# Legal: Busted operating electronic device while driving, must prove my innocence (Need answer fast! **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 5, 2010, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446 "2010-03-05T18:03:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Super\_Kapowzler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a698b9/32.png) [@Super\_Kapowzler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Super_Kapowzler)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2010, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/41 "2010-03-07T16:55:33Z")
The 'Ol Kapowz is just about to send $117.00 (by 3/15/10)for getting caught driving with his i-Pod in both ears. I knew it was illegal, but NEVER in a $117.00USD YEARS did I think he was going to cite me. He told me of the safety factor BULLSHIT that I could not hear a horn or sirens. I asked, “What do deaf people do? It is not illegal TO DRIVE DEAF!” You should have seen his face. I actually verbally-slapped the taste out his dumb MF-in’ maw. I said, “I know you don’t write the laws, and I’m not going to argue with you, but this is dumb.” And I left. Happened about 4 weeks ago to the hour. There was just WAAAY too much pot in a container in plain sight. I’ll slip the County $117.00 to keep my job, reputation, and the roof over my head. Best of luck. ---
**Author:** ![Myglaren](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f1d935/32.png) [@Myglaren](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Myglaren)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2010, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/42 "2010-03-07T17:18:28Z")
> [@PBear42](#): > > “Your Honor, with all respect, how many people do you know who carry two cell phones? I don’t, and I don’t know anyone who does. I mean, why would one? I don’t doubt Officer Friendly made an honest mistake, but it was a mistake.” The judge might wonder whether you pulled a fast one, but I bet the charge would have been dismissed. I have several friends that carry two or more phones, mainly business and private ones. One guy has one for his wife and one for his girlfriend. That turned messy when his daughter picked up the ‘girlfriend’ phone 🙂 As far as the ‘driving distraction’ is concerned, several people here have been convicted of driving while eating. A local one was a girl driving with an apple in her hand (not actually eating it). As a bit of come-uppance, the following week a police officer on the force that arrested her was caught driving his patrol car while eating - doughnuts! ---
**Author:** ![anson2995](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@anson2995](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anson2995)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2010, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/43 "2010-03-07T18:30:21Z")
> [@PBear42](#): > > “Your Honor, with all respect, how many people do you know who carry two cell phones? I don’t, and I don’t know anyone who does. I mean, why would one? I don’t doubt Officer Friendly made an honest mistake, but it was a mistake.” The judge might wonder whether you pulled a fast one, but I bet the charge would have been dismissed. The burden was on me to prove that the bill in hand matched the cell phone I had in the car. (For what it’s worth we have a family plan with five phones in my name. I’d wager _tons_ of people have multiple cell phones.) But that isn’t really the point. Even if I could enter the bill as evidence, the fact that I call didn’t go through didn’t mean I wasn’t dialing, or using an app, or typing a text message that I cancelled when I saw the red lights in my rearview. ---
**Author:** ![Duckster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duckster/32/1244_2.png) [@Duckster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duckster)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2010, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/44 "2010-03-07T20:24:45Z")
We recently had a policy change at work in cell phone use and handheld devices. It used to be that the use of a cell phone was prohibited, unless it was hands-free. That was thrown out the window when the big boss signed an executive order banning texting while driving. By the time that order filtered down through the bureaucracy it had expanded to be: [ul] [li] The use of any handheld device while driving in a company vehicle (or any other vehicle during company time or as a result of company business) is prohibited. That means cell phones, GPS, IPods (or equivalent), CB radio, etc. There is a defined exception for law enforcement and emergency workers using a handheld device as a business tool as part of the emergency.[/li][li] It gets better. The ban extends anyone contacting anyone else who may be using their own cell phone and driving. So at work or during business hours, if I call someone, or I’m called by someone, and they are on a cell phone and driving, the call is to be terminated. It doesn’t matter if I am on a landline, as long as the other party is on a cell phone and driving. We are prohibited from putting someone else in danger as a result of their inappropriate cell phone use.[/li][li] Wait. It gets better. The ban extends to any cell phone use, including personal time and personal cell phone use, if in the course of the conversation anything related to the business is discussed, and/or any party is using a cell phone and there are other laws banning cell phone use and driving.[/li][/ul] I have no problem with any of this. Oh, yeah. My employer is the federal government. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2010, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/45 "2010-03-07T20:36:53Z")
