Comments on: Wisconsin: Cell phone laws, legislation

By: Adam

Adam — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 01:45:21 +0000

Here is the real deal of it. Any hands-free legislation is completely stupid. I do agree and support the practice of removing and or penalizing unsafe drivers. You CANNOT prove that someone was texting while driving. Sure, you can pull phone history and see a text being sent or received. Sure, you can pull history and see when a call was made or received. But just try and prove that the source of that text was my fingers. Try and prove that I dialed the number. I have an Iphone 3GS and my phone allows me to text without even touching a button as well as take calls completely hands free. The actual text messages or voice calls arent specifically coded as hands free or not, therefore there is no way to prove 100% unless this is video taped clearly which would cause us to have to drastically increase budgets to law enforcement that many areas ALREADY won’t do.

Word to the wise, you can’t pass laws to change people; the people you want to change already don’t care about common sense, so why would passing a law help.

Here is the resolution: Require all registered vehicles to have the cell signal blocking apparatus installed into all motorized registered vehicles. The devices only work when the car is running, and with only a limited range. If your car dies, it wouldn’t be on, so it wouldn’t block you from getting roadside assistance.

Don’t let stupid people remain stupid, stop the source of the problem.

By: reallyhereintheunitedstates

reallyhereintheunitedstates — Thu, 01 Sep 2011 18:27:48 +0000

Ok I know people are killed by use of texting on cell phones we all know this. But did we realize people are killed daily by people driving with animals on their laps, kid yelling in the back seat, eating, being to tried having the sun in your eyes or maybe you just blinked for a minute. Our goverment finds a reason to ban the smallest things but fogets to ban wars, sending our boys and girls off to another country to be hated by all. Or maybe we should wonder where all the jobs went or why so many people are unemployed? Seem if its an on going problem what isn’t?

By: Ron

Ron — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 04:48:12 +0000

I can shave while driving, gel my hair, change cd’s and radio stations, I can eat, I can reach into my backseat to grab and soda and open it while steering the car with my knees as i open my soda, but yet these are all things I feel are much greater distractions but are not illegal. This law is a quick fix to a growing problem, sure some accidents are cause by people on their phones I will not debate that. However, I am sure just as many are cause by a multitude of other things.

Are they going to ban steroes next? CD Players, or maybe driving young children around, because believe me kids fighting in the backseat is one hell of a driving hazard. This will not keep people safe, it just gives officers one more thing they can pull you over for, but hey schools and highways need money too right? 400 dollar is excessive, the first offense drunk driving fine is 800 so that seems rediculous.

Why can’t they just sign a law against inattentive driving. If they see you doing something stupid and driving like an idiot then pull you over, targeting cell phones will for one thing not stop anyone from doing it, and will not stop accidents from happening.

By: Ashley

Ashley — Sun, 26 Dec 2010 09:57:00 +0000

I find it sad that you all including the government find it ok to be harder on people for texting on a phone then drunk drivers. And I love how you can read the messages that’s just as bad even so the new phones when you text you can talk to your phone and it will text for you. If Wisconsin wants this to be ban then maybe they should have radio stations stop saying text if you see a problem or be the 6th text message and you win this.

I don’t agree with completely banning phones in a car if I get in a accident I want my phone to call for help duh. Or if someone is following me or I see a drunk driver its a good thing to have a cell phone

By: Danni

Danni — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 17:54:08 +0000

I think this whole argument has gotten a little bit out of hand. I agree with the points made about accidents happening before this ban came into effect, but to suggest that the government should just start banning whatever they feel like is a pointless argument. That’s not what is trying to get accomplished here.

Ultimately, if people are going to suggest that the government should just start banning everything or that they shouldn’t be allowed to ban stuff like this and take our freedom away….wouldn’t it be okay for me then to go around and drive into people because I’m free to do what I choose? If I want to text and not pay attention to the road and take out whoever I feel like hitting because my message is so important that it can’t wait until i get home shouldn’t I be allowed to do that?

I myself have attempted texting while driving among other things and it just doesn’t work out all that well. If sending a message about the type of bread i should pick up at the store is more important than my safety (or others’) I suppose i deserve getting into an accident for the sake of being “free” to choose.

By: drew

drew — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:20:54 +0000

I’m going vigilante. If you want to be unsafe around me whilst being distracted, I’ll make you pay attention. Everybody I see driving distracted will get CUT OFF VIOLENTLY.

By: trevor hook

trevor hook — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 14:35:40 +0000

why don’t they just ban cell phone use over all? how can’t you text but you can use the internet. i think using the internet would be worst then texting.

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 12:36:31 +0000

So good to see that some people realize that legislation doesn’t make people safer. They are just attacking ONE unsafe practice, because they can villianize one boogyman. It is because it is one that they can get proof of (they can take your phone as evidence). You can’t prove that someone was distracted by their ipod or a sandwich or a newspaper, but they can prove a text. You can’t legislate stupid, so they have to legislate other things.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 19:39:23 +0000

Regarding the people here giving example of almost getting hit…guess what? The people that almost hit you were already breaking the law before this law was passed. Inattentive driving and Illegal lane change laws are already on the books…why do we need to waste time making more? And why target this specifically? If you want to start banning stuff, why stop here?

-browsing songs on your ipod
-looking for a cd
-going through radio stations
-having kids in the back seat when you’re the only adult in the car
-billboards
-doing hair/makeup
-eating/drinking/messing with food
-smoking

And the list goes on and on. Ultimately, it is the driver’s responsibility to make sure they are operating their vehicle in a responsible manner. You can’t legislate people into being good drivers.

By: John

John — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 19:22:20 +0000

While we are at it, let’s ban eating, reading, GPS, computers, portable DVD players, putting on makeup, arguing with you spouse, ect. How about the sheriffs deputy that I saw run a stop sign the other day while looking at his patrol car computer mounted right next to him.