Should Idaho Ban Text Messaging While Driving?
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to the newsletter or RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Should Idaho ban text messaging while driving?
It seems there are more and more reported stories of accidents resulting from young people text messaging while driving. Washington state banned texting while driving (TWD) last May, and six other states are reportedly considering a similar ban. I recently read a study saying 91% of Americans believe text messaging is as dangerous as drinking and driving.
However, would a law banning text messaging really help society or move us towards the so-called “Nanny-state”? Isn’t it obvious that one should not shift attention from driving to communicating with written words on a tiny screen? Are folks who drive while text messaging just complete idiots, candidates for a so-called “Darwin Award”? (In case you hadn’t heard, “Darwin Awards” are given posthumously to folks who do society a favor by killing themselves in spectacularly foolish ways.)
For that matter, this debate resurrects the old question if cellphone use should be banned entirely while driving, or if using a hands-free set significantly reduces the distraction? I don’t think it’s just a matter of the number of accidents caused by cellphone users, it’s also a matter of the close calls they have. I get a close call nearly each day I drive out and about, as someone with a cellphone to their ear almost causes an accident.
Perhaps one important distinction, though, is that I think that text messaging while driving is being done more by younger people than by older people. Younger people have enough problems with lack of driving experience and really do not need the extra distraction. Maybe I will sound like an old hypocrite, but perhaps a text messaging or cellphone use ban should just apply to people under 21 years old?
What do you think?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Vote:
0 
0 No special law necessary.
If texting while driving doesn’t meet the criteria of the existing law “inattentive driving” then I don’t know what does. Same goes with talking on the cell phone, applying makeup, etc. If any of these can be shown to be the cause of the wreck there is a plenty good existing law in place.
Vote:
0 0 Good post Joe. I’ve mentioned this in a couple comments in the past and I’m glad you started its own post. I for one am all for enacting a new law regarding text messaging while driving. I also think talking on your cell and driving should be against the law as well, UNLESS you’ve got a handsfree or bluetooth device which enables you to keep both hands on the wheel. I can tell you you’re much more aware while driving, and being able to keep both hands on the steering wheel makes all the difference in the world. I tried getting the wife to convert for the longest time, until about 6-7 months ago she had a close call while on her cell & driving. I bought her one and convinced her to use it and now she wishes she started using one years ago. Of course I didn’t use the old “I told you so” on her, but with children in the car and having enough distractions around us these days, it’s really difficult to drive defensively with one hand on the wheel and the other at your ear. She doesn’t leave home without it now. They come in all shapes, sizes and price ranges and are very reasonable these days. If you don’t want to spend the money on the wireless ones, WalMart sells wired earpieces for about 5-6 bucks these days and those are just as good.
I just can’t imagine trying to text somebody while you’re driving. I’ve seen it happen before, but you know just dialing your cell phone while driving is hazardous as well. Most cell phones these days come with one touch dialing and voice activated features. I suggest everyone activate these features, at least for those people that you talk with the most.
I know a number of eastern and southern states already have these laws on the books, and I think it would be very beneficial to Idaho as well. Everytime I get in the car, whether its to go to work or just a quick run to the store, about half the people around me are talking on their cell while driving. Coming from a larger city, defensive driving is a must, and with more and more people on cell phones these days, it’s time we put this law on the books.
Good post!
Vote:
0 0 I agree with Guest @ #2. No new law needed. Just start cracking down on inattentive driving. However, one thing I’ve noticed in great numbers is Idaho Falls Police officers talking on cell phones while driving their patrol cars. I have to believe that makes it a bit more difficult to notice other inattentive drivers.
Furthermore, one thing Prohibition proved is that once the government tries to take away something that has been universally allowed for years, Americans tend to revolt.
I agree, though, that driving while talking on a cell phone–and to a much larger degree, texting while driving–are every bit as distracting and dangerous as driving while drunk. Any circumstance that impairs the driver’s judgement and/or ability to react is a danger to everyone else on the road. Distracted drivers are a threat to public safety, and every measure should be taken to restrict their dangerous practices.