> [@constanze](#): > > The ADAC\* and an university did tests on using a cell phone in your hand while driving (on a simulator) vs. hands-free phoning, and both found that using a phone, even hands-free, is very distracting; and it’s different from a normal conversation with a passenger (not a parent trying to get children to behave, or a spousal shouting match). The difference, as the psychologists in the Uni tests, explained, was that, since the passenger is in the car with you, the driver will stop the conversation if he needs to concentrate on driving, knowing that the passenger will understand. > On the phone, where the partner can’t see what’s going on, people feel pressured to answer immediatly, and thus put priority on the conversation over the driving.\ I think just about all studies have found that it isn’t holding the phone that’s the problem, it’s the distraction of talking on a phone while trying to drive. [Here’s an online test to really illustrate this](http://www.dft.gov.uk/drivingchallenge/) (it takes a loooong time to load). I also noticed that trying to do the driving stuff while also doing the distracting stuff made me irritated and stressed - people need to stop doing that to themselves. Life is stressful enough already. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/46 "2010-03-08T08:10:48Z")
> [@constanze](#): > > Do you know how much you are endangering your own health and life, and the life of your dog in case of an accident? Even a small dog of 5 or 10 pounds, even with moderate speed of 40 o 50 km/h, the weight increases to dangerous levels because of momentum. Yes. I’ll tell you why it happens but beyond that I won’t try and defend it. The dog can’t sit in the back because we have two young children sitting in the back and they annoy the dog, dealing with that is more distracting than having to deal with him on my lap. He is supposed to sit in the passenger seat but he always tries to jump onto my lap and preventing him from jumping across is more distracting than having him on my lap. The best place for the dog while he is in the car is on my lap, BUT the best place for the dog in general, is not in the car at all. I agree with all of your points. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/47 "2010-03-08T08:23:59Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > [Here’s an online test to really illustrate this](http://www.dft.gov.uk/drivingchallenge/) Very good, I like it. I got very close to the right number of passenger points (missed by 1) but failed to answer 8 questions. I suppose that’s good in a way, as it shows that I prioritised the driving over the talking, but then I know it’s a test, so I might not prioritise that way in real life. She was just talking about inane shit anyway, can’t that stuff wait till I get home? ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/48 "2010-03-08T14:24:58Z")
> [@Super\_Kapowzler](#): > > The 'Ol Kapowz is just about to send $117.00 (by 3/15/10)for getting caught driving with his i-Pod in both ears. Hooded sweatshirt. Sure, I look like the unabomber, but no tickets. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2010, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/49 "2010-03-09T01:03:57Z")
Here’s a novel type of [distracted driving](http://keysnews.com/node/21349): > [@](#): > > Florida Highway Patrol troopers say a two-vehicle crash Tuesday at Mile Marker 21 on Cudjoe Key was caused by a 37-year-old woman driver who was shaving her bikini area while her ex-husband took the wheel from the passenger seat. > > \ > > If that weren’t enough, Megan Mariah Barnes was not supposed to be driving and her 1995 Ford Thunderbird was not supposed to be on the road. > > The day before the wreck, Barnes was convicted in an Upper Keys court of DUI with a prior and driving with a suspended license, said Monroe County Assistant State Attorney Colleen Dunne. Barnes was ordered to impound her car, and her driver’s license was revoked for five years, after which time she must have a Breathalyzer ignition interlock device on any vehicle she drives, Dunne said. Barnes also was sentenced to nine months’ probation. ---
