Forums Home › East Contra Costa › Antioch

Rental Inspection & Cell Phone Fines!


Posted on Tue, 07/01/2008 - 17:22 — by BazookaJoe
BazookaJoe
BazookaJoe's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2776
I had my City of Antioch Residential Rental Inspection today and nearly got fined big time.  Not because my rental didn't comply (it passed with flying colors), but because I forgot all about the appointment and the code enforcement man called me on my cell phone which I held up to my head while talking to him.  I suddenly caught myself and looked around to see if a cop had spotted me.  Thank goodness there were no cops around, but I had a good alibi all ready in case I got caught.  I looked down at my watch to see what day it was and it read June 31st.  I'm sure the cops would have seen how I could have mistakedly thought I had one more day. There's no excuse for the 2 other times I caught myself later in the day.  It's going to take some self discipline to conform to this law.  How come there's no grace period? 
No votes yet
‹ Antioch Car Fires 7/7/08? 4th of July Celebrations ›

Tue, 07/01/2008 - 17:50 — joe they gave hands free
jhd1200
jhd1200's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 260
joe they gave hands free today at work but it is a wire going from the phone to my ear,its bad enough i have my walkman type radio and headset around my neck allready im going to have a hard time with it so i think i will use loud speaker on my phone. i think that this new law is there for revenue for the state but here is my take i ride a motorcycle and can tell you that driving while celling is distracting to drivers because iam paying attention to them and see it first hand so whether it is up to your ear or you are hands free you  when celling your mind is elsewhere and your mouth is a yapping,so  so it is basically the same so if the state throws a rule in there and catch you breaking it aha! revenue.
Tue, 07/01/2008 - 17:50 — it's not the fine what's
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
it's not the fine what's hurting you. the radio waves go by you ear right into your brain....
Tue, 07/01/2008 - 18:40 — Grace Period
001
001's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1403
The grace period has been pretty much the last 6 months. The law passed some time ago, but they are just now enforcing it. I got a bluetooth about a month ago, but still haven't gotten it completely figured it out.
Tue, 07/01/2008 - 18:45 — This morning I introduced my
stoney4
stoney4's picture

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1930
This morning I introduced my Bluetooth to my cell phone and they said "howdy". I'll have to have someone call me and see if I did it right.
Tue, 07/01/2008 - 20:16 — even i welcome some kind of
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
even i welcome some kind of action against those drivers with their phones in their hands, the problem i am having is, that a certain group of people, like police / ermergency personal etc is exempt.   if the argument is, distraction...ergo..higher accident rate,  what makes the drivers of that group "better" ?
Tue, 07/01/2008 - 22:49 — Cuz!
TrueHonesty1
TrueHonesty1's picture

