InterceptRadio.com Forums

The radio website that respects the Civil Air Patrol and their copyrights.
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 5:36 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Forums       Map Search       Database Search       Live Audio       Alerts       Wiki




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2017 3:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:08 am
Posts: 94
-----Original Message-----
From: ARRL Members Only Web site [mailto:memberlist@www.arrl.org]
Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2017 6:12 AM
To: af7pq@comcast.net
Subject: Washington House Bill 1371 2017 - 2018 - Distracted Driving

I have been contacted by many ARRL members in the Western Washington Section regarding House Bill 1371 – 2017 – 18 Distracted Driving.
Information regarding this bill may be found at:

http://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillN ... &Year=2017

“Revises distracted driving provisions with regard to portable electronic devices which are defined as a device that is capable of wireless communication or electronic data retrieval and is not manufactured primarily for hands-free use in a motor vehicle.”

The bill repeals Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 46.61.667 and 668.
Then will add a new RCW that addresses “personal electronic device while driving a motor vehicle on a public highway.” Unlike the current statute, the proposed law does not provide an exemption for members of the Federal Communications Commission’s Amateur Radio Service.

Mark Tharp, KB7HDX, the Eastern Washington Section Manager and I have been watching the progress of House Bill 1371 and communicating with members of the legislature. Mark has determined that the companion bill Senate Bill 5289 as written does provide for an exemption of FCC licensed amateur radio operators.

Those of us in the Amateur Radio Service would be adversely impacted if House Bill 1371 were to be enacted and signed into law without an exemption as currently provided for in the current law. We would not be able to not only engage in hobby communications, but we would be not allowed to engage in communications for public service events such as walks and bike rides. Further, use of amateur radio in support of Search and Rescue would not be allowed. Our FCC licenses are issued at the public’s interest, convenience and necessity. It would not be in the public’s best interest for the Amateur Radio Service to not be exempted from the law. It is important to note that the exemption would be only if the amateur is otherwise lawfully operating their vehicle.

HB 1371 is currently in the House Transportation Committee. Sponsors of this bill are Representatives Farrell, Lovick, Haler, Harris, Clibborn, Orwall, Kagi, Robinson, Appleton, Ryu, Goodman, Tarleton, Gregerson, Sells, Ormsby and Cody. If you would like to communicate with one of the sponsors or your representative, please be courteous and respectful to them.

On February 9, 2017, at 3:30 p.m. the bill will be discussed in the House Committee on Transportation. It is suggested that you keep tabs on the bill at the site above in case the meeting time changes.
The Western Washington Section State Government Liaison Lee Chambers, KI7SS, is planning on attending the meeting. It would help greatly if you could attend to explain what the impact would be on you and your stakeholders if the bill is passed as written.

I appreciate the great feedback I've received from ARRL members.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
ARRL Western Washington Section
Section Manager: Monte L Simpson, AF7PQ
af7pq@arrl.org


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:00 am 
Offline
Angus Cheeseburger
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:09 pm
Posts: 4699
Location: CN88st
Getting sick of this states legislators trying to expand the reach of government.

_________________
" SILENCE IS CONSENT "

Jim N7UAP - Bellingham, WA / InterceptRadio.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:15 pm
Posts: 1653
Location: Destination Unknown
Jim wrote:
Getting sick of this states legislators trying to expand the reach of government.


While at the same time, I am REALLY sick of asshats rear ending my van because they are fucking around with their phone

By far the worst: 25 year old dipshit had a clear view of the back of the Big White Van for almost 3/4 of a mile, and STILL managed to push me into the car in front of me.

I agree in general Jim, but if that were a day I was riding my Magna, there's no way I would have survived to post this comment.

The level of distracted driving is ridiculous

That said, they really need to add the "don't do your makeup" clause, cuz that ain't NO different


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:50 am 
Offline
Angus Cheeseburger
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:09 pm
Posts: 4699
Location: CN88st
I agree with you for sure on the dips who blab on the cell and text, but that is already against the state law.

At the same corner every day I see about 3/4 of the people turning left in front of me with the good old cell up to their ear.
Maybe about a $5000 fine for first time caught and suspension of DL for 6 months the second time would work, but you just can't fix stupid like they say.

