Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: this is becoming a comunist country

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    14

    Post imported post

    this is a email i just got from a buddy. is this true now that you can use a cell phone when your driving now?

    soon, we wont be able to do anything.






    Subject: New Cell Phone Laws for Ohio (July 1st)

    Two new laws dealing with the use of wireless telephones while DRIVING IN OHIO go into effect JULY 1, 2008.

    Below is a list of Frequently Asked Questions concerning these new laws.

    Q: When do the new wireless telephone laws take effect?
    A: The new laws take effect July 1, 2008.

    Q: What is the difference between the two laws?
    A: The first prohibits all drivers from using a handheld wireless telephone while operating a motor vehicle, (Vehicle Code (VC) '23123). Motorists 18 and over may use a "hands-free device." Drivers under the age of 18 may NOT use a wireless telephone or hands-free device while operating a motor vehicle (VC '23124).

    Q: What if I need to use my telephone during an emergency, and I do not have a "hands-free" device?
    A: The law allows a driver to use a wireless telephone to make emergency calls to a law enforcement agency, a medical provider, the fire department, or other emergency services agency.

    Q: What are the fines(s) if I'm convicted?
    A: The base fine for the FIRST offense is $20 and $50 for subsequent convictions. With the addition of penalty assessments, the fines can be more than triple the base fine amount.

    Q: Will I receive a point on my driver license if I'm convicted for a violation of the wireless telephone law?
    A: No. The violation is a reportable offense, however, DMV will not assign a violation point.

    Q: Will the conviction appear on my driving record?
    A: Yes, but the violation point will not be added.

    Q: Will there be a grace period when motorists will only get a warning?
    A: No. The law becomes effective July 1, 2008. Whether a citation is issued is always at the discretion of the officer based upon his or her determination of the most appropriate remedy for the situation.

    Q: Are passengers affected by this law?
    A: No. This law only applies to the person driving a motor vehicle.

    Q: Do these laws apply to out-of-state drivers whose home states do not have such laws?
    A: Yes.

    Q: Can I be pulled over by a law enforcement officer for using my handheld wireless telephone?
    A: Yes. A law enforcement officer can pull you over just for this infraction.

    Q: What if my phone has a push-to-talk feature, can I use that?
    A: No. The law does provide an exception for those operating a commercial motor truck or truck tractor (excluding pickups), implements of husbandry, farm vehicle or tow truck, to use a two-way radio operated by a push-to-talk feature. However, a push-to-talk feature attached to a hands-free ear piece or other hands-free device is acceptable.

    Q: What other exceptions are there?
    A: Operators of an authorized emergency vehicle during the course of employment are exempt, as are those motorists operating a vehicle on private property.

    DRIVERS 18 AND OVER
    Drivers 18 and over will be allowed to use a "hands-free" device to talk on their wireless telephone while driving. The following FAQs apply to those motorists 18 and over.

    Q: Does the new hands-free law prohibit you from dialing a wireless telephone while driving or just talking on it?
    A: The new law does not prohibit dialing, but drivers are strongly urged not to dial while driving.

    Q: Will it be legal to use a Bluetooth or other earpiece?
    A: Yes, however you cannot have BOTH ears covered.

    Q: Does the new "hands-free" law allow you to use the speaker phone function of your wireless telephone while driving?
    A: Yes.


    Q: Does the new hands-free law allow drivers 18 and over to text message while driving?
    A: The law does not specifically prohibit that, but an officer can pull over and issue a citation to a driver of any age if, in the officers opinion, the driver was distracted and not operating the vehicle safely. Sending text messages while driving is unsafe at any speed and is strongly discouraged.

    DRIVERS UNDER 18
    Q: Am I allowed to use my wireless telephone "hands-free?"
    A: No. Drivers under the age of 18 may not use a wireless telephone, pager, laptop or any other electronic communication or mobile services device to speak or text while driving in any manner, even "hands-free."
    EXCEPTION: Permitted in emergency situations to call police, fire or medical authorities (VC '23124).

    Q: Why is the law stricter for provisional drivers?
    A: Statistics show that teen drivers are more likely than older drivers to be involved in crashes because they lack driving experience and tend to take greater risks. Teen drivers are vulnerable to driving distractions such as talking with passengers, eating or drinking, and talking or texting on wireless devices, which increase the chance of getting involved in serious vehicle crashes.

    Q: Can my parents give me permission to allow me to use my wireless telephone while driving?
    A: No. The only exception is an emergency situation that requires you to call a law enforcement agency, a health care provider, the fire department or other emergency agency entity.

