|
 |
1/18/2010
Does most of the public fall for this stuff?
Outlawing texting while driving is maddening. And 100% political.
The bill the Wisconsin state Assembly is considering Tuesday, would prohibit a driver from composing or sending an electronic message, such as an e-mail or text, while driving. Drivers would face fines of $100 to $400 for a first offense and $200 to $800 for subsequent offenses. The law would not apply to electronic devices like GPS systems and two-way radios.
…. The Waunakee-based National Motorists Association [NMA] opposes Wisconsin's texting bill.
"There are (already) laws on the books for distracted driving, whether it's texting or someone combing their hair, or changing the radio station or turning around to yell at the kids in the back seat," said Gary Biller, the group's executive director. "What we would like to see is more effort into a public education campaign...we are concerned about all these preemptive things banning this or banning this activity. It just pre-judges a situation.
Check out the NMA. Kind of a NRA for drivers. Cool.
The National Motorists Association (NMA) was founded in 1982 to represent and protect the interests of North American motorists. We began by combating the 55-mph National Maximum Speed Limit and we continue to support efforts to retain motorists' freedoms and rights. We work for more reasonable speed limits and fight for better driver training, fair enforcement practices and important privacy protections. The NMA believes in freedom and responsibility to make choices, not in "one size fits all" legislation, ticket cameras, unfair driving taxes, revenue-motivated traffic courts and speed traps. The NMA supports traffic laws based on sound engineering principles and public consensus - not political agendas.
Hear, hear. AB 496 is great fodder for press releases and campaign brochures. You will see mention of it at campaign time, be assured.
I’m not saying public outrage may not be warranted – but why is a new law always the answer when public anger erupts over something or another? Do you think most of the public falls for this stuff?
Kind of like President Obama going after the bad boy banks. Geez.
Jo Egelhoff, FoxPolitics.net
COMMENTS
According to a Virginia Tech study drivers are 23 times more likely to get into an accident while texting. Texting while driving can be more dangerous than drunk driving. This isn't about rights of drivers it is about the lives of drivers, their passengers and the innocent people they kill because of distracted texting. I see teenagers texting while driving and swerve etc. I see adults do the same thing and yes, occasionally I have done it and should not have. The reason why there should be a law is because people don't do the right thing when their personal habits (drinking/texting) conflict with the rights and safety of others. For those who think a law is not the answer, put your own lives and those of your own kids at risk but don't put mine at risk. Your "right" to text shouldn't be a right to endanger my kid or me.
dave allen (Mon Jan 18 06:51:06 2010)
Dave, you miss the point. Or I didn't state the point clearly enough. We already have ample laws on the books to prevent texting - why are we passing another one?
Jo (Mon Jan 18 06:59:15 2010)
Jo,
I do not miss the point. "distracted driving" is a judgment call and enforceable usually after the damage is done. It is also a trial lawyer's dream. "my client shouldn't be charged with manslaughter of your child because they weren't distracted and just try to prove otherwise". Just like the seatbelt laws which finally came to Wisconsin, texting is identifiable via direct observation. I do not even trust myself to know exactly when it is safe to text. (and I have never had any auto accident of any kind in 36 years of driving) How in the heck can I expect a teenager to know the difference? The point is lives are at stake and texting is not and should never be so important as to trump those lives.
dave allen (Mon Jan 18 07:41:01 2010)
Hey Dave: Do you ever drive over the speed limit? Why? Did you know it's against the law? Why doesn't the law deter you from not speeding? Obviously many laws and the subsequent punishment for breaking them don't always prevent people from "behaving" properly.
If there's already a law that doesn't work to deter texting, what makes you think another law will help? Personal responsibility and common sense are missing from this equation, not the absence of more laws. BTW, the Virginia Tech study that you cited was conducted on truckers who drive long-haul trucks, not those who drive light-duty passenger vehicles.
I don't want or need the government legislating my behavior. I'd rather see adults become adults and take responsibility for their own actions. The concept of “more government” intrusion on our lives is insulting to the intelligent, liberty-loving American.
