Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Police Text and Drive, Want Exemption to Proposed Texting Ban

There's a bill in the legislature that would ban texting and driving. If passed, the question is whether that law would exempt the enforcers of that law.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

Cops need to get off their cell phones while driving, I am an officer and believe me it looks bad. Plus can you do your job while you talking to all your lady friends, please stop.

Anonymous said...

I didn't watch the video, but IMHO, it's not a good idea to ban texting or if you do so, to give cops an exemption.

If you're not paying attention to driving and you hit someone it's your responsibility - no matter if your texting, doing your nails or staring at the sun.

If the police don't want to be bound by a new law, that's prolly a decent sign that it shouldn't be a law.

Daniel said...

I personally think the no-texting law misses the point. Should we attempt to outlaw all different forms of distraction and would the really be enforceable. Who is to say what is texting vs dialing a number? Could a cop really tell the difference? Would voice-texting, that is using speech-to-text be considered texting or would it be exempted? Finally, I do not agree with law enforcement exemptions for something that puts others at risk like this, if the law were to pass.

Anonymous said...

Law enforcement is exempt from certain laws because to follow them would prohibit our ability to do our job. Example: If you are suffering through a home invasion, we are coming 10-18 to get to you. Obeying the speed limit would put you at risk, and we are trying to get there as fast as we can. But we do get specialized training on operating vehicles at high rates of speed.

Your points are valid in terms of questioning the viability of enforcing such a law, be interesting to see what happens.

Anonymous said...

Oh my God, Jenkins' patrol car is in motion while he is driving and using both hands to type on the keyboard. On video! Are you kidding me?! (Shaking my head)

Anonymous said...

Anonymous #1 you obviously are no cop..maybe a security guard that drives in circles around a mall all day...we have to talk on the phone. we need to get things done and if we didn't things would slow down drastically. if this was 1960 with a low call volume it would be possible. but you wouldn't know this.

Anonymous said...

#1. Why is badge 29000000 driving a Sgt car?
#2. Why is badge 29000000 driving the media around?
#3. Why is badge 2900000 constantly typing on the computer? even running tags doesn't require that much attention.
#4. Where is the MPO or Sgt that should be driving the media around?
#5. How did we ever do our job before Laptops?

Oh ya, Sgts and MPOs are too disgruntled and might tell them the truth about this place. I don't know badge 2900000. He might be a great officer, but he hasn't earned the right to drive a sgt car or represent the Department to the media like that. Secondly I see no logical reason to drive with one hand on the computer at all times. Drive first and check the call when it is safe to do so, Not type messages with both hands as you are still moving. Police first and socialize later, that is what we get paid to do.

The law will be difficult to enforce. And I see limited exemption in the law for police. If you 41 and it is caused due to your negligence while typing on the computer, it is PREVENTABLE! And with the new 41 points system you surely will be suspended. Think about that before you bitch about the proposed law and what it might do. Dekalb County will get thier money from you one way or the other. Dont give them a reason.

Anonymous said...

These officers need to practice what they preach.....

Anonymous said...

Anon #3 - the voice of reason, thank God. As for personal calls, I'm old school and believe they should be reserved for breaks, unless urgent.
But if I need a cop to get to me fast, do you think I give a sh!t that he was in motion while picking up the details? I'm more afraid of all the other idiots on the road, but not a trained expert at multi-tasking cop. JC.

Anonymous said...

Daniel - you're getting caught up in your mentally masturbatory process. Try to look at this issue from a broader perspective.
I'll be here for more advice when you're ready for the next homework assignment.

Anonymous said...

Saw an Atlanta cop last week who rear-ended the car in front of him. I knew exactly what happened, he was busy with his computer when he piled into the car in front. Felt kinda of sorry for him. What is needed for cops is a "Heads up display" (HUD)and a virtual interface with only using one hand. Give the technology another decade, until then expect more accidents. Dora Tabb told me "our officers are trained to drive and use the computers". Lots of luck! Be safe out there guys!

Anonymous said...

Just to clarify, Ofcr. Jenkins was driving a Sergeant car because it had more space for the camera. The chief's office / public affairs office authorized the WXIA ride-along.

Btw-- feel free to reach me at dougwxia@gmail.com Thanks.

Doug Richards
WXIA-TV
liveapartmentfire.com

Anonymous said...

Hey doug don't worry as the county keeps screwing us less and less officers will take any risk we will all find the biggest parking lot sit there until we have to answer a 911 call we read the whole call then leave nice and easy would eant to put anybody on the road in danger trying to get to a person shot raped or robbed. only thing 10-18 is for now days is if an officer needs help sorry citizen and BOC ya'll screw us and we have to protect each other

Anonymous said...

Doug, of course he had authorization to use the car (without screen) and drive you and your cameraman around for the story (for practical accommodation purposes). But as a 10+ year vet with as many safe driving years pinned on my shirt, those actions I saw him displaying (two hands on typing on computer while driving), well, when the supervisors see the video I bet...it's my hope...he at least gets his ass chewed out. Ridiculous.

I know we have some exemptions under the law. And yes, it this specific law were passed, we undoubtedly would be exempt. But policy is still policy. State law does not require us to wear seat belts. But, our policy does.

Personally, it disgusts me to see any of our officers driving around talking on the cell phone and/or texting. They display the same bad driving habits (violations of law) as civilians (following too closely, inattentive, failing to signal, failing to maintain lane, etc.) Our policy requires us to SET THE EXAMPLE. Sorry Officer Jenkins whatever your badge number is, but if that is your normal behavior behind the wheel you should be ashamed of yourself.

Anonymous said...

Watch the video, when he is typing with two hands he is rolling to a stop at a light, not flying down 285.

Anonymous said...

OK "Watch the video", but the vehicle is still in motion so say you. Whose hands are on the wheel if a child were to suddenly dart into the roadway. Using one's knees? That would require lifting the leg(s)...away and off of the pedals! How can a driver react to the unexpected when operating a car if you allow yourself to divert your attention from the driving task? Especially with both hands off of the wheel while it is in motion (at any speed)?

Anonymous said...

Most states that have passed cell phone related laws exempt law enforcement, fire safety, and EMS knowing cell phones/computers are utilized in the line of duty.

However, as with all motorists, cell phone use behind the wheel presents a clear danger, which you all probably know because you've worked the many accidents they cause.

Ray LaHood, NHTSA and others have drafted a sample law as a "suggestion" for states to consider. http://bit.ly/bY1zC3 It leaves squiggle room to add other devices to law.

Be safe!

Anonymous said...

Obrien need to talk faster...sounds like a tape on slow speed.