Bill 118

[thgear]

I have observed a few times a police offcier casually driving the streets while clearly operating a cell phone.

what can i do, should i high beam him, get him to pull over and request for him/herself to write out a ticket?

should i try and jot down the vehicle number and call the police complaint department?

Curious...

[spd-dmn]

police are exempt.

surprise surprise.


plus the law isn't in effect just yet

[thgear]

police are exempt.

surprise surprise.


plus the law isn't in effect just yet

"The systems used by Ambulances, Fire Departments, and Law Enforcement are exempt."

i am not aware of an ontario police "system" where cellphones are involved, they have their dispacher radio, i do not see the need for a police officer to operate a cellphone while in a squad car for anything other than personal use.

[TFB]

Individual cops frequently require direct communication with other agencies that do not have access to police radio frequencies. How do you expect them to call a hospital, a court house, a women's shelter, Children's Aid Society, local utilities, etc?

As usual, you're looking a little too hard to find fault with them.

[Maddog]

Individual cops frequently require direct communication with other agencies that do not have access to police radio frequencies. How do you expect them to call a hospital, a court house, a women's shelter, Children's Aid Society, local utilities, etc?

As usual, you're looking a little too hard to find fault with them....and as usual, you're trying too hard to defend them.:rolleyes:

[Keith-02Accord]

Unless it's an emergency, there is no reason for them not to be required to where a headset as well.

[gearhead]

Individual cops frequently require direct communication with other agencies that do not have access to police radio frequencies. How do you expect them to call a hospital, a court house, a women's shelter, Children's Aid Society, local utilities, etc?

As usual, you're looking a little too hard to find fault with them.

Actually I know that is true,as the Toronto cops used cell phone to check for insurance coverage.

TFB.You write & think like a cop,so what force are you with or retired from?

[thgear]

Individual cops frequently require direct communication with other agencies that do not have access to police radio frequencies. How do you expect them to call a hospital, a court house, a women's shelter, Children's Aid Society, local utilities, etc?

As usual, you're looking a little too hard to find fault with them.

um, either stop at a safe location or use a headset like the rest of us.

a cop on a phone is no more attentive than me on the phone, his brain is not magically more advanced than mine that he can concentrate fully on both actions.

[George]

... should i high beam him, get him to pull over and request for him/herself to write out a ticket?


Yeah, give that a try next time and let us know what you get charged with.

[MazdaMatt]

Any defense of police on cell phones while driving is BS. Need an insurance check, pull over. I watched a pedestrian nearly hit while walking along the sidewalk crossing a Tim Hortons driveway as a police officer was leaning his left elbow on his window sill, phone in hand, palming the steering wheel into the parking lot. Geez, even I have the decency to look around when I'm on the phone driving.

Serge, by all means please do that... it can be as simple as *OPP, report the incident and the white crown vic with plate number yada yada. Something will happen unless they are above the law.

[thgear]

Yeah, give that a try next time and let us know what you get charged with.

appearantly flicking your highbeams could get you a "impersonating a police officer" charge :rolleyes:

[TFB]

Something will happen unless they are above the law.

Um, "unless they are above the law"?

A cop using a cell phone would not be operating "above the law", they would be driving within the law.

Maybe you should read the proposed bill, specifically the exemptions given to drivers of certain classes of vehicles, emergency vehicles included.

http://www.ontla.on.ca/bills/bills-files/39_Parliament/Session1/b118.pdf

[thgear]

How does a "class of vehicle" make a human's use of a cellphone justifiable when the argument is that use of said device leads to accidents.

[slucas]

They also don't have to wear seat belts.

They could be heading up a Darwinian study though.

[MazdaMatt]

TFB, my bad, i thought it was clearified above that the law refered to their communication systems, ie computer/radio.

What's the point of exempting them from the law, though? As my Tim Hortons pedestrian incident clearly shows, they are no more responsible than you or I are. Actually, that demonstrates that they are less so because i've never made a blind turn due to talking on a cell phone. The conversation is second to the driving.

They can use an earpiece just like anybody else can. They are already quite distracted with observing drivers, running plates, getting coffees and donuts.

