What the Texting Law Means

By: Mr. Wilson on July 6, 2010
Be the first to comment!
There's been some chatter about the new texting law that will go into effect on July 15. (I originally thought it was July 1. Silly me.) The law (PDF) is actually a bit broader than just texting. The law reads:
Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2) of this section, no person shall use a handheld wireless communication device to read a written communication, manually type a written communication, or send a written communication while operating a motor vehicle which is in motion.
Let's start at the end. Note that this law only applies to operators of vehicles in motion. If you want to text at a stop light, you're golden. Just be ready to face the ire of other drivers when you text through a green light. So what is a "handheld wireless communication device"? The law defines it like this:
Handheld wireless communication device means any device that provides for written communication between two or more parties and is capable of receiving, displaying, or transmitting written communication.
That includes, but is not limited to:
  • Cell phones
  • Text messaging devices
  • PDAs
  • Pagers
  • Laptops
Importantly, devices built into the car itself and handsfree devices are not included. The law also defines "written communication":
Written communication includes, but is not limited to, a text message, an instant message, electronic mail, and Internet web sites.
This definition is odd. Texts, IMs, and emails I get. But "Internet web sites"? How is looking at a website a communication "between two or more parties", unless a server is counted as a "party"? I'm no lawyer, but I thought a "party" was typically human. Furthermore, does that mean that looking at a map from maps.google.com is illegal, but looking at the identical map via the Maps app on an Android phone is allowed? Not that you should worry yourself too much about any of the loopholes and quirks in the law. The law is a secondary offense, meaning you can't be pulled over for violating it. (Not that a police officer couldn't find some other reason to pull you over if he wanted to.) Aside from that, police officers will have a hell of a time trying to prove you were illegally engaging in written communications using a handheld wireless communication device as opposed to, say, dialing a phone number. For a charge to stick, cops will pretty much have to get you to confess on your own or pull your phone records, an act which would require a warrant. Still, the point of the law isn't really about texting. It's about people being idiots while driving. The long and short of it is stop being an idiot behind the wheel. No law can halt idiocy, it has to be a voluntary act. So how 'bout it?

Comments

See what your friends and neighbors have to say about this.

No comments yet! Be the first.

Share your thoughts with the community.

Commenting is no longer permitted on this post.