Greta (Mon Jan 18 08:50:37 2010)
Greta,
Are you saying get rid if speed limits just because some people speed a little ? Why not get rid of drunk driving laws, loaded gun laws etc. You seem to think that laws have no impact and that everything is just 'personal responsibility'. Totally false. Laws have a huge impact on behavior. And do I speed? No. Look me up on CCAP. Not one speeding ticket, Nada, zilch. Why? Not because I'm an angel but because I have cruse control and don't want a ticket. The problem with the "personal responsibility" issue when you're dealing with automobiles is that an auto is a deadly weapon if not used safely and I don't want to be on the receiving end. Maybe you think that it is Ok for yourself if a distracted driver runs you over since they have preserved their freedom to text. But no thank you, I think my life (and that of my family) is more important than someone's(including my own) right to text while driving. Once you're dead it doesn't matter whether the person who hit you is charged with "distracted driving".
dave allen (Mon Jan 18 09:26:14 2010)
Greta: I don't know what source you're using but this is the link to the VA Tech study. They looked at different types of drivers not just truckers. And, if it had been just truckers OMG! Imagine professional drivers would themselves have a huge increase in risk? Imagine what a non professional would do? Do ya think non-professional drivers results would be better??
http://www.vtti.vt.edu/PDF/7-22-09-VTTI-Press_Release_Cell_phones_and_Driver_Distraction.pdf
dave allen (Mon Jan 18 09:49:58 2010)
Jo & Greta have done a fine job of articulating my points regarding not needing another law. Thanks!
As for an unanswered question in the original post - "...why is a new law always the answer when public anger erupts over something or another?"
The answer: School House Rock.
For years it has been the default reaction "This is an outrage ... there ought to be a law!". Why? In the 70s (maybe late 60's) when SHR came out kids across the nation learned in a 'short & fun way' how a bill becomes a law. Sadly, they didn't learn the real reason WHY we need laws!
We and our kids and grandkids have all now been indoctrinated in to this mentality to the point where life now imitates art. Texting is just the latest variation on a theme.
My question - who can write the 'anti-progressive' version of that very popular production ... and which district will have the necessary "anatomy" to put it on in their schools?
Jeff Riedl (Mon Jan 18 10:35:59 2010)
Jeff,
There is no logic to the philosophy that there is a finite limit to the number of laws. The law adapts to society. We didn't need laws regulating speeds on highways when there weren't highways. The fact remains that texting while driving is dangerous and not adequately covered by the general laws on the books already. It needs to be specifically on the books just like the primary seatbelt law. Driving is a privilege like owning a gun is and specific rules (laws) come about as necessary.
dave allen (Mon Jan 18 11:11:59 2010)
I agree that such a law against texting while driving is political--part of the progressive agenda to turn citizens into mindless sheep. Nearly every state already has laws against inattentive driving, which ought to cover it.
This is still another demonstration of the fact that we're getting too many laws at too high a cost from politicians who forget that, as sovereign citizens, WE NOT THEY are the source of power, and they are not to have all power over citizens.
Jan T (Mon Jan 18 11:15:42 2010)
Once again we have a case of those who want mimimalist government and those who prefer more activist government.
Perhaps the problem needs to focus not the "number" of laws but the "bite" of the law.
Rather than add a special law against texting, simply change the penalty for violating an existing law, e.g. accident or speeding while distracted results in immediate and permanent loss of driving privileges.
Stiffer 1st offense driving penalities seem to work in Sweden.
Dennis (Mon Jan 18 11:24:34 2010)
The problem with simply increasing penalties is that enforcement matters. A high probability of getting caught but a low penalty is always more effective than a lower probability of getting caught with a higher penalty. This is well documented over decades of research. Texting (like lack of seatbelt use use) can be considered a primary offense so the driver is caught before there is an accident. Texting (again like seatbelts) is observable by an outside observer where intoxication or sight issues are not.This saves lives, injury, and cost. Other than meeting some personal philosophical goal, what good does it do to have someone injured or killed and a hapless texter put in prison because they hit someone when perhaps a little prevention would have made a difference. How many innocent lives should be sacrificed for someone else's lofty philosophy?
dave allen (Mon Jan 18 14:42:55 2010)
David,
I fail to see the logic of your enforcement argument. It is rather easy to determine if a cell phone was in use (and whether texting was happening) at the time of a traffic violation such as an accident or speeding citation.
I realize there are those who are not dissuaded by the threat of severe penalties. But many people are.