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 31
"...a certain group of people, like police / ermergency personal etc is exempt...if the argument is, distraction...ergo..higher accident rate,  what makes the drivers of that group "better?..." Well, believe it or not but there are many types of vocations that are exempt from certain laws/rules for certain reasons. For example, newspaper delivery persons are exempt from wearing a seatbelt while in the course of their duties. The same goes for emergency personnel. There are times they will need to use their phones (yes, even while driving) to provide service so they too should be exempt. I believe all agencies will encourage their personnel to refrain from using cellphones while driving. But to take it away by policy, when not done so by by law, would be a disservice to the community and could possibly put lives in danger as cellphones are critical communication tools when used during "valid" emergencies. But If Joe/Josephine Cop want to talk on their cellphones with their friends or family while they're working they should pull over like everyone else to talk.
Tue, 07/01/2008 - 23:30 — Oh, you mean you have to
BazookaJoe
BazookaJoe's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2776
Oh, you mean you have to also be driving to get a ticket?  Waiting in line at Lowes while holding a phone to your head is ok?
Wed, 07/02/2008 - 00:28 — just that we're at the same
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
just that we're at the same page. i am pro police.   but if the argument is that the use of a cell phone is the cause of a certain % of accidents, then no one should use them while driving. emergency personal has to watch other vehicles, their in car radio, their in car computer, their partner, and now they can handle a cell phone on top of it? i don't like the idea and fact, that the law creates two different kind of people.
Wed, 07/02/2008 - 07:18 — two kinds of people
Smokey38
Smokey38's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 840
     Berlin, there are 2 kinds of people, The Haves and the Have Nots.  We are the Have Nots, get over it.
Wed, 07/02/2008 - 07:41 — It's probably going to be a
BazookaJoe
BazookaJoe's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2776
It's probably going to be a little more dangerous at the beginning while people try to figure out how to use their new blueteeth (Look Mom, No Hands!) devices.  Plus they will be spinning their heads around looking for cops after they catch themselves goofing up instead of watching the road, or as in my case yesterday, while I was in line at Lowes.  No wonder people didn't give me dirty looks until I turned on the speakerphone.
Wed, 07/02/2008 - 08:01 — Cell Phones In Public
Smokey38
Smokey38's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 840
Question??  If I am standing in line at, say, Lowes, and someone is talking on their cell phone. Is it a threat to me getting cancer? Or will the radiation waves stop and go around my body? RF energy, also called radiowaves, is a form of electromagnetic radiation.  It is not yet known whether non-ionizing radiation poses a cancer risk.
Wed, 07/02/2008 - 08:06 — The only person at potential
stoney4
stoney4's picture

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1930
The only person at potential risk is the user with the thing crammed against their head.
Wed, 07/02/2008 - 08:56 — When your head starts
001
001's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1403
When your head starts turning orange and red, it is time to just put the phone away.  
Wed, 07/02/2008 - 11:10 — When your head starts
TinRoof
TinRoof's picture

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 182
This guy looks like he’s missing part of his occipital lobe. I don’t think I would want to be on the road with him even if he wasn’t holding a cell phone to his ear!
Wed, 07/02/2008 - 12:36 — Smokey
whirledpeas
whirledpeas's picture

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 442
 Question??  If I am standing in line at, say, Lowes, and someone is talking on their cell phone. Is it a threat to me getting cancer? Or will the radiation waves stop and go around my body. I believe your OFEC hat will protect you against radiation waves, global warming, earthquakes and people who park in Handicapped stalls that aren't handicapped.  Simply hold it by the bill in front of of you and say "I feel the power of the farce OFEC WON KENOBI"
Wed, 07/02/2008 - 13:11 — This will undoubtedly come
stoney4
stoney4's picture

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1930
This will undoubtedly come in handy when forces from the Dark Side invade our territory. An impending showdown with Darth Clayton in inevitable and I'm going to need all OFEC farce energy channeled through me to vanquish the enemy. I've been practicing my moves with my Light Wurst for the battle to come.
Thu, 07/03/2008 - 13:59 — popping popcorn with your cell phone!!
4Antioch
4Antioch's picture

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 420
Have you seen the videos on youtube where they laid them down pointing towards some popcorn kernels and then ran them? The radiowave energy was enough to pop the kernels!!
Thu, 07/03/2008 - 14:17 — Cell Phone Popcorn
001
001's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1403
Snopes.com reviewed that and declared it false. The page refers to cooking eggs with a cell phone, but if you go to the bottomof the page, it referes to the popcorn myth as well. Evidently, it was started by a Bluetooth company trying to create fear in consumers and stir people to buy their products. Now with the new law, they should be sitting pretty. http://www.snopes.com/science/cookegg.asp
Thu, 07/03/2008 - 14:34 — snopes.com
4Antioch
4Antioch's picture

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 420
Thanks, 001. I found it a bit unbelievable since a cell phone operates at less than 5 watts radiated power. But those youtube videos had me going for a while :)
Sat, 07/05/2008 - 18:59 — Two kinds of people
JHouse
JHouse's picture

