And I'm sure that some politician will jump right on that one. What would be the result? There's already a HTA173.
Emotion makes for bad law.
Barrie man killed in crash that also left several friends with serious injuries
- Thread starter unoR
- Start date
And I'm sure that some politician will jump right on that one. What would be the result? There's already a HTA173.
Emotion makes for bad law.
Everybody has glanced over their phone while driving. However, if you choose to extend that glance so much that you end up driving across into oncoming traffic, that has to be severely punished. I used the word choose, because driver chose not to pay attention to driving for an extended period of time. Does not matter what he was doing in the car; eating, setting destination on navigation system, playing on the iDrive,… the individual chose to make this dangerous move. How can this not be dangerous driving?
Not me. If my employer didn't give me a cell phone, I wouldn't have one. If the phone rings while I'm driving, I look at it when I'm at my destination. If it was important, the caller will leave a message.
An easy fix: every phone has a GPS these days. Once the phone is over "X" kilometers per hour, all keys are locked out and everything goes directly to voice mail.
Hands-free or not, phones/texting and driving do not mix well.
Corrected:
Everybody has glanced over their phone, nav, radio, heating/cooling controls, dash while driving…My point was, just because you look at something (be a screen of the phone to see who is calling) does not mean that you will automatically swerve into an oncoming traffic or a tree on the side of the road. If you chose to continue to keep your eyes occupied so long that you end up off your path, you should be punished. In my humble opinion.
Petition what? I don't have any clearly defined alternative to put forward, and the question of law reform itself is entirely unfamiliar to people. Like you guys, people would look at me as a fool and ask WTF I'm talking about, except you guys are polite enough to keep it civil. Besides, it would go to the heart of our constitution, a petition would mean nothing even if I could get millions of signatures. Large-scale awareness and discussion of the issue would be the only way to move the agenda forward.
You guys are still thinking inside the box.
Why does the law have to prescribe each and every little thing we can't do, when it's all the same; don't cause harm. And why does the prosecution have to choose from the menu of laws, in a one-shot deal, when the details of what happened are yet to be uncovered?
I haven't given this a ton of thought, but doesn't it make sense to just say OK, here's some harm that was done. Let's find out who is responsible, to what degree, how much they should have known better, their intent, and the result will point to a prescribed range of sentences to mete out. Less conflict-oriented, less opportunity for loopholes, delays, more room for leniency, more accessible. It could apply for everything from broken taillights, to fraud, to abduction, rape and murder.
That sounds pretty reasonable to me but one fundamental part of holding someone responsible is laying an appropriate charge.
If the CP pursues a realistic case they have a better shot of winning. If they aim too high and can't deliver we end up with some jerkoff "getting off scott free". I think the tools are in place to handle these types of events properly, if the tools are misused you can not fault those who created the system.
You don't need to change the system to fix this problem. You just need to have people use the system properly (a fairytale, I know)
Oddly enough, that's precisely what the current legal system is designed to do. It's never simple.
What about them? We're talking road safety, not public convenience.
People used to ask "how are you?", now they ask "where are you". One shows compassion for the person, the other, not so much....
Maybe instead of a fine for using a phone/texting while driving, driving over the device should be the penalty?
There are some in BC who are calling for a 24 hour confiscation of cell phones, from people caught using them in their vehicles. My opinion is that if you aren't really going to enforce a law, then there's no point in making a law. I see just as many people texting and talking on their phones in traffic, now, as I did before the law was passed.
I agree with the concept of distracted driving laws. The phone would be the only device you listed designed to take your attention right out of the car for an extended period of time.My Garmin GPS won't allow most actions if the car is moving, and that suits me fine.
Don't confiscate, make the driver crush 'em! Time for some tough love!
Did the distracted driving law help, nope, not a bit. But the taxpayer paid for the implementation!
Don't confiscate, make the driver crush 'em! Time for some tough love!
Did the distracted driving law help, nope, not a bit. But the taxpayer paid for the implementation!
Well there's still that pesky "innocent until proven guilty" thing.
No, it didn't. It should have, or it should have been tossed out under Constitutional challenge the moment that it hit court.
maybe we should use this argument to allow confiscation (or hell, destruction) of any phone caught in use and have it HEAVILY reinforced if passed.
Or, swing it around, knock the HTA172 down, and do something less severe with phones?
....then again, this is politics, and human stupidity is infinite.
油井緋色;1964765 said:
My opinion is, and always has been, that using a phone while driving should be charged as "operating a vehicle without due care and attention." To me, that's exactly what it is.
The $490 fine and 6 points would probably serve as a better deterrent too.
That's my point: Why not apply a law that already exists, modifying it to suit if necessary? We don't need more and more convoluted laws. We need clarity and sense.
You Know
Well-known member
He killed one and
mowed down some bikers. Can't help but wonder how different the outcome would be if he crossed the centre line only to mow down some kids? Traffic laws are subject to each specific case, absolutely no rhyme or reason regardless of how the hta reads! Justice system all around is such a big letdown!!!
