US Senators target driving-while-texting

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Azure

Well fine, if you really want to go through all that red tape just to give someone a $200 ticket for texting while driving.

Well fine, if you want drivers to continue texting while driving and killing people.....

[habernac]

Originally Posted by Azure

Well fine, if you really want to go through all that red tape just to give someone a $200 ticket for texting while driving.

Personally, I have a problem with giving the police another reason to subpoena more of my personal stuff.

don't text and drive and you won't have to worry about it

[photon]

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Dion

Well fine, if you want drivers to continue texting while driving and killing people.....

I never said I was okay with texting and driving, nor do I support it.

You can't just throw that argument in my face and expect me to accept the police being more intrusive in my personal life.

What if there was another reason I accidentally weaved back and forth, and the cop is hellbent on proving that I was actually texting, and takes me to court, subpoenas my records, without proper justification for doing so?

Why should my personal stuff be made public to prove that I should get a $200 ticket?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by habernac

don't text and drive and you won't have to worry about it

Thats like saying I shouldn't worry about the Patriot Act or government intrusion in my personal life because its for MY security and I have nothing to hide.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by photon

FATA!!!!

Page one there, uberMod.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Azure

I never said I was okay with texting and driving, nor do I support it.

You can't just throw that argument in my face and expect me to accept the police being more intrusive in my personal life.

You wouldn't have to accept it unless you were txting and driving.

Originally Posted by Azure

What if there was another reason I accidentally weaved back and forth, and the cop is hellbent on proving that I was actually texting, and takes me to court, subpoenas my records, without proper justification for doing so?

Then the court sees a few of your txt messages?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Azure

Thats like saying I shouldn't worry about the Patriot Act or government intrusion in my personal life because its for MY security and I have nothing to hide.

Not really the same at all is it?

I thought the Patriot Act meant they didn't have to get subpoena's for wiretaps.

Before the Patriot Act they could subpoena your phone records if you were under suspicion of certain types of activities no?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Not really the same at all is it?

I thought the Patriot Act meant they didn't have to get subpoena's for wiretaps.

Before the Patriot Act they could subpoena your phone records if you were under suspicion of certain types of activities no?

The point is that the government almost never does any of this right, so they're going to subpoena some records of a guy that never did anything wrong and force him to go to court to defend himself.

I mean, if the cop is hellbent on giving you a ticket, either you go to court and fight it, knowing the judge will subpoena your records to prove the case, or you just be a good drone for the government and pay the $200 fine.

[CrusaderPi]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Not really the same at all is it?

I thought the Patriot Act meant they didn't have to get subpoena's for wiretaps.

Before the Patriot Act they could subpoena your phone records if you were under suspicion of certain types of activities no?

You completely missed his point.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Azure

I never said I was okay with texting and driving, nor do I support it.

You can't just throw that argument in my face and expect me to accept the police being more intrusive in my personal life.

Move to another country if you're so worried about the police and your personal records.

What if there was another reason I accidentally weaved back and forth, and the cop is hellbent on proving that I was actually texting, and takes me to court, subpoenas my records, without proper justification for doing so?

Accidently weaving back and forth is one thing but doing it constantly. Big difference there.

Why should my personal stuff be made public to prove that I should get a $200 ticket?

To protect the lives of others.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Azure

I mean, if the cop is hellbent on giving you a ticket, either you go to court and fight it, knowing the judge will subpoena your records to prove the case, or you just be a good drone for the government and pay the $200 fine.

I've delt with cops like that and fought a few tickets and won. Not every cop out there is hellbent on giving you a ticket.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

You wouldn't have to accept it unless you were txting and driving.

I realize that. But what if you're just checking your phone, or clicking 'end' to hang up a phone call, and the cop interprets that as texting. Then you'd have to go to court and get your cell phone records brought in by your provider can prove that you weren't actually texting at 4:17 PM on Oct 5, 2009.

Assuming your provider can even do any of that. And assuming they can accurately pinpoint exactly when you were texting. What if you never sent a text message, and just received one? Or what if you just saved a draft? Is there a way to log, with time, all the activity on your phone?

How soon until the government has real-time updates coming from your cell phone telling the police which phones are active, and which phones are doing what?

Then the court sees a few of your txt messages?

Thanks, but I'd rather not go to court.

[jammies]

Azure, let me get this straight: you personally have witnessed people texting while driving, yet you think that police don't witness people texting while driving? I think you're making some big assumptions about how this law will be enforced that don't necessarily follow. I doubt very, very much that the police are going to try to pin a "texting while driving" charge on someone who is driving erratically unless they actually witness the driver doing so, especially as there are already perfectly good laws about driving erratically that can be applied.

Now if you said the Congresspeople should have bigger issues to deal with than this, THERE I'd agree with you.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Azure

But what if you're just checking your phone, or clicking 'end' to hang up a phone call, and the cop interprets that as texting.

Sounds unlikely. Or maybe paranoid. Probably both.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Dion

Move to another country if you're so worried about the police and your personal records.

Seriously, these strawman arguments have got to go.

Accidently weaving back and forth is one thing but doing it constantly. Big difference there.

Oh, so now you're going to develop a criteria for the cops to follow.

Can't see how THAT will go wrong.

To protect the lives of others.

Yeah, that is what the government always says.

Its for your security that we need to develop a surveillance system that can log every phone call you make, just in CASE you mention the word terrorist.

Thanks, but the government can go screw itself.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Dion

I've delt with cops like that and fought a few tickets and won. Not every cop out there is hellbent on giving you a ticket.

Let me guess, you didn't have to go to court, have your records subpoenaed, which probably results in a lot more than just ONE court date, and have those records, assuming they actually exist, prove that you were speeding or not.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by jammies

Azure, let me get this straight: you personally have witnessed people texting while driving, yet you think that police don't witness people texting while driving? I think you're making some big assumptions about how this law will be enforced that don't necessarily follow. I doubt very, very much that the police are going to try to pin a "texting while driving" charge on someone who is driving erratically unless they actually witness the driver doing so, especially as there are already perfectly good laws about driving erratically that can be applied.

Now if you said the Congresspeople should have bigger issues to deal with than this, THERE I'd agree with you.

Out of the millions of drivers I have driven by, behind, on the side....whatever, I have witnessed maybe 3 people texting.

All 3 were obvious too.

My problem isn't with THEM, but with those cases that aren't so obvious. How do you prove, or disprove, that someone was texting? Because a way to do that had better exist.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

I think there's way crazier privacy of information issues with stuff like facebook. Cops are reading that stuff. Saw a rave get broken up near Chilliwack because the directions were posted on facebook.

Why worry about some extremely unlikely situation that you'd probably never be in if you don't txt and drive?

Like I said, sounds pretty paranoid Azure.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Sounds unlikely. Or maybe paranoid. Probably both.

Is it?

I have used my cell phone a lot while driving, and I always have to close the phone, or open it. And I usually don't do it down in my lap either.

Does a driver have to be recklessly weaving back and forth in order to get stopped? If someone isn't weaving back and forth, but the cop thinks that he sees that person doing something on their cell phone, can he stop them?

Yeah, no way THAT couldn't go wrong either.