The use of amateur gear in a car is somewhat different. The present law was made to take that into consideration.
Haven't heard of any accidents caused by hams using their mics in their vehicles in the news that I can recall.

Glad to hear you weren't hurt Nick!

_________________
" SILENCE IS CONSENT "

Jim N7UAP - Bellingham, WA / InterceptRadio.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 12:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:15 pm
Posts: 1653
Location: Destination Unknown
Like I said, I think it needs to be expanded to cover doing makeup

I completely agree on the penalty

I'm not sure if you know, but Washington's "cell ban" was one of (if the the) first in the nation. The language of the law itself is very narrow and makes enforcement extremely difficult.

I believe this is why the re-write is occurring.

I don't believe most legislators are aware of us as HAMs.

I appreciate the heads up on this. I intended to contact some Legislators.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 7:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:08 am
Posts: 94
N7QOR wrote:
Like I said, I think it needs to be expanded to cover doing makeup

I completely agree on the penalty

I'm not sure if you know, but Washington's "cell ban" was one of (if the the) first in the nation. The language of the law itself is very narrow and makes enforcement extremely difficult.

I believe this is why the re-write is occurring.

I don't believe most legislators are aware of us as HAMs.

I appreciate the heads up on this. I intended to contact some Legislators.


I have discussed this with a friend of mine who is a retired police officer and it was his opinion that the present law was not being enforced enough. He said he has seen several people in his neighborhood drive by police officers with phones to their ears and nothing is done about it.

Police officers are no better I had one almost take the front end of my car because he was on his cell phone.

N7QOR I agree with you most legislators do not understand Ham Radio.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 10:55 pm
Posts: 494
Location: Britain
N7QOR wrote:
Jim wrote:
Getting sick of this states legislators trying to expand the reach of government.


While at the same time, I am REALLY sick of asshats rear ending my van because they are fucking around with their phone




'Distracted driving' has been against the law since time immemorial.... Idiots still put on makeup, read the newspaper, fill out reports, etc.

That's like making murder MORE illegal.. Can't really do that, it's already illegal.... Can't make it MORE illegal..

You can legislate away criminal acts, nor can you legislate away stupidity....

The BMW drivers will still think they're too important to have to follow the rules, and the teenagers will still think that it won't happen to them...

_________________
Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I'm being repressed!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:15 pm
Posts: 1653
Location: Destination Unknown
"Making" something "illegal" does not necessarily make it "enforceable".

Legislation like this isn't about making it "more illegal", it's about making it "more enforceable".

Our legislation was the first in the nation, the language is primitive and makes it very easy to slip out from under. This created a situation where officers simply do not (because they basically cannot) enforce existing laws.

I get that a few people here are "anti-government" / "anti-cop"

Personally I disagree with the anti-cop slant in some of the OP remarks.

Also, I (like you) know how to walk and chew gum at the same time. While I would certainly never shave while driving, I do know how to take a call on occasion and not raar end someone.

Bottom line is, this state has seen significant increase in injurys and deaths as a direct result from distracted drivers. It's UP, arguably way up.

I for one appreciate our legislators looking at the issue to see what better tools they can offer to the men and women of our state who agree to go out and take a bullet for us.

I have not had distracted drivers hit me in 30+ years of driving avg 40K/ Year miles

Last year I had 2 in 6 months, and countless try.

It's not always some big bad gubment conspiracy bro


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:08 am
Posts: 94
N7QOR wrote:
"Making" something "illegal" does not necessarily make it "enforceable".

Legislation like this isn't about making it "more illegal", it's about making it "more enforceable".

Our legislation was the first in the nation, the language is primitive and makes it very easy to slip out from under. This created a situation where officers simply do not (because they basically cannot) enforce existing laws.

I get that a few people here are "anti-government" / "anti-cop"

Personally I disagree with the anti-cop slant in some of the OP remarks.

Also, I (like you) know how to walk and chew gum at the same time. While I would certainly never shave while driving, I do know how to take a call on occasion and not raar end someone.

Bottom line is, this state has seen significant increase in injurys and deaths as a direct result from distracted drivers. It's UP, arguably way up.

I for one appreciate our legislators looking at the issue to see what better tools they can offer to the men and women of our state who agree to go out and take a bullet for us.

I have not had distracted drivers hit me in 30+ years of driving avg 40K/ Year miles

Last year I had 2 in 6 months, and countless try.

