In States with Cell Phone Laws, Question?

[phorsenuf]

You can also talk on the cell phone in Massachusetts, right across the state line. I haven't noticed that they are dying in Massachusetts at a faster rate than we are.

I was actually pointing out to the other poster that said talking on cell phones while driving in FLA is illegal, that it's not.

 

[pixiewings71]

calls are NOT dispatched through car speakers nor can they be...yes a blue light can be unsafe for cops trying to sneak up on someone which they do.

I was referring to the use of a blue tooth while IN the vehicle, not while on foot. And why can't they be dispatched thru speakers, if said police car has a built in blue tooth (as was suggested by a pp) and the dispatcher calls the officer on his (or her) cell phone, if the cell phone is hooked up to the blue tooth in the car then it would come thru the car speakers. I think you need to re-read what I said as it appears that you did not understand my points.

I highly doubt that Dawn is on a diatribe. In fact, she seems to be concerned about their safety. Isn't that nice of her?

If these laws are enacted for *safety*, that means that people are safer when not holding phones and talking into them. Therefore, police officers, who are already multi-tasking anyway, shouldn't be doing it either.

It's the weirdest thing...happens with police officers and military personnel...people who are concerned about their safety are so often seen as being against them. It's so weird. If I want a police officer to be safer than they are right now, how does that make me against the police officer? To my view, it makes me feel like I care MORE about that police officer than others do. But that's impossible. Right?




Electrical tape.

Should mention that if the officer is out of the vehicle, they could hold a cellphone in their hand...no need for the earpiece.





Absolutely!




Good points! If the officer is giving out important info, it would be by walkie talkie or cellphone. Using an earpiece would do the exact same thing, he would be heard just the same as if he were holding a phone to his face or a walkietalkie to his mouth, AND it would keep the officer safer!

If there were someone else in the car, it makes no difference at all what method they would use...the other person is going to hear it anyway.

OF course, if it's dispatch giving the info, especially something like a SSN, then isn't the officer writing it down? So she's got a pen and paper, a cellphone, oh, and she's driving...wait...2 arms, three things... Again, ear cricket (sorry, I hate those things, I just don't use the phone in the car b/c I can't stand those things, they look like a bug has landed on your face!) would keep them safer.





In your scenario, they are on foot, yes? So they can be holding a phone to their ear. Except, wait...if they are on a phone and they are talking or someone is talking to them, then let's forget about that whole safety thing b/c they would be making noises.

And a phone ringing as they snuck up would be bad as well. So pretty much, they might not be on a cellphone while sneaking up in the pitch dark (except for on TV, where I see it often b/c they seem to think bad guys are deaf to voices). Also there would be that pesky issue of the lit-up display on the phone shining a bright beacon to their location (unless they found some electrical tape).

So how can that possibly be an issue, let alone an argument for not using bluetooth on a cellphone? It's not part of it at all.



The arguments for police officers to continue holding a cellphone to the face, vs using an earpiece, aren't making a bit of sense.

Thank You Molly, you made the points I so clearly neglected to put in my pp. lol I just agree with everything you said so I'll leave it at that.

yep you sound like you can do that job better then most cops...when ya start? by the way all that "multi tasking" they do...they are TRAINED to drive while distracted! you know TRAINED like a dr is trained to do his job...these r not any joes they give a gun belt and a car to! they are even trained to shoot while distracted...so yeh not so much a big deal...

I know many types of officers (military and civilian) and they may get training to drive while distracted or training to shoot while distracted but every single one of them has said it's still not safe, most of them agree that they should use blue tooth technology while driving and most of them do use it. It's the ones that think they are "all that" that won't use blue tooth and they will be the ones running red lights, or driving over medians and causing accidents where innocent people die. All the training in the world doesn't mean it's safe to do.

I stand by what I said, if an officer is driving they should be using blue tooth technology, they are the law enforcers they should uphold the laws not be exempt from them.

FTR my DBF has family members who are officers and he also talks about joining the force so no, I'm not bashing officers or the work that they do, I fully support our police force and am appreciative and grateful but I do not feel that they should be exempt from the laws that are designed to keep us safe.

 

[DawnCt1]

I was actually pointing out to the other poster that said talking on cell phones while driving in FLA is illegal, that it's not.

Oh, I know, it wasn't a criticism. I was adding to your comment that it isn't illegal in Massachusetts either.

 

[DawnCt1]

Whether you believe the conversation is work related or not..it is inmaterial, as in your state it is legal. If it bothers you that much you can always seek to change it.

No need; I have bluetooth in my car and use it, and it doesn't bother me who is talking on their cell phone. I happen to think that the law is a huge revenue grab and inconsistent however.

 

[pixiewings71]

As for having to program your phone every time to the blue tooth in the car, again, not a valid point. I have a blue tooth unit that's programmed to my phone, I can take it into ANY car I drive and I do not have to program it again.
I WAS REFERRING TO A BLUE TOOTH SYSTEM BUILT INTO A PATROL CAR, WITH EACH OFFICER HAVING THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL CELL PHONE, AND NOT NECESSARILY HAVE THE SAME CAR EVERY SHIFT. THE SYSTEM WOULD HAVE TO BE PROGRAMMED EVERYTIME ANOTHER OFFICER WITH HIS OWN CELL PHONE GOT IN
And to suggest that the small blue light on the ear piece could cause problems to the officers, I think that's ridiculous, that small blue light can be in anyone's ear, in anyone's car so again, that invalidates that reason not to use them.
NO OFFENSE, BUT THAT'S HARDLY RIDICULOUS, IT'S A SERIOUS SITUATION THAT COULD PUT AN OFFICERS LIFE IN JEOPARDY. IN THE PITCH DARK, SEARCHING FOR A POTENTIALLYARMED SUSPECT WHO IS HIDING, THE OFFICER'S POSITION WOULD BE INDICATED BY THAT LIGHT EVERY FEW SECONDS. THE ELEMENT OF SURPRISE IS A TOOL THE OFFICER NEEDS

Wow, really? You needed to yell to get your point across? I don't think so.
My point was clearly missed by you, when an officer is IN his (or her) car the blue tooth would be in use, not while they trying to find a suspect on foot, of course they would not want any type of light then, that would give their position away, but of course so would the use of a cell phone, because you know, there's talking and then cell phone lights....I'm with Molly on that one, an officer would hardly use a cell phone while walking around in the dark trying to apprehend or locate a suspect, dangerous or otherwise.

Note that my post clearly refers to use of blue tooth devices in the car, not outside the car. And no offense but you cannot tell me to what to think, I can think something is ridiculous, it's called my opinion. Just as you are free to disagree with me, as it is called your opinion.

BTW I love how you cut my OP and edited to make your reply sound better. I really think you should go back and read what I said again, without your edits, because I clearly agreed with you on each officer having to reprogram the blue tooth if they were using cars with that feature built in.

 

[livie1205]

So, a person that says an officer talking on a cell phone could very well be conducting business is wrong, but you who have seen calls and make arbitrary guesses out of your rear as to whether they are personal or business is right?

What a load.

 

[livie1205]

I was referring to the use of a blue tooth while IN the vehicle, not while on foot. And why can't they be dispatched thru speakers, if said police car has a built in blue tooth (as was suggested by a pp) and the dispatcher calls the officer on his (or her) cell phone, if the cell phone is hooked up to the blue tooth in the car then it would come thru the car speakers. I think you need to re-read what I said as it appears that you did not understand my points.



Thank You Molly, you made the points I so clearly neglected to put in my pp. lol I just agree with everything you said so I'll leave it at that.



I know many types of officers (military and civilian) and they may get training to drive while distracted or training to shoot while distracted but every single one of them has said it's still not safe, most of them agree that they should use blue tooth technology while driving and most of them do use it. It's the ones that think they are "all that" that won't use blue tooth and they will be the ones running red lights, or driving over medians and causing accidents where innocent people die. All the training in the world doesn't mean it's safe to do.

I stand by what I said, if an officer is driving they should be using blue tooth technology, they are the law enforcers they should uphold the laws not be exempt from them.

FTR my DBF has family members who are officers and he also talks about joining the force so no, I'm not bashing officers or the work that they do, I fully support our police force and am appreciative and grateful but I do not feel that they should be exempt from the laws that are designed to keep us safe.

there are alot of laws they are exempt from....its like that for a reason.

 

[livie1205]

There is more radio traffic on their radios in there cars then just their own dept. that they have to hear so no having bluetooth go through the radios is not even safe for them plus even if it was who would pay for this? The taxpayers that already complain about the taxes? Do you even relize how many millions it would cost to redo the radios in all the cars?I still stand behind my point of anyone who asks WHY they have to do things the way they do to go to a civ P.D. program(about a 6 week course) to see why they do what they do before you start telling them what they should do.Most towns have them for people to go to see just that.
If they are going to a bad call and need to talk by phone to another cop about the call in route they can not just pull over..they just CAN NOT do that.They can not take up radio space like that unless they call "traffic" and they only do that with things like cop down or something else BIG. please take one of these classes before you judge.

