In Australia it has been illegal for ages. They have also had mobile (cell) phone cameras for years to penalise drivers. They claim that distracted drivers are as dangerous as drunk drivers. Why is LA only doing this now?
I hate being cynical, but in LA this ruling means nothing. I can’t remember the last time I saw someone pulled over for a traffic offense.
Here in Norway, it has been illegal some years. The fine for using a cellphone while driving has been going up year after year.
Right now, the fine is equal to around $1035, with a couple of "marks" on your drivers license (if you get too many of them, you lose your license for some time).
IIRC, the only exemption here is if your phone is mounted to the dashboard.
> Mounted phones, and drivers operating them with a single swipe, are exempted, according to the decision, but looking at a map while holding the phone would violate the current law, the court ruled.
If car screens were grouped under the same ruling, a lot of modern implementations would (rightfully) be illegal.
On a modern BMW with iDrive 8 I need at least 2 presses to change my blower settings, all while the temperature indicator is flashing at me that it is heating / cooling.
The issue with this sort of tightening is that people drive way more distracted putting phones down in their lap to "hide" them. (This is how my how my neighbor was hit and killed walking down a sidewalk.)
To be clear, I hate people staring at their damn phones and texting in traffic, and wish that was punished more often.
The great thing about California is that most things are de jure illegal and de facto unenforced until someone decides to make an example of you.
I built a hands free cell phone adapter based on a headset for an android phone, little dash mike, and an answer button, it puts out audio to honkin amp that powers the trucks stock speakers, the amp has a high impidence output and gain control that works with the headphone output just fine (no hum) hitting the button cuts off music and answers the call. Totaly stealth phone shelf where the stereo used to be.
Good time to remind everyone to get a driver-facing dashcam.
Pokémon Go players in shambles!
The law prohibits concerns "handheld wireless telephone or an electronic wireless communications device." So, this is ok as long as the device is unable to connect to WiFi?
Any what, exactly, does looking at a map have to do with telephones or communications? I despair far too often reading court decisions.
Here's the text of the current law [1] for those curious. That link is to the heart of it, but for completeness there is more on the next and previous pages at that link.
Some observations.
1. The gist is that driving while "holding and operating a handheld wireless telephone or an electronic wireless communications device" is prohibited unless it is specifically designed and configured to allow voice or hand-free operations and it is used in that matter.
2. "This section shall not apply to manufacturer-installed systems that are embedded in the vehicle".
I wonder where this leaves CarPlay and Android Auto? My understanding is that while these use the car's infotainment system for their UI the applications such as navigation are running on your phone.
3. There is an exception allowing use of the driver's hand if two conditions are satisfied:
• The device is mounted on the windshield in the same manner as a a portable GPS as described in some other section of the Vehicle Code that they cite or it is mounted or affixed to the dashboard or center console in a way that doesn't interfere with the view of the road.
• The driver's hand is used to activate or deactivate a feature or function with a single swipe or tap of the driver's finger.
It's interesting to compare with other states to see the different expressions of essentially the same intent. I just recently had occasion to look at Washington's equivalent [2] law. It's more concise in some parts and more detailed in others.
It starts out with a general prohibition:
> (1) A person who uses a personal electronic device while driving a motor vehicle on a public highway is guilty of a traffic infraction and must pay a fine as provided in RCW 46.63.110(3)
That's followed with some exceptions including contacting emergency services, some transit system employee communication with dispatch services, some commercial driver use within the scope of their employment, and operators of emergency vehicles.
It defines some of the terms:
> "Driving" means to operate a motor vehicle on a public highway, including while temporarily stationary because of traffic, a traffic control device, or other momentary delays. "Driving" does not include when the vehicle has pulled over to the side of, or off of, an active roadway and has stopped in a location where it can safely remain stationary.
and
> "Personal electronic device" means any portable electronic device that is capable of wireless communication or electronic data retrieval and is not manufactured primarily for hands-free use in a motor vehicle. "Personal electronic device" includes, but is not limited to, a cell phone, tablet, laptop, two-way messaging device, or electronic game. "Personal electronic device" does not include two-way radio, citizens band radio, or amateur radio equipment.
and
> "Use" or "uses" means:
> (i) Holding a personal electronic device in either hand or both hands;
> (ii) Using your hand or finger to compose, send, read, view, access, browse, transmit, save, or retrieve email, text messages, instant messages, photographs, or other electronic data; however, this does not preclude the minimal use of a finger to activate, deactivate, or initiate a function of the device;
> (iii) Watching video on a personal electronic device.
[1] https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-veh/division-11...
> That case also arose when a driver was found guilty of violating the law because he was looking at a map on his phone while driving. But when the case reached the court of appeal, it interpreted the word “using” in the law’s language as prohibiting listening and talking while holding a cellphone and driving.
Legislators seem to love to do this. They deliberately write these laws using vague terms like "using" and then expect people (and the courts) to read their minds later on.
> In issuing its ruling on Tuesday, the California Court of Appeals noted that, when the current law was being drafted, the Assembly Committees on Transportation and Appropriations concluded that the new law would prohibit wireless phones from being used “for any purpose” while driving, and would include “all distracting mobile device-related behavior.”
No shit. The spirit of the original law was pretty clear. Why couldn't they have simply written what they meant in the first law without it having to be amended? Sloppy people writing sloppy laws.
[EDIT: Wow, the up-and-down voting swings on this comment have been wild. Is this really that controversial?]
Mounted phones, and drivers operating them with a single swipe, are exempted, according to the decision, but looking at a map while holding the phone would violate the current law, the court ruled.
Makes sense. It seems they're considering the distraction as being caused by trying to hold the device, and not merely its use.