BC aims to seize cellphones from drivers, Alberta top cop watching with interest

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Dion

Pull over to the side of the road or a parking lot to use your phone. No one is going to take away your phone for that.

Actually you are not supposed to pull over to use it, you can get a ticket for that.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Which all comes right back to: If your cell phone is an irreplaceable part of your life, don't us it in violation of the law and risk getting it confiscated.

The punishment needs to fit the crime. Taking away someone's access to emergency services doesn't meet that threshold for me. Or what about someone who's job requires them to be on call? Should they lose their livelihood? There's so many problems here.

Originally Posted by Dion

Go next door to one of your neighbours and have them call 911. Maybe the guy or gal walking down the street has a cellphone that could call for you. IMO your excuse is invalid

Getting assistance from a bystander isn't always trivial.

[Hockeyguy15]

So a fine and demerits is ok for most other traffic violations, but for distracted driving it's seizure of personal property?

I see more idiots speeding through playground or school zones than I do people texting and yet we don't confiscate their vehicles. A fine and demerits is what the punishment should be, and don't tell me that because people aren't listening to the distracted driving law is the reason to justify taking their cell phone. People have been ignoring the speed limit since it was implimented and we don't confiscate their cars.

[Northendzone]

taking away access to emergency services is a pretty weak argument - people survived for years without cell phones, if your house is buring down you could likely run next door to your neighbors and surely they would have a phone, unless they had thiers taken away too.

i could just see some guy on the front page of a sun in front of the smoldering ruins of his house complaining how the police took away his phone and as a result his house burnt down and he should now be reimbursed because he could not obtain emergency services - and that soceity has broken down into two classes - those folks that can obtain emergency services becasue they have a phone, and those that can't.......

[GrrlGoalie33]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

I can't believe people think the police would go through your precious cell phone data.

Police aren't supposed to sit at lights and run the plates of everyone they can see, but they do...

[FlamingLonghorn]

Here in Austin the cell phone while driving laws aren't even enforced. Well. also you are allowed to talk on it just not web browse and text. When the law was passed the police department pretty much said it was unenforceable because a driver could just deny it and cops weren't going to waste the time to get a warrant to search a cellphone/cellphone records to prove otherwise.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by SebC

The punishment needs to fit the crime. Taking away someone's access to emergency services doesn't meet that threshold for me. Or what about someone who's job requires them to be on call? Should they lose their livelihood? There's so many problems here.

Honestly, if your phone means that much to you, but a @#$%ing hands-free kit.

Personally, I think we should change the laws so that there are demerit points added to distracted driving fines, and to remove the judge's option to reduce demerits. Lowering fines as a part of a plea should be okay, but if you can't argue your way out of the ticket, you get the points.

But on, say a third offence, take the phone for 24 hours. Or tow the car. I don't really care which. Terminal stupidity warrants it.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by SebC

The punishment needs to fit the crime. Taking away someone's access to emergency services doesn't meet that threshold for me. Or what about someone who's job requires them to be on call? Should they lose their livelihood? There's so many problems here.

Getting assistance from a bystander isn't always trivial.

Not at all in fact most companies have strict policies on cell phone usage while driving. If you get your cell phone taken away you probably risk termination or discipline seeing you went against company policy by talking on the phone while driving. Win-win IMO as if you are dumb enough to break the law as well as your company policies you are reaping what you sew.

[TopChed]

I don't really know how the law is being applied by the police, which makes me tentative to accept this kind of punishment. Everyone that's okay with people giving up their phones seems to think the only time it will happen is if you're endangering other people by using your phone. But there are so many minor incidents that can potentially be met with the same punishment. For example, finding a cd in my centre console, opening the case, and putting it into the CD player in my car at a red light, or even while moving, is legal. But sitting at a red light and hitting 2 buttons on my phone gets it taken away. It's a very arbitrary distinction. If they only took away the phones of people endangering others, that'd be fine. But there's no way to ensure the law is applied that way.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Not at all in fact most companies have strict policies on cell phone usage while driving. If you get your cell phone taken away you probably risk termination or discipline seeing you went against company policy by talking on the phone while driving. Win-win IMO as if you are dumb enough to break the law as well as your company policies you are reaping what you sew.

