YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 No need to even list...just one law that says "PAY !@#$ING ATTENTION BEHIND THE WHEEL, !@#$S!" That covers all existing situations and any new ones that pop up. FYI, it is on the books in Alexandria, VA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 About as easy to enforce as the seatbelt law. Unless someone is texting next to a cop car, they won't get caught. It could be done, but it would involve plain clothes officers. You always see several people texting every day, right? Whether or not a person is "for" this ban would depend on how they prefer their police to be deployed imo. Enforcement of this nature is all for the insurance companies. Can you imagine how high your rates will climb if you get a summons for texting? Maybe in NYC they can borrow some cops from the "Cigarette Squad" and give some tickets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 FYI, it is on the books in Alexandria, VA Text them when you see someone else doing it. Mainly from observation, looking for erratic driving etc ... I see it all the time. If you are behind someone you can see their eyes in their mirror constantly looking down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 No need to even list...just one law that says "PAY !@#$ING ATTENTION BEHIND THE WHEEL, !@#$S!" That covers all existing situations and any new ones that pop up. Also on the books in Coeur d'Arlene, Idaho... Apparently it enables creepy law enforcement officers to pull over sober drivers, decide they failed a totally impossible sobriety field test, grope them and disquise it as a pat down, then haul them off to jail thinking they are drunk... When it is all said and down and they find out the driver wasn't drunk, let alone buzzed, they let the driver go with a "inattentive driving, non-alcohol related" ticket. Just what the system needs one catch all law so they can pull everybody over that doesn't pass their subjective view of driving and then harrass them. Then on top of it all the cop had to wash his stinky finger. And you think I am brain dead. Giving cops more subjective authority is really the way to go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Also on the books in Coeur d'Arlene, Idaho... Apparently it enables creepy law enforcement officers to pull over sober drivers, decide they failed a totally impossible sobriety field test, grope them and disquise it as a pat down, then haul them off to jail thinking they are drunk... When it is all said and down and they find out the driver wasn't drunk, let alone buzzed, they let the driver go with a "inattentive driving, non-alcohol related" ticket. Just what the system needs one catch all law so they can pull everybody over that doesn't pass their subjective view of driving and then harrass them. Then on top of it all the cop had to wash his stinky finger. And you think I am brain dead. Giving cops more subjective authority is really the way to go! They already do that anyway. Ever been pulled over by an Erie County Sherrif who "visually" clocks you doing 50 in a 35 at 10 at night? Or have a Buffalo cop smash your taillight, then write you up an equipment citation? I have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 They already do that anyway. Ever been pulled over by an Erie County Sherrif who "visually" clocks you doing 50 in a 35 at 10 at night? Or have a Buffalo cop smash your taillight, then write you up an equipment citation? I have. We gotta stop blindly backing theses guys... That is the problem. Ya... That is bad... Which is why even more over-sight should added to the job... Track their every second by GPS... Have truly independent internal affairs, etc... etc... Internal affairs IMO is just OSHA or EEO coming down on a Fed Agency... And believe me it is a farce... What is good for the goose (civilian, private company) is good for the gander (agency, law enforcement, whatever). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts