Interesting CA traffic law updates...

[widebody911]

Got this in an email today. Some of these I'd already seen, some are news to me:

***

PHREEWAY PHONING (California Vehicle Code Section 23123)

We know you love your mobile phone. You call your friends, family, and business associates from everywhere: at the store, at the beach, in the shower. Okay...maybe not the shower? Well, starting on July 1, 2008, if you talk on your phone while you're driving, you'll need to use a hands-free listening and speaking system. Drivers cited will be subject to a fine of $20 (at least $70 with fees and penalties) for a first offense and $50 (at least $175 with fees and penalties) for subsequent offenses. Push to talk (PTT) systems, such as those from Nextel, will be exempt from the hands-free edict until July 1, 2011.

TEEN MOBILE PHONE USE (California Vehicle Code Section 23124)

Who loves their mobile phones even more than adults? Teens!!! Yet, teen drivers are faced with an even more restrictive mobile phone law. Effective July 1, 2008, drivers under the age of 18 are prohibited from using any mobile messaging device (including wireless phones, pagers, texting devices, laptops, etc.) — even if it is equipped with a hands-free device. Drivers cited will be subject to a fine of $20 (at least $70 with fees and penalties) for a first offense and $50 (at least $175 with fees and penalties) for subsequent offenses.

For a video clip from CNN on dangerous driving behaviors, click here.

WHAT A DRAG! (California Vehicle Code Section 23109.2)

Street racing can be a gas, but injuring or killing someone during the course of a race is a real drag. Effective January 1, 2008, this statute allows law enforcement officers to impound a vehicle for 30 days when a person is arrested for street racing, exhibition of speed, or reckless driving. Vehicles impounded under this law can be claimed by their registered owners if the owner was neither the driver nor a passenger and was unaware that the vehicle was being used in a forbidden manner.

Having your car impounded could be the least of its worries if you engage in a speed contest. To read a news article about street racers being crushed by law enforcement, click here.

NO SMOKING! (California Vehicle Code Section 12814.6)

As an adult, you can choose to suck on that stinky, smelly, choking tar stick. Your underage passengers, however, don't have the luxury of choice. This statute is intended to protect children riding in vehicles from the dangers second-hand smoke. Effective January 1, 2008, the law makes it an infraction — punishable by a fine of up to $100 — to smoke a cigar, cigarette, or pipe in a vehicle containing a minor, whether the vehicle is in motion or not.

DON'T HAZE ME, BRO! (California Vehicle Code Section 5201, 5201.1)

This law makes it illegal to sell or use a product that obscures or impairs the reading or recognition of a vehicle license plate by an electronic device employed by law enforcement or toll authorities. The fine for using a product to obscure a vehicle license plate is approximately $146; the fine for selling such a product is $250 (approximately $900 with fees and penalties) per item sold.

SLOW FOR SCHOOLS! (California Vehicle Code Section 22358.4)

Release your driving aggression with Grand Theft Auto. When it comes to school zones...SLOW DOWN! This amendment to the vehicle code allows local jurisdictions to establish a speed zone of 15 mph up to 500 feet around schools, if a local ordinance is adopted to authorize it. (This is a decrease from the prima facie speed limit of 25 mph in school zones.)

TRAFFIC SCHOOL LIMITATIONS (Penal Code Section 1203.4; California Vehicle Code Sections 40501, 41501, and 42005)

This statute prohibits the courts from dismissing two-point violations through the completion of a traffic violator school or safe driving program. Two-point violations include drunk driving, hit-and-run collisions, speed contests, evading a law enforcement officer, and vehicular manslaughter. While we think drivers who commit a two-point violation could benefit from one of our traffic safety courses, we do agree that those drivers' records should reflect their extreme driving habits.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

So when does the "breathing tax" go into effect?

Virtually all of these won't be enforced. They'll be used on occasion by either overzealous rookie cops looking to "make their mark", as an "excuse" to pull someone over in order to provide probable cause for (hopefully) finding something more sinister (like a nickel bag of weed or a couple of ecstasies - or possibly a bloody chainsaw or a kidnap victim). And naturally they'll be used by the popo to bust peoples' balls by giving them more fines/charges to tack on when the person pulled over doesn't adequately "re-spect mah author-a-tay".

I can't say I disagree with cracking down on inattentive, cell-phone-yammering idjuts out there or people that blast through school zones, etc. but I'm skeptical of ANYTHING government does. At this point, with so many laws on the books and virtually every human activity from birth through death (inclusive) regulated, taxed, overseen and administrated, I wonder if these laws are just designed to serve as the "first step" towards future, more odious/draconian regulations. . .

Yes, I distrust government THAT much.

[grudk]

I hate big gov't, but in this case I am for all of them. The roads are just ridiculous in SoCal now, and cell phones in particular are a big problem. Not sure the 'hands free' will make much a of a difference, but it's worth a try.

[nostatic]

I'm all for banning cell phones.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/traffic/california2008.asp

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I agree to a point. The problem is that driving is SUCH a waste of time due to traffic congestion, virtually everyone sees them as a necessity to get things done in a busy world. While I'm not defending this, I can see the reasoning.

Traffic congestion is (largely) due to GOVERNMENT failure to adequately plan and provide either (1) adequate capacity or (2) viable alternative transportation methods. To see the government now use the consequence of their crappy planning (people "needing" cell phones while driving because the traffic/delays/congestion is so bad) as an excuse to raise more revenue seems a bit problematic to me. . .

It's kind of like throwing your dog's schit over your neighbor's fence and then complaining to the H.O.A. about the odor coming from his property.