 

[mrsltg]

Nothing but excuses. My father was a cop and yet he had no problem wearing his seatbelt, even with a gun on his right hip.

Great for your dad. I somehow don't buy he wore a seatbelt to each and every call each and every day. I know too many cops in too many jurisdictions who do not. Their reasons are solid. Maybe the difference is the area being patrolled? My husband has been downtown DC for 20 years. It's not an easy place.

That makes perfect sense and I would think the way it should be done. This keeps him safe during all the other times he is driving around and yet allows him the assurance that he can quickly and safely get out of the car when getting to a call.


Also in light of the fact that we have plenty of cops around who think the laws don't apply to them she probably figured this was just one more.

What exactly does "plenty" mean in your last sentence? It sounds like you've got an axe to grind between this comment and your other one about officers on a power trip. I don't disagree that there are those using the badge to be a jerk, but I hardly see it as "plenty" in relation to the number of police across the United States. The majority of these people are good men and women willing to do a job that sucks, is dangerous, and is not particularly respected.

As far as the seatbelt is concerned, you don't want a cop talking on cell phone while driving, but playing with their seatbelt is okay? That's somehow safer?

there are alot of laws they are exempt from....its like that for a reason.

They're sworn officers of the law. They can detain people without being charged with kidnapping, enter private property without being arrested, drive in excess of the speed limit for appropriate purposes, ignore traffic laws, etc., etc., etc. I've been with my husband for 13 of his 20 year career. I've known A LOT of cops because of this. I have yet to meet one who thinks him or herself "cool" or "above the law". Likely because when I meet them I haven't broken a law or suffered a trauma of some sort. Context makes all the difference in the world I suppose.

 

[livie1205]

Great for your dad. I somehow don't buy he wore a seatbelt to each and every call each and every day. I know too many cops in too many jurisdictions who do not. Their reasons are solid. Maybe the difference is the area being patrolled? My husband has been downtown DC for 20 years. It's not an easy place.



What exactly does "plenty" mean in your last sentence? It sounds like you've got an axe to grind between this comment and your other one about officers on a power trip. I don't disagree that there are those using the badge to be a jerk, but I hardly see it as "plenty" in relation to the number of police across the United States. The majority of these people are good men and women willing to do a job that sucks, is dangerous, and is not particularly respected.

As far as the seatbelt is concerned, you don't want a cop talking on cell phone while driving, but playing with their seatbelt is okay? That's somehow safer?



They're sworn officers of the law. They can detain people without being charged with kidnapping, enter private property without being arrested, drive in excess of the speed limit for appropriate purposes, ignore traffic laws, etc., etc., etc. I've been with my husband for 13 of his 20 year career. I've known A LOT of cops because of this. I have yet to meet one who thinks him or herself "cool" or "above the law". Likely because when I meet them I haven't broken a law or suffered a trauma of some sort. Context makes all the difference in the world I suppose.

you are right on all these points...it is a hard job and it is hard on a spouse...it is also worse when people who have a axe to grind with LE lump everyone in the same boat..thats just not correct...all of our friends are cops for the most part and I dont know ANY of them who think they are above the law and that they can just do whatever they want! There are very good reasons why they do not have to follow the same rules as everyone else.It sucks when you know your dh risks his life everyday for people that have nothing better to do then complain about if THEY think he should be on his phone...and that your dh would put himself in danger (because he chooses to) for all the same people that want to complain about him...

 

[scrapquitler]

Are the state and local police exempt from following those same laws? Here in Ct the fine is sizable and increases with each incident. In the last three weeks I have seen several police officers talking on their cell phone, smiling, nodding, looks like a social call to me. When they are on official business, would they not use a radio? Would they not have a bluetooth built into the car? Just wondering.

I thought there was an exemption for them, and Ijust found an article from the New Britain paper and it says:
"The new law continues to exempt police officers, firefighters, ambulance and emergency drivers or members of the military in emergency situations or in situations in which they are performing their official duties. Drivers who use a hands-free device are in compliance with the law."
So yeah, they are exempt, but only for official buisness.

Lets not talk about the number of police I've seen with FACEBOOK on the laptop in the front seat....