**Author:** ![CutterJohn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/91b2a8/32.png) [@CutterJohn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CutterJohn)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2010, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/50 "2010-03-09T02:02:02Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > I think just about all studies have found that it isn’t holding the phone that’s the problem, it’s the distraction of talking on a phone while trying to drive. [Here’s an online test to really illustrate this](http://www.dft.gov.uk/drivingchallenge/) (it takes a loooong time to load). I also noticed that trying to do the driving stuff while also doing the distracting stuff made me irritated and stressed - people need to stop doing that to themselves. Life is stressful enough already. Is there a study that compares it to having a passenger in the car and talking to them, which, I presume, is still legal? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2010, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/51 "2010-03-09T05:58:28Z")
> [@CutterJohn](#): > > Is there a study that compares it to having a passenger in the car and talking to them, which, I presume, is still legal? Post 39. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2010, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/52 "2010-03-09T19:24:24Z")
> [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > Yes. I’ll tell you why it happens but beyond that I won’t try and defend it. The dog can’t sit in the back because we have two young children sitting in the back and they annoy the dog, dealing with that is more distracting than having to deal with him on my lap. He is supposed to sit in the passenger seat but he always tries to jump onto my lap and preventing him from jumping across is more distracting than having him on my lap. The best place for the dog while he is in the car is on my lap, BUT the best place for the dog in general, is not in the car at all. I agree with all of your points. Sorry, this I don’t understand. If he is supposed to sit in the passenger seat, are there no special seat belts/ harness combinations available so you can belt him in? Is he too big to be put in a carrier, which you could then belt onto the passenger seat? Sure, you would have to get him used to this first, but surely you have him already trained, don’t you? Or could get a dog training school to help? Please understand, I don’t want to attack you, I’m simply puzzled about this. I assumed from reading the Motorwelt (ADAC monthly member magazine) on how to transport dogs that the technical side of this has been solved for some time now, and the behaviour problem should be solved by making the dog generally obey soft, firm commands. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2010, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/53 "2010-03-09T19:49:16Z")
Okay, not the quote I was thinking of, but in English: Authors Full Name Redelmeier, D A. Tibshirani, R J. Institution Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, ON, Canada. Title Association between cellular-telephone calls and motor vehicle collisions. Comments Comment in: N Engl J Med. 1997 Feb 13;336(7):501-2; PMID: 9017945], Comment in: N Engl J Med. 1997 Jul 10;337(2):127-8; PMID: 9221335], Comment in: N Engl J Med. 1997 Jul 10;337(2):127; author reply 128-9; PMID: 9221333], Comment in: N Engl J Med. 1997 Jul 10;337(2):127; author reply 128; PMID: 9221334] Source New England Journal of Medicine. 336(7):453-8, 1997 Feb 13. Abbreviated Source N Engl J Med. 336(7):453-8, 1997 Feb 13. NLM Journal Name The New England journal of medicine (Full text available through my university, so I can’t link to it). However, the abstract says > [@](#): > > BACKGROUND: Because of a belief that the use of cellular telephones while driving may cause collisions, several countries have restricted their use in motor vehicles, and others are considering such regulations. We used an epidemiologic method, the case-crossover design, to study whether using a cellular telephone while driving increases the risk of a motor vehicle collision. METHODS: We studied 699 drivers who had cellular telephones and who were involved in motor vehicle collisions resulting in substantial property damage but no personal injury. Each person’s cellular-telephone calls on the day of the collision and during the previous week were analyzed through the use of detailed billing records. RESULTS: A total of 26,798 cellular-telephone calls were made during the 14-month study period. The risk of a collision when using a cellular telephone was four times higher than the risk when a cellular telephone was not being used (relative risk, 4.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 3.0 to 6.5). The relative risk was similar for drivers who differed in personal characteristics such as age and driving experience; calls close to the time of the collision were particularly hazardous (relative risk, 4.8 for calls placed within 5 minutes of the accident, as compared with 1.3 for calls placed more than 15 minutes before the accident; P\<0.001); and units that allowed the hands to be free (relative risk, 5.9) offered no safety advantage over hand-held units (relative risk, 3.9; P not significant). Thirty-nine percent of the drivers called emergency services after the collision, suggesting that having a cellular telephone may have had advantages in the aftermath of an event. CONCLUSIONS: The use of cellular telephones in motor vehicles is associated with a quadrupling of the risk of a collision during the brief time interval involving a call. Decisions