| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 10:56:08 AM | Manitoba has passed a law banning talking and texting on cellphones while driving.
The bill quietly passed on June 12 during the last day of session at the Manitoba Legislature, but the province plans to launch an awareness campaign before the new law is enforced.
"This is going to be a culture shift for Manitobans so we want the opportunity to have a media campaign about the changes so that everyone knows what to expect," said Labour Minister Nancy Allan.
Samantha Charran of CAA Manitoba says the organization is happy leaders have recognized the risk of using a cell phone while driving. "In fact, distracted driving is attributed to about 20 per cent of accidents in Canada every year," Charran said.
The new law excludes hands-free devices, such as car speaker phone adaptors.
Four other provinces have planned similar electronic bans, including Ontario and Quebec.
Distracted Drivers are a danger to everyone & I'm certainly not against cell-phone usage, however, I'm happy to see that Manitoba has finally passed this law.
Thoughts? Ideas? Discuss... | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 11:46:39 AM | It’s about time… the police have been running out of excuses to pull people over and hand out $250 fines.
This comes just in time to help the cops meet their new ticket quotas which they’ve been assigned.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/columnists/Police-memo-clears-up-doubt-on-traffic-ticket-quotas-52790247.html | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 12:56:22 PM |
This comes just in time to help the cops meet their new ticket quotas which they’ve been assigned.
 what a coincidence.....
So what's next, a law so they can ticket people eating as they drive, or applying makeup as they drive? Wasn't there already a law in place that that covers people not paying attention as they're driving, driving imprudently or some such law?
I guess next they'll be allowing the police to pull people over & ticket them for having their tires inflated at the wrong level ( for our safety, of course). | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 1:15:52 PM | i think thi s law is a good thing. I saw this study that said texting drivers were more dangerous than drunk drivers. It really caught my attention.
Guess i have to get a blue tooth set up | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 2:21:29 PM | I saw that study too. Does that mean, when drunk, I can take over for my buddy and tell the police officer he needed to text so I took over because it's safer?
Shouldn't they be busier stopping people who are stealing cars than pulling over the ones texting in them? | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 2:33:52 PM | LMAO I have gotten into so many arguements with people about this - i knew it was passed the day it passed, and was telling everyone - but no, everyone said I was wrong...
I agree 150% in the law. I also think that police shouldnt be allowed to use their laptops while driving (see it all the time). | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 3:05:52 PM |
I agree 150% in the law
Sure, but why is necessary to have a specific law against talking on your cell or texting when driving? Why not a law that you can't be doing anything which would take your mind off the safe operation of a motor vehicle?
So under the new law you can't use your cell to talk or text while driving, but having a map open in your lap to try to find the street you're looking for is OK ?
Not sure it'd make much difference to the pedestrian or person on the bicycle you hit whether you were texting, looking at a map, , checking your makeup in the miror or searching in your glove compartment for something whe you struck them. | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 4:23:50 PM | It isn't a new law....yet. The amendments to the Highway Traffic Act have not been proclaimed yet. No proclamation date has been set yet.
In addition to bringing in the sections to ban cell phone use (unless it is hands free) the new amendments prohibit smoking in a motor vehicle when children under the age of 16 are in the vehicle. Maximum fine for doing so will be $1,000.
Once again, none of these amendments have been proclaimed yet. The law has not been changed until it is proclaimed.
As for banning the use of phones while driving, I find that it is hard to argue against it. The studies seem pretty conclusive that it is a distraction. However, there is some suggestion by the studies that it is not just using the handset that increases the risk of danger. Some studies go further to suggest that hands free is not a real solution. It is being distracted while talking on the phone that causes the risk. My gut reaction to this is to wonder about simply talking to your passenger. Somehow, the brain functions in a way to cause two different sets of risks between the act of speaking on the phone and talking to someone in the car. Of course, if you are smoking in the car while you text with a 16 (or younger) child who is also in the car, you are in real trouble. *LOL* | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 4:38:34 PM | MPI can force people to install immobilizers on their vehicles. Short range cell phone jammers are available, why not make those mandatory on new vehicles; installed so the cell signal is jammed if the vehicle isn't in "Park" ?
