[ back ]
CW considers texting while driving ban
(by Linda Dillman - July 20, 2010)
The texting ban bandwagon continues to roll across Ohio, gaining supporters in Canal Winchester and, while the legislation is intended to save lives, the question becomes - how enforceable is the law?
On July 19, Canal Winchester Village Council heard the first reading of an ordinance prohibiting sending, reading, or writing a text message or accessing the Internet while driving, citing the need to improve roadway safety for everyone.
According to the ordinance, any message sent, stored, or received via a mobile communication device-including wireless phones, a personal digital assistant, or personal computer-while driving is a violation of the proposed law.
Drivers would not be allowed to manually enter letters, numbers, or text messages, or read any received e-mails or text messages transmitted to and/or from a device; send, read, create, or interact with Internet-based content; play games; or otherwise interact with the Internet.
The provision would not apply to operators of emergency or public safety vehicles used in the course of official duties; anyone reporting a health or safety emergency; drivers parked, standing, or stopped on the side of the road; a person reading, selecting, or entering a name or telephone number in order to make or receive a call; or a commercial truck driver using a mobile data terminal while working.
Violators would be guilty of a minor misdemeanor.
"People are going online while they're driving," said Councilman Steve Donahue. "I was sitting at the light by Bob McDorman and the drivers of the seven cars in front of me were on the phone."
Fairfield County Deputy Sheriff Kirk Kern said there are several bills at the Statehouse addressing similar concerns. However, since Canal Winchester-like others before it-is making the ordinance a secondary, instead of primary offense, law enforcement officers are not permitted to stop an automobile for the sole purpose of determining whether or not a violation was committed.
(Prior to becoming a primary offense, mandatory wearing of seat belts was a secondary offense. Officers could only cite violators if they were pulled over for a different primary offense. Now it is a primary violation and law enforcement can pull over and cite violators for not wearing their seat belt.)
"I see people reading newspapers (while driving). I'm concerned it's (proposed ordinance) a little too specific," said Councilman Rick Deeds, who suggested broader language addressing inattentive driving.
Kern said that as a secondary offense, even if officers see a cell phone, they cannot check it to determine if it was recently used for texting. It would be necessary to first obtain a search warrant or rely upon the honesty or cooperation of the driver. As a primary offense, and under broader definition, it would be easier for deputies to enforce a ban on texting while driving a vehicle.
According to the Ohio Revised Code, as a secondary offense, a law enforcement officer cannot stop a motor vehicle solely because the officer sees the vehicle driver text messaging while driving; the officer must have another valid reason to stop the motor vehicle in order to issue a citation, summons, or ticket to the vehicle driver for the offense of driving while text messaging.
House Bill 415, prohibiting driving while texting, was introduced in the Ohio House of Representatives in January and the Ohio Senate in March. It would make the violation a minor misdemeanor, primary offense with a maximum fine of $150. If adopted, law enforcement officers would have a mandatory six-month grace period following the legislation's effective date to issue warnings before issuing citations.
[ back ]