 

[AshleyW]

I thought there was an exemption for them, and Ijust found an article from the New Britain paper and it says:
"The new law continues to exempt police officers, firefighters, ambulance and emergency drivers or members of the military in emergency situations or in situations in which they are performing their official duties. Drivers who use a hands-free device are in compliance with the law."
So yeah, they are exempt, but only for official buisness.

Lets not talk about the number of police I've seen with FACEBOOK on the laptop in the front seat....

And how do you know that they weren't on a break looking at Facebook? Or maybe they just didn't have a call to respond to. If our officers aren't on a call and aren't assigned to traffic duty, guess what - they get to do what they want. Whether that is chit-chatting with another officer, stopping for some coffee at a gas station, or whatever. Our officer's laptops have those sites blocked, so they just come into the station to look at it. But jeez, I can't believe how many people feel like they know exactly what is going on by just a 2 second look at what an officer is doing.

What would I find if I dropped in on one of YOU [general 'you', not any poster in particular] at work? I'm sure NO ONE would be doing anything that isn't work related.

 

[tvguy]

Wow, really? You needed to yell to get your point across? I don't think so.
My point was clearly missed by you, when an officer is IN his (or her) car the blue tooth would be in use, not while they trying to find a suspect on foot, of course they would not want any type of light then, that would give their position away, but of course so would the use of a cell phone, because you know, there's talking and then cell phone lights....I'm with Molly on that one, an officer would hardly use a cell phone while walking around in the dark trying to apprehend or locate a suspect, dangerous or otherwise.

Note that my post clearly refers to use of blue tooth devices in the car, not outside the car. And no offense but you cannot tell me to what to think, I can think something is ridiculous, it's called my opinion. Just as you are free to disagree with me, as it is called your opinion.

BTW I love how you cut my OP and edited to make your reply sound better. I really think you should go back and read what I said again, without your edits, because I clearly agreed with you on each officer having to reprogram the blue tooth if they were using cars with that feature built in.

Sorry, didn't mean to yell, just forgot I wasn't at work(we have to use all upper case for the teleprompters).
My perspective is as an ex-cop, who now spends 40 hours a week monitoring police activities.
Sorry you felt I edited your post to make anything I said sound better, I just didn't think folks needed to scroll through items I agreed with or wasn't something I was commenting on.

 

[Heidict]

Great for your dad. I somehow don't buy he wore a seatbelt to each and every call each and every day. I know too many cops in too many jurisdictions who do not. Their reasons are solid. Maybe the difference is the area being patrolled? My husband has been downtown DC for 20 years. It's not an easy place.

I know that he was religious about seatbelt wearing, at home and on the job. I never quizzed him on his minute by minute seatbelt habits, but thanks for the implication that he is lying.

What exactly does "plenty" mean in your last sentence? It sounds like you've got an axe to grind between this comment and your other one about officers on a power trip. I don't disagree that there are those using the badge to be a jerk, but I hardly see it as "plenty" in relation to the number of police across the United States. The majority of these people are good men and women willing to do a job that sucks, is dangerous, and is not particularly respected.
I am referencing the police in Connecticut, the state that I and Dawn both live in. I know and have known plenty of city and state cops here. Most are honest & hard working and are more then willing to go out and risk their butts for the measly pay that they get. However I have run into more then a few who have a huge ego because they wear a uniform and a gun. There are cops out there who abuse their power.

No, I do not have an ax to grind, as you put it. I have never been arrested nor even gotten in trouble with the law. Therefore, I don't have some deep ulterior motive. I am speaking only from my personal experiences with officers that I have known over the years.

As far as the seatbelt is concerned, you don't want a cop talking on cell phone while driving, but playing with their seatbelt is okay? That's somehow safer?

I never said that they shouldn't use a cell phone. I understand that it is needed as part of their job. Were did I say differently? I think you are starting to jump to conclusions or you are getting posters mixed up?

My replies are in red

 

[Dictator]

I will bet that I am right half of the time.

Of course, that means you are wrong half the time too.

 

[pixiewings71]

Sorry, didn't mean to yell, just forgot I wasn't at work(we have to use all upper case for the teleprompters).
My perspective is as an ex-cop, who now spends 40 hours a week monitoring police activities.
Sorry you felt I edited your post to make anything I said sound better, I just didn't think folks needed to scroll through items I agreed with or wasn't something I was commenting on.

Thanks for explaining. I had to use cap locks at my last job too, sometimes I forgot to take them off, not here but when doing internal emails.
I also can see why you edited my post, but in doing so it made it appear you hadn't really read it, you were making some of the same observations I did. Anyway, Thank You for your time as an officer and thank you for your insight and observations.