Ultimate boomer law - "joke" bill bans phones for people under 21

[williamcll]

Up to a year of jail time and a fine of $1000, it is not entirely serious.

Quote

MONTPELIER — A bill has been introduced in the state Senate that would make it illegal for anyone under the age of 21 to use or possess a cellphone. The bill, S.212, would make such possession or use a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of a year behind bars and a $1,000 fine. It said cellphone use while driving is one of the leading killers of teenagers. It also said young people use cellphones frequently to bully and threaten each other, something that has been linked to suicides.

 

“The Internet and social media, accessed primarily through cell phones, are used to radicalize and recruit terrorists, fascists, and other extremists. Cell phones have often been used by mass shooters of younger ages for research on previous shootings,” the bill reads. The bill said the Legislature has concluded those under 21 years old “aren’t mature enough” to possess guns, smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol and the same should apply to cellphone use. The state recently increased the smoking age to 21 and barred those under 21 from buying a gun unless they take a hunter safety course. The bill was introduced by Sen. John Rodgers, D-Essex-Orleans. Rodgers said Wednesday he introduced the bill to make a point. “I have no delusions that it’s going to pass. I wouldn’t probably vote for it myself,” he said. He said he’s a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and the Legislature “seems bent on taking away our Second Amendment rights.” He said, based on the information presented in the bill, a cellphone is much more dangerous than a gun.

 

The bill talks about suicide and suicide prevention was a major talking point when the Legislature passed a bill requiring a 24-hour waiting period to buy a handgun. Gov. Phil Scott vetoed the legislation and it’s not expected to be taken up again this session. Michelle Fay is the executive director of Voices for Vermont’s Children, an organization based out of Montpelier that promotes public policy that enhances the lives of children and youth in the state. Fay issued a statement saying, “There are so many critical issues impacting the lives of working families in Vermont today, from increasing minimum wage to implementing equitable family and medical leave insurance programs to establishing an office of child advocate. We urge the Legislature to focus on the important work at hand instead of getting tied up in hollow diversions.”

 

She said in an interview Wednesday there’s no question technology plays a role with children treating each other badly, but isolating cellphones doesn’t seem to make sense because they will still be able to use computers. “It feels like a reach, for sure,” she said. Fay said parents rely on cellphone access to be able to get in touch with their kids. She said most of the calls teen drivers receive come from their parents. She said it’s already against the law to text and drive. Fay said there need to be more conversations about distracted driving. “For teenagers, people in their car is a bigger distraction than cellphones,” she said. She said giving children conflict resolution skills and helping them feel more accountability for each other will help avoid cyberbullying.

Source: https://www.timesargus.com/news/local/bill-would-ban-cellphone-use-for-those-under/article_2e4064f1-892f-5a83-95a2-d8a4272942d9.html

Thoughts: considering the fact that not even the senator that made the proposal would vote for it, is he being serious? If so it's not a well made statement that is for sure, not to mention the economic effect and black market that is sure to follow.

[lewdicrous]

Okay, this is dumb. Instead of addressing the actual issue, they opt to just ban phones and punish people for having them?

Can't wait for the neighborhood dealer to start selling phones.

[Jurrunio]

Seeing how some adults drive cars under the influence of alcohol, maybe we should ban booze from anyone with a valid driving license?

[PopsicleHustler]

USA.... You can own firearm at an age of 14, but cannot own a god damn phone before turning 21.

 

The argument "X people use Y thing while driving is causing accidents" can go so deep, you will need a flashlight to see.

 

Another point is "suicide prevention". Question - Where do you draw the line between phone and a tablet? Or better - What is a smartphone? This reminds me about our ridiculous "TV License" law here in Ireland. It states that all TV owners must have a license, but it doesn't really specify what a TV is. It only outlines its basic functions that require you to get the license.

 

So same applies to smartphones. It doesn't specify what a "smartphone" is. I can easily go on Amazon and find a decent tablet under 10 inches that works exactly like a smartphone, but isn't classified as one.

[Retro_R]

Do they no recognize the difference between a phone and a gun? One is an info/entertainment device, and one is a killing machine. Have they also never heard of a computer? This is so stupid.

 

Why don't we go back to a prohibition age law since drinking and driving kills so many. If that's the type of solution they want to give, they should do it for everything

[SpikeSpiegel]

Our state already has an anti-texting/mobile phone law.  However people still abuse the law.  And Minors who abuse the anti-texting law are under stricter policy under that law.  However it doesn't work.  They will text while driving and it's not even monitored by the police unless you're in an accident.