Good point. My workplace recently sent a company-wide email reaffirming that talking on a phone while driving is grounds for termination after a person tweeted that they saw one of our drivers doing so.

[Northendzone]

Originally Posted by Frankster

Police aren't supposed to sit at lights and run the plates of everyone they can see, but they do...

is there a docuemented policy about this somewhere?

but regardless, once again, if you are a law abiding driver/vehicle owner, then so what if they are running your plates. I'd rather have them doing this and catching the odd scofflaw, than not.

[CaptainCrunch]

I would like to see the use of cellphones while driving added to the "your an a$$hole its the law" initiative.

that means, if you argue that football is soccer, and soccer or football. Or iceland is green and greenland is icy, or if you talk about how you discovered a band before it got big in a coffee shop while sipping a soy milk latte, or if you use your phone while driving you get a public beating. Its the law

[Smartcar]

There should be due process. Seizing your cellphone on the spot because someone saw you using your cellphone? Shouldn't you be able to fight it and pay the price when you lose? It seems like the whole innocent until proven guilty concept has gone out the window when it comes to vehicles.

[Thor]

The research keeps coming in pretty clear on this issue, using a cell phone without hands free is like driving drunk, and not just a little over the limit, but a lot. Texting is the king of dangerous driving behavior.

When I see people talk about drunk driving there is no debate, and usually just a lot of people calling out those who do drive under the influence as horrible people. Yet even with what we know about the science of what happens when you are distracted on the phone, people treat this like some personal freedom issue.

Handsfree is much better, but even that still has you distracted, albeit much less than holding your phone or the worst of them all, texting.

I don't doubt that in 10 yrs time people will treat talking on your cell phone in the car or texting on the same level as drunk drivers, minus the hands free crowd.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by Smartcar

There should be due process. Seizing your cellphone on the spot because someone saw you using your cellphone? Shouldn't you be able to fight it and pay the price when you lose? It seems like the whole innocent until proven guilty concept has gone out the window when it comes to vehicles.

If I wasn't using my phone I would jaunt show them the call and text history.

[GrrlGoalie33]

I am certainly in the group of don't be an idiot, and simply don't text while driving. However, I don't agree with the police being able to confiscate your phone for doing so. Increase the fines, add demerit points, but confiscating the phone is a slippery slope.

Some of the most dangerous distracted driving I have ever seen have been police officers driving marked cars with no lights and no sirens. Weaving in and out of traffic, erratic 3 lane changes. If another officer catches him, does he get his phone confiscated as well?

[GrrlGoalie33]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

is there a docuemented policy about this somewhere?

but regardless, once again, if you are a law abiding driver/vehicle owner, then so what if they are running your plates. I'd rather have them doing this and catching the odd scofflaw, than not.

Perhaps it's myth, I do not have documented policy.

I have nothing to hide, no tickets, no accidents. But if they're not supposed to be doing it, they shouldn't. It's really no different than them looking at your cellphone without cause.

[St. Pats]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Just a thought but why would anyone be in an uproar about this? You have nothing to worry about unless you are texting or talking on your cell phone while driving.

Exactly and that effectively ends the argument. It is against the law and they want to break the law. Take their phone and/or their car. Drive safely or get off the road and save your stupid excuses.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by St. Pats

Exactly and that effectively ends the argument. It is against the law and they want to break the law. Take their phone and/or their car. Drive safely or get off the road and save your stupid excuses.

So when you speed we should take your car as well.

I think it's stupid that we feel the need to jump from a fine all the way up to confiscating personal property.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by SebC

The punishment needs to fit the crime. Taking away someone's access to emergency services doesn't meet that threshold for me. Or what about someone who's job requires them to be on call? Should they lose their livelihood? There's so many problems here.

When was the last time you used your phone for an actual emergency? I can't remember the last time I've done it, if ever.

Would calling 911 because a driver who was texting at the same time hit a pedestrian count as an emergency?

If your job requires you to be on call, then you should be responsible enough to make sure you don't get your phone taken away. If they have the potential to kill or injure a member of society by being distracted while texting on their phone, then yes they should lose their livelihood. No one is forcing you to text while driving. It is not imperative to your livelihood to text and drive at the same time. It is completely unnecessary.

What if the person, in your example, is on call and drops their phone in the toilet? Should their livelihood be taken away because they were clumsy?