SB 1613 would slap you with a $20 fine the first time, and $50 on the second offense for driving while using a cellphone unless you have a headset or speakerphone working. But there are some iffy loopholes ...
The bill would provide that this prohibition does not apply to a person who is using the cellular telephone to contact a law enforcement agency or public safety entity for emergency purposes, or to an emergency services professional while he or she operates an authorized emergency vehicle, as specified. The bill also would provide that this prohibition does not apply to a person when using a digital two-way radio service that is built into a wireless telephone.
Were you taking notes? Tell the cop who pulls you were over that you were on the horn with 911 or chatting with your firefighter/cop/paramedic buddy and you might get off.
If, of course, the officer verifies that's true.
But why allow people to use the "digital two-way radio" loophole? What does it matter whether you're holding the handset up to your ear or a foot from your face? You still have your brain wrapped in remote conversation and one of your driving hands busy with a gadget.
Doubtless, some rich egocentric Angelenos will flout the law and eat the fines. But remember - it's not just the fine, it's the time you lose explaining yourself to the cop writing you the ticket. Time is money, baby.
Amazingly, some tool of a cellphone company is dissing the bill:
Kathleen Dunleavy, a spokeswoman for Sprint Nextel - the only group formally opposing Simitian's proposal - said: "These types of bills single out the wireless phone whereas there are many other distractions drivers encounter, including screaming kids in the back seat, eating food, putting on makeup - so all of these are certifiable distractions, but those are not legislated."
Not sure how you expect to legislate "screaming kids in the back seat," but you go, lady.