[sammyg2]

That 15 mph speed limit is lust plain stupid.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by widebody911

Effective January 1, 2008, this statute allows law enforcement officers to impound a vehicle for 30 days when a person is arrested for street racing, exhibition of speed, or reckless driving.

Hmm... arrested for rather than convicted of. Prior to any sort of due process. Lovely. How far do U.S. citizens need to be pushed before they wake up?

[968rz]

Lovely. How far do U.S. citizens need to be pushed before they wake up?

All the way to MECCA

[Moses]

More nanny state BS.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by Moses

More nanny state BS.

well, if people didn't behave like stupid children, we wouldn't need nannies.

I see horrific driving every day. 95% of the time they person has a cell phone glued to their ears. If people can't demonstrate enough common sense, then it sadly needs to be legislated.

What I'd rather see is them pulled over for reckless driving. Just enforce the law we have and include weaving in and out of lanes at varying speed as "reckless".

Or maybe sentence them to riding a motorcycle or bicycle on the roads for awhile...

[the]

Originally Posted by nostatic

What I'd rather see is them pulled over for reckless driving. Just enforce the law we have and include weaving in and out of lanes at varying speed as "reckless".

That'd be ok, but the problem with cell phone use/inattention is that there usually isn't a whole lot of weaving, etc. Everything is going fine - until the impact.

[nostatic]

I see a fair amount of weaving here in SoCal. On the freeway especially. That and irregular speeds and gaps.

[steve911]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

That 15 mph speed limit is lust plain stupid.

I respectfully disagree. Anything to somewhat slow down cars around schools is a positive.
We live on a narrow street about 300 yards from an elementary school, which both my kids attended. Cars ROUTINELY go past our house at 35-40 mph, despite well-marked School Zone signage. There's no way a car going that fast can stop when a kid darts out from a driveway to chase a ball or is riding a bike and wobbles a little. I've yelled numerous times at drivers to slow down, only to be me with blank stares.

[Moses]

Originally Posted by steve911

I respectfully disagree. Anything to somewhat slow down cars around schools is a positive.
We live on a narrow street about 300 yards from an elementary school, which both my kids attended. Cars ROUTINELY go past our house at 35-40 mph, despite well-marked School Zone signage. There's no way a car going that fast can stop when a kid darts out from a driveway to chase a ball or is riding a bike and wobbles a little. I've yelled numerous times at drivers to slow down, only to be me with blank stares.

Hmmmm. They are going 35-40 MPH. What's the speed limit? Reducing the limit from 25 (which you suggest people are ignoring) to 15 MPH will accomplish what?

[Moses]

From wisegeek.com;

"If it is determined that lower speed limits are needed, particularly for safety reasons, then a sample is taken of the existing speeds of free flowing vehicles traveling the road. This sample is obtained by using the same type of radar or laser gun that police use to enforce speed limits that are already determined.

The minimum sample cannot be less than 100 vehicles. After the sample is taken, the speed that 85% of the vehicles are traveling at or below will be the proper speed limit for that particular road. The vehicles traveling above that speed can be singled out and ticketed."

In order to reduce the speed limit, you would typically need a supportive speed survey, unless there is a budget crisis and you really, really, need more government revenue.

[gprsh924]

Originally Posted by nostatic

well, if people didn't behave like stupid children, we wouldn't need nannies.

I see horrific driving every day. 95% of the time they person has a cell phone glued to their ears. If people can't demonstrate enough common sense, then it sadly needs to be legislated.

What I'd rather see is them pulled over for reckless driving. Just enforce the law we have and include weaving in and out of lanes at varying speed as "reckless".

Or maybe sentence them to riding a motorcycle or bicycle on the roads for awhile...

I think you give people too much credit...a lot of people simply cannot drive, regardless of if they have a cell phone glued to their ear or not.

[Jeff Higgins]

Yup, the typical lawmakers' answer for citizens ignoring their existing laws is to simply pass more of them to ignore. We have reached the point of absurdity. We have so many laws governing any one particular behavior that we have become accustomed to ignoring most of them.

Enforcement of current law is where we need to focus our attention. And, quite possibly, on the repeal of the vast majority of this kind of law. I bet none of us would notice much of a difference.

[steve911]

Originally Posted by Moses

Hmmmm. They are going 35-40 MPH. What's the speed limit? Reducing the limit from 25 (which you suggest people are ignoring) to 15 MPH will accomplish what?

Speed limit is 25 mph, clearly marked several times along the street.
Not sure what it will accomplish, though perhaps some will take notice and slow down (but they will probably be the ones already observing the 25 mph limit).

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

That 15 mph speed limit is lust plain stupid.

That is the law in much of Clark County, NV. It's crawl.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Can ANYONE seriously tell me that this particular one has to do with ANYTHING other than revenue generation?

- - - - -

DON'T HAZE ME, BRO! (California Vehicle Code Section 5201, 5201.1)

This law makes it illegal to sell or use a product that obscures or impairs the reading or recognition of a vehicle license plate by an electronic device employed by law enforcement or toll authorities. The fine for using a product to obscure a vehicle license plate is approximately $146; the fine for selling such a product is $250 (approximately $900 with fees and penalties) per item sold.

- - - - -

In a pursuit, they're going to say "in pursuit of a white Ford Bronco westbound on such-and-such" or whatever. They're not going to say "I'm in pursuit of vehicle with plate # 1234567". That comes later. When the vehicle is stopped. To check for stolen vehicle reports and to make sure the owner is current on his/her shakedown payments to the state (registration) and the politicians' golf buddies (the insurance companies).

All it amounts to is a "revenue maximization tactic" for their favorite unconstitutional pet projects - the red light cameras.