I like Jenkins Careless Driving bill today more than I did initially. My hesitancy was because it can't always be proved that a person was multi-tasking (i.e. talking on the phone, attending to children, etc) once the officer pulls a driver over. Not if they were pulled over for speeding and the driver was, otherwise in their own lane, and not a danger anyone.
Jenkins has amended the bill so that police can't pile on with these careless driving offenses if the person is only speeding. If, however, they are swerving all over the road, and can't manage multi-tasking, then these might be added to their ticket.
Now it seems that careless driving would require some proof before it is enforced. I can't argue with that.
However, the 5 mile an hour increase, is a problem. I don't think we should change the law to accommodate what people are already doing. There is no data to say that increasing the speed limit will make us safer.
Careless drivers would be targets, speed limit raised
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Careless drivers would be targets, speed limit raised
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Could not disagree more. I think the distracted driver parts of the bill are the most problematic. The increase in speed limits is a long time coming. 90% of drivers exceed the posted limits not because they are all bad drivers but because the limits are too low.
Speed limits on I-15 between Spanish Fork and St George and on I-80 between Toole and Wendover are stupidly low. It is time for an increase
Well, I still think that the careless provisions would be the most problematic. That is, after all, what concerned me most in the first place. I think the law of unintended consequenses could get in the way. It gives 'ambulance chaser' types way to much to do.
Speed limits should not be changed just because of popular demand. Besides, it is only a 5 mile an hour increase. If speed limits are "stupidly low", will that small increase make the speed limits smart, in your opinion?
Post a Comment