KCRag Forum

The ban proposal was rejected last night, 5 - 4.

That's a pretty close vote.

An increase in the fine incurred when the driver is yaking on the phone during an accident was passed, though (went from $60 to $120).

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/jun/0 ... city_local

can you imagine the costs (in non monetary terms at least) of enforcing such a thing, however?

warwickland wrote: can you imagine the costs (in non monetary terms at least) of enforcing such a thing, however?

What do you mean? What non-monetary costs are you talking about?

time, effort, paperwork. it would certainly be an issue for the kcpd, i dont know about the larrytown marshal. about 2/3 of the drivers i see on cleaver II are on teh cell phone, so enforcement would take up a lot of resources, at least in kansas citys case. im guessing it would be the same for lawrence.

There was a quote in the LJWorld article about Biotech not coming to Lawrence because, golly, people couldn't use phones in their cars.  (He didn't mention stem cell research limitations).  But anyway.

I think the guy was just whining.

This would have been very difficult to enforce.

Would it have been a primary phone law (i.e. you can get pulled over if a cop sees you on the phone) or a secondary law (you can't get pulled over for it, but if you get pulled over for other reasons and you are on the phone, you get a ticket)?

I've had an open wager going for a while that I pose to people:

Which do you think will become illegal first, in KC: smoking in bars or talking on the phone while driving?

It's going to happen, whether it's the right thing to do or not.

bahua wrote: Which do you think will become illegal first, in KC: smoking in bars or talking on the phone while driving?

smoking will be the first to be banned. and it will only happen when the suburbs get their act together and trigger the "85%" clause. as a former smoker, i welcome it. although i would also welcome a ban on cell phone talking while driving, but study after study says that drivers are just as distracted by at least 10 other things (eating, radios, etc.).

The biggest distraction is children in cars.  If we can get a ban on those then by trickle-down effect no more babies crying in movie theaters and no more kids running around wild in restarants.  Hooray! 

scooterj wrote: The biggest distraction is children in cars.   If we can get a ban on those then by trickle-down effect no more babies crying in movie theaters and no more kids running around wild in restarants.   Hooray!   :)

Actually, the biggest distraction, and this is pretty much supported by insurance company data, is a teenage driver with another teenager in the car.  I have two kids and have driven them all over the place at all ages, I can honestly say, they have never been a serious distraction.  When they were little and were being disruptive, we pulled over and sorted things out.  What is required is a little common sense.  If there is a distraction whether it is a child or a cell phone, pull over and take care of it but do not try to drive at the same time. What is maddening about cell phones is that it is a self inflicted distraction and they are a distraction that not only endangers the user but everyone else on the road.  Personally, I think they should be banned in all states at all times while driving and that includes hands-free devices (which have been proven to be no better than regular cell phones in terms of safety).  For a country that is so dependent on driving, we sure take it lightly and the result is that we kill enough people every year to populate a small city.  If we had Iraqi war deaths on the same scale we had road accident deaths, American troops would have been pulled out in the first few months.