Then they can start going after people with older vehicles, making them mandatory when you have the vehicle safetied.... oh wait, can't have that, then the police won't be able to fill their coffers writing tickets for the scofflaws. | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 4:58:15 PM | I think it's a good law to pass. One can say just let people use common sense when it comes to talking and texting with cell phones,but too many people don't use common sense. I've done it too,talked on my cell while in heavy traffic,trying to check over either shoulder with the phone glued to the side of my head,can't signal because I don't have a free hand.
My last couple of cell phones have a speakerphone which helps a bit. At least I kind of have a free hand since I can hold the phone and the steering wheel at the same time.
I think texting while driving is about as dumb you can get. It's worse than just talking on the cell phone. Last year at my job in Saskatchewan we were running large rock trucks in a pit. One of the other drivers was trying to text his wife and ended up running his truck into a wall on one side of the ramp we were using to climb out. Over $4000 in damage to the truck,and it had to be paid by the owner of the company. | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/11/2009 5:29:46 PM |
I think it's a good law to pass.
I don't think anyone thinks it's a bad law, the point is it's a needless law becaue there are already laws on the books to cover imprudent/unsafe operation of a motor vehicle; this is just a fuzzy, feel-good law to make it look like the authorities are being pro-active. | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/12/2009 7:03:37 AM | I think it's dumb, and it will be interesting to see if and how they can actually enforce it. Are they going to seize my cell phone to prove I was on a call? Are they going to try and subpeona my phone bill?
It's another law done without any thought put into it beyond "what will make us look good in the public eye?" Nothing more than political pandering. | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/12/2009 9:05:00 AM | I agree that it is a good law. Not everyone can divide their concentration between talking on a cell phone and driving. Unfortunately some people do stupid things while driving, and their actions have caused accidents.
When I get a call on my cell while driving, I tell the person to hold on and I pull over to take the call, or tell the person I will call them back, if I can't pull over immediately.
I was downtown and pulled into the parking lane to take a cell phone call. While doing so, I had a commissionaire come over and tell me to plug the meter or move my car. I just looked at him and said "You have got to be kidding, I pulled over to answer my cell". It was not like I was taking the last spot available on the street - in fact my car was the only one on that block. If you can't pull over without plugging the meter, does the city intend on creating "cell phone talking parking zones" I could not believe that he stood there watching to see what I was going to do. I finished my call and drove away. | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/12/2009 11:43:09 AM | I think it's a damn good idea. Is is worth risking your life just to speak on a cell? Friggin' Winnipeg drivers.....I don't know how many times I have been cut off or almost rear-ended by some idiot on their cell phone. And it's not just the young ones either, we drove by an older woman who was driving and trying to text ....
^^^Haywire... that happen to me also, but the commissionaire kept on going. Though I did notice he looked back. Probably was amazed by my beauty!!! | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/12/2009 12:30:27 PM | Susan CD
I guess next they'll be allowing the police to pull people over & ticket them for having their tires inflated at the wrong level (for our safety, of course).
As a technical matter, they already can pull you over and ticket for such a violation. It comes under the category of the list of things that are required for a motor vehicle to be allowed on the road.
It is not as obvious as a broken headlight, for example, but in theory they can ticket for it just as easily.
Captain Girly Girl
I think it's dumb, and it will be interesting to see if and how they can actually enforce it. Are they going to seize my cell phone to prove I was on a call? Are they going to try and subpoena my phone bill?
As for the law being dumb, I would counter that what is dumb is the fact that there is actually a need for it. Unfortunately, most if not all of us can tell stories of some idiot driving in a dangerous manner because they were paying too much attention to their cell phone.
As for how they will enforce it... I would submit the "proof" will be the same as most of the other "proof” in traffic court... The cop said so.
Cops enjoy a special status as far as testimony goes. The judge automatically accepts what the cop says as gospel, unless evidence can be entered to cast doubt upon what was said
And since you are guilty until proven innocent in traffic court (in my opinion anyway), the cop saying “I saw him” is about all it will take to get a guilty verdict.
T_M | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/12/2009 2:33:07 PM |
As a technical matter, they already can pull you over and ticket for such a violation. It comes under the category of the list of things that are required for a motor vehicle to be allowed on the road.
I know that, my point is that there are already laws on the books to prevent unsafe/imprudent operation of a motor vehicle; creating a "new" law specifically for those using cell phones or texting is superfluous. We have a law against shoplifting, we don't have seperate laws for shoplifting of food prducts, shoplifting of clothes, shoplifting of electronics... why do we need a seperate law for using a cell phone or texting while driving, when laws are already in place to deal with people driving unsafely? You can't legislate stupidity out of existence.
