Cell Phones: The Ax Falls July 1

Posted on: June 4, 2008 at 1:08 p.m.

After a long battle, and many false starts, driving in California while taking on your cell phone will be prohibited unless you have a headset, blue tooth or other handless device. The new law will take place on July 1, 2008, and besides requiring those over 18 to use handless devices, those under 18 are completely prohibited from using any wireless device while driving.

The fine for the first driving infraction is $20, but each fine after that is $50. However, this is just the base and with additional fees the final cost could be three times that amount. Violating this new law will not count as points on your license, however in conjunction with a DUI charge or another violation, the fines could add up immensely.

Other wrinkles to the law include that a driver may use a bluetooth or earpiece, but may not have both ears covered while driving.

Driving laws change from time to time, such as when the state lowered the legal blood alcohol content from .10% to .08%, which obviously increased the number of convictions, fines and incarcerations for DUI. Laws like this can be hard to follow at first, although since this is a hot-button issue throughout the nation, CHP and police may crack down hard on offenders in order to send a message to other drivers.

Another law coming into affect is that drivers can no longer smoke in a car if children are present. This law may also be hard for CHP to follow up on, but as second hand smoke around children is another hot-button issue, this will surely be something law enforcement are keeping their eyes out for.

Tagged as: california criminal laws

Comments:

M Phung Tu on June 10, 2008 at 1:55 p.m. wrote:

I think that it is great that there is a law limiting people to talk on their phone without an ear piece while driving. However, I agree with Peggy that sometime it is the conversation that's distracting. But the law can't prohibit people from conversing while driving. It can only regulate other factors that are less innate, like driving with one hand on the wheel and the other on the phone. Yes, people will still talk and this might also be unsafe, but I prefer them talking and turning or merging with their eyes on the road and both hands on the wheel; rather than turning with one hand, their eyes on the dial pad instead of the road, or their eyes angled because their shoulder is holding the phone. There were quite a few drivers on the road that nearly hit me (one did) because they were on the phone. Like Luisa, I have rampage my bag looking for that ringing phone. This is bad, because my eyes were off the road. But I think requiring drivers to have an ear piece would prevent them from taking their off the road to look for their phones or fidget it trying to make a call. I don't know how the law enforcements will enforce this legislation and the second hand-smoke one. I am very interested to find out how the law will be enforced.

Aaron Bensoua on June 10, 2008 at 3:10 a.m. wrote:

Yeah, while I do agree that driving and talking is probably a bad decision, I don't feel like this law will change many people's behavior. For one, most citizens of California will have no idea that this law is even enforced, especially those who don't have access to widespread media information. Secondly, it isn't difficult to see when a cop is coming and just put your cell phone out of sight for a brief moment. It's like not wearing a seat belt. I have yet to see a police officer pull someone over for just 'not wearing a seat belt.' It's hard to detect and easy for a driver/passenger to conceal from the police. So I personally feel like this law will most likely go unenforced.

Samantha Chen on June 9, 2008 at 9:50 p.m. wrote:

I strongly support this new law and feel that it should have been implemented years ago. A few years ago, I was at a family friend's house and we all decided to walk the dog together after dinner. While walking through the crosswalk, her dad suddenly screamed both of our names from behind. We both briefly stopped and turned around to see what he wanted. Right then, a black SUV stormed through the intersection with no apparent attempt to stop even though her signal had clearly been red. The car was literally a few more steps forward and had we not stopped we both would have been severely injured. When the lady drove by, her hand was clearly up next to her face as if she was holding a phone. The worst part is that it seems as if she didn't even notice that she almost killed to innocent girls that night. I know that when I drive while talking on my cell, I feel less aware of my surroundings and more prone to reckless driving practices. I am even tempted to check my texts while mobile because I sometimes feel that I have enough space in front of me to read and drive at the same time. Recently I have been on my blue tooth headset and answering the phone is much easier since I don't have to look through my purse to find the phone. Also, I still have control of both hands and can freely look behind the car on both sides. Even though I am not using my hands, I sometimes still feel distracted while talking and I know that it is still somewhat dangerous to be talking at all. Overall, I feel that the law will help, but cannot completely ameliorate the problem until people stop talking on their cells while driving altogether.

Luisa Garcia on June 9, 2008 at 10:54 a.m. wrote:

I completely agree that driving while talking on one's cell phone should be prohibited unless one has a handless device. The reason why I feel very strongly about this issue is because I've been personally affected by it. I myself am guilty of having crashed because I was distracted by my cell phone. I remember hearing it ring and reaching for my purse to answer it. At this point, I still had my eyes on the road, but after rummaging through my purse, and not being able to find it, I took my eyes off the road. Unfortunately, at this very moment the driver that was two cars in front of me, made an abrupt stop. The car in front of me barely managed to stop, but because my eyes were off the road, I ended up hitting the car in front of me. I hit that car with such force that it ended up hitting the first car. It was as if I was playing dominoes. Looking back, I really wish that there had been a law prohibiting the use of cell phones before, and maybe, this accident would never have happened. I had always been told not to use a cell phone while driving, but such advice would go in one ear and out the other. I was very lucky that no one got hurt, but the bills for the repair sure hurt me--and that is not mentioning the increase in my insurance premium. =(

Tatiana Vardanyan on June 9, 2008 at 1:48 a.m. wrote:

<<>> That might actually save lives, I've had too many 16 year old brats nearly kill me.

