New law "heads up" for our out of state guest

[Rattlesnake Guy]

From the NH Department of Safety / Division of State Police Official Web Site:

December 10, 2009

Text Messaging While Driving

Effective January 1, 2010, it will be a violation of New Hampshire law to send a text message while driving a motor vehicle on any way within the State of New Hampshire. Troopers will be educating motorists and enforcing the new law so that New Hampshire’s roadways remain safe for all users.

265:105-a Prohibited Text Messages and Device Usage While Operating a Motor Vehicle.

I. A person operating a moving motor vehicle who writes a text message or uses 2 hands to type on or operate an electronic or telecommunications device, is guilty of a violation. A person does not write a text message when he or she reads, selects, or enters a phone number or name in a wireless communications device for the purpose of making a phone call.

II. The fine for a violation of this section shall be $100.

Source. 2009, 291:1, eff. Jan. 1, 2010.

[Pineedles]

GREAT LAW! Fine should add a ZERO or TWO, or license suspension for 2 WEEKS, 2 months? JMHO.

[trfour]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

GREAT LAW! Fine should add a ZERO or TWO, or license suspension for 2 WEEKS, 2 months? JMHO.

Just add another 4 x 4 to the sentences.

Texas'ing from Texas, by the way...

Terry

[Argie's Wife]

Good one.

But that's gonna be a booger to enforce.

[Lakegeezer]

Good start, but the law as written seems to be vague.

A person operating a moving motor vehicle who writes a text message or uses 2 hands to type on or operate an electronic or telecommunications device, is guilty of a violation.

Where is the definition of a text message? Is typing an instant message (AOL, MSN, etc) or an email OK? With smart phones, these are possible and just as dangerous. And, nothing is said about using a phone (with one hand) as a camera while driving, or using it as a GPS, playing cribbage, or web surfing.

It will be interesting to watch where this one goes.

[dpg]

I believe this is passing soon in Mass also, I've heard it talked about.

[dpg]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Good start, but the law as written seems to be vague.

A person operating a moving motor vehicle who writes a text message or uses 2 hands to type on or operate an electronic or telecommunications device, is guilty of a violation.

Where is the definition of a text message? Is typing an instant message (AOL, MSN, etc) or an email OK? With smart phones, these are possible and just as dangerous. And, nothing is said about using a phone (with one hand) as a camera while driving, or using it as a GPS, playing cribbage, or web surfing.

It will be interesting to watch where this one goes.

Nothing vague here in my opinion. No typing of any messages while driving...Period.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Argie's Wife

Good one.

But that's gonna be a booger to enforce.

Agreed. How exactly are they going to prove that you were texting? Even if they had the ability to snap a photo of you in action, how can they prove you were not entering a phone number to call?

In my opinion, this is just another unnecessary law that is tough to enforce. There is already a distracted driving law on the books, why not enforce that one?

[wifi]

Originally Posted by chipj29

.... There is already a distracted driving law on the books, why not enforce that one?

Exactly my opinion as well. It will be interesting to see if they will try to ticket you for both.

So now, we need to invent a 'dragon naturally speaking' for the cell phone, so we can text, and the person in the car passing you will think you are talking to yourself

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by wifi

So now, we need to invent a 'dragon naturally speaking' for the cell phone.

They did that already. Long before people caught on to how good the hearing impaired have it and discovered the luxury of typing all their communications, they used to have to actually talk on telephones. They often used wired head sets, blue tooth head sets, or speaker phones to do this. My kids don't believe me, but it's true.

[Winnigirl83]

We shouldn't even need a law for this - it should be common sense!
I agree with Argie's Wife, it'll be hard to enforce.

[DickR]

Even looking down at a tiny device to enter a number on those tiny keys or to select a number from a menu on an equally tiny screen is a distraction that has no place behind the wheel when there is any traffic at all around you. Taking both hands off the wheel of course is foolish, but taking eyes off the road for the same length of time is equally bad.

[ghfromaltonbay]

I agree with Argie's wife, this law is hard to enforce. We've had a no handheld phone, no texting law for over a year now in NJ and I still see the same number of people yakking as they drive to/from work. It's a joke. When they put the statistics for tickets given out to these nummies in the paper recently, the numbers were awfully low for a state with several million drivers.

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by Lakegeezer

Good start, but the law as written seems to be vague.

A person operating a moving motor vehicle who writes a text message or uses 2 hands to type on or operate an electronic or telecommunications device, is guilty of a violation.

Where is the definition of a text message? Is typing an instant message (AOL, MSN, etc) or an email OK? With smart phones, these are possible and just as dangerous. And, nothing is said about using a phone (with one hand) as a camera while driving, or using it as a GPS, playing cribbage, or web surfing.

It will be interesting to watch where this one goes.