To clarify, this law also prohibits the "use" of an ipod and a navigation system, right? Does having a nav system running and telling you where to go imply that you are using it? Or is it specifically hand-held devices? I know people with car stereos with remotes that adjust their station and volume via remote so they don't have to lean forward and take their eyes off the road to adjust it on the dash.

I'm all for cutting out morons texting and yapping on phones, in general.

[camaroguy]

Individual cops frequently require direct communication with other agencies that do not have access to police radio frequencies. How do you expect them to call a hospital, a court house, a women's shelter, Children's Aid Society, local utilities, etc?

As usual, you're looking a little too hard to find fault with them.they can have dispatch do it. an officer does not need to use a cell phone.

[John Powell]

they can have dispatch do it. an officer does not need to use a cell phone.

If they have a good radio system they should be able to get a call patched through directly by the dispatcher. And speaking of good radio systems, they should also have earbuds, a mike and a PTT button on the steering wheel ... it works well for racing.

[TFB]

they can have dispatch do it. an officer does not need to use a cell phone.

Think about your idea for a minute.

For them to "have dispatch do it", they need to use their two way radio in the car. Many of these two-way radios have a hand set that looks like a regular telephone hand set, while others use a regular hand-held mic. Alternately, they could use their portable with a should clip speaker-mic.

Now tell me, how is this functionally any different than using a cell phone, except for they now have to explain to a dispatcher what they need, and then hope that the dispatcher accurately relays that info to the call recipient? And tell me, how efficient would having the dispatcher be in anything but the simplest telephone request?

And how does this serve the public when the radio frequencies are jammed on a busy night, or in a poor reception area, or when being used to convey private or sensitive information that should not be open to hearing by anyone who just happens to own a scanner?

Yes, using cell phones while driving increases the risk of collision, but Bill 118 makes exemptions so cops and other emergency personnel have options to let them do their jobs in the most efficient manner possible. The bill also lets regular motorists use a hand-held cell phone to call emergency services in an emergency.

I can understand why the cop-haters here would want to tie the hands of the cops. But like everything else, this Bill is a trade-off balancing risk against the greater good of giving emergency personnel the flexibility needed to do their job - not just cops but ambulance, fire and other emergency response people as well.

[GTRacer]

I can personally see the need for officers to use whatever communication devices they have handy to get their job done on any given shift. Even if there's a possibility of danger that an officer using a cellphone might cause a crash, that is a minuscule fraction compared to the crashes that will be averted by taking cellphones out of the hands of the civilian imbeciles who couldn't drive to start with, let alone when they try to text message while driving.

[MazdaMatt]

I bet the dude that I saw almost get run over by a cop going for coffee is a cop-hater, too.

The law is against handheld electronic devices... we can use an earpiece or a stereo handsfree... why can't they? Serious question, TFB... you're so quick to defend the most distracted people on the road using cell phones, i just don't understand why. It has been clearly demonstrated to me that they are no more responsible with them than Joe Public. Certain less responsible than myself.

[camaroguy]

Think about your idea for a minute.

For them to "have dispatch do it", they need to use their two way radio in the car. Many of these two-way radios have a hand set that looks like a regular telephone hand set, while others use a regular hand-held mic. Alternately, they could use their portable with a should clip speaker-mic.

Now tell me, how is this functionally any different than using a cell phone, except for they now have to explain to a dispatcher what they need, and then hope that the dispatcher accurately relays that info to the call recipient? And tell me, how efficient would having the dispatcher be in anything but the simplest telephone request?

And how does this serve the public when the radio frequencies are jammed on a busy night, or in a poor reception area, or when being used to convey private or sensitive information that should not be open to hearing by anyone who just happens to own a scanner?

Yes, using cell phones while driving increases the risk of collision, but Bill 118 makes exemptions so cops and other emergency personnel have options to let them do their jobs in the most efficient manner possible. The bill also lets regular motorists use a hand-held cell phone to call emergency services in an emergency.

I can understand why the cop-haters here would want to tie the hands of the cops. But like everything else, this Bill is a trade-off balancing risk against the greater good of giving emergency personnel the flexibility needed to do their job - not just cops but ambulance, fire and other emergency response people as well.i have thought about have you? they do not need to use a cell phone. i've highlighted what you said the proves my point.

[TFB]

i have thought about have you? they do not need to use a cell phone. i've highlighted what you said the proves my point.