But enforce the laws that are in place. Especially when an umbrella term like “inattentive driving” covers a lot of bases.
Vote:
0 0 Nevermind: The problem with your suggestion is, “inattentive driving” is much more difficult for our officers to spot, then say having a cell phone up to their ear, or holding a cell phone while driving and inputting a text message.
I too have noticed officers on their cell phones while driving, and personally I think they should be the first ones to lead by example. Like SlimP stated earlier, earpieces whether wired or wireless, are relatively inexpensive these days and having both hands on the wheel makes all the difference in the world. Otherwise, talking on your cell phone is no more dangerous than having a conversation with the person or persons sitting in the passenger seats.
Vote:
0 0 Jimbo…what the difference on a Police Officer talking on a cell phone and the same officer talking on his two way radio?
Vote:
0 0 His two way radio is usually clipped to his shoulder, or if he has a larger hand held radio, it isn’t constantly held to his ear. It’s basically a “speaker phone” type set up. There’s a big difference.
Plus our officers are trained to communicate with their two way radios and drive at the same time. Truck drivers have been doing it for years with their CB radios. There’s a big difference between that and a cell phone.
Vote:
0 0 It’s definately a touchy subject. People don’t want to give up their cell phones. I’ve had a few close calls myself on the phone while driving. Bought myself a bluetooth that’s attached to my sunglasses and it helps tremendously. Nobody wants to be told they can’t use their cell phone while driving, but it’s definately an issue that needs to be addressed. We all survived just fine without our cell phones years ago, there’s no reason a law like this should seriously bother anybody! If it does, get an earpiece. The wired ones cost next to nothing.
imo
Vote:
0 0 Jimbo: Agreed, it’s difficult to enforce, so perhaps this is a case where additional legislation would be needed to define what exactly constitutes a traffic stop.
Good point. Thanks.
Vote:
0 0 Personally I think the seatbelt law is ridiculous and unecessary. Sure seatbelts save lives “sometimes”, but why would our legislature want people that drive cars safe, and those people that ride motorcylces to have their brains splattered all over the highway because their not wearing a helmet? It just makes no sense to me that we have given motorcyclists the option to NOT wear a helmet, but those of us in a 2000+ pound steel framed automobile MUST wear a seatbelt. Someone please tell me what’s wrong with that picture.
Vote:
0 0 Jimbo.. using a hand held radio in a vehicle is a pain because of feedback through the vehicle mounted radio unless one turns off the vehicle radio or the hand held is working a different frequency. But you are right MOST Police Officers are trained in emergency driving which usually doesn’t include driving with a cell phone against your ear. We use head sets in our rigs, better hearing and more “Hands Free” operating safety.
Vote:
0 0 Police officers holding a two way radio up to their heads while driving vs police officers holding a cell phone up to their heads while driving. Somehow I’m not seeing a difference. And no police officers are not trained to somehow do this. But I imagine that they do it so much that they are used to multitasking.
Vote:
0 0 Guest: Officers don’t hold two way radios up to their heads like a cell phone! Its much like a speaker phone set up where you don’t need to hold it to your ear. Have you ever used a CB radio before? Probably not, but that’s the same scenario. And yes….officers DO have more experience driving and talking to dispatch or fellow officers, then the general public does with a cell phone stuck to their ear.
Vote:
0 0 Instead of debating what officers do with their two way radios, why not stick to the topic at hand and offer your opinion on the topic instead?
Vote:
0 0 SlimPickens: One difference is that motor vehicles are equipped with seat belts from the manufacturer. The federal seat belt mandate on car makers paved the way for state-imposed seat belt laws.
Motorcycles, on the other hand, do not come with helmets. Presumably for that reason, being required to purchase a helmet–at an additional cost–is viewed as a greater violation of civil liberties (the right to choose) than being required to wear a seat belt in a car.
Similar legislation requiring passengers to wear personal flotation devices (life jackets) while riding in a recreational boat has also failed in most states. (Although federal law requires one PFD per person to be stored on board.)