Tatiana Vardanyan on June 9, 2008 at 1:45 a.m. wrote:

It's not having your hands on a phone that's the problem, Its' your inattention to the road! That's what all the research says so having a stupid blue tooth isn't going to do anything

Diana Hill on June 9, 2008 at 1:13 a.m. wrote:

I am a firm supporter of this particular law, mostly because I know from personal experience how distracting it can be to try to talk on a cell phone while still paying full attention to what's going on in one's surrounding environment. While a law like this might be difficult to enforce, it does have benefit in at least building awareness as to the dangers of engaging in such an action.

Ruchi Banka on June 7, 2008 at 6:47 p.m. wrote:

Cell phones are a distraction and the cause of numerous accidents and deaths. I agree that passing this law is a good step in the right direction as it will allow drivers to have both hands on their steering wheel while driving. However, although using a blue tooth or headset may allow drivers to have more control of the steering wheel, I do not think it will eliminate distractions altogether. The driver may still be distracted when trying to adjust their bluetooth, put their headset on, or dial numbers. These actions also involve the use of hands even though they are not needed to quite the same extent as actual cell phone use. Therefore, lawmakers may want to encourage drivers to prepare for any calls they wish to make before actually starting to drive or only if they are fully stopped. I also am not sure how effective it will be to prohibit those who are under 18 from using wireless devices altogether. Since talking on the phone is such a popular thing, it may take a while for this law to be effective and lawmakers may want to consider loosening these restrictions to being the same for those under 18 as they are for those over 18, at least initially.

Gabe Rose on June 7, 2008 at 1:55 p.m. wrote:

Has there been any comprehensive studies done on the impacts of similar laws in other states? And if so, why doesn't it play a more prominent role in this discussion? There have been so many other states that have already taken this action, and I would be really interested to see the impact (or lack thereof) that these laws have had. I guess its a little personally frustrating to me, because I have been driving and talking for five years now, and have never felt any less capable a driver while doing so. That being said, that probably isn't a very good public policy or legal argument, so I would be very interested to see some independent research proving me wrong.

Peggy Li on June 7, 2008 at 12:58 p.m. wrote:

This law is useful and it makes sense--keep your eyes on the road and hands on the steering wheel. The problem here though is that law makers are overlooking the fact that it is not holding the phone that causes the accident, it is the phone conversation itself. Regardless of whether you use a bluetooth or not, being distracted by a conversation while your driving is dangerous. In contrast to a conversation with another person in a car with you, phone conversations are not modulated by the situation; for example, a bump in the road, a sharp exit, or a sudden brake by the person infront of you. The conversation itself is causing the accident, not the act of holding the phone. Although this is a first step to increasing the awareness of the dangers of the cell phone on the road, their is still much more room for improvement.

Carly Gray on June 6, 2008 at 10:16 p.m. wrote:

I believe this is a very practical and life-saving law to pass to prevent the increasing prevalence of cell phone usage while driving because of the fatal car accidents caused by inattentive careless drivers. Research has shown that talking on the phone while driving is just as dangerous as driving drunk. I think that the hands-free sets will help to prevent drivers from looking down to dial and stop the frequent use of text messaging. Although, the safety of hands-free sets has been challenged by various studies showing that hands-free sets may provide drivers with a false sense of ease. Even if a driver's hands are free they can still be so absorbed in thier conversations that thier ability to concentrate on driving is severely impaired, jeopardizing the safety of people in the vehicle, other drivers on the road, and pedestrians. However, I believe that having both hands on the steering wheel is better than just one.

Jessica Humphrey on June 6, 2008 at 6:59 p.m. wrote:

It's about time we have a law prohibiting cell phones usage while driving. Last year I was involved in an accident in which a lady rear-ended me because she was text messaging. I have seen and heard of so many avoidable car accidents that we the result of drivers paying more attention to their cell phones than to the road. My only question is why didn't California make a law sooner? New York has had cell phone laws for a couple years now so why was California so behind in creating such laws?

Amanda Hester on June 6, 2008 at 1:42 p.m. wrote:

It is definitely important to start enforcing the law heavily from the beginning. A message needs to sent to drivers that this is a law that will be enforced. I cant count how many drivers I have come upon swerving only to see that this poor driving was due to texting or talking on the phone. Hopefully this law will prevent people from talking on the phone while driving and create a safer driving enviornment. And as for the law banning smoking in a car with a child; I think this is great. Most parents that smoke don't consider the second hand smoke affects on their children. Now if only we could get them to stop smoking inside their homes and around their children period.