Lakegeezer I believe the definition of text messaging is implied in the law.... "writes a text message or uses 2 hands to type"..... basically If a cop see a situation where it is reasonable to believe the person doesn't have the wheel grasped in at least one hand..... this law should stop texting.... people fumbling with GPS devices, etc. etc. This law is writen write I believe.... loose enough to require some interpretation, however specific enough to all for enforcement. This will also stop those idiots, who talk on the cell phone while trying to turn on their GPS... or change radio stations etc. etc.....

Personally I think Cell phones and GPS systems should be period outlawed in a car, along with video systems, etc, etc.... we have gone to far in this country, some vehicles it is like the living room on wheels......

[Excalibur]

While driving into Boston from NH on I-93 in a SUV ( up high enough to see) on a Monday morning I notice people enjoying a meal, steering with there knees, shaving, putting on lipstick, playing with there IPOD or Iphone, typing in the gps device, watching a movie, checking email, putting on makeup, talking on the phone, reading the newspaper, reading a book, working on a laptop and even some good make make out sessions and you can use your imagination on other things between two people. Now I know why we are only going about 20 mph on a good day, everybody is multitasking.

[EllyPoinster]

Originally Posted by chipj29

Agreed. How exactly are they going to prove that you were texting? Even if they had the ability to snap a photo of you in action, how can they prove you were not entering a phone number to call?

In my opinion, this is just another unnecessary law that is tough to enforce. There is already a distracted driving law on the books, why not enforce that one?

When you use a cell phone, you leave an electronic trail. Reasonable suspicion to justify serving a warrant on the service provider will produce the evidence necessary for a conviction or a civil suit award.

[CrawfordCentury]

Originally Posted by Winnigirl83

We shouldn't even need a law for this - it should be common sense!
I agree with Argie's Wife, it'll be hard to enforce.

I think it was Miss Manners who wrote that laws and regulations get passed when neighbors fail to attend to matters of common sense and common decency.

A cop's perspective would be interesting to hear on this one.

Seems to me like a law passed by the gang in Concord to make it look like they're being responsive to a public safety threat - and not a bunch of quakebuttocked ninnies prone to inaction.

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by EllyPoinster

When you use a cell phone, you leave an electronic trail. Reasonable suspicion to justify serving a warrant on the service provider will produce the evidence necessary for a conviction or a civil suit award.

I thought of that as well. Not sure a $100 ticket will be worth the courts time for all that paperwork though?

I just spent a few mins searching for it, with no luck. But I read last week in the Union Leader an article regarding the new law. There was a quote from a police chief, or other law enforcement saying basically that the law would be difficult to enforce. I wish I could find the article.

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by chipj29

I thought of that as well. Not sure a $100 ticket will be worth the courts time for all that paperwork though?

I just spent a few mins searching for it, with no luck. But I read last week in the Union Leader an article regarding the new law. There was a quote from a police chief, or other law enforcement saying basically that the law would be difficult to enforce. I wish I could find the article.

I agree the law will be hard to enforce, and for sure at 100$ it isn't something the Police are going to want to put the effort into to build a case against someone. Hence why I believe the best idea is a no cell phone no GPS, no videos, basically no gadgets in operations while a motor vehicle is underway policy. The Video's maybe for the kids in the back seats, but they are a distraction.......

Where I think this law, is really aimed, and probably the where the lobbiest are from that brought it about are the auto insurance companies. Looking for something to use for blame in cases, that has more wait then just saying "you know that isn't a safe practice". My guess is that this law will bring about more negligence court cases after accidents.

[jmen24]

For what it is worth. I asked my BIL the question regarding the distracted driving law and how it is enforced and this is the response I recieved.

Police are not out looking to pull people over for playing with the radio or using their cell phones as they drive by, this law is enforced when you get into an accident and you tell the cops at the scene "I was picking up my phone and looked up and I did not have time to stop" or "I was changing the radio station when all of a sudden I was off the road".

If you have ever been in an accident or witnessed one right after it happens, you will know that one of the drivers will almost always say " I only looked away..... or I didn't notice the car.... or I was (whatever)....." Statements that start with those words will almost always get you wrapped into the corner regarding fault and it also pins some sort of distraction as the reason for that cause of the accident, most people do not believe that they are terrible drivers so the excuses start flying as to what must have caused the accident, if it was their fault. The stories that have been shared with me is almost to comical to seem real.

Basically IMO this law falls directly in line with the current distracted driver law, meaning that, with the only difference being, you can tell without a doubt when someone is texting while driving, I have seen it myself and if you look into the driver side mirror while behind someone that you think is texting you will notice as well, and they will most likely get pulled over if a cop notices this, this law will give probable cause for a stop while the distracted law really wouldn't, unless you are crossing lines on the road.