Personally, I never use a cell phone while driving, period. I wear my seat belt religiously. I also wear helmets while riding motorcycles, snowmobiles, and bicycles. All because I believe my personal safety depends on them. (Although a friend of mine adamantly maintains that in a motorcycle crash, the only difference a helmet makes is that between an open casket or a closed casket.)
Such personal safety laws are frivolous, in my opinion.
But driving while distracted, by cell phones or text messaging–most of all, drunk driving–is unacceptable. Impaired drivers simply don’t have the right to use the same roads where their negligence puts my family in danger.
I would support the law if it were to reach a vote.
Vote:
0 0 Sorry Slim…I just strayed a little bit. NO I don’t think people should text or use their cells while driving. And risking getting off subject a tab bit again I agree with the seatbelt laws, how many little kids have you seen bouncing around in the back seat, and front for that matter, while mom or dad is yackin on the cell phone?. Soccer Mom’s, on cells, with a load of kids in the SUV with no seatbelts in use…Not a Pretty Picture.
PS: I drive a Hummer with everyone belted in, or the truck don’t move and the cell & satelite phone are used only in emergencies or if I’ve pulled over.
Vote:
0 0 I think writing a law addressing this is a waste of time. It is something that needs to be addressed, but why not address it along with other distractions, like general cell phone use. There isn’t much actual need for people to be talking on the phone while they drive anyway. I let mine go to voicemail and return calls later. What is so important that I have to risk that half second of attention loss that could cost my life. Nothing! So back to the point, instead of making a specific law for police to enforce, why not have them just start pulling over inattentive drivers. Why focus on just text messaging. Pull over anyone that is driving erractically or tailgating, or being reckless, or any number of dangerous things I see on the roads every day. I agree that text messaging is a problem, but its part of a wider problem of drivers just not being good drivers. I am not that old, but when I took drivers education, I seem to recall that paying all your attention to the road was encouraged. I see very distracted people every day on the roads. They can’t even drive to walmart without making a phone call. Some people actually WAIT until they get in the car to start dialing. I just think perhaps more traffic enforcement for poor driving.
Vote:
0 0 There are many good points here.
Regarding the point about inattentive driving, what’s the saying about there never being a cop around when you need one?
It seems the people causing near misses with a cellphone at their ear do so when cops are not around. They probably drive fine all day, but then cause a near wreck once a day.
Are we really expecting the cops to be there at that critical second to witness the second of inattentive driving? How likely is that to happen?
Perhaps the cell phone should not be allowed to use while driving at all.
Vote:
0 0 Joe, I would definitely vote for a cell phone ban. Sad to say, but it seems like a high percentage of drivers are not capable of being responsible while using their phones and driving.
Vote:
0 0 I’ve been thinking about the previous arguments that a cop being able to pull you over for inattentive driving would suffice. I don’t think that does suffice.
The issue is folks who drive while texting or yapping, and are all over the road. Cops rarely see that.
It seems almost more of a nanny-state mentality to think we should wait for the cops to see it before anything can be done about it. If it were illegal, then anyone could call and report it on their own, just like drunk drivers.
Vote:
0 0 Aye, but ye’d have to pull over to make the call, lest ye be guilty of the same crime…
And how long before we all become complacent about reporting the incidents, and police officers follow suit?
I wish I had the nerve to report every time I see someone throw garbage out their car window…99 times out of 100, it’s a cigarette butt. The rampant littering makes me shake with anger. But it’s become an accepted norm. Admittedly, I do nothing besides judge them harshly from within the safe confines of the old Ford.
I’m always tempted to toss their still-lit cigarette butts back into their windows and watch the sparks fly…literally.
Vote:
0 0 While living in Nampa, I saw a teenage girl toss a lit cigarette butt out her window while parked at a gas station, car was parked by the pumps, boyfriend was out filling up.
Vote:
0 0 I agree, I think both text messaging and the use of cell phones while driving should be banned (also in the stores). But due to the large number of these “infractions” that I see on a daily basis (others seem to agree), I don’t know that there are enough police officers in the entire County to enforce a law such as this just within the City Limits.
