.

 

[gmeh1]

Doesn't FL already have a "driving while distracted" law?

Not sure, but, if they do, it certainly is NOT enforced at all.

 

[OKW Lover]

I agree with you, but, the reason stated here does make some sense. IMHO, the rewriting of the laws could be expedited. And, if the present FL. Legislature actually cared about the impact of the law, they would have made it primary, not secondary.

The cynic in me is saying that its more important for the lawmakers to appear to be concerned by passing a law.

 

[Luvchefmic]

FL ! I love it don't get me wrong; hate that its not a law until Oct but considering other things here thrilled its even happening (ie people and animals riding back of pickup trucks ok, no requirement for motorcycle helmets ok
just so wrong)

 

[gmeh1]

The cynic in me is saying that its more important for the lawmakers to appear to be concerned by passing a law.

I can agree with that.

 

[gmeh1]

FL ! I love it don't get me wrong; hate that its not a law until Oct but considering other things here thrilled its even happening (ie people and animals riding back of pickup trucks ok, no requirement for motorcycle helmets ok
just so wrong)

Not many states have laws about wearing a helmet while riding a donor cycle, however, just let them catch you without a seat belt. Go figure. BTW, just a FYI, I never leave my driveway without my seatbelt on and I don't ride donorcycles.