What it proves is that instead of holding a cell phone and having conversation, they now have to hold with their hand a radio microphone to their mouth or a radio handset to their ear, and then enage in conversation. Except now with those two pieces of equipment instead of a cell phone, you now have an additional task to deal with - the PTT button which must be operated by fingers. Still seems pretty much a handheld device to me.

On top of that, have you ever had to engage in a complex back-and-forth discussion over a radio? Two-way radios are simplex communications - only one person talks at one time and the other party can't say anything until that talk button is released. It's not ideal for complex communications.

[camaroguy]

What it proves is that instead of holding a cell phone and having conversation, they now have to hold a radio microphone to their mouth or radio handset to their ear, and then enage in conversation. Except now with those two pieces of equipment instead of a cell phone, you now have an additional task to deal with - the PTT button.

On top of that, have you ever had to engage in a complex back-and-forth discussion over a radio? Two-way radios are simplex communications - only one person talks at one time and the other party can't say anything until that talk button is released. It's not ideal for complex communications.you're wrong on that. they don't have to hold anything. plus as you say they only have to be touching it while talking only. so when they are listening they can have both hands on the wheel.

[Rampant WS6]

I do not disagree with the police or emergency sevices using cell phones. I just think they should be hands free the same as everyone else, so no need to be exempt. Why must an officer have a hand held unit in their ear in the car.

Install a bluetooth unit, it would be one of the things that as a tax payer I feel willing to pay for. They work great. I have had mine for years now and love it. It can be pre-programmed to dial by voice for those special business related calls. BTW that should be the only calls they should be making if they are exempt!

Sounds like the radios should be made hands free too.

I personally was once nearly t boned by a cruiser running a stop sign, only 2 blocks from home. She was with in a foot or so. She had the nerve to give me a dirt look too. :rolleyes: I thought about pulling her over but figured whats the point. We know it would some how be my fault.;) If the roles were reversed, it would have been a ticket and lecture for sure.

[TFB]

you're wrong on that. they don't have to hold anything. plus as you say they only have to be touching it while talking only. so when they are listening they can have both hands on the wheel.

Perfect as long as they don't have to actually talk. Genius. :rolleyes:

[pimphand82]

I do not disagree with the police or emergency sevices using cell phones. I just think they should be hands free the same as everyone else, so no need to be exempt. Why must an officer have a hand held unit in their ear in the car.

Install a bluetooth unit, it would be one of the things that as a tax payer I feel willing to pay for. They work great. I have had mine for years now and love it. It can be pre-programmed to dial by voice for those special business related calls. BTW that should be the only calls they should be making if they are exempt!

Sounds like the radios should be made hands free too.

I personally was once nearly t boned by a cruiser running a stop sign, only 2 blocks from home. She was with in a foot or so. She had the nerve to give me a dirt look too. :rolleyes: I thought about pulling her over but figured whats the point. We know it would some how be my fault.;) If the roles were reversed, it would have been a ticket and lecture for sure.

i think it depends on the officer at the time, some are bad some are good, some are reasonable and some not. i personally have never had a good experience with a cop, but thats not the point. the point is that altho is it going to be against the law to use hand held devises, its up to the officers own discretion whether to enforce the law/charge u or not. especially if they are the same people that talk on their cell and do not wear their seat belts.

[Rampant WS6]

i think it depends on the officer at the time, some are bad some are good, some are reasonable and some not. i personally have never had a good experience with a cop, but thats not the point. the point is that altho is it going to be against the law to use hand held devises, its up to the officers own discretion whether to enforce the law/charge u or not. especially if they are the same people that talk on their cell and do not wear their seat belts.

I have had good and bad experiences.

I have had bold face lying local and OPP's. One the JP ripped a new one for bringing it to court. The same officer got it for the case before mine too. I have also had them be very fair with me.

There are good and bad ones. More good than bad I think, or good ones that have a bad day. This is why I do not want them to be the judge and jury at the road side.

[slucas]

The upshot of all this I guess is that the police have a poor comunications system still. Before cell phones it was common practice for them to use pay phones. Now instead of updating we are letting them use a communication system they themselves deem as dangerous. As an aside , and this is asked to TFB, do these guys use their own phones or are they "company" phones?