As far as a citizen turning them in, wouldn’t that just become a case of your word against mine?
I admit, I don’t know the solution.
Vote:
0 0 Couldn’t a cell phone carrier confirm whether or not a line was being used at a certain time? Not to play Big Brother, but it shouldn’t be too hard to ascertain whether a person had been using their phone at a given time. I would hope that the solution to this problem doesn’t come down to people turning each other in.
Regarding cell phones while driving, on the way back to work from lunch today I was behind an IFPD patrol car who was behind a large SUV going at least 10 mph under the speed limit. Finally the officer and I had an opening and got around this slowpoke, they were yakking on their cell phone oblivious to the outside world. I could tell that the police officer was annoyed. It’s not only inattentive driving, some serial yakkers think that if they slow down to a crawl while they are on the phone they are somehow being safer. Very inconsiderate.
Vote:
0 0 Idaho Native, you’re right about the fact that a citizen could report an infraction if it is illegal to use a cell phone while driving, but the police could not cite the driver unless the police officer himself observed the infraction.
This would be like the reporting of a ‘drunk driver.’ A citizen can report a drunk driver, but of course the driver in question could only be cited if a police officer also observes the driver’s conduct.
Vote:
0 0 Excellent point Inative. Which is why I suggested just banning cell use in car “without” the use of a handsfree communication device. The cities of which I am familiar that have passed this law, make it ok for handsfree devices, only because they give you the freedom to keep both hands on the wheel, which in turn make it no more dangerous than having a conversation with somebody sitting next to you. (which of course we have all done)
Those of us that currently use handsfree devices can tell you it’s much safer and it seems the most practical way to go with this law.
A lot of people don’t like cell phones and most people just need some common sense or to learn cell phone etiquette, whether their in the store, restaraunt or wherever. Cell phones are here to stay whether we like it or not, so it’s best to get the word out there regarding cell phone etiquette (sp?) and push towards imposing the handsfree only law.
imo
Vote:
0 0 SlimPickens I have a comment about wearing a seat belt: Several years ago I was taking a trip going up this steep pass a car coming in the other direction started swerving out of control and ended up flipping sideways several time before coming to a stop landing up on the driver side. As I watched in horror, something wrapped in a blanket flew out of the windshield landing on the highway, as a matter of fact stuff was flying everywhere. A bus driver which had been behind the car slammed on his brakes pulled over and quickly swooped up the bundle. I, li others pulled over and ran across the medium to find a young 16 year old boy in the driver seat pinned behind the wheel , his 13 year old sister pinned behind him in the passenger seat and their mother in the front seat, which they had just pick up in SLC from the hospital, hanging slumped over hanging from her seat belt with the top of her head missing . Needless to say she was dead. I jumped in the back seat to block the view from the daughter. All three of the passengers in the car had their seat belts on. But! And notice the BUT? There was one passenger missing. The something wrapped in a blanket that flew out of the windshield that the bus drive almost hit but swooped up instead? Was the 8 or 9 year old brother asleep laying across the back seat asleep without his seat belt on. And because he didn’t have on his seat belt he flew through the car like a jet plane breaking his moms neck and taking the top of her head off. So as for wearing a seat belt you Damn right you should wear one. And as for those stupid motorcyclist that don’t wear a helmets, I thing that is God’s way of weeding out the culls? And I think there should be a cell phone law too!!! Dang God gave us all a brain. Why do some of us take it out and play with it and forget to put it back in?
Vote:
0 0 The PR carried an AP report today that sixteen states are considering banning teens from using any electronic devices while driving. Thirteen states already have banned teens from using electronic devices. Soon a majority of states will have this type of law.
Idaho was not one of them. Maybe in January?
Vote:
0 0 Betty & Slim: I can understand both points of view here. I’m with Slim wherein I don’t think it should be “mandatory”. My parents were in a terrible accident and having a seatbelt on almost killed my Mother. I won’t go into the specifics, but her seatbelt buckle ended up being crushed which prevented her from unbuckleing it and escaping. She was trapped in her vehicle which was on fire and had no way to escape. She received 2nd & 3rd degree burns over 60% of her body before my Father could get her out.