As we significantly reduce the number of people willing to take the risk, we reduce the probability of a texting-related violation occurring.
Dennis (Mon Jan 18 15:46:28 2010)
Steve Prestegard expands on Jeff's School House Rock theory in a Marketplace post this morning....
Jo (Tue Jan 19 07:07:05 2009)
Dave,
I don't believe I ever said there was a finite number of acceptable laws. I'm a firm believer in individual responsibility and if you cause a wreck or if you're responsible for your own stupid injuries because you were texting - then you should have to deal with the consequences of your actions. Not a nanny law.
But let's just say I run with your concept of a law for everything. In that case I WOULD be in favor of a legal limit on the number of laws issued each session. How's THAT work for ya?
Jeff Riedl (Tue Jan 19 18:56:17 2010)
|
|
Blog Archives
| 2010 |
  December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
• Solberg: Healing After an Abortion
• Basketball fans eyeing extension of Miller Park sales tax
• Nanny sex-ed bill goes to Doyle
• A first. Village limits pension contribution for employees
• Nanny State update: Toothbrushing mandated
• Obama pushes education inflation
• WI Investment Board votes to borrow to juice up returns
• So Republicans have brought nothing to the table?
• You have got to be kidding me
• Nygren: Governor Continues Terms of Failure in State of the State
• Sen. Fitzgerald: Governor down the wrong track at high speed
• Phosphorus is the new CO2. $Billions in Wisconsin
• More Obama giveaways
• A reprimand? Would you keep him on the job?
• Burri: Sarah Palin for Prez troubles me
• Quote of the Day – Obama after the pie-eating contest
• Populism, abused and trampled
• Fitzgerald: Senate Republicans Propose Real Job Creation Agenda
• Stripped down health insurance – it’s about time
• Ok GOP, scrap the Party of NO; time to lead
• No way Feingold is a Coakley. Is Wall a Brown?
• Burri: Conservatives off the chart for a RINO?
• Paltry quid pro quo?
• Doyle says ARRA has ‘created or retained’ 44,000 WI jobs
• Does most of the public fall for this stuff?
• When you get signatures, always get a couple extra
• Blame it on the outmoded computers
• Scott Brown victory does not scuttle health bill
• 8th Congressional Candidate Forum, Jan. 25
• Scott Walker Meet-and-greet, Monday, Jan. 18
• Aren’t consumers taxpayers too?
• MORE taxes on investment income - dreadful and wrong
• Join the blaze orange army and say ‘Enough is Enough’
• The future of government-run health care
• Tax on banks is a really bad idea
• Roth, Savard on the stump, grassroots style
• Savard speaking in Appleton, 8 PM, Wed., Jan. 13.
• Rahmlow: Savard, Bies frontrunners for State Senate
• Burri: Failing Political Correctness 101
• School contracts and Race to the Top
• Senator Feingold worrisome and big red flags
• Psephological?
• This is really important. Contact Rep. Kagen. Now. Please.
• This is exactly what we need from Governor Doyle
• This guy is my hero
• Why am I not surprised?
• Talk health reform with Feingold (Th), Petri (today)
• Give the Mayor power over MPS - if he can break contracts
• Burri: Yup, Dems really are going to bypass a conference
• The $2.7 billion Wisconsin deficit no one told you about
• Walker launches county accountability website
• Rahmlow: Why is Van Hollen dodging the Nebraska deal?
|
| 2009 |
December
|
November
|
October
• The Lawton-Bader files
• Yup, it’s the TAX LEVY, not the tax RATE
• Ellis: costly automobile insurance laws must be rolled back
• If not Barrett, who?
• The subsidy game
• Burri: Bailouts, Banks, Health Care, and the Mob
• Attend Appleton Schools budget meeting tonight
• A public option WON’T increase costs? That’s delusional!
• Appleton Schools budget meeting Monday
• Wisconsin should be screaming for accountability
• Burri: If anything, we need more obstructionism around here
• WI on the leading edge - in the wrong direction
• Rep. Montgomery: Utility Customers Join State’s Crime-Fighting Efforts
• Public Conservation and Recreation Lands Total 16.5% of State
• In the crow's nest of the Titanic, shouting 'Iceberg!'
• Is Rep. Nelson a political hack?
