The new "no texting while driving" law in Illinois
The new "no texting while driving" law that goes into effect January 1 in Illinois is absolutely ridiculous, in terms of what it allows and does not allow. I reference below some exact wording (at least, according to the Chicago Tribune) that the law uses to clarify these new regulations. In general, this new law stipulates "usage of your phone" based on certain applications. You can still use the GPS features of your phone, but you "can't send or read a text message." Correct me if I'm wrong, but my phones' GPS/map features still require text input (and reading address or location results). So it's okay to type in addresses, navigate the touch-screen map, and completely take my eyes off the road in doing so? Seems so. "You can't send or receive an email." So, specifically, my phones' email application cannot be used? Or I just can't send and receive email? But can I type one? Can I organize my inbox into folders? Is all use of my phones' email application out of the question, or just physically sending and receiving? (How does one "receive" an email anyway? The application does that - I don't physically have to do anything except hit "Refresh." So, really what they're saying is any incoming network traffic for emails specifically is disallowed.) "You can't send an instant message." A what? Who sends instant messages on a phone?? I suppose some phones have IM applications, but it's not a very popular activity since it requires a constant network connection, which SMS does not. Really this just sounds technically-amateurish. "You can't web surf nor download ring tones." Now we're just getting silly. How on Earth would a police officer know exactly what I was doing on my phone? Officer: "Sir, were you just downloading ringtones?" Me: "Sorry, officer, I was not actually downloading ring tones, but rather adjusting the settings for ringtones to be used, based on who calls me. And, tecnically, iTunes had already downloaded the ringtones, I was just listening to the 30-second samples, since Aunt Barb likes a certain song, so I was making sure it was the right one before applying it to her contact in my address book." Officer (after a long pause): "Okay. But were you also web surfing?" Officer: "Well... not really. I was logged into my bank account to see how much I have in my checking account. I also transferred some funds to savings. It wasn't really 'web surfing,' per se." Officer (after another long pause, and looking at me strange now): "Okay then. Sorry for the inconvenience. Have a good day." It seems that if they are going to make a law banning "cell phone usage," at least make it easier to understand, and more black and white. There's way too much room for interpretation. A law should be crystal clear. Basing the law on certain applications, or "activities" that these non-tecnically-inclined law makers believe that people do on their phones, is only going to confuse people more, and cause them to be more distracted while driving ("Hmm, which applications can I use again?") than they were in the first place. A better idea would be to ban phones entirely - except for emergency situations. That includes talking on the phone, or handling it in any way. Even headsets and Bluetooth in-dash speakers would be disallowed. (This would be easy for patrol to spot since you should not appear as if you're talking to someone, if you're the only one in the car.) Leaving the law open for interpretation, and some allowed usage, just makes the situation worse. Either enforce no usage, or allow all. Comments/Mentions |
