so if you’re an “experienced” driver go right ahead and text away. What the heck, just type out war and peace on that thing while you drive down the freeway at 85…please, do me a favor and do it okay…more precious natural resources for me after you kill yourself.
The texting ban would apply only to drivers with learner’s permits, which require another fully licensed driver to be in the vehicle for supervision; or with intermediate licenses, which restrict the hours for unsupervised driving. So…..what would the dufus doing the training be doing while the permitee is driving? Probably screaming to be let out of the car!!
I assume most readers are familiar with “named perils” vs. “all risk”. Applying a “named perils” approach to our driving laws would result in having to name whatever activity a driver is prohibited from doing in their vehicle, such as: “texting”; “drinking and driving”; etc., which then implies that something that isn’t specifically prohibited is okay….”but officer, I wasn’t texting, I was making pizza dough when I ran that light”…or…”I wasn’t drinking, I was changing my watch battery when I rear-ended the other car”.
BUT, we already use the “all risk” approach: if you distract yourself for ANY reason and have an accident you’re going to be found at-fault and legally liable for any resulting damages, barring extenuating circumstances or contributory negligence.
AND,we already have laws addressing stop signs/red lights; speeding; tailgating; improper lane change; failing to signal, etc, etc…SO, regardless of the excuse given, ALL OF THE DANGERS presented by improper cell phone use, texting, knitting doilies, or any other activity for that matter, are ALREADY ILLEGAL!
Under current law is it possible that some shrewd lawyer could get a guilty driver off the hook with some argument like “your Honor, I examined the statute and could not find that performing jet aircraft engine repair while driving is prohibited”? I don’t think so…
so if you’re an “experienced” driver go right ahead and text away. What the heck, just type out war and peace on that thing while you drive down the freeway at 85…please, do me a favor and do it okay…more precious natural resources for me after you kill yourself.
Is it in affect for people who already have their permits before this is passed
The texting ban would apply only to drivers with learner’s permits, which require another fully licensed driver to be in the vehicle for supervision; or with intermediate licenses, which restrict the hours for unsupervised driving. So…..what would the dufus doing the training be doing while the permitee is driving? Probably screaming to be let out of the car!!
I assume most readers are familiar with “named perils” vs. “all risk”. Applying a “named perils” approach to our driving laws would result in having to name whatever activity a driver is prohibited from doing in their vehicle, such as: “texting”; “drinking and driving”; etc., which then implies that something that isn’t specifically prohibited is okay….”but officer, I wasn’t texting, I was making pizza dough when I ran that light”…or…”I wasn’t drinking, I was changing my watch battery when I rear-ended the other car”.
BUT, we already use the “all risk” approach: if you distract yourself for ANY reason and have an accident you’re going to be found at-fault and legally liable for any resulting damages, barring extenuating circumstances or contributory negligence.
AND,we already have laws addressing stop signs/red lights; speeding; tailgating; improper lane change; failing to signal, etc, etc…SO, regardless of the excuse given, ALL OF THE DANGERS presented by improper cell phone use, texting, knitting doilies, or any other activity for that matter, are ALREADY ILLEGAL!
Under current law is it possible that some shrewd lawyer could get a guilty driver off the hook with some argument like “your Honor, I examined the statute and could not find that performing jet aircraft engine repair while driving is prohibited”? I don’t think so…