Author Topic: North Dakota House approves texting-while-driving ban  (Read 1576 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pmp6nl

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5617
  • Karma: 113
  • Gender: Male
    • Campus Dakota.com
North Dakota House approves texting-while-driving ban
« on: February 09, 2011, 01:40:05 pm »
Quote
UPDATED: North Dakota House approves texting-while-driving ban
BISMARCK A bill that would ban texting while driving in North Dakota barely passed the state House on Tuesday. The 50-41 vote allowed the bill to now move on to the Senate.
The House Transportation Committee deadlocked over the bill last week, and several committee members wanted to see an overall distracted driving bill pass instead.

By: Teri Finneman, INFORUM

Quote
However, the distracted driving bill failed on the floor with a 47-44 vote with three members absent. The bill needed 48 supporters to pass.

Rep. Dan Ruby, R-Minot, said texting may be the primary concern of people now, but future technology could change that. He supported the distracted driving bill, saying the texting bill focuses on just one form of distracted driving.

Quote
Some legislators expressed concerns about the penalties in the bill, which now includes a $100 fine for a violation.

A first offense also means 2 points against a license, while a second offense would be worth 4 points. A third or subsequent violation would result in a suspended license for a year.

What about doing other dangerous things while driving: reading books, putting on makeup, etc. I would be willing to bet reading and putting on makeup are more dangerous than texting.  However, I do agree with having laws against texting and driving.

Are these penalties more harsh than drunk driving penalties?  That is something that needs to be cracked down on in ND.
CampusDakota.com

Offline Sal Atticum

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7116
  • Karma: 38
  • Gender: Male
    • Campus Dakota
Re: North Dakota House approves texting-while-driving ban
« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2011, 02:24:46 pm »
It's funny, because the Grand Forks ban on texting and driving has a fine of $15 or something like that.  This will go over great here. 
JUST EXTRA POLISH. I DO SOME WORK WITH EXCELL SO I KEEP THE CAPS LOCK ON :-P

Offline red hibiscus

  • UND
  • *
  • Posts: 125
  • Karma: 14
  • Gender: Female
Re: North Dakota House approves texting-while-driving ban
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2011, 03:32:46 pm »

What about doing other dangerous things while driving: reading books, putting on makeup, etc. I would be willing to bet reading and putting on makeup are more dangerous than texting.  However, I do agree with having laws against texting and driving.


I agree. All of those things are dangerous, just like texting.

I cannot fathom why the distracted driving bill didn't pass. Are these legislators living under a rock? Conclusions from the literature on distracted driving are pretty straightforward---people miss more traffic lights, have more collisions, hit more pedestrians, have greater difficulty maintaining speed...etc. etc. when they're distracted while driving. Granted they're in simulators in these experiments, but the results can translate to real-world situations.

Okay, off soapbox. This subject hits close to home since I teach about attention in some of my classes.

Offline pmp6nl

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5617
  • Karma: 113
  • Gender: Male
    • Campus Dakota.com
Re: North Dakota House approves texting-while-driving ban
« Reply #3 on: February 09, 2011, 03:44:38 pm »
It's funny, because the Grand Forks ban on texting and driving has a fine of $15 or something like that.  This will go over great here. 

Any stats on the number of fines etc.?


I agree. All of those things are dangerous, just like texting.

I cannot fathom why the distracted driving bill didn't pass. Are these legislators living under a rock? Conclusions from the literature on distracted driving are pretty straightforward---people miss more traffic lights, have more collisions, hit more pedestrians, have greater difficulty maintaining speed...etc. etc. when they're distracted while driving. Granted they're in simulators in these experiments, but the results can translate to real-world situations.

Okay, off soapbox. This subject hits close to home since I teach about attention in some of my classes.


They are all bad situations.  I think they are targeting texting because the younger crowd is more likely to text then those older (well this may be changing but it seems to be the case.)

Could it be that they are targeting younger people that are less likely to make a fuss about it or are they targeting younger people because of their relative inexperience?
« Last Edit: February 09, 2011, 03:45:48 pm by pmp6nl »
CampusDakota.com

Offline gh

  • CD Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 109
  • Karma: 8
Re: North Dakota House approves texting-while-driving ban
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2011, 11:03:49 am »
Quote
Are these penalties more harsh than drunk driving penalties?  That is something that needs to be cracked down on in ND.

I found what the drunk driving penalties are in ND and apparently they are harsher than the texting penalties. The problem with all of these laws and penalties are there are certain people who will continue to text and drive, put on make-up and drive and those that drink and drive and never seem to get caught. I know I've seen people talking on their phones, smoking, and putting on make-up at the same time. That seems way more distracting than texting. I know I'll text occasionally, but usually only if I'm stopped at a red light.

I found this info at http://dui.drivinglaws.org/ndakota.php
ND DUI Offense
1st Drunk Driving Conviction
    * Fine - $250 Minimum
    * License Suspension 91 Days (Blood Alcohol Content Up to .17)
    * License Suspension - 108 Days (Blood Alcohol Content .18 or Above)
    * Work Permit Possible After 30 Days
    * Mandatory Alcohol Evaluation
    * SR22 Insurance Coverage

2nd Drunk Driving Conviction
    * Jail 5 Days or,
    * Community Service 30 Days
    * Fine - $500 Minimum
    * License Suspension 365 Days (Blood Alcohol Content Up to .17)
    * License Suspension 2 Years (Blood Alcohol Content .18 or Above)
    * No Work Permit Possible
    * Mandatory Alcohol Evaluation
    * SR22 Insurance Coverage

3rd Drunk Driving Conviction
    * Jail 60 Days
    * Fine - $1,000 Minimum
    * License Suspension 2 Years (Blood Alcohol Content Up to .17)
    * License Suspension 3 Years (Blood Alcohol Content .18 or Above)
    * Mandatory Alcohol Evaluation
    * SR22 Insurance Coverage

4th Drunk Driving Conviction
    * Jail 180 Days
    * Fine - $1,000 Minimum
    * License Suspension 2 Years (Blood Alcohol Content Up to .17)
    * License Suspension 3 Years (Blood Alcohol Content .18 or Above)
    * Must Complete Addiction Treatment For License Reinstatement
    * SR22 Insurance Coverage

5th Drunk Driving Conviction
    * Jail 5 Years Maximum
    * Class C Felony
    * Fine $5,000 Maximum
    * SR22 Insurance Coverage

Offline pmp6nl

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5617
  • Karma: 113
  • Gender: Male
    • Campus Dakota.com
Re: North Dakota House approves texting-while-driving ban
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2011, 06:30:11 pm »
Ah ok, thanks for finding em.  Glad they have at least some penalty, but I agree that many people are never caught.  You know with all of these budget issues the country is having, why dont they just raise the fines on these?   :tinfoil:
CampusDakota.com

 

With Quick-Reply you can write a post when viewing a topic without loading a new page. You can still use bulletin board code and smileys as you would in a normal post.

Name: Email:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image
Type the letters shown in the picture:
What color is an apple, it starts with an r?:
What is 18 minus 7?:
What is UND's new athletic nickname?:

anything
realistic
anything