    Q: Does the law apply to me if Im an emancipated minor?
    A: Yes. The restriction applies to all licensed drivers who are under the age of 18.

    Q: If I have my parent(s) or someone age 25 years or older in the car with me, may I use my wireless telephone while driving?
    A: No. You may only use your wireless telephone in an emergency situation.

    Q: Will the restriction appear on my provisional license?
    A: No.

    Q: May I use the hands-free feature while driving if my car has the feature built in?
    A: No. The law prohibits anyone under the age of 18 from using any type of wireless device while driving, except in an emergency situation.

    Q: Can a law enforcement officer stop me for using my "hands-free" device while driving?
    A: For drivers under the age of 18, this is considered a SECONDARY violation meaning that a law enforcement officer may cite you for using a "hands-free" wireless device if you were pulled over for another violation.

    However, the prohibition against using a handheld wireless device while driving is a PRIMARY violation for which a law enforcement officer can pull you over.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    That's the 1st I've heard of this for Ohio. I wonder if they intend to apply such laws to ham radio/CB telephony? Off-topic in any case...

    -ljp

    p.s. This looks like something from Orwell's Ministry of Truth, indeed. This may clarify the situation: http://www.wcpo.com/content/news/loc...8-09c4c9ff8ff8.


  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ravenna, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    They aren't saying you can't use a cell phone while driving. They are saying you can't have the damned thing stuck to the side of your head while driving. So what? I have to buy a hands free device. No big deal. Hopefully this will decrease the number of cell phone using ******** that don't pay attention and almost run me down when I am riding my motorcycle. I am usually against matters of restriction but this one seems pretty fair in my book.

    I know if you are under 18 you kind of get the shaft but then again that isn't an unfair rule either. You should be learning how to drive and developing motor vehicle reflex and instinct skills before texting all your bitches.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    62

    Post imported post

    Thank goodness. If you ever rode/ride a motorcycle I can tell you this.....I'll either be killed by an old person who shouldnt be drivingor by someone on a cell phone. Those are the two kinds of drivers that worry me the most. I dont think anyone can say it shoudnt have been done a long time ago. That is my .02, andI wanted to sharemy opinion.

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
    Posts
    2,798

    Post imported post

    Communist? No. Socialist, yes and even more dangerous than communist.

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Timmer wrote:
    SNIP soon, we wont be able to do anything.
    I agree; but for a different reason. I happen to think it a safety issue when people talk on cell phones when driving. There were plenty of accidents before cell phones; now we have a new item making people crash. On top of all the old reasons. Jeez. Whatare people thinking?

    Don't worry about communists, fascists, Bolsheviks, Maoists, etc. They're all, every single one, just a name for how population control is sold to the population. Keep you eye on the ball. Its all about control. Even the concept of power is not the pinnacle, because the motive behind accumulating power too often is control.

    Just watch who is trying to do things that would let them have more control.

    And keep your eye on the money. Money, aquisition of, is a motive in its own right for many, but there is a bigger problem with money. Control the money, and you can control the country. If government needs money, and you control it, government will be susceptible to your influence.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Off-topic, but if you can't beat them...


    Anyhow, it's not an issue of having something stuck to your face that is distracting... or having one hand off the wheel. It's about one's brain not being able to handle the task of conversing AND driving responsibly at the same time.

    Unfortunately, all of the nanny-statists can't accept that driver distraction is about responsibility, and instead insist that it is the phone. However, hands-free devices yield no different results than hand-held phones. To truly "eliminate" this distraction, conversation with the driver would also have to be banned. Next time you have an in-depth discussion with someone in your car, take note of how your driving changes. It's a brain function, not a phone function. Hell, I've been noticing (or maybe I've just been looking for) idiots who cut me off, tailgate, and engage in other reckless behavior while driving... with a little blinking blue light on the ear. So much for that theory. And Pennsylvania hasn't even banned handhelds yet, though I'm guessing it's soon on the way from the same Republican nanny-statists who brought us a New-York-style ban on private property rights, er, I mean smoking in private restaurants.

    To try to bring it back on-topic... I'm concerned about this being a primary violation, and the implications for LEOs' using it as a free ticket for a fishing expedition. This is why seat-belt laws are still secondary violations in many states: to avoid presenting a universal cause to pull over cars and search. "Yessir, it looked to me like the driver had something next to his head, so I pulled him over and found 10 kilos of [cocaine, "assault weapons", insert vice of your choosing]"

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    Off-topic, but if you can't beat them...