about regulation of such telephones, however, need to take into account the benefits of the technology and the role of individual responsibility. So instead of simulators, they looked at actual accident data - a different approach. > [@from the article itself](#): > > We found that using a cellular telephone was associated with a risk of having a motor vehicle collision that was about four times as high as that among the same drivers when they were not using their cellular telephones. This relative risk is similar to the hazard associated with driving with a blood alcohol level at the legal limit Some more cites from the above article - the simulator tests > [@](#): > > Violanti JM, Marshall JR. Cellular phones and traffic accidents: an epidemiological approach. Accid Anal Prev 1996;28:265-270. > Brown ID, Tickner AH, Simmonds DCV. Interference between concurrent tasks of driving and telephoning. J Appl Psychol 1969;53:419-424. > Alm H, Nilsson L. The effects of a mobile telephone task on driver behaviour in a car following situation. Accid Anal Prev 1995;27:707-715. > McKnight AJ, McKnight AS. The effect of cellular phone use upon driver attention. Accid Anal Prev 1993;25:259-265. > Brookhuis KA, de Vries G, de Waard D. The effects of mobile telephoning on driving performance. Accid Anal Prev 1991;23:309-316. A quick search showed reports that talking while driving is generally distracting and should be avoided (hence the sign in buses: Don’t talk to the driver), but is less of a risk than a telephone conversation. So far, the studies seem to have consisted of asking the test drivers in the simulators questions requiring concentration - adding numbers, what colour is this item, - but not a normal-type conversation that people would have in a car. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2010, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/54 "2010-03-09T19:59:46Z")
> [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > Yes. I’ll tell you why it happens but beyond that I won’t try and defend it. The dog can’t sit in the back because we have two young children sitting in the back and they annoy the dog, dealing with that is more distracting than having to deal with him on my lap. He is supposed to sit in the passenger seat but he always tries to jump onto my lap and preventing him from jumping across is more distracting than having him on my lap. The best place for the dog while he is in the car is on my lap, BUT the best place for the dog in general, is not in the car at all. I agree with all of your points. [Here’s one solution.](http://www.petsafetybelt.com/)[Here’s another.](http://www.discount-pet-superstore.com/dog_crates/vari_kennel.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Achren](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/898d66/32.png) [@Achren](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achren)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2010, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/55 "2010-03-13T04:37:44Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > [Here’s an online test to really illustrate this](http://www.dft.gov.uk/drivingchallenge/) (it takes a loooong time to load). I completely ignored the woman and I still couldn’t count the pedestrians. (I’m bad at counting multiple things if it’s all done in my head) If I used a piece of paper with RED and YELLOW headings and put a mark down for everyone I saw, I could probably do it, but that seems like cheating. I know what they’re trying to show, but I don’t think much of the way they’ve done it. ---
**Author:** ![jnglmassiv](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f07891/32.png) [@jnglmassiv](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jnglmassiv)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2010, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/56 "2010-03-13T21:17:40Z")
> [@ZenBeam](#): > > Just using a CB radio would run afoul of the ordinance. The law would seem to only apply to seldom-seen _portable_ CB radios. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2010, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/57 "2010-03-14T16:12:13Z")
Spamming asshole reported. ---
**Author:** ![ZenBeam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/3ab097/32.png) [@ZenBeam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZenBeam)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2010, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446/58 "2010-03-16T01:33:46Z")
Update: [Ann Arbor City Council postpones vote on cell phone ban](http://www.annarbor.com/news/ann-arbor-city-council-pauses-cell-phone-ban/) > [@](#): > > It will be another two weeks at least before Ann Arbor City Council members get a chance to vote on a new ordinance banning the use of cell phones while driving. City Council Member Stephen Rapundalo, D-2nd Ward, the sponsor of the measure, asked council to postpone a vote scheduled for tonight while some revisions are made around the issue of two-way radios. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-busted-operating-electronic-device-while-driving-must-prove-my-innocence-need-answer-fast/531446.md?page=2)