McMahon why dont ya give me a toot on the horn when you pass. I'll wave a friendly howdy. BTW it is illegal in Idaho to drive 85 mph on US 95 but the coffee and phone are fine.

Blue water pro thanks for the dose reality. Its true, it takes fatalities to get change in legislation and change in the ifrastructure, but it takes far more fatalities to change the minds of the public.

Ain't you a benevolent SOB......

"blinker on for 10 blocks"

Except if you are following a blue hair in Ballard.

What we really need is a stiffer penalty for people who run the school
bus stops Once a week someone will go right on by when my kid is getting on and after talking to the bus driver you not only need licence number but a description of the driver ,time of day,description of the car and a witness. And these people are not on a phone

Making the cell phone law a primary infraction, is a waste IMO. There are so many distractions in the car, at least holding a phone to your ear you have the chance to look around. My only accident/moving violation ever, was when I was looking at that stupid Garmin. Those things should be outlawed, I spend way more time looking at that rather than the road, before I decided that it was just as hard as getting around the way I always had: Using my aborigonal 6th sense to locate the nearest Starbucks.

I use a blue-tooth, which I hate, but it is necessary for work. I can't use one of those whole-car units, or a speaker phone because I might be talking about the person I am with and that could cause an issue.

I was riding with a client out to an emergency meeting one day. Boss, called and I had him on speaker and did not get a chance to let him know the audience . . . he called the guy I was with a 'f^cker'. That was a great car-ride.

Remember, it's only illegal if you get caught.

Anger is understood STAM. The Washington autobody industry stands to loose millions with safer drivers.


Anyone else that thinks this will line the pockets of legislators is biting hard on what they want. They want you to be resistant; they want you to get tickets because thats the only way money will make it to them. If you want to make them poor, then you must never get a ticket because of the cell phone (i.e. put it down). Instead of being defiant maybe encouraging your fellow driver to put his phone down and not pay the legislators. Does this help to have a "stick it to the man" clause?

Still think it's a good law?

If so I've got a bridge to sell you.

From today's Seattle Times-

Washington's highway deaths lowest in more than 5 decades
Last year was the safest on Washington's highways in 54 years, according to the Washington Traffic Safety Commission.

By Seattle Times staff

Last year was the safest on Washington's highways in 54 years, according to the Washington Traffic Safety Commission.

The 490 deaths in 2009 on state highways was the lowest since 1955, when 461 people died. There also were 31 fewer highway deaths last year than in 2008.

This comes at a time when traffic volumes have increased.

According to the commission, a person traveling from Wenatchee to Edmonds in 1955 was five times more likely to die on the road than someone making that trip today.

Wait, I didn't know that they had cell phones back in the 50's.

Yep. GET OFF YOUR PHONE AND DRIVE

Statistics also show that cell phone related accidents were fewer in 2009 with 827 motor vehicle accidents including 13 fatalities attributed to cell phone use.

http://www.seattlecaraccidentlawyerblog.com/2010/02/washington_state_had_fewer_car.html

I need to see the wording of the bill exactly, but if it passess I might just drive around with a phone to my ear and talk to myself. I would love to see the officer try to swear how he could know for a fact that there was an actual call in progress. Seeing how it is all a kangaroo court they probably would still find me guilty, but I am such a jerk I might just appeal any guilty finding and watch what happens.

Yes!

It's stretch to say that it is auto technology that reduced the death rates. Cause and effect in a complicated system... like highway deaths... with many variables... are seldom so cut and dried.

It could be:

1) DUI patrol emphasis
2) Click it or Ticket emphasis
3) Greater Safety of cars as legislated
4) Greater Safety of car by free market forces
5) Stricter regulations regarding under 18 drivers

and the list goes on.

Undoubtedly, every one of the proponents of the above claim victory but only an astute student of statistics would be able to discern the truth.

I am no good at math let alone statistics so I'll let the debate go on..

Screw cell phones.

Truth in statistics?

I think you are on to something. ROTFL and SMOMN.

Bit by bit they chip away at our liberties until at some point in time we are reduced to nothingness.

Actually the cars don't sustain the impact nearly as good as they used to, it is the passengers inside that fare better, and I know what you mean, just being nit picky. . . . .

..actually it's the way in which the energy, in the form of rapid-deceleration , is transfered.

I agree that technology has improved survivability. But is that all? Or are there other components that people claim to help. MADD comes to mind.

Now, just to be straight I think that all the things you mentioned have helped considerably, along with better response by LEO and EMTs.

I'm just saying it ain't that simple.

If it was just airbags we would all be safe. At least those of us who were married.

Getting back on target, I would love to see cell phone talking while driving be a primary offense. For texting, it's an absolute no-brainer.