This happened 17 years ago and to this day, nobody in our family wears a seatbelt, aside from the children, which is just common sense. I’m all for keeping children buckled up, but it should be up to the individual driving whether or not he or she wants to wear a seat belt.
I also agree with the previous poster regarding motorcycle helmets. They make it an option to wear a helmet, but a law to wear a seatbelt? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Someone noted that vehicles “come with” seatbelts, and motorcycles don’t come with helmets. That’s just plain ridiculous. Most motorcycles are far less expensive than your average car, so purchasing a helmet when you purchase a bike shouldn’t be a problem.
I think it all has to do with personal preference. Sure there’s horror stories on both sides, but in the end, it should be left up to the individual.
thanks
Vote:
0 0 When I was a boy we didn’t have fire-retardant pajamas. Or seat belts. Or laxatives. So we just flew right through those windshields in our flaming pajamas, chewing the bark off of trees. That’s the way it was and we liked it!
Vote:
0 0 We also knew how escrows worked.
Vote:
0 0 It should be up to the individual if they want to wear their seatbelts, although I personally think it is a wiser choice to wear it. It is hard to expect your kids to do it if you don’t do it yourself also.
Sure there are a few accidents you hear about that not wearing a seatbelt may have reduced your injuries, but I think that there are far more accidents where the seat belts have saved lives.
Vote:
0 0 I think texting while driving should definitely be banned for all drivers. It requires taking your eyes off the road and is inattentive driving. NOBODY has any right whatsoever to place the life of another in danger through their own selfishness or stupidity.
Talking on cells, or using any handheld electronic device, should not be allowed for young drivers (under 18) since they have so few driving skills and very poor judgment to begin with. The accident rate for this age group is astronomical compared to older drivers.
For adult drivers I’d say treat cells as any other inattentive driving issue - if you get in a wreck and you were using the phone you will be given an additional citation and large fine.
Vote:
0 0 The PR reported this morning that Idaho Falls is considering a law like this. The report said talking on your cellphone would be illegal if it interferes with driving your vehicle. The proposed ordinance apparently will cover any activity that causes you to swerve around, so text messaging or applying makeup could get you pulled over.
The proposal also states that if you can do the activity and not swerve around, you are fine. If you are doing an activity while driving and swerving around, then they can pull you over.
I think I like it, it acknowledges that multiple activities can distract drivers, without targeting just cell phone chatters. It also acknowledges that some people can handle it and some cannot. Maybe this is the kind of law that will encourage people to take stock in their abilities and make responsible choices based on what they can and cannot handle?
What do you think of this proposed ordinance?
Vote:
0 0 I think it’s a step in the right direction. But I don’t see too many people being issued tickets. I see people driving badly while on the phone quite a bit. But a police officer would have to see them in order to give them a ticket. And who will determine whether their driving ability was impaired? Is it just a judgement call by the officer? Do they have to commit a traffic offense, such as crossing lanes, speeding, etc.? How can a law apply to some drivers and not others, is that constitutional? It would probably be more fair to not allow anyone to have phones while driving at all unless it is hands-free. This proposal sounds good and I hope it helps but I’m skeptical.
Vote:
0 0 All the officer has to see you doing is weaving from side to side in order to pull you over. I’ve seen it a number of times. Holding the phone to your ear with one hand and the steering with the other is difficult enough for most people, I can’t even imagine the stupidity of those that think they can enter a text message and drive at the same time!
I’ve used my bluetooth earpiece for a little over 3 years and if I’m driving I won’t make or answer a call without it. I think it should be mandatory. (it already is in some cities)
Vote:
0 0 I don’t like the proposed law for Idaho Falls. It’s redundant and it’s too broad.
I think it will be selectively and subjectively enforced (but maybe all traffic laws are?)
Vote:
0 0 The new proposed ordinance is dumb. If the driver is driving badly enough to be pulled over then there are already other violations they could be cited for.
It either needs to be an all or nothing ban on cell phones.