• Health care: The road ahead will be brutal
• Kagen's pandering again
• Birthers - good stuff for you
• How much do we bend over backward for seniors?
• The trouble with health care is paying for it
• Two-parent families: The Gold Standard
• Burri: Kids... the joys and blessings
• Very, very worried about health care
• Rep. Huebsch: Wisconsin is proof government health care isn’t the answer
• School district contracts push up tax levy
• What? Obama, the Peace Prize?
• TODAY - hearing on Campaign Finance Reform
• Appleton School District tax levy up way too much
• CBO report is out - and the bill isn't even written yet?
• So, how much do YOU budget for health care?
• Burri: Copenhagen trip was amateurish
• “Sotomayor, you have blood on your hands...”
• Cap and Trade. Always follow the money
• Rep. Kagen gets (almost) free health services
• I actually agree with Rep. Kagen
• Future Wisconsin Conference for Conservatives, October 10, Wauwatosa
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
|
| 2008 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
• Important votes Tuesday, including Appleton Common Council
• Democrats are becoming supply siders??
• Further debunking Hillary myths
• WEAC has created an unsustainable monopoly
• From Mark Gundrum: One of the greatest honors an American can experience
• 'Operation Chaos' working?
• Joe Martin the best candidate in Appleton's 8th
• State programs to cut? - Volume II
• Oh the naivete of youth
• Not just disingenuous - flat wrong
• Steve - you will be missed
• Make cuts only AFTER you're elected....
• Getting serious: What programs can we cut?
• Rep. Steve Kagen joining me on Jerry Bader Show today
• Rep. Van Roy: Dental Care Pilot Program
• Has Dave Obey turned the corner on earmarks?
• Speaker Huebsch: Governor turns down Federal Aid?
• Mark Rahmlow: "We're Broke."
• As taxpayers, how do we know if it's a Chevy or a Lexus?
• This is trash talk - about a veteran
• Frank Lasee: Take time to get the Compact right
• 'The Gableman Ad' - is it racist?
• Roth thankful, Kagen shaking money tree
• Gov. Doyle's office not enamored with Freedom of Information
• Governor Doyle will never do it
• Leadership on smoking ban? Not Hanna
• Rep. Van Roy speaks out about smear ads
• You're threatening me about potholes?
• Losing the Hastert seat is NOT a trend and NOT curtians for the GOP
• First suggestion for 'slashing' programs
• Big money-saver for municipalities
• More one time fixes. Nuts.
• Any chances???
• I'm doing the Jerry Bader Show, today, the 11th
• Representative Frank Lasee: Final Waltz of the Season
• Guest Blog: It's not the county's business to be in the nursing home business
• Yup, Hillary won Texas and Ohio
• Gableman/Butler race featured - and it isn't pretty
• Lies from Planned Parenthood and NARAL
• He who sacrifices liberty.....
• Duh.
• The Troha sentencing, Doyle and that $200K
• Guns, passion and "originality"
• How hard is it anyway, to shut down a government program?
• Voting is a PRIVILEGE. And so are property taxes....
• Guest Blog: Governor Doyle, cancel your Ireland trip
|
February
|
January
|
| 2007 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
August
|
July
|
June
|
May
|
April
|
March
|
February
|
January
• Lots of ideas. No money.
• The Cigarette Tax - "Poor Policy Instrument?"
• School budget Lite?
• Frankenstein - not in the library, but in the legislature
• A librarian, a legislator, a president
• $1.25/pack - NO, NO, NO, and NO
• Kagen and Reagan in the same breath?
• Menasha: behind the 8-ball, but not biting the dust
• Any way you slice it, Wisconsin government wants (further) in on health care
• The World is Flat...what about health care?
• The PAC - too precious to fail. Day 3
• News follow-ups: Appleton West, Kagen at the White House
• Fox Cities PAC - too precious to fail - Day 2
• Fox Cities PAC - too precious to fail
• New Transit Tax coming your way
• Rep. Petri has his finger in the dike - I guess
• AASD Retirement Costs Burdensome
• Health care, health care, health care, health care
• Water rate increase was no slam dunk
• Education for all is just a bad dream
• New Year's resolutions from a parade snob
|
| 2006 |
December
|
November
|
October
|
September
|
| 2000 |
May
|
|