Joined: May 2004
Posts: 13
 There are two kinds of people; those who socialize on their cell phones and those who use them only for emergencies. With the exception of solo police vehicles there are two or more occupants in most emergency vehicles so one can drive and the other use the radio. That of course doesn't mean that the chores are divided up that way but the potential is there.   One hopes that operators of emergency vehicles have significantly more training in driving with lights and siren and radio use than the average motorist and that the conversations they are carrying on are brief and related to the situation and not social in nature.
Sat, 07/05/2008 - 20:01 — if my wife has to call me ,
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
if my wife has to call me , you better believe it's an emergency...lol   the law talks about if a driver, while driving on a cell phone, not the partner. no matter which way you want to turn it, this law is absolutly wrong. and you're right it is all hopes   don't get me wrong, i am absolutly against it, same like...changing/ feeding the baby, shaving, blow jobs, teeth brushing, news paper reading and so on...the list is long   by the way....i been driving for over 40 years now, 18 in emergency vehicles, so i am not just sucking here something out of my fingers.
Thu, 07/03/2008 - 14:03 — Emergency personnel not totally exempt!
4Antioch
4Antioch's picture

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 420
Emergency services personnel such as police cannot use their cell phone while driving if it is a personal call; they can only use it for official business per the new law. Firefighters have no excuse for the driver using a cell phone since they have at least two other firefighters on each fire truck. Not covered by the new cell phone law are Amateur Radio operators (which are federally licensed) since it is not classified as a "cell phone". All of us HAM radio operators have been given copies from the ARRL attornies to keep in our vehicles to help the police should we get mistakenly pulled over.
Sat, 07/05/2008 - 08:49 — Exemption
gordo
gordo's picture

Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 9
Police/Fire/Ambulance are exempt because they need to be.  What you probably don't know and realize is that police call victims on the way to the calls, especially in progress calls, to get updated information that maybe the dispatcher didn't ask.  For example maybe you left your car warming up in the driveway on a cold morning and upon coming out with your hot cup of coffee you see someone jump in your car and drive away.  Well the Officer needs to know specifics about your car, about the person getting in the car and the direction the car left. BY obtaining this information quickly over the phone the officer can be looking for your car while on his/her way to the call.  To help you be safe there has to be different rules, sorry, but that is how it is.
Sat, 07/05/2008 - 09:32 — well, one more time. it
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
well, one more time. it don't care what kind of reasons they may have. the reason we have that new law is...the use of a cell phone distracts a driver....= accidents. the exempted people here drive too, don't they? = accidents? may be the dispatcher needs a better training to ask all the questions, or the software needs to be re-written. or may be we should hire only cops with a third ear for the blue tooth device?          
Sat, 07/05/2008 - 10:01 — Berlin
Smokey38
Smokey38's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 840
Come on Berlin. I know you aren't serious about this. Are you? It's kind of like, well how come the PD and emergency cars get to go through red lights? And another thing: If they get 3 hands then I want another one. It sure would make it easier to slap some people up side the head. LOL
Sat, 07/05/2008 - 13:37 — this is not the same at all,
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
this is not the same at all, and you know that. and just that you know, if you get a thrid arm, i am not coming closer then 3 ft anymore....        
Sat, 07/05/2008 - 15:42 — Duh
P5Ret
P5Ret's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 342
In a simple word training, most drivers of emergency vehicles have to go through training every couple of years. Not to mention the fact that they have been mult-tasking while driving for years when you have to use the radio (2-way) and MDC while driving a cell phone is a easy thing to use.
Sat, 07/05/2008 - 16:11 — Most of us have been
001
001's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1403
Most of us have been mult-tasking while driving for years. Just today I was driving along with a cup of coffee in one hand and putting my sungalsses on with the other (steering with my knee for a few seconds). Of course, I waited until there were no other cars around and the road was straight, but I think the law was put in place due to the large number of people on the road immersed in phone conversations that are not paying any attention at all to driving. I would hope that emergency personnel would have access to bluetooth or hands-free devices and use them when they can, as Berlin correctly points out that if it makes people drive safer then it makes sense for everyone to be safer. The same argument could be made for our speed limits. If it is safer for people to drive within the posted speed limit, then everyone should do so unless it is an emergency situation. I still can't figure out why school buses don't have seat belts.
Sat, 07/05/2008 - 18:32 — while driving a cell phone
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
while driving a cell phone is a easy thing to use. why would we need a law? most, not all driver undergo training?????? there is a training..driving under red light/ siren condition and using the cell phone at the same time? come on now, why are you making things up?    
Sat, 07/05/2008 - 23:42 — come on
P5Ret
P5Ret's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 342
Why are you putting words in my mouth did I say that there is training for cell phone driving? When was the last time you had to undergo any type of drivers training, let alone high speed pursuit driving where you have to use the radio and pay attention to traffic and where you may be because you may not be in an area you are familiar with while driving over the speed limit, safely. This is why most police officers are better than average drivers. The law is regulatory for all because of the percentage of drivers who for the most part can't walk and chew gum at the same time let alone drive and talk on a phone. I don't like it, I don't think that using a hands free device is going to make any difference if you are on the phone, and caught up in a conversation what difference will it make if you have a hand set or a hands free unit?
Sun, 07/06/2008 - 07:46 — When was the last time you
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
When was the last time you had to undergo any type of drivers training, let alone high speed pursuit driving where you have to use the radio and pay attention to traffic and where you may be because you may not be in an area you are familiar with while driving over the speed limit, safely. thank you. that's exactly why there should no exemption. This is why most police officers are better than average drivers. the law...my friend should be the same for everybody    
Sun, 07/06/2008 - 10:36 — your world
P5Ret
P5Ret's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 342
You are just convinced that some officer is using a cell phone while driving a pursuit or responding code 3 to a call aren't you, so obviously you are living in your own little world and don't understand the need of law enforcement to use a phone while driving for "business" use. You have twisted comments by others to fit your needs trying to make some point, or other. Try having a reasonable conversation without putting words in someone else's mouth or twisting something around to fit your needs. Gee there is also an exemption for truck drivers using a Nextel you haven't said that is a problem, why is that? Truck drivers cause and get into quite a few collisions. Maybe we should just outlaw phone use in cars altogether, that would make me happy I sure would hope that most people would pay more attention on the freeway if they wern't wrapped up in what ever little world they happen to be in on the phone.
Sun, 07/06/2008 - 11:36 — understanding the need of
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
understanding the need of having/ use cell phones and a law which creates different classes of people are two  different things. this law was created to prevent accidents. that has to apply for the exempted people too. what is a code 3? and again if you think that our police does not has the right equipment, then they need to get it, but in the  ear...!!!!! i miss something here. i thought if i have an emergency, i call 911, the operator takes all needed info down and alarms whoever. communication is between base and car is by computer and radio? and yes, i live in my own little world  
Sun, 07/06/2008 - 16:26 — your words
P5Ret
P5Ret's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 342
by the way....i been driving for over 40 years now, 18 in emergency vehicles, so i am not just sucking here something out of my fingers. And you don't know what "code 3" driving is? Makes me question your statment. I don't know of a single police department that has all of the equipment or up to date equipment they need budgets being what they are these days. I guess I just have a better idea on why the exemption was put in there in the first place, and nothing anyone says or shows you will change your mind or make you understand that there are times when an officer needs to have a more descreet form of communication between themselves and dispatch, not too mention all of the calls that are cleared by telephone without returning to the station to call the reporting party. I know I want my cops on the street not in the office making calls to citizens.
Sun, 07/06/2008 - 17:03 — it is secondary to me why
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
it is secondary to me why and what calls are made. we're talking about two different things. the use of cell phones while driving has increased accidents..distraction.....that's why this law is there now....but it distracts  only a certain group of drivers?   unfortunately a very high % of officers have died in regards to automobiles,  but the state by state stats . given are incomplete, in comparision  to citizen accident reports there are detailed stats available about accidents with cell phones in regards to ordinary citizen, but where are the stats about the dead accidents officers?   i strongly support that our pd has all the needed and newest equipment to do the job. if you're saying the provided radio in the car, and computer system is not enough, i urge you to address that publicly, and i will be the first one to support you.   if a cop needs to call me, i want him to park the car, because it is dangerous to use a cell phone while driving.
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 07:03 — Don't complain
gordo
gordo's picture

Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 9
I don't want to hear you complain when you call the police because you have an emergency and the police take a long time to respond because they had to pull over to call you because they had a question the dispatcher forgot to ask.  Maybe the officer will just have to return to the station first to make the call as officers are not provided with dept issued cell phones. They have to use their own and are not required to do so, they do it to make their job easier and to give you better service.  I understand your point on this issue, but obviously you have NEVER been in this situation and don't really understand why there has to be exceptions.
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 08:16 — when i have to call 911, i
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
when i have to call 911, i want the pd officer in the car to come and not to call me.   the issue also is not if the phone is owned privatly or issued by the pd department. the issue is not if a cell phone makes a job easier, and again, if the dispatcher does not ask the right questions...train them..have department meetings, discuss what quetion need to be ask, change the software.        
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 08:39 — Hey Berlin, the only part of
BazookaJoe
BazookaJoe's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2776
Hey Berlin, the only part of that video that was in German was the sentence:  Enabling [bleep]bags Everywhere."  What does that mean? That was funny, but I think they exaggerated a bit.  If they didn't exaggerate, I wouldn't want the cops having all the latest technology because then it would be too tempting for them to be shaving and making wedding invitations while driving to the scene of a crime, and I agree that wouldn't be good. I kind of agree wih the message in that video, that the handsfree law will do little to make the roads safer.  Personally, I feel like I am more of a risk to myself and other people, than I was when this law went into effect, but I'm willing to take extra precautions, go to counseling, or whatever, to make sure nothing happens.  Not to be overly paranoid or cynical, but will other people?  We have to give it time though.  The say it worked in other States, and if the automakers react by installing handsfree technology in every car that doesn't cost extra to use or something, it could help in the long run.  I wouldn't have minded if they went an extra step and just outlawed cell use altogether, but I see the problem in enforcing it and positive safety issues you don't want to eliminate.  I'm sure they put a lot of thought in it and this is the best they could come up with.  I still like the feel of holding a phone to my head though.  It feels like it belongs there and it helps block outside environmental noise pollution that can be stressful, like those split-laning loud motorcycles that go whizzing by (no offense, JHD).
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 08:50 — while you here...... i
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
while you here...... i thought i saw you yesterday..a car drove by,inside a guy with a hat, yelling and screaming to who knows..suddenly a phone flew out of the window...now my windshield is broken. do i send you the bill? can i keep the phone?
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 09:05 — That was my twin.  I was on
BazookaJoe
BazookaJoe's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2776
That was my twin.  I was on the other line and told him to quit impersonating me and doing bad things or I would have to take him to court.  I guess he didn't take the news too well.  Looks like you have cause to take him to court.  Did you happen to videotape it? (while you were driving, of course).
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 17:58 — Outlaw Conversation!
HelpUsFixIt
HelpUsFixIt's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 53
Wouldn't the natural next step be to outlaw all conversations while driving?  If talking is distracting, maybe we just shouldn't talk to anyone in the backseat- or even the passenger seat. Or maybe, we just need to get better at talking on cell phones. If you do it right, it shouldn't be any more distracting to you or irritating to others than talking normally. This whole concept just escapes me.
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 19:43 — you know, it bugs me when i
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
you know, it bugs me when i see those people with all their extra activities in their cars while driving, and if i hunk the horn, then suddenly i am the aggressor..how crazy. but if we do something, don't exempt half of the population. putting lipstick on while driving is as dabgerous as using a csll phone. well, i guess i am not gone talk on the phone anymore, i just text
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 21:34 — You know what Berlin?  I
BazookaJoe
BazookaJoe's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2776
You know what Berlin?  I don't think the cops can enforce it.  I caught myself twice again holding the phone to my ear.  I don't do it purposely, the problem is it rings and I'm so engrossed to paying attention to driving that I just answer it the old way out of habit.  How often do you see a cop around anyway?  Each time I catch myself getting away with it, I feel a little less anxiety.  I hope this isn't how people fall into a life of crime, by getting away with things because there's no consequences for your lawless behavior.  I can see how it happens.  This is why it's stupid to have laws that you can't enforce.  We need more cops, a tougher legal system, and start cracking down on crime if we expect people to change or comply with the law.  Heck, I'm pretty honest and would probably march into the police station tonight and tell them I held a cell phone to my head, but what's the point?  The DA probably wouldn't prosecute me anyway.  There's probably some stupid law they have to catch me in the act.  Probably some law against self-incrimination, or maybe they would just think I'm some kind of nut trying to get attention.  The cops are busy now trying to find that murder suspect the juvenile hall guards let go by mistake, so do they really have the time to go after cell phone yappers?  Maybe all of us on this forum are stressing over nothing.  I'll try my best to comply, but i'm not worrying about it anymore.  Maybe you shouldn't either? Now those residential rental inspectors are the ones you really should worry about.  Sooner or later, they will get you.  The guy told me if you install a window air conditioner in a bedroom, you have to have another window to allow egress.  I thought to myself, "Yeah, but doesn't that just allow ingress for a burglar?"  I guess that's not as important. 
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 21:36 — I Just Don't get It
Smokey38
Smokey38's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 840
Why would anyone want a cell phone?
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 21:57 — Why would anyone want a cell phone?
cowboy1539
cowboy1539's picture