Vote:
0 0 I agree with Slim on this one…Bluetooth is the way to go. The proprosed law as described is too subjective. It is not clear cut enough for enforcement or for defending against a ticket. Absent hands free cell phone technology being put in place we need to either agree a full ban on hand held phones or none at all.
Vote:
0 0 Last night I was returning home with my family, and the van in the next lane started drifting into my lane, forcing me to take evasive action. As I sped past the van, I could see the driver’s cellphone held up their head.
It’s fine and dandy if a cop saw this person but there was no cop, so what use would the ordinance have been in that case? My family saw this person was violating that ordinance (if it were in place), but a cop did not and we did not have video so what then?
I think this proposed ordinance should have a “kicker” fine if an accident is caused by a person using a cellphone at the time of an accident. For instance if that van wrecked into me, the cop contacts the cellphone company and they confirm the phone in the driver’s possession was being used at the time of the accident, there should be a “kicker” fine of a thousand bucks on top of it all.
Give the ordinance some teeth and we will see some changes. Otherwise it’ll be like the irresponsible dog owner fines. Unless you catch them it is pointless.
Vote:
0 0 Wow! Mike agrees with me on something! Incredible… 
In all seriousness, hands free is the only way to go and it should be mandatory. Like Joe, I’ve seen it all too often, people driving erraticly with a phone to their ear. It’s a dangerous thing and thank goodness Joe was driving defensively or the outcome could have been a disaster. I agree with Joe’s “Kicker” fine and I think that would do alot to help curb this bad habit. Of course those people that got in accidents would immediately have to write down the time of the accident in order to prove the other person was indeed on the phone. As we all know, once people DO get into an accident, the first thing they do is get on the cell phone to call the police, family members or insurance companies. So knowing the exact time is pertinent in this situation.
Vote:
0 0 Good points. I would even say make that kicker fine be split evenly between the accident “victim” and the city.
I can understand calling out right after an accident, but the first call should be to 911 not a family member or insurance, and the call record would indicate that. They could also check the records to show that a call had lasted X minutes up until the moment that the next call was placed to 911. I don’t think it would be that difficult to prove that the person was using the cellphone and caused the accident.
Vote:
0 0 That’s true. As detailed as the cell phone bills are these days, said calls wouldn’t be difficult to prove.
Great idea
Vote:
0 0 The PR reports today that this ordinance’s sponsor, Ida Hardcastle, is having second thoughts on doing this. She has heard from 9 people against it and 2 people for it. I would hope she tries to find more opinions than that! Apparently there is a city council meeting tonight where they will discuss it, and you can voice your opinion.
I don’t really know how more effective this new ordinance would been from what we already have. I don’t think it would make us any safer, because of the issue widely cited that cops don’t see all these things happening.
I DO think these incidents would be reduced if the city council introduced this “kicker penalty” idea if an accident happens and it is proven the person who caused it was using their cell phone. Make the kicker penalty something like $500 kickers on top of the other traffic citations, that being $500 for the city and $500 for each vehicle owner affected by the cellphone-accident driver.
Then we would see people being more careful with their cellphone use in the car.
Also add checking for times of text messages sent at the time of the accident, in addition to phone calls being made.
Could Ida Hardcastle support this kind of an ordinance?
Vote:
0 0 Oh, Yeah! That kicker penalty fine sounds great. I’m all for that…it’s some pocketbook incentive.
But this new law was just wrong (well meaning but wrong) and I’m hoping she keeps it withdrawn.
The existing laws already cover these issues and just need to be enforced.
Vote:
0 0 How does everyone feel about cops and cell phones? Cops talking on them while on duty, cops texting while on duty. When driving, when not driving. I see it often, and have dated folks who engaged in this behavior while on duty. I know because they were talking/texting with me. Maybe if there was a rule about this IFPD could catch more of those red light runners I keep reading about ; )
Vote:
0 0 Excellent point. I see alot of officers with the cell phone stuck in their ears driving down 17th street alot. Perhaps the IFPD should have an in-house policy of not using cell phones except to talk for official business. Or go a step further and pull over to talk, except in emergency cases.