    I hope nobody gets the bright idea to legislate for hands-free guns while driving. I really don't want anybody telling me I can't holdmy gun to my ear and listen to it or talk to it while driving.

    There. Back on topic.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Centennial, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,412

    Post imported post

    While I agree with the intent of the law (Damn near got run off the road again this afternoon by a soccer mom who couldn't be bothered to look for a motorcycle), this is really something that should never have to be legislated.

    Also, how exactly does this make the US a communist country? Do you not know what communism is?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hinesville, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    187

    Post imported post

    FogRider wrote:
    While I agree with the intent of the law (Damn near got run off the road again this afternoon by a soccer mom who couldn't be bothered to look for a motorcycle), this is really something that should never have to be legislated.

    Also, how exactly does this make the US a communist country? Do you not know what communism is?
    The OP is not at all off base. America has adapted all 10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    Go to Snopes or Fact Check . org This cell phone email is a scam. IT IS NOT REAL. Sometimes, I suggest, we should check story sources before reacting. Much like scanning the situation before we draw. Once the bullet is out of the barrell, you cannot bring it back.

    Be that as it may, this is a great forum for public OPINION. Be careful how you exercise your vote in the next election - Supreme Court is one reason why.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    62

    Post imported post

    Lame, posting made up stuff here....just lame.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    It's not real! No such law coming.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    14

    Post imported post

    whoa, i didnt know it wasent real. i did start looking for "Vehicle Code (VC) '23123" in the ORC, but couldent find it. so if a MOD could jus delet this hole thred, adn reduce my post count by 2, i would be greatfull. :quirky

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Worry Free wrote:
    Go to Snopes or Fact Check . org This cell phone email is a scam. IT IS NOT REAL. Sometimes, I suggest, we should check story sources before reacting. Much like scanning the situation before we draw. Once the bullet is out of the barrell, you cannot bring it back.

    Be that as it may, this is a great forum for public OPINION. Be careful how you exercise your vote in the next election - Supreme Court is one reason why.
    I suspected it was a scam.

    However, this is irrelevant. The reality is that handheld phone bans are in place in many states already, and on the way in others. I'd be curious to find out how many states, if any, have laws like this as a primary offense.

    Also, this speaks moreso nanny-statism than communism. The "liberals" weren't the ones who pushed for Prohibition I. And the Republicans and Democrats are allied in telling you how much you have to pay the government in order to smoke a cigarette. Both want to control your behavior... the Republicans tell you it's for your own good, the Democrats tell you it's for the good of society.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Ohio, USA
    Posts
    52

    Post imported post

    As far as a ban on cell phones, shouldn't happen. It is another taking away of Freedom tactic. There are already consequences for your actions while driving.

    As to the talking on the handset/handsfree versus a passenger....completely different.

    If you are about to drive off a cliff, the passenger, at least hopefully, will notice and clue the driver in. I really doubt a passenger will continue a conversation if they are heading for a rear end collision or something worse, no matter how heated the convo is.

    The person on the other end of the line has no clue.

    And that goes with other dangers of driving. The passenger is THERE and can see the driving conditions.

    As a passenger, how often do you hang on a bit tighter when you feel thingsmight, from your observations, go to hell? Ever do that whilecell phoning someone who is driving and you are not?

    And what is the first question someone asks the person they are talking to who is driving and they hear "Oh crap!!" and sounds of crunching metal? "What happened??"

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Worry Free wrote:
    Go to Snopes or Fact Check . org This cell phone email is a scam.
    Trial balloon floated by some legislators?
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Ground Chuk wrote:
    SNIP The passenger is THERE and can see the driving conditions.
    Goes right along with something I saw a while back in Reader's Digest.

    Something asking to the effect if anybody ever noticed that in the days of horse-powered transportation, there weren't many crashes. Of course, there weren't. The horses were paying attention even if the rider or driver wasn't.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    Why did y'all have to go an spoil this with Snopes?

    An excerpt from the article bleow about cell phones and driving. Yes it is a hazard.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25379642/

    The difference is easily demonstrated with driving simulators. Professor Strayer tells test subjects to pull over when they see a rest area about eight miles up the road.

    When no one is talking to the driver, every one pulls off at the right spot. If there’s a passenger talking, about 90 percent of the drivers are successful. In many cases, that’s because the passenger helps them remember to find the rest area. But when test subjects are talking on a cell phone 50 percent drive by the rest area. Why? “Because they simply didn’t see it,” he says.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •