Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
“Eyes on the Road,” the campaign that kicks off a new law that bans the use of a handheld electronic device while driving, is unveiled Friday, Sept. 23, 2011. The law takes effect Oct. 1, 2011.
By Kyle B. Hansen (contact) 
Friday, Sept. 23, 2011 | 2:07 p.m.
Law banning use of handheld cell phones while driving about to take effect
Viewing video requires the latest version of Adobe's Flash Player
KSNV coverage of new law that bans use of handheld cell phones while driving, Sept. 23, 2011.
SB 140 (Cell Phones and Driving)
Related Content
- Contrary to tweet, cellphone law goes into effect Oct. 1 (7-7-2011)
- Letter to the Editor: Is Nevada’s new cellphone law a necessary evil? (07-03-2011)
- Sandoval signs bill banning hand-held cell phones, texting while driving (06-17-2011)
- From cell phones to smoking, 6 bills that could affect you (06-10-2011)
- Bill to ban cell phones, texting while driving gets final OK (06-04-2011)
LOL. OMG. RIP.
Officials are using signs with that message in hopes of getting their point across to all ages: Not only is talking or texting with a cellphone while driving dangerous, it will soon be illegal.
Politicians behind the ban joined with law enforcement and driving safety advocates today for a news conference to remind drivers of the new law, which takes effect Oct. 1.
After that, officers will aggressively pull over motorists who are talking or texting with handheld phones, but they’ll be issuing warnings until Jan. 1, when they will begin issuing misdemeanor fines of $50.
A first offense will not be treated as a moving traffic violation, but a second offense in a seven-year period carries a $100 fine plus points on the driver’s record and the third and subsequent offenses would result in $250 fines. Those convicted of a third offense in a seven-year period will have their driver’s license suspended for six months.
Nevada Highway Patrol Sgt. Kevin Honea said troopers and police officers would be happy if the warning period is enough to stop people from using their phones.
“Ideally we’d get to everybody and in a perfect world come Jan. 1, we never have to write this citation,” he said. “That would mean we got the message to everybody and everybody understood it.”
That’s not likely to happen, he acknowledged, and officers will be watching closely to enforce the law, he said.
Those responsible for the law hope the citations will encourage people to be safe.
State Sen. Shirley Breeden, D-Henderson, sponsor of the bill that became law, said she knows not everyone will follow the rules, but she hopes the financial consequences in bad economic times will encourage obedience.
“It hits them in the pocketbook,” she said.
State Sen. Mark Manendo, D-Las Vegas, had similar ideas: “There are only certain things that really get people’s attention,” he said. “I don’t think many things work better than hitting their pocketbook and putting points on their license.”
Manendo said this is the most important public safety bill he’s seen in 18 years in the Legislature.
“No bill has more of a significant impact on the day-to-day lives of people in Nevada than this bill,” he said.
Others at today’s event sought to encourage participation through the heartstrings.
Brian LaVoie gave a tearful account of the last time he saw his 18-year-old daughter, Hillary, one year ago. Hillary wasn’t wearing a seat belt when the driver of the car she was in lost control while talking on the phone.
“I come here not for your sympathy, not for your tears and not for the sadness,” LaVoie said. “I come here to educate you and to prevent you from belonging to the club that … no one wants to belong to, the club that my wife Tina and I belong to. We have lost our child.”
Now, the memory of his daughter and the desire to warn others is what gets him out of bed in the morning despite his grief, he said.
“Please, put down your cellphone, do not text and always wear your seat belt.”
This law does have an impact on public safety.
No one has to buy a hands free unit, like all things, it's a choice.
You could wait until you are parked to talk or text. No one is saving lives by driving 70 mph on their cellphone oblivious of others lives.
It won't be too hard to find these drivers b/c they'll be the ones driving slower than everyone else.
What if I put my phone on speaker and hold it a short distance from my head?
I drive a lot, and constantly see people on cell phones. The amount of accidents directly related to cell phone use is minimal compared to the amount of times they are used while driving. This is government control and a money maker for the government. They get away with it because of scare tactics. It's for safety. It's all bs. This law is dumb. I feel bad for people that are hurt or injured because they got into an accident where someone was using a cell-phone, but that's life. If it happened to someone I loved, I would be hurt. However, not everyone should be punished because of the few that mess up. It's all about money and controll from the government. You want to be totally safe? Live in a bubble
You can tell drivers have absolutely no fear of getting caught or desire to change their behavior. I see it constantly through out my day. This article states warning tickets will start to be issued Oct 1st, but I know I saw TV news stating warnings were to start last July. It can't start too soon in my opinion. I hope this is a law that will be enforced. Yesterday I even saw a guy driving the wrong way down a street in the Alliante area. When someone got him to stop, he acted as if everyone else was in the wrong. To bad a cop wasn't around to at least give him a ticket for failure to keep right and hazardous driving. These people have no clue how dangerous it is to text while driving.
"Manendo said this is the most important public safety bill he's seen in 18 years in the Legislature."
Read this, People -- they made it a misdemeanor. As in it's an actual crime, something you can go to jail for, and creates a criminal record. Funny how the reporter missed the significance of that little detail.
Anyone else care to speculate that's what was REALLY behind that group of local judges who just upped bail for a simple misdemeanor to $1,000?? That's also in today's lasvegassun.com/news/2011/sep/23/las-vegas-court-raises-bail-amounts-crimes/
Anyone out there still think it's not about the money??
"[The law] has placed the collective force in the service of those who wish to traffic, without risk, and without scruple, in the persons, the liberty, and the property of others; it has converted plunder into a right, that it may protect it, and lawful defense into a crime, that it may punish it." -- Frederic Bastiat, 1850 "The Law"
Studies show that hands free devices are no safer. A piece of feel good legislation, backed by egotistical law enforcement (who are exempted). Too bad we live in an era when facts and science do not matter.
http://www.webmd.com/balance/news/201008...