Kelly Donohue on June 6, 2008 at 2:11 a.m. wrote:

I have to agree that the new cell phone laws are extremely appropriate, especially in California. Driving in Los Angeles is usually a very stressful event, which requires a great amount of consentration simply to avoid getting into daily accidents. The obsession with texting and usig cell phones has certianly added to the long list of California accidents and hopefully this law will begin to prevent some of those from occuring in the future. I know from personal experience that I have seen drivers who go through red lights or have even found myself committing similar acts of neglegence while driving and using my cell phone. In a world where we all find the need to multi-task, and in a city, such as Los Angeles, that is known to be heavy with traffic, it is very tempting to use cell phones while sitting in our cars. However, this law may contribute to California having safer roadways. In respons to the second new law, regulating second-hand smoke in the presence of minors while driving, I feel it is a great attempt to help innocent children. I have always felt really bad for kids who were raised in smoke infested homes. Though we may not erradicate problems in the home, if police begin to target parents for smoking around children, it may cause adults to think twice about smoking in front of children in general. Second-hand smoke has proven to be associated with serious health risks and helpless children should not be forced to endure such abuse.

Tyler J. Marik on June 5, 2008 at 5:42 p.m. wrote:

Driving while on cell phones have contributed to a large number of deaths in every year since the inception of the technology in our society. I feel that overall, when the government gets in the habit of telling the public what they can or cannot do, that usually it is a bad thing, and a very slippery slope at that. However in this situation, I cannot say how many (at least 100) drivers in my life have cut me off on the freeway / roads that I have later passed (sometimes giving the finger) and observed them on their cell phones. I think that cellphones have made our roads considerably less safe. The implementation of this law is a good thing for our society in California. However I cant quite imagine how the CHP plans to enforce this law. Are CHP officers supposed to peer into our cars to observe us driving and speaking on the phone? I feel that the majority of California residents will welcome this change, but for the most part the public will be supremely skeptical about the plan CHP and law enforcement will choose to attack people that are DWC (Driving While Cell-ing).

Aida Ter-Khachatryan on June 4, 2008 at 11:40 p.m. wrote:

We hear of some many cases of people getting into horrible car accidents because they were being distracted by cell phones. I absolutely believe that cell phone use while driving limits the attention span that a person has while driving therefore causing many of the fatal accidents we have today. I think by passing this law, we will hopefully have less accidents and more people concentrating on driving instead of talking. Using a blue tooth is really a safer way to use the phone will driving because this way you have both your hands on the wheel and you have more control of the vehicle.

Kestenbaum Eisner & Gorin LLP has been recognized as one of the best U.S. law firms, based on the experience, professionalism, and ethics of its criminal defense lawyers and attorneys. We aggressively defend clients in all Southern California courtrooms on state and federal charges, including DUI, DMV, misdemeanor, felony, juvenile cases, in the following communities and courthouses.

Los Angeles County, CA: Agoura, Altadena, Alhambra, Bellflower, Beverly Hills, Burbank, Calabasas, Century City, Chatsworth, Compton, Culver City, Diamond Bar, Downey, Downtown Criminal Court, El Segundo, East Los Angeles, Eastlake, Encino, El Monte, Glendale, Glendora, Hermosa Beach, Hidden Hills, Hollywood, Huntington Park, Inglewood, Los Angeles Lawyer, La Canada, LAX Court, Los Padrinos, Long Beach, Los Angeles Attorney, Malibu, Manhattan Beach, Marina Del Rey, Newhall, Norwalk, Palos Verdes, Pasadena, Pomona, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, San Dimas, San Fernando, San Marino, San Pedro, Santa Clarita, Sherman Oaks, Sierra Madre, Santa Monica, South Gate, South Pasadena, Sylmar, Torrance, Universal City, Valencia, Van Nuys, West Covina, West Hollywood, Walnut, Westchester, West Hollywood, Westlake Village, Whittier, Woodland Hills, California. Orange County, CA: Anaheim, Anaheim Hills, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine Attorney, Laguna Beach, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel, La Habra, La Palma, Mission Viejo, Newport Beach, Orange, Orange County Lawyer, Rancho Santa Margarita, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Santa Ana, Seal Beach, Tustin, Villa Park, Westminster, Yorba Linda, California. Ventura County, CA: Camarillo, Moorpark, Oxnard, San Buenaventura, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Westlake Village. San Bernardino County, CA: Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Upland.

Prior Criminal Law Posts

Cell Phones: The Ax Falls July 1

Comments:

Add your comment!

Firm Fan Page & News

Our Criminal Defense Partners

Criminal Defense Resources

Prior Criminal Law Posts