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 760
Your right Smokey they can be a pain in the butt. The main reason I have mine is that both of my parents are in declining health. My mother now lives alone and has my cell phone on speed dial. She also has a "Life Alert" system and my cell phone is listed as a secondary response number after my home phone. For the last month my father has been in the hospital and his doctor has my cell phone number and has used it give me daily updates if we do not hook up at the hospital. My alarm company also uses my cell number to let me know when the alarm goes off and to find out what action I want them to take. Its's also nice to have on road trips which me and the wife do a lot of both together and apart. The last thing is that many people have dropped their "hard line" phones as with some cell plans it is cheaper than "Ma Bell".
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 21:39 — I don't think the cops can enforce it
cowboy1539
cowboy1539's picture

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 760
 BJ.. your pretty much right. This is nothing more than a minor traffic infraction, not even a moving violation as there are no points to your driving record. There will be no cops hiding in the bushes to catch you on your cell phone. It will be hit or miss, if they see you and got the time they will cite you. One thing though, all news reports say that the first offense is $20 while following offenses will be $50. With court costs and penalty assesments in Contra Costa County the fines will work out to be about $76 for first offenses and $190 for following offenses. 
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 22:09 — How do the cops see through
BazookaJoe
BazookaJoe's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2776
How do the cops see through all the dark tinted windows anyway?  They ought to make those illegal so the cops can see what the heck people are doing in there!  It's nice when you are on a freeway and can see through the clear back windows of the vehicle in front of you in case there's stopped traffic or some other hazard up ahead (it's also nice when you can watch their DVD's too when you're at a red light :)
Mon, 07/07/2008 - 23:13 — i have a cell phone, not
berlin
berlin's picture