That is my take on the situation with alittle insight from a police officer (city force).

Its laws like this that make me super happy that I have and use Vlingo on my BB, I can email, text, make a phone call, etc. without looking at my phone, simply speaking into it and it types away. Free app too for anyone that remembers that thread..

[Just Sold]

I fully support the new law.

As a driver who was rear ended on Dec 11, 2009 in Derry it brought home the need for this law.

The driver of the car that hit me was 2 handed typing on his GPS and admitted it to me and the Derry Police. Based on the wording of the new law had the accident happened after 1/1/10 there would have been a ticket issued for 2 handed typing on an electronic device. BTW I was stopped at a traffic light.

Luckily I was not injured and the damage was less than $1,100 to my car. It goes in the shop on Monday to get repaired.

[John A. Birdsall]

Living in CT where its a two hundred fifty dollar fine for driving while using a cell phone I can say it does not work. I sit in an office for eight hours a day on a main road. I have seen many accidents at this intersection, and I would say that cell phone use is a major cause.
Ticketing someone at the scene of the accident is too late. We need to find a way to prevent accidents. Texting, or using the cell phone is too distracting. Need to make a call? pull off the road and do what you gotta do.

[DickR]

What to do when the law doesn't seem to get attention? Treat "impaired by use of a distracting device while driving" the same as impaired in the form of DWI. Big fine first time. Second offense, loss of license for 6 months or so. Third offense - aren't you listening fella? Maybe some time in the slammer will get your attention.

[lawn psycho]

Unfortunately it is going to take someone related to a politician or some other connection getting killed before a law with serious teeth is enacted. All this does is give an officer a way to write a ticket for the state and maybe provide evidence in civil court for negligence. The current laws aren't painful enough to change behavior.

This country does not truly want to stamp out drunk driving as it's still considered a social ill, not criminal.

Government makes money on booze, Cops make overtime money going to court to prosecute, district attorney makes money, judge make money of DWIs(they even have dedicated DWI court days), insurance company makes more money, safe driving instructor makes money (most of them are cops), state makes more money on reinstatement fees.

So you see, it's not a criminal situation, DWI is a money making INDUSTRY.

The penalties for phone/text and DWI need to be very painful. DWI should be jail for first offense IMO (6 months).

For the record, I am not some non-drinking doo-goody. I just have the brains to know if I am operating a car that the booze stays in the bottle and the phone stays off. My wife has given up calling me on the way home frm work because she knows my phone won't be answered.

I've also seen the personal tragedy from having worked at a world-class level 1 trauma center (not Maine med ) when the victims family is saying goodbye to their loved one and having to donate their organs. All because of bad decisions involving motor vehicles. More times than I can ever care to think about.

Phone/text/DWI are the same IMO.

Here's a recent story about a decent young lady killed in Maine because of her cell phone. The video is on the right of page:
http://www.wcsh6.com/news/local/stor...storyid=112130

[GTO]

Originally Posted by jmen24

For what it is worth. I asked my BIL the question regarding the distracted driving law and how it is enforced and this is the response I recieved.

Police are not out looking to pull people over for playing with the radio or using their cell phones as they drive by, this law is enforced when you get into an accident and you tell the cops at the scene "I was picking up my phone and looked up and I did not have time to stop" or "I was changing the radio station when all of a sudden I was off the road".

If you have ever been in an accident or witnessed one right after it happens, you will know that one of the drivers will almost always say " I only looked away..... or I didn't notice the car.... or I was (whatever)....." Statements that start with those words will almost always get you wrapped into the corner regarding fault and it also pins some sort of distraction as the reason for that cause of the accident, most people do not believe that they are terrible drivers so the excuses start flying as to what must have caused the accident, if it was their fault. The stories that have been shared with me is almost to comical to seem real.

Basically IMO this law falls directly in line with the current distracted driver law, meaning that, with the only difference being, you can tell without a doubt when someone is texting while driving, I have seen it myself and if you look into the driver side mirror while behind someone that you think is texting you will notice as well, and they will most likely get pulled over if a cop notices this, this law will give probable cause for a stop while the distracted law really wouldn't, unless you are crossing lines on the road.

That is my take on the situation with alittle insight from a police officer (city force).

Its laws like this that make me super happy that I have and use Vlingo on my BB, I can email, text, make a phone call, etc. without looking at my phone, simply speaking into it and it types away. Free app too for anyone that remembers that thread..

I think this law passed quickly after an accident a few weeks before over the border in Lowell Mass. A driver went off the road in his familiar neighborhood around noon time on rte 133, hit a tree and died. Police at first couldn't explain what had happened with alcohol and speed not being a factor. The next day they found his cell phone on the passenger floor of the car and saw that at the time of the accident, he had been texting. Imagine being the person at the other end of that text.