Kentucky drivers could soon face fines for texting and driving
Tickets for texting could reach more than $100 each
Laura Butler
Issue date: 9/17/09 Section: News
|
A study conducted by the Virginia Tech Transportation institute revealed drivers can travel the distance of a football field at 55 mph, in just under five seconds - the average time a person took their eyes off the road to send or view a text message.
These statistics and survey results have lawmakers and enforcers concerned.
Eighteen states have already passed legislation prohibiting texting while driving, and seven other states have laws restricting texting for newly licensed drivers.
Earlier this summer, U.S. senators from New York, New Jersey, North Carolina and Louisiana (states who already have a Driving While Distracted ban) unveiled a plan for a national bill that would penalize those caught texting while driving throughout the U.S.
The ALERT Act, proposed on July 31, would ban truck and car drivers and other "mass transit operators" from sending text messages and e-mails from behind the wheel. Should the bill pass, the national Department of Transportation would establish minimum standards for compliance.
But senators lobbying for the bill are in favor of that minimum being a high one, as the bill suggests that states that do not enact the legislation should lose 25 percent of federal highway funds until they agree to adopt the policy.
Warren County Representative Jody Richards (D) has already pre-filed a bill on Sept. 9 asking Kentucky legislators to consider legislation "prohibiting text messaging while operating a motor vehicle," as soon as they resume the 2010 session in January.
The bill proposed by Richards doesn't suggest immediately fining drivers caught sending messages behind the wheel, but would call for a probationary period, ending Jan. 1, 2011, where courtesy warning would be issued. After the probationary period ends, the proposal suggests fines would be placed at $20 to $100 in addition to court costs, which currently weigh-in at $143 for Kentucky.
Greg Crockett, a sergeant at the Kentucky State Police Post in Richmond, said he thinks putting the concern for safety into a legislative format would send up a necessary red-flag for inattentive drivers.
Viewing Comments 1 - 8 of 9
heather
posted 9/18/09 @ 5:06 PM EST
I fully agree with this law.. I cannot stand when people text and drive. Go ahead an endanger yourselves, but you don't have to endanger the rest of us too. (Continued…)
Jonathan
posted 9/25/09 @ 3:11 PM EST
I'll stop texting and talking on the phone and driving when people stop eating and drinking while drive. You know why European cars only have one or two cup holders (and some don't even like having that many)? Because in Europe, cars are used for driving, not a mobile dinning room like most Americans use them. (Continued…)
Mason_Brock29
posted 9/30/09 @ 3:19 PM EST
You don't have to take your eyes off the road to eat.
Anyway, what would qualify as "eating"? Having a mint in your mouth? I think texting and eating need to be judged on a case by case basis. (Continued…)
Jonathan
posted 10/01/09 @ 10:42 AM EST
It's not that you take your eyes off the road (which you do) it's that fact that it is as much a distraction as texting. Sure listening to the radio can be called a distraction, but you're not using your hands to listen. (Continued…)
Mason Brock
posted 10/01/09 @ 3:30 PM EST
If we are going to follow the logic that anything which takes a hand to use should be banned while driving, then we have to ban changing the radio station, lowering sun visors, and use of cup holders. (Continued…)
Patrick
posted 10/08/09 @ 12:59 AM EST
What about the use of cell phones in general? If they're going to ban texting while operating a motor vehicle why not ban cell phone use? It should only be legal if you're using a Bluetooth device. (Continued…)
Anon
posted 10/08/09 @ 5:16 PM EST
Reaction times while texting (according to a recent study) were reduced by 35%, compared to 12% when above legal alcohol limit, and 25% while under the influence of pot. (Continued…)
Mason Brock
posted 10/09/09 @ 3:47 PM EST
cft: I concede that things that are inherently dangerous (e.g. that require that you take your eyes off the road, get out of your seat, ect) have reason to be preemptively banned. (Continued…)
Post a Comment