 

Hands Free Georgia Law (HB673)

MAY 25, 2018

Effective July 1, 2018, pursuant to 40-6-241(c), all drivers operating a motor vehicle on any highway of this state are prohibited from:

• Holding or supporting, with any part of the body, a wireless telecommunications device or stand-alone electronic device.

• Writing, sending or reading any text-based communication, including a text message, instant message, e-mail or internet data.

• Watching, recording, or broadcasting a video or movie.

Penalties:

• 1st conviction – 1 point and $50.00 fine
• 2nd conviction – 2 points and $100.00 fine
• 3rd or more convictions – 3 points and $150.00 fine

For more information on the law and FAQ, visit http://www.headsupgeorgia.com/handsfree-law/.

[PopsicleHustler]

4 minutes ago, CalintzJerevinan said:

Our state already has an anti-texting/mobile phone law.  However people still abuse the law.  And Minors who abuse the anti-texting law are under stricter policy under that law.  However it doesn't work.  They will text while driving and it's not even monitored by the police unless you're in an accident.

 

Hands Free Georgia Law (HB673)

MAY 25, 2018

Effective July 1, 2018, pursuant to 40-6-241(c), all drivers operating a motor vehicle on any highway of this state are prohibited from:

• Holding or supporting, with any part of the body, a wireless telecommunications device or stand-alone electronic device.

• Writing, sending or reading any text-based communication, including a text message, instant message, e-mail or internet data.

• Watching, recording, or broadcasting a video or movie.

Penalties:

• 1st conviction – 1 point and $50.00 fine
• 2nd conviction – 2 points and $100.00 fine
• 3rd or more convictions – 3 points and $150.00 fine

For more information on the law and FAQ, visit http://www.headsupgeorgia.com/handsfree-law/.

Does that mean you cannot use bluetooth driving headset? Its a wireless telecommunication device that is supported by your body part (ear).

[SpikeSpiegel]

3 minutes ago, PopsicleHustler said:

Does that mean you cannot use bluetooth driving headset? Its a wireless telecommunication device that is supported by your body part (ear).

You can use a wired or bluetooth.  However texting is not allowed.  Even video snap chat/Facebook/Skype are a big no no.

 

HOUSE BILL 673- “HANDS FREE LAW”

 

House Bill 673 also known as the “Hands Free Law” was passed by the Georgia General Assembly and signed into law by Governor Nathan Deal.  The Hands Free Law will take effect on July 1, 2018.  The following is a brief description what the law states and some frequently asked questions.  A link to the complete law can be found at www.gahighwaysafety.org.

• A driver cannot have a phone in their hand or use any part of their body to support their phone.  Drivers can only use their phones to make or receive phone calls by using speakerphone, earpiece, wireless headphone, phone is connected to vehicle or an electronic watch.  GPS navigation devices are allowed.
• Headsets and earpieces can only be worn for communication purposes and not for listening to music or other entertainment.
• A driver may not send or read any text-based communication unless using voice-based communication that automatically converts message to a written text or is being used for navigation or GPS
• A driver may not write, send or read any text messages, e-mails, social media or internet data content
• A driver may not watch a video unless it is for navigation.
• A driver may not record a video (continuously running dash cams are exempt)
• Music streaming apps can be used provided the driver activates and programs them when they are parked.  Drivers cannot touch their phones to do anything to their music apps when they are on the road.  Music streaming apps that include video also are not allowed since drivers cannot watch videos when on the road.  Drivers can listen to and program music streaming apps that are connected to and controlled through their vehicle's radio. 
• The hands-free law does NOT apply to the following electronic communication devices and the following devices can be used by the driver when on the road:  radio, citizens band radio, citizens band radio hybrid, commercial two-way radio communication device or its functional equivalent, subscription-based emergency communication device, prescribed medical device, amateur or ham radio device, or in-vehicle security, navigation, or remote diagnostics system. 

EXCEPTIONS TO THE LAW ARE AS FOLLOWS:

1.    Reporting a traffic crash, medical emergency, fire, criminal activity or hazardous road conditions.
2.    An employee or contractor of an utility service provider acting within the scope of their employment while responding to a utility
       emergency.
3.     A first responder (law enforcement, fire, EMS) during the performance of their official duties. 
4.     When in a lawfully parked vehicle—this DOES NOT include vehicles stopped for traffic signals and stop signs on the public roadway.

COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE OPERATORS

1.    Commercial Motor Vehicle Operators can only use one button to begin or end a phone call
2.    Cannot reach for a wireless telecommunications device or stand-alone electronic device that it no longer requires the driver to be a seated position or properly restrained by a safety belt

SCHOOL BUS DRIVERS

1.    The driver of a school bus cannot use a wireless telecommunication device or two-way radio while loading or unloading passengers.
2.    The driver can only use a wireless telecommunication device while the bus is in motion as a two-way radio to allow live communications between the driver and school and public safety officials

ENFORCEMENT

When the Hands-Free law takes effect July 1, the Georgia Department of Public Safety and local law enforcement have the option to issue warnings for violations as part of the effort to educate and to help motorists adapt to the new law.  However, citations can and will be issued starting July 1 for any violation of the Hands-Free Law, including those where the violation involves a traffic crash.  There is not a 90-day grace period provision in the Hands-Free Law.  

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Why is this law needed in Georgia?
Our state has seen significant increases in vehicle traffic crashes, fatalities and bodily injury. The vast majority of these increases have been in rear-end crashes, single-car crashes and crashes by drivers from 15 to 25-years-old. State and local law enforcement have stated that these incidents are a clear indication of driver inattention. The 15 states that have passed hands-free driving laws saw a 16 percent decrease in traffic fatalities in the two years after the law was passed. In addition, traffic fatalities were reduced even further in subsequent years.

Could I still talk on my phone while driving?
Yes, as long as it is done hands-free. Drivers would be able to use their phone’s speakerphone, Bluetooth technology, an earpiece, a headphone or other device to allow them to communicate on a hands-free basis. 

Could I touch my cellphone to dial a number or receive or end a call?
Yes. The law would simply prohibit drivers from holding or supporting the phone.

Would I be required to purchase a hands-free accessory, such as a mount or bracket?
No. The proposed law simply states that a driver cannot hold or support a mobile phone. A phone can be left on a vehicle’s console, a front seat, etc. However, for the safety of all Georgians, state and local law enforcement recommend the purchase and use of a hands-free device if using a mobile phone while driving.

My vehicle does not have Bluetooth technology/capability. How could I comply with the law?
Many online retailers offer a Bluetooth adapter for vehicles without Bluetooth or similar technology built into the vehicle. These adapters can be found at local retailers or online by searching “Bluetooth hands-free car kit” in an internet search engine. 

What would the fines/penalties be?
 First conviction: $50, one point on a license; 
 Second conviction: $100, two points on a license; 
 Third and subsequent convictions: $150, three points on a license. 

Could I listen to online radio apps while driving?  (Updated information)****
A driver cannot touch their phone to activate or program a radio app while they are on the road (the road includes being stopped for traffic signals and stop signs).  A driver can activate a radio app before getting on the road and listen to the programming.  A driver can also listen to programming from their app if it is connected and controlled by the vehicle's stereo (radio), and the driver is not touching their phone while driving.  We caution drivers that music streaming apps that also include video do violate the new law which specifically prohibits drivers from watching videos.   The rule of thumb here is you can listen to your radio app as long as you do not touch your phone when driving on the road AND its use does not distract the driver in any manner in the safe operation of their vehicle.  

Could I listen to music stored on my mobile phone, thus not requiring an internet connection?
Yes, as long as the driver is not holding or supporting the phone.

Could I talk to someone via video telephony apps, such as FaceTime or Skype, if doing so “hands-free?”
No. The proposed hands-free driving law states that a driver shall not “record or broadcast a video” on any mobile phones, iPads, computers, etc. while operating a vehicle.

Submit specific questions about the Hands-Free Law to:  https://www.gahighwaysafety.org/contact/

[justpoet]

Sometimes politicians do these sorts of things purely for the news cycles to bring awareness to something.

[Mooshi]

The genius who drafted this probably depends on a 4 year old to figure out how to use an iPhone lmao

[justpoet]

Also, I love that the video thumbnail is "how are parents supposed to communicate with their kids."  Because clearly parents never talked with kids before cell phones.

[atxcyclist]

1 hour ago, PopsicleHustler said:

USA.... You can own firearm at an age of 14, but cannot own a god damn phone before turning 21.

 

The argument "X people use Y thing while driving is causing accidents" can go so deep, you will need a flashlight to see.

 

Another point is "suicide prevention". Question - Where do you draw the line between phone and a tablet? Or better - What is a smartphone? This reminds me about our ridiculous "TV License" law here in Ireland. It states that all TV owners must have a license, but it doesn't really specify what a TV is. It only outlines its basic functions that require you to get the license.

 

So same applies to smartphones. It doesn't specify what a "smartphone" is. I can easily go on Amazon and find a decent tablet under 10 inches that works exactly like a smartphone, but isn't classified as one.