As for the law being dumb, I would counter that what is dumb is the fact that there is actually a need for it. Unfortunately, most if not all of us can tell stories of some idiot driving in a dangerous manner because they were paying too much attention to their cell phone.
So when some moron driver plows into me, I can feel better knowing that "thank god, he wasn't texting, he was looking at his map ( or searching his glove compartment for something) when he crashed into me! Good thing this new cell phone law is here to protect me".
As for how they will enforce it... I would submit the "proof" will be the same as most of the other "proof” in traffic court... The cop said so.
I guess the cop could use his cell phone camera to snap your picture before pulling you over, but the cop better not be driving alone in his squad car or you can make a citizen's arrest foe his using his cell camera while driving.... or does the law only cover talking & texting? | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/12/2009 5:55:00 PM |
I think it's dumb, and it will be interesting to see if and how they can actually enforce it. Are they going to seize my cell phone to prove I was on a call? Are they going to try and subpeona my phone bill?
If you check the HTA, you will see that they don't have to prove that you are actually speaking on the phone. If you are holding your phone in such a manner consistent with using it, that is good enough. Check out the sections 215.1-215.6.
I know that, my point is that there are already laws on the books to prevent unsafe/imprudent operation of a motor vehicle; creating a "new" law specifically for those using cell phones or texting is superfluous. We have a law against shoplifting, we don't have seperate laws for shoplifting of food prducts, shoplifting of clothes, shoplifting of electronics... why do we need a seperate law for using a cell phone or texting while driving, when laws are already in place to deal with people driving unsafely? You
You won't see "shoplifting" in the criminal code. You will see theft under $5,000 and theft over $5,000. What we informally call shoplifting is really theft under. However, there are further provisions in the code that deal with other types of theft. Theft from oyster beds and theft of cattle, theft by a person who holds a power of attorney and theft of credit card are such examples.
Sometimes more specific charges are introduced to reflect different sentencing maximums. For example, a credit card is something that has a negligible worth (the card itself). Stealing it could net a charge of theft under $5,000. The maximum penalty would be two years. However, under the theft of credit card provision, the maximum penalty could be ten years.
There are provisions that one should not be distracted while driving. It is an open debate over whether cell phone use is a distraction. It would have required expert evidence to show that it was in fact a distraction. A lot of money would be spent on giving someone a traffic ticket. By simply outlawing the use (or apparent use) of cell phones while driving, eliminates the need to prove anything other than the person had a cellphone in their hand and held up to their head as if they were using it. Think about it. Is driving while drinking coffee or a slurpee a distraction while driving?
The same amendment that will ban cell phone use (unless hands free) also has the no smoking with kids in the car provision. I wonder what people think about that. | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/12/2009 6:24:07 PM | Maybe the punishment should be that for using your cell while driving, you have to re-take your road test while talking on your cell phone. If you fail the test, you can be retested in 1 year, but no driving til then.
And this new law does nothing for people looking at maps, eating, or rooting around in their glove compartments while driving. | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/13/2009 3:43:55 AM | I would be the last one to argue there are not other kinds of distractions that cause accidents.
However, there appear to be few as statistically identifiable as cell phones. For example, the example of looking at a map while driving, as mentioned above.
I have no doubt that looking at a map while driving can and has contributed to accidents. However very few of the people on the road are looking at maps. The statistical likelihood is probably so small as to not be of substantial concern.
Another problem with cell phones is the duration of the distraction. Most other distractions are momentary... while the period of distraction with a cell phone can easily be several minutes. As the length of the distraction increases, the likelihood of error by the driver increases exponentially.
Finally, the cell phone law may be as much as an "educational tool" as it is a way to cut down on a statistically identifiable problem. The fact that it is making news is an example of what I mean.
Many people who might never have given a moment's thought to the issue may think twice about using their phone while driving, "just because" there is a law about it.
And for those that don't... well... I can imagine only very few scenarios were driving while talking on the phone is really absolutely necessary. And those kinds of emergencies really are quite rare.