It's about time. These knuckleheads are usually oblivious to everything going on around them. Talking, not signaling, swerving, changing speeds and a general disregard for everyone else.
I would like to see the 1st offense $100. After that $300. Then you lose your license. Maybe this law will get some of these idiots to wise up. You don't need to be on your phone while you are driving. Aunt Sara's pound cake recipe can wait. Your daughter calling wanting to know if her friend can come over can wait. Let them text you. You can glance down and read it at a stop light. If it's an important message pull over and make your call.
Friend of mine calls today to ask for help. Seems he was TEXTING while driving his boat on Lake Mead.
His boat is now 20 feet up on the shore in a remote area of the lake.
It going to cost him $3500 to get it salvaged plus the repairs to the boat.
Driving cars or boats and texting is expensive.
Good thing he is still alive though.
How do the police plan on enforcing this? I see very few cops driving around and whenever I do see police they are talking on their cell phones!
STOP THE PRESSES, mred said something I actually agree with!
Now I know it's going to be a good weekend!
Utter waste of time and legislation. This law is nothing but an appeasement to nanny-staters. The law already exists; it's called "drvmg while distracted." the only difference? There is "evidence" that someone was on their phone, but no evidence other than hearsay that someone was shaving, applying makeup, reading, taking notes, eating, singing, arguing, changing the radio station, having sex, or whatever else people do instead of driving.
Lame. It will change nothing.
I'm with Tom on this. The fines are way too low.
I am all for the new law but the question is..........how does can a police officer (or anyone)) determine if you are texting or not. You can be dialing a number on your phone or touching your IPOD/MP3 player or even operating accessories on your dash board.
OMG GGPOBM SL IGGAT,,,,,,,Omg,,,gonna get pulled over by metro, stop laffing, I'm gonna get a ticket,
"Utter waste of time and legislation. This law is nothing but an appeasement to nanny-staters. The law already exists; it's called "drvmg [sic] while distracted." ..... Lame. It will change nothing."
James_P -- excellent post, and part of the public debate since the beginning on this topic. Next will come the iPod law, then the "driving while drinking your [insert favorite non-alcoholic beverage here]" law -- then the state will propose to outlaw all drivethroughs, and not just Starbucks. Then on down the list for every busybody crying to the legislature about what they saw other drivers doing -- adjusting stereos/GPS/whatever's on your dashboard, putting on makeup, reading, dealing with kids and pets on their laps. All of it handled with the simple law already on the books about driving while distracted.
The threshold inquiry for every citizen should be at what point should the state get a legitimate interest in a driver's actions. And that's a Constitutional question.
"...police dont need a search warrant to download your electronic device. welcome to amerika."
dipstick -- you're making sense lately, that's scary. Especially the part about Amerika.
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Isaac H Tiffany (1819)
Mrhorsey?
Are you trying to justify the use of hand held cell phones by pointing out that the hands free stye ones aren't any safer or are you attempting to make a valid point?
Or are you making an opening for the "king of quotes" to point out that had cell phones have been legal back in the day Paul Revere could have saved some wear and tear on one of your ancestors by texting that "the British are coming"?
Pmart! Thanks for the great Paul Revere visual and laugh!
Flash mob at dock...we got tea...prepare to party!
Sorry! Couldn't resist.
Well-connected and well-financed insurance industry lobbyists have won this battle, and the Essential Liberty of the People will suffer yet another setback. Welcome to crony statism, my friends.
I think i'll go to the second hand store and buy a box of old phones. How will they know which one i am using? Will i get a ticket for each one?
Can we ticket them for using their cell phones, of course not. They will just say it is for emergency purposes. I will have that same answer.
Sorry officer, i was calling 911 for you cause i saw you spill ur Latte on your motorcycle tank.
It's a reasonable law. We've all seen drivers talking or texting on their cell phones and not paying attention to the road. Personally I don't want other drivers to be free to do that, I just don't. Defensive driving will only get you so far. It's hard to drive defensively against someone who suddenly swerves into your lane, for example.
Of course the police will not catch all the offenders. Of course there are other reasons for car crashes. So? Here is one thing that can be addressed, and I for one am glad it is being addressed.
Manendo thinks he was elected to be "The Punisher"? Sort of like when Bush claimed to be the "Decider"?
Idiots -- the both of them.
This law gives cops virtual Carte Blanche to pull ANYONE over. Let the witch hunts begin!
I don't have a problem with people using their cell phone while driving.
What I have a problem with is people who are on their cell phone and then slow down to 45mph on the 15. THOSE are the dangerous ones - clearly they can't do both at once.
(ANYONE who is texting while driving, on the other hand, is just plain stupid.)
Great law, all military bases enforce these as standard and accidents are down a good bunch.
I endorse this law 100%. I have had so many people change lanes into me while talking on the phone, run through stop signs, and back into my car in parking lots all while talking on the phone!!
There is no right that allows you to use your phone while driving! So all this big government BS is just that! You have a license to drive..period! There is no Phone endorsement on that license! There is no intrusion on your rights or freedoms of any kind! If you think there is I would love to hear which of your rights you think is being violated? Freedom of speech? hahahaha
Grow up!
Bimmerdude,
You say that this big goverent is not behind this, you are wrong. Government is the one who proposed this. Have not seen the expansion of government and loss freedoms of Americans over the years? Maybe that's because you have been paid by them the over 10 years according to your older posts. Your accounts of all these mishaps with cells phones and other drivers, I call bs. How can u have a recommend button next to your posts, when u only have 6 and are not a trusted commentor? Why do most trusted commentors not have One. That seems fishy. Wonder why
James_P_Reza- great post