Some clarification: This is a proposed law in one state in a country of 50 states and numerous territories. Also, there's nowhere in the United States where someone that age can legally buy a firearm. I'm not sure if that's you sensationalizing or if that is how we're portrayed in the media around the world, so I won't comment further.

 

I'm all for driver's licenses being much more difficult to get, and probably raising the minimum age for a license to 18 wouldn't be a bad thing either. High-schoolers with limited driving experience really are dangerous on the road, and while I don't agree with this proposed law, texting and driving combined with the inexperience of new drivers are a bad combination. Prohibition is always dumb and hasn't worked on anything yet, but there's no right to a driver's license, so it'd be fine with me if more scrutiny were required for driver's licensing here.

[RejZoR]

"Murica"

 

LMAO

[williamcll]

37 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

"Murica"

 

LMAO

 

[Kisai]

3 hours ago, lewdicrous said:

Okay, this is dumb. Instead of addressing the actual issue, they opt to just ban phones and punish people for having them?

Can't wait for the neighborhood dealer to start selling phones.

I think the problem here goes right back to vice crimes (tobacco, alcohol, recreational drugs, etc.) In those case, using those substances always harm the user.

 

In an ideal environment, those substances would not exist at all, but they're too simple to manufacture, and there is too much money to be made in letting people kill themselves. 

 

You can't do that with phones or cars. They are expensive. Post-paid phones require credit, car loans require credit. Kids do not have credit.

 

So this is actually easy enough to do. The state tells the ISP's to discontinue family plans. They could also go even further by banning the sale of sim cards and prepaid phones without ID. Put them in the same place with the Vape pens and Cigarettes.

 

Yet, what is more likely to kill someone under 21? Definitely not the phone.

 

Rather, more work has to be done to twist the arm of smartphone manufacturers (eg FCC) to require that devices that "can distract" must have distraction-prevention safety features in the same way seat-belts are a standard feature on cars. 

 

There is a very simple way to do this with cars, and it surprises me nobody has done this.

 

- Put a USB port in the glove compartment or a dedicated center console compartment. When the vehicle is in gear, the compartment magnetically locks. Do not permit USB ports in the front of the vehicle otherwise. Rear vehicle USB ports must only be permitted in the rear seating area, (eg behind the headrest and at unable to be reached by the driver.)

- To make it more useful, this USB port shall communicate with the vehicle's entertainment services, GPS, dash cams, and CANBUS II to tell the device it's in a vehicle and should route the SIM card appropriately if the car has it's own LTE/5G radio.

 

Every car has a glove compartment or a center console, and that is the best place for the phone to prevent distractions presently.

 

Now what about other problems? Using phones in class? Using phones in theater's? Using phones in churches? etc.

 

This is also easily solved by the user not being an asshat in the first place, but since we're talking about laws here, let's solve this with a technical measure that isn't really that hard. Cineplex has the "timeplay" app so you can play games in the theater pre-show. Extend this function further, where if you connect to the School, Theater or Church's WiFi, the WiFi AP actually switches to "DND mode" which means devices connected to this must turn off all sound, lights, vibrations other than emergency calls while "in session". When not in session, the AP connects to the internet without an interception page and will even permit WiFi calling.

 

Now, because bad things always happen when you try to curb how something is used, people are going to miss important calls/texts while in the theater. Is that a fair tradeoff? Maybe not if you're a doctor or have a sick family member. But you're also not required to connect to that AP. Interrupt class, theater or church, and you'll be asked to leave. The AP is a courtesy so you don't accidentally interrupt things.

 

No law is necessary to do any of the technical measures. However perhaps a law might light a fire under Apple or Google's feet that this is something that should be addressed or their devices will be curtailed from sale.

[mr moose]

I find this news stupid on several levels.  There is already a law to address that problem so why can't they enforce that?  People will always argue that anything removing freedoms is bad regardless of the how many arguments there are for it,  and lastly some moron in parliament introducing a stupid law has nothing to do with age or generation.  I see plenty of young people making stupid demands for laws that won't work.

[Nicnac]

3 hours ago, Jurrunio said:

Seeing how some adults drive cars under the influence of alcohol, maybe we should ban booze from anyone with a valid driving license?

*Angry prohibition noises*

[lewdicrous]

On 1/11/2020 at 12:32 PM, Kisai said:

- snip -

In my country, you're not allowed to buy a SIM card if you're under 18 and you need an ID or passport to get it, but that doesn't stop people from asking siblings or whatever to get them one, that's if the parents didn't get one for them.