T_M | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/13/2009 6:31:55 AM | the notion that the cell phone belongs in a vehicle without a commercial licence 
oh goody a law which a picture from a walking cell phone can submit to police would be grand.....especially to the ignorant driver who thinks the road is only for other vehicles....it's about time this law hit the general public...if you knew the times i have seen idiots stop in intersections yapping and not paying attention you would puke.
manufactures for cars would like you to believe your cell phone is NOT GOING TO HELP YOU KILL SOMEONE...LIKE GUNS CARS KILL PEOPLE WHEN THE OWNER IS A FALKING IDIOT....WHAT ARE YOU MISSING IN YOUR HEAD IF YOU THINK YOUR STUPID PHONE BELONGS IN YOUR HAND WHEN YOUR DRIVING....BAD ENUFF YOU FLAPPING TRAPS CAN USE HANDS FREE ME THINKS.
ROAR...BETTER THAN CHRISTMAS....TALK ABOUT BUMPING UP THE FINE PILE......GOOD ONE!!!
I WONDER IF THERE WILL BE A TIPS HAWT LINE TO TURN IN AZZHOLES....I SURE HOPE SO! is a good way for the community to police there neibourbours brats roar. get licence number in frame and you have enuff to proove the deed was done and let that licence go talk to the judge....excellent recovery of the economy and solve the cash crunch for new roads......to walk on...chuckles.
| |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/13/2009 9:44:10 AM |
Another problem with cell phones is the duration of the distraction. The duration will remain the same, we can still talk and drive, you just can’t get caught holding it in your hand (as opposed to a cup of coffee or a slurpee)… instead of fumbling for the phone, we can fumble for our ear piece.
As far as texting goes… don’t hold the phone at the top of the steering wheel so you can see the road at the same time, hold the phone close to your lap so no one else can see it.
It’s only illegal if you get caught!
| |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/13/2009 1:39:14 PM | I think the biggest issues with new laws is not so much the law itself but whether or not (and how) it will be enforced. It's hard enough to enforce the traffic laws currently in place, can they really handle another one?
The law is a good idea and I don't see much harm coming from it other than some frusterated people after they get caught. Let's just hope this doesn't side track them from other their other (possibly more important) duties. | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/13/2009 5:18:33 PM | Enforcement is really not the issue. We all know speeding is wrong but we all do it (that is except for you wusses). There will always be people who will do it but at least everyone will know it is wrong. That may keep it down.
Now that we will not be able to talk on the phone as we drive I guess those phones will be useless for anything other than taking pictures of other people talking on the phone while they are driving.
Sort of on topic. Yesterday one of the guys going to work saw a teenager coming over the top of the Arlington bridge with a girl sitting on the handlebars. He was pretty impressed because Arlington bridge is a chore just with one person. On top of that the girl was texting as they went over the top. Must have had something real important to tell someone else at the time rather than hanging on for dear life. | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/13/2009 5:38:34 PM | Heck! I am driving down Kenaston while I am writing this...ooops hang on ....my cell just went off....
Dammit I just bumped my radio off its station....
......
Well ^%#%*#@ you too buddy!
....some people sure don't know how to drive in this city
....Ya ! And your mother wears Army Boots , Creep!
Ok !
Yes !
Unmm huh !
Ok ! I will pick up some steaks for a BBQ tonight !
Ok ! Thanks honey...See you later!
Now where was I ?
Oh yes! If I can write this and drive through this friggin traffic on Kenaston ...why the heck, can't people talk on their cell phones without gettin in an accident?
Ya! Well you can stick that up your wazzoo too Bozzo! | |
|
| Did you know? (New Law Passed June 12 2009)
Posted: 8/14/2009 2:37:23 PM | Enforcement is an issue- they prove you were speeding because a cop says he got a reading on a laser gun that said you were speeding. There can't be a mistake about the reading.
You take a picture of someone in a car using a cell phone- well, you will have to be in court to testify as to the taking of the picture- are you willing to miss a day of work to give someone a ticket?
http://web2.gov.mb.ca/bills/39-3/b005e.php I don't believe however that it says how the offence is punishable.
I want to know if an officer is going to be able to search your car to find your cell phone if it's not in plain view when he pulls you over. He is not arresting you, so he should have no entitlement to search incident to an arrest. I mean- he's likely behind you, can he see if your lips are moving? Were you singing along to a song, or talking?
Again, how they are going to prove the offence beyond a reasonable doubt is beyond me. | |
|
Home
login 