Vote:
0 0 I think that is too restrictive. Cell phone contact with loved ones seems like an important and positive thing for a cop to enjoy. Ultimately it comes down to the exercise of good judgement, and if any given cop is not excersizing good judgement in the use of their phone they may show poor judgement in other areas as well. I’d rather leave it up to the cops discretion, and work towards a high standard for conduct in general.
Vote:
0 0 I think that is too restrictive. Cell phone contact with loved ones seems like an important and positive thing for a cop to enjoy. Ultimately it comes down to the exercise of good judgement, and if any given cop is not exersizing good judgement in the use of their phone they may show poor judgement in other areas as well. I’d rather leave it up to the cops discretion, and work towards a high standard for conduct in general.
Vote:
0 0 While your at it, you should restrict cops from talking on their police radios, checking the moving radar, and all other things required of them while they drive. Taliing on the cell phone is distracting while you drive but police multi task very well and talking on the cell phone is a requirement of the job. Stopping every time its used would slow down response time etc.
Vote:
0 0 The only way to be safe about this is if we hire a personal assistant for each cop in their cars, to ride along shotgun all day, answer phones, run the laptop, use the radio, check radar, etc. The assistants also have to be early 20’s and pretty, it’s a uhhh tactical requirement. C’mon now, it’s for the public safety. That’s only another $30k per car in pay and benefits.
Vote:
0 0 The quickest fix and the thing most officers use in larger cities is bluetooth technology. It should be mandatory for the IFPD to use bluetooth or another type of wireless technology and lead by example. We all know officers have more training with driving and multitasking, but I see it on an almost daily basis with a cellphone stuck to a cops ear while he’s driving it’s just unnecessary, especially when wireless technology has dropped so dramatically over the years.
I’ve turned most of my family and friends onto bluetooth earpieces for their cellphones and it’s a cheap gift to give for Christmas, Birthdays, etc. More than anything it’s much safer to use while driving since you’ll have both hands on the wheel.
Vote:
0 0 I don’t use bluetooth, but I hear tech folks talking about what they use. The Jawbone is functionally about the best bluetooth, but you walk around looking like a borg with a blue light flashing (but hey maybe that’s a part of the intimidating image cops want to project).
The cheapest but still good bluetooth headset is supposed to be the plantronics voyager for about $50.
Anyone know where in Idaho Falls they sell either of these, or a good online source?
Vote:
0 0 The “jawbone” has been designed for use in windy situations to cut down on the background noises. I think the “look” leaves a little to be desired, but that’s just my opinion. The reviews I’ve read on Plantronics have never been very good, although they may have come out with something better since I’ve looked into them. Jabra is a decent generic bluetooth set and is pretty inexpensive. (around 30-35 bucks) I’ve always used the Motorola brand. I use the HS500 model and the next step up is the HS850 which has the same features, just a little different style. I also have the Oakley “razrwire” bluetooth that attaches directly to my sunglasses that I use when biking, boarding or doing any sporting activities.
You can find a few different brands of bluetooth devices at Wal-Mart, Radio Shack, mall kiosk’s and all of the major electonic retail stores such as Best Buy, Circuit-City, etc. Most standard bluetooth headsets are under 50 bucks these days and worth every penny.
Now if somebody could just fuse the bluetooth with some voice recognition software to send text messages, it would solve lots of problems!
Vote:
0 0 Hi everybody. It is my understanding that the primary danger of using a cell phone while driving is not the physical act of holding the phone but the actual amount of brain activity which is unrelated to the act of driving. Studies show that handsfree devices do not reduce the amount of impact talking on a cellphone has on driving attention/response time. Sorry can’t link you to one here, just on a quick break at work, but I’ve seen such a study recently. I’d rather ride along than settle for late ni
Vote:
So we want to tell cops, “It’s your job now to determine what people are doing in the front of their car.” I don’t know about you, but I only see people using their cell phones from the side or across the street. The police pulls them over and by this time, the kid’s shoved the cell phone in her pocket and says, “Officer, I was just putting on my make-up.” And the officer has to say, “Oh, carry on then.”