 

Restricting access to minors is a sensible thing to do, but threatening jail time is not the right thing to do imo.

[Lathlaer]

Won't pass but if it did, I sure hope that no one under 21 is in a state of emergency requiring them to call 911.

 

I know that he wants to raise an issue but what he isn't saying is how many lives are saved daily by usage of cellphones.

[Bramimond]

Just make it somewhat troublesome for kids to access the Internet, use the same way that is meant to prevent kids from watching R rated movies.

[Master Disaster]

7 minutes ago, Bramimond said:

Just make it somewhat troublesome for kids to access the Internet, use the same way that is meant to prevent kids from watching R rated movies.

That doesn't work. Look at the UKs "Porn Pass" idea as an example.

 

The only way that could work is a register of users which brings with it a whole bag of worms. Is keeping a database of users legal? What would happen if the database got breached and leaked? Would users simply ignore the law and bypass the restrictions? Ultimately would it cost more (literally and figuratively) to implement than it would save at the other end?

 

The conservative government here in England spent millions researching the idea and drawing up the plans. It was delayed twice for changes which cost even more. They finally got it through the legal system and we even had a firm date then at the last minute the idea was scrapped, they didn't even really publicly announce the scrappage either, it quietly died. We don't know the exact reason why but the public/expert consensus is because it simply wouldn't work, its far to easy to bypass and because it causes a huge security risk.

 

What you're suggesting is they keep a register of minors which complicates things even more.

 

It seems like the solution here is have the car talk to the phone and say "hey, the ignition is on and the driver is actively driving, don't allow them to call or text in either direction until I say otherwise unless it goes through me" That would take a monumental effort though, a standard would have to be created and every phone OS would have to be updated to support and interface.

[Worstcaster]

3 hours ago, atxcyclist said:

I'm all for driver's licenses being much more difficult to get, and probably raising the minimum age for a license to 18 wouldn't be a bad thing either. High-schoolers with limited driving experience really are dangerous on the road, and while I don't agree with this proposed law, texting and driving combined with the inexperience of new drivers are a bad combination. Prohibition is always dumb and hasn't worked on anything yet, but there's no right to a driver's license, so it'd be fine with me if more scrutiny were required for driver's licensing here.

There are plenty of bad drivers in every age group.  Many 16 year olds have jobs and other responsibilities for which access to a car is necessity.  I think it would be better in lower the age for a learners permit (requires a licenced driver over 21 in the car with them) to 15 and not allow the licence until 16 as it is now.  Give their parents a year to instill good driving habits (hopefully).

[Bombastinator]

In other news a bunch of states deal with a problem in a particular way and one of them does it wrong.  Unless it’s a joke news story, which was implied.

[lewdicrous]

1 hour ago, Bramimond said:

Just make it somewhat troublesome for kids to access the Internet, use the same way that is meant to prevent kids from watching R rated movies.

1 hour ago, Master Disaster said:

That doesn't work. Look at the UKs "Porn Pass" idea as an example.

"You are about to access the internet, are you over the age of 21?" _/s

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, Master Disaster said:

 

 

It seems like the solution here is have the car talk to the phone and say "hey, the ignition is on and the driver is actively driving, don't allow them to call or text in either direction until I say otherwise unless it goes through me" That would take a monumental effort though, a standard would have to be created and every phone OS would have to be updated to support and interface.

Indeed, but there's a lot of edge cases.

 

Like the first phase would be to simply prevent unlocking the device when it exceeds 25kph (I pick this because 30kph is the speed limit in school zones), so you must use a hands free mode that is part of the car to use the phone. 

 

That however inconveniences passengers in the car, and those on transit (Eg subways. Trolley/LRT's and Buses rarely exceed 25kph unless they have highway segments.) Which goes back to the entire thing about having WiFi AP's that the device can connect to that pass information from the vehicle to the device. So for transit vehicles, having a "free internet" WiFi access point comes with the device being able to be unlocked used while the vehicle is in motion, however to do that presently would require an app to enforce compliance, which people could probably delete if they found it obnoxious. 

 

Then you have people on bikes, motorcycles, scooters, and mobility scooters which obviously won't have "car kit" type of connectivity. In these cases it would make sense to lock out everything, as there won't be a passenger in most cases.

 

A second phase, where car manufacturers and phone manufacturers require that all mobile devices be connected to the vehicle in order to be unlocked in the vehicle. Transit vehicles (including airplanes, trains and ferries) have their own WiFi AP's that also act as beacons for municipal traffic control.

 

There can also be other benefits, like on transit vehicles, putting the phones into silent automatically so that other passengers are not disturbed.