We are about to have a Texting while driving law

[Coded-Dude]

It won't. Doesn't apply when vehicle is not in motion.



I'm not seeing this provision in the Enrolled final version.

Seeing as how the Enrolled version wasn't put up until yesterday(4/30) I was referencing the Amended and Engrossed version that was put up on 4/9.

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16 ENR/hB/HB1965 ENR.PDF

[EDIT] NVM, that is if you are trying to contact emergency operators or law enforcement.....

 

[Eagle Eye]

The law would be better if it defined "dangerously texting" or something...this way an overzealous policeman would not take pleasure in citing a guy who isn't hurting anyone. The "risk" to the public is not the exact same in EVERY scenario of texting. If only those worst case scenarios were punished, where the risk was determined to be greater (such as weaving or in heavy HWY traffic, etc) then I think this would be more well received. But if some guy is relying "Yes" to his wife while he is waiting for a red light to change, then it becomes more about revenue and less about protecting the public...nobody sees gray area anymore in this country.

I agree.
Problem is, everyones grey area differs.
I trust LEO's to make the right decision. But I am also a middle class white male.

 

[KOPBET]

Under Section 2, Part D (shall not apply), Reference 1 (an emergency response operator) or Reference 5 (a law enforcement agency)

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2015-16 ENR/hB/HB1965 ENR.PDF

You left out a part.

D.

The provisions of subsection A of this section shall not apply if the person is using the cellular telephone or electronic communication device for the sole purpose of communicating with any of the following regarding an imminent emergency situation:

1. An emergency response operator;
2. A hospital, physician's office or health clinic;
3. A provider of ambulance services;

 

[Coded-Dude]

You left out a part.

the person is using the cellular telephone or electronic communication device for the sole purpose of communicating with any of the following regarding an imminent emergency situation:

1. An emergency response operator;
2. A hospital, physician's office or health clinic;
3. A provider of ambulance services;

yes I misread it.

 

[CHenry]

jesus. Imma have to unsubscribe from my own thread... lol

 

[OKCHunter]

jesus. Imma have to unsubscribe from my own thread... lol

Not allowed. You cannot start a brawl and then leave. We've got people advocated everything from vigilante justice (my personal contribution) to no speed limits with texting allowed in school zones.

 

[Lurkerinthewoods]

Not allowed. You cannot start a brawl and then leave. We've got people advocated everything from vigilante justice (my personal contribution) to no speed limits with texting allowed in school zones.

Not many threads go from A to Z as quickly as this one did.

 

[twoguns?]

ban data streams:

then traffic will be even worse......everybody will be lost because they can't use google maps to find the nearest starbucks!

I don't know. The more I think about it the more I like the idea of vehicles having proximity control and GPS lane control. I definitely would want the ability to disable this kind of control but warnings would be nice. I think this technology is coming in the near future. I've got a friend that has a vehicle that monitors the distance to vehicles or objects ahead when on cruise control. The vehicle will automatically slowdown if you get to close to the vehicle ahead. The vehicle also has a warning light near the mirrors that senses vehicles in the blind spots.

Technology is a wonderful thing, you know most smart phones have speak to text or something similar,
Why isn't that being used?
They already have vehicles with these technologys , in the $80k plus range.
It will take some time for some of us to get to that class, or prices come down.

It's certainly more than sad for harm or death to come from ignorance or uncaring.
This law just seems like more of a right to infringe on otherwise law abiding citizens, as there is already a law addressing it.
Or maybe one of those "feel good we did something" to stop the rampant crimes.
To serve and protect....is a pretty tall order, add in protecting people that don't want\need protection... Almost impossible.

Thank You to those that have accepted this Great Responsibility.....Please be reminded, we're not all rampant criminals.
We just don't agree to be controlled
Be Careful out there.....and Know, some are looking out for You too

 

[nofearfactor]

^^^^ Bluetooth...

...in the shadows(Tapatalk)

 

[excat]

Mary signed the bill today:

The two added amendments reduce a $150 offense to $100, as well as making texting while driving a primary offense.

According to the Governors Highway Safety Association, 44 states currently have a texting ban on drivers.

“States with primary-enforcement laws saw an overall reduction of three percent in traffic fatalities,” he says. “For young drivers between 15 and 21, there was an 11 percent reduction in fatalities. That’s huge.”

He says research shows states that only had secondary enforcement saw virtually no change.

“Primary enforcement saves lives,” says Yen.

Oklahoma is the 46th state to have a law banning texting while driving.

It has exceptions for certain emergency situations and specifies it will not apply to devices operated in a voice-activated mode in which a driver’s hands would not be needed to write, send or read a text message.
The law goes into effect Nov. 1.