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 139
i have a cell phone, not because i want to call my mother in law....jesus....no, i have one because my daughter had 3 heart operation and still her heart is not fixed. i want to be reachable......but as you have noticed, i am not pushing the reason why people use a phone (as others do here) what gets me is that this law exempts half of the population. and you're also right, don't we have other issues to take care of? if our pd now goes after cell phone users, who in the world will take care of those trash can violators? nobody left to look up the sticker on rv's......and so on. i wish that the supporters of that law, would come forward and claim that they need better equipment to do their job. sorry, you issue with the rental inspector is off the table....
Tue, 07/08/2008 - 00:17 — But they go hand in hand, if
BazookaJoe
BazookaJoe's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2776
But they go hand in hand, if it wasn't for me having a cell phone in the car, the rental inspector wouldn't have been able to reach me to remind me I forgot about his appointment.  I didn't think he needed me anyway because I figured he just did a drive-by to make sure the lawn was mowed or the trash cans weren't out.  No, they actually go into the back yard too.  I think he wanted me there to go through the gate first in case the tenants had a new pit bull or something.  I was really impressed by his thoroughness.  He was looking at everything and even pointed out dryrot and other maintenance issues.  There shouldn't be much code infractions or shabby looking rentals after they get done with all these inspections.  You can tell they take it seriously.  I was pretty cocky mine would pass easily, but he had me sweating bullets for a while there while he went around looking at every little thing and asking all kinds of questions.  I was so scared he wouldn't pass the house, that I ignored my bad back when I noticed the damn side gate was broke and totally dragging on the ground.  Somehow the adrenaline kicked in and I was able to pick it up and open it without him even noticing.  See, when you enforce things like that, it's pretty effective.  Stop worrying about the cell phone thing.  It's the rental inspector that's going to get you, not the cell phone police! 
Sun, 07/06/2008 - 07:56 — Having tried it the new law
BazookaJoe
BazookaJoe's picture

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2776
Having tried the new law now, I don't find it any safer.  I didn't get in any accidents when I held the phone to my ear, and as far as I know, I didn't cause any either (but I wasn't really paying attention so how would I know?). One thing I know for sure, the quality of my speaker phone sucks!  I'm on the phone a lot longer because I have to tell people to repeat what they're saying and speak louder.  I'm also fumbling around trying to turn down the car fan, close the windows, find the pause button to stop my "How to get rich buying cheap foreclosure for no money down CD" (still haven't found the pause button).  All the time it takes just to make the car quiet enough so I can hear the garbled conversation on the speaker adds to the time on the phone and makes more distraction.  After the conversation, which usually just consists of telling each other to speak up and then ending with an agreement to call back when I get to the nearest phone booth, I have to turn all that noisey stuff back on just to have the phone ring again and turn it all back off. I guess in other states, they have proven similar laws have been effective.  Maybe people get so frustrated, they throw their cell phones out the window?  But that could cause accidents attributed to cell phone use while driving too.  Former cell phone use, anyway.
Thu, 07/03/2008 - 08:16 — Two years is enough warning...
tara1
tara1's picture

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 505
It has been on the books for two years now to "give everyone time to adjust."  As we have found in so many cases, SOME people never have enough time to adjust.  I loved the video of the people pulled over on the first day of enforcement... "why didn't someone tell us?  I was just talking to my BFF; I'm a moronic, self-indulgent [bleep] who runs a home office from the front seat of my car and endangers other without a thought or care."  Check out the video of the Muni-Skidiot driving and talking on his cellie seconds before he RAMS the Muni car ahead of him.  Case closed.  But you're still doing it... I see you out there still, swerving all over the road while trying to text Buffy.  Heavier fines ought to do it.  Then go to work on the non-directional bass stereo systems.
Thu, 07/03/2008 - 08:41 — Hey tara 1 - I've never
stoney4
stoney4's picture

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1930
Hey tara 1 - I've never heard that term before. Maybe I would have had better luck with the jerk that's been rattling the windows on our street if I had flagged him down and asked him politely: "Sir, would you be so kind as to lower the volume of your non-directional bass stereo system".
Thu, 07/03/2008 - 14:56 — If it is distraction...
HelpUsFixIt
HelpUsFixIt's picture

Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 53
If it is distraction, then why not outlaw eating, putting up makeup, caring for crying babies, reading bumper stickers and any of the other potential distractions.  It seems like a weird law to me.  I think if an officer thinks you are driving distracted and dangerously- regardless of the reason- that should be grounds for a citation.  I feel like this one is a little arbitrary.  Not to mention, I would imagine for most people it is the conversation that is distracting, not the action of holding an object- I think most of us have that one down. Just my 2 cents
Thu, 07/03/2008 - 17:04 — you have some good points.