Illinois Texting and Internet Surfing Ban

[Shawn Gossman]

Maybe and maybe not

The new law makes it illegal to [FONT=&quot]compose, send or read text messages, instant messages and e-mail on a cell phone or surf the internet while driving. The ban also includes personal digital assistants and portable or mobile computers, but does not include global positioning systems (GPS) or navigation systems[/FONT].

It's already illegal to drive while operating a "video device" screen in view of the driver, per an earlier link. Whether or not any of this applies to open laptops with radar programs running is nothing less than a matter of individual interpretation.

Thank you for the response. Helps me out

 

[Chris Campbell]

Laws banning cellphone use while driving fail to reduce crashes, new insurance data indicate

http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr012910.html

"Whatever the reason, the key finding is that crashes aren't going down where hand-held phone use has been banned," Lund points out. "This finding doesn't auger well for any safety payoff from all the new laws that ban phone use and texting while driving."

Keyword: hand-held. The problem is NOT the holding it up to your ear part. It's the conversation. And the person on the other end doesn't see what the road conditions are like as someone in the car would, so they don't know when to shut up and let you concentrate, and they can't help you watch traffic.

The problem is that most people don't have enough brain power to drive safely when they're NOT distracted. Throw a conversation in there, and you have problems. I'll fully admit that I'm a less safe driver if talking on a cellular phone. That's why I don't do it. Ever the question, "Why do we turn down the radio when we're looking for something?" Answer: It's distracting, and so is talking on the phone.

A guy almost backed into me the other day. Guess what. He was talking on the cell phone. I had to lay on the horn and then he finally woke up.

Listen, I don't care if you kill yourself with your distracted driving -- mobile phones, TVs, magazines, whatever -- but you're not the only ones on the road. You're going to hurt or kill someone else.

 

[Glenn Dixon]

If you DO get stopped, make sure that you don't manage to incriminate yourself unnecessarily. Basically, give 'em your license and insurance proof, then STFU.

Here's a law school lecture on why you should never, EVER talk to the police:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik

 

[Chris Campbell]

If you DO get stopped, make sure that you don't manage to incriminate yourself unnecessarily. Basically, give 'em your license and insurance proof, then STFU.

Here's a law school lecture on why you should never, EVER talk to the police:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik

Thank you for helping distracted drivers. Do you have tips to help drunk drivers avoid a conviction as well?

 

[Drew.Gardonia]

Even if you're "Busted" for texting or surfing, simply say you were making a call, checking your battery, or one of the million other excuses. This will be about as effective as the "click it or ticket" check points. They advertise the check point a mile ahead of time; you have to be extremely stupid or stubborn enough to pay $100 for it to be effective. Another joke of a law that will have absolutely zero impact on making the road safer...

i've never paid $100 for a seatbelt ticket. only paid $10 for seatbelt tickets in Missouri or Tennessee, but I guess it could be more somewhere else.

 

[David Drummond]

You better wear it if you are ever chasing in TX. The law now requires ALL passengers in the vehicle to wear one and there is no warning, it's an automatic ticket. Fine ranges from $25 to $200 depending on how much they like you.

 

[James Hilger]

I had one follow me into the gas station and make some comments about my setup and then asked me if I knew about the new text law? I said I did but fortunately for me I have a amateur radio license and I can legally operate my phone at anytime since it operates within that frequency. I then added that it's just like scanners are illegal in some states but not for me since a state law can't supersede a federal law. It was hard to keep a straight face but that pretty much ended that.

 

[Glenn Dixon]

Thank you for helping distracted drivers. Do you have tips to help drunk drivers avoid a conviction as well?

You didn't watch any of that video, did you? You just hit reply.

BUT, since you asked, the advice would be the same, with an added caveat...no breathalyzer, no field sobriety tests. Way too much wiggle room there. See 5th amendment. Of course, this is a completely separate issue from whether you should drive while distracted or drunk.

 

[Glenn Dixon]

You better wear it if you are ever chasing in TX. The law now requires ALL passengers in the vehicle to wear one and there is no warning, it's an automatic ticket. Fine ranges from $25 to $200 depending on how much they like you.

And make sure you leave it on until said cop is at your window. Don't take it off to reach for the glove box until they ask for it.

 

[David Drummond]

You didn't watch any of that video, did you? You just hit reply.

BUT, since you asked, the advice would be the same, with an added caveat...no breathalyzer, no field sobriety tests. Way too much wiggle room there. See 5th amendment. Of course, this is a completely separate issue from whether you should drive while distracted or drunk.

Except in Texas now refusing a breathalyzer is an automatic driver's license suspension, and if you refuse all the test they call the local judge, get a warrant and take you down to the E.R. and extract a blood sample.

 

[James Hilger]

We have a local attorney that has been beating the breathalyzer test because the company that makes it refuses to explain their patents on how it works.

 

[Paul Knightley]

I don't see the problem with a breath test - surely if you've not been drinking, it's not a problem! If you have been drinking, don't drive - it's pretty simple really.

When you're driving, you should be focussed on the act of driving and nothing else. This can't be difficult to understand, can it?