California Appeals Court Rules State Law Doesn't Prohibit Driver Use of Smartphone Maps

MOST "distracted driver" laws are idiotic.

And it's not because distracted driving is OK. The problem is that most of these laws concentrate on SPECIFIC distractions: Texting and e-mailing are NOT OK, but scrolling through your list of contacts to find a number to dial or using a map IS OK? That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

Here's a simple suggestion: Write a law that says ANY distraction is punishable, IF it causes you to cause or be involved in an accident. I don't care if the distraction is your cellphone, your desire to apply makeup while you are driving, your trying to fish a CD case off the floor on the passenger side, or you turning around because your kids in the backseat are misbehaving -- if you take your hands off the wheel or take your eyes off the road, YOU ARE A DISTRACTED DRIVER.

So, eyes front and DRIVE.

----------

"No, officer, I wasn't distracted when I caused that accident; I was looking at porn on my iPhone. Pretty sure the law doesn't cover that."

I'm almost certain that 'vacuum' won't last; too much at stake with lives lost due to distracted driving.

Having said that, there should be a clear distinction between such cases whether you are driving, or stationary due to traffic lights or construction, etc.

awesome!
idiotic police giving tickets L and R to substantiate their own meaningless existence!

MOST cops don't think, he should have moved on, obviously the drives was not endangering the traffic in anyway doing what he did.

It is possible that the California state legislature will address the issue in a future session

What issue?

I'm almost certain that 'vacuum' won't last; too much at stake with lives lost due to distracted driving.

Having said that, there should be a clear distinction between such cases whether you are driving, or stationary due to traffic lights or construction, etc.

The problem is, how do define "distracted driving?" Most new cars now have built-in GPS. If you glance at the built-in screen, like intended, is that distracted? If you use a phone gps, how is that any different than looking at the built-in screen? How is any of this different than when we had paper maps or printed turn by turn directions? How is manipulating a gps any different than manipulating a radio or other controls on a car?

The real problem is caused by people texting or talking on the phone, one-handed and not paying attention. But drivers get just as distracted by talking with other people in the car. A mother with her kids can be equally distracted while driving as someone who is texting while driving.

Where are all the lines drawn?

The answer to that is obvious: You shouldn't be handing out tickets to anyone JUST because they are distracted. The distraction must lead to actual harm. We shouldn't punish people for what might have happened; we should punish them for what DOES happen.

Most tickets wouldn't apply then if something could be done only after something actually happened. Tickets for going over the speed limit wouldn't apply. Tickets for broken/non-working lights. Tickets for DUI even. That doesn't seem to make much sense really. The whole point of sticking to the laws/regulations and making sure that people stick to them is to avoid all those those bad things, not to wait for them to happen so that then people can be punished for them.

common sense?

and then there is just plain old common sense.....

I thought Nanny Government was supposed to tell us what's best for us? For example, I get real warm and fuzzy now that I don't have to worry about what light bulbs or health insurance coverage to buy because I must be too stupid to figure all that out myself. Who needs common sense when we've got politicians?:rolleyes:

MOST "distracted driver" laws are idiotic.

And it's not because distracted driving is OK. The problem is that most of these laws concentrate on SPECIFIC distractions: Texting and e-mailing are NOT OK, but scrolling through your list of contacts to find a number to dial or using a map IS OK? That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

... if you take your hands off the wheel or take your eyes off the road, YOU ARE A DISTRACTED DRIVER.

I agree with most of what you said.

Part of the problem is prior to the specific no mobile phone use while driving laws came into being we already had unsafe driving laws on the books. Let's be honest and understand this is also a revenue generating ploy (I don't care if some say otherwise) since as I think has been pointed out before, if he had consulted a paper map to get around the traffic, this would not have been an issue.

I really wish the laws were repealed, not so that I could use my phone with impunity, but because too many officers see things in black and white (I guess it's the training, amazingly though, they expect nuance when it pertains to them) and don't evaluate the situation in its totality. But I think if you follow the money, you can imagine there are pressures placed on them by higher powers demanding more traffic stops and citations.

I'll go a step further. One can can be a distracted driver even while one is supposedly looking at the road as there are plenty of distractions to be had - other cars, billboards, street signs, businesses, people, drowsiness. I think you get the point.

common sense

If the traffic was indeed stopped, as the description seems to indicate, then why was this officer looking for ticket opportunities instead of helping it move more smoothly.

Oh wait - he was under quota. Sorry.

The answer to that is obvious: You shouldn't be handing out tickets to anyone JUST because they are distracted. The distraction must lead to actual harm. We shouldn't punish people for what might have happened; we should punish them for what DOES happen.

So if I have to do an emergency brake while having the right of way, because some idiot in a 2.5 ton SUV is on the phone and drives straight to where he would hit me, that's OK?

----------

It was okay for me to cruise at 170mph last month when I was there, yet here in the U.S. I would be considered a dangerous criminal. Why?

Americans are not capable driving 170 mph on a German motorway _safely_. Driving faster than you can drive _safely_ is illegal in Germany, so it was definitely not OK.

Anyway, at any speed over 80mph any accident will be your fault, automatically, unless you can prove it would have happened at a lower speed as well. Even if it was caused by someone else making a mistake. Because driving at over 80mph means you have to take into account that others make mistakes, and drive carefully enough to be able to avoid accidents _if_ that happens.