It's not always some big bad gubment conspiracy bro


We do need Law Enforcement to enforce laws no matter what and some Officers don't. I do feel you have a valid compliant about your personal experience. I hope you can get what you deserve in a settlement if you are going to get one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 2:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 8:11 pm
Posts: 2136
Location: Puget Sound
N7QOR wrote:
Bottom line is, this state has seen significant increase in injury's and deaths as a direct result from distracted drivers. It's UP, arguably way up.


I hate to see them picking this one point of distraction to single out. At the same time if they don't pick and choose one could be pulled over and sited for picking ones nose as that distracted them or even the cars driver next to him..

One of the calls Im hearing quite often lately is "Driver has TV in lap and keeps looking down at it.." I rarely hear complaints of cell phones. In fact Ive not seen any WSP reports come through that name "distraction by talking on cell phone" as the cause but more than anything its texting if the phone is involved at all. Not to say that it doesn't happen nationally but this state WSP reports from accident scenes name many other reasons such as the driver falling asleep. Truthfully Id rather drive around someone on their phone because Id at least know they aren't napping with their eyes open.

Troopers out in Clallam Co. like to set up at the River Rd westbound on-ramp to 101 and do cell phone emphasis. And Ive heard them in Kitsap somewhere doing the same thing.. I believe the Gorst curve but Ive not seen.. only heard. Emphasis does happen. But Im of the belief that its the local jurisdictions that need a little push to do so.

_________________
"A well regulated breakfast, being necessary to the healthy start of the day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 7:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:15 pm
Posts: 1653
Location: Destination Unknown
It's my opinion that the laws need to be structured in such a way that, when "distracted driving" is likely to have caused serious injury or death, "escalators" in sentencing are available.

I typically drive at least 50% of my workday, aside from the rear-enders I do a decent job of avoiding fools. Less experienced drivers are not so lucky.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 7:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 8:11 pm
Posts: 2136
Location: Puget Sound
N7QOR wrote:
It's my opinion that the laws need to be structured in such a way that, when "distracted driving" is likely to have caused serious injury or death, "escalators" in sentencing are available.

I typically drive at least 50% of my workday, aside from the rear-enders I do a decent job of avoiding fools. Less experienced drivers are not so lucky.



+1 for sure!

_________________
"A well regulated breakfast, being necessary to the healthy start of the day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2017 9:17 am 
Offline
Angus Cheeseburger
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:09 pm
Posts: 4699
Location: CN88st
GOOD NEWS !

From ARRL News Letter:

Yesterday Section Government Liaison Lee Chambers, KI7SS, and I appeared
before the House Transportation Committee in Olympia. This was a great
experience for me. The committee heard comments on two distracted
driving bills. HB 1371 and 1631. HB 1631 had no impact on the Amateur
Radio Service.

In the hallway before the hearing Shelly Baldwin from the Washington
Traffic Safety Commission contacted me to say that Senator Ann Rivers
had contacted her about correcting SB 5289 to provide an exception to
the Amateur Radio Service.

After I gave my testimony the committee, the chair, Representative Judy
Clibborn told me that Representative Jessyn Farrell was acting to see
that amateur radio was excluded from enforcement action in the bill.
After the hearing, Representative Farrell made it a point to come out
to the hallway to let us know that she appreciated the feedback from
the hams and that she is working on an exemption in the bill for them.

If Senator Rivers or Representative Farrell is from your legislative
district, please take a few minutes to thank them for helping the
amateur radio operators in the state to retain their exemption from the
distracted driving law. Their gracious cooperation and assistance will
allow us to continue our support of charitable and non-governmental
organizations as well as government agencies.

I would like to offer caution as it relates to the distracted driving
bill and eventually law. This exemption means that an officer cannot
cite the ham for just having a microphone or handheld radio in their
hand. If the ham is driving erratically, like lane travel, or following
too closely while using their radios they will be subjected to the law
just like the cell phone user.

I am very pleased with the reception amateur radio received in the
senate and the house. I believe members of the Amateur Radio Service
are well respected by our lawmakers for our contributions to the people
of the State of Washington. Thank you to each of you for your deportment
that reflects so highly on our hobby.

Hearty thanks goes to each ham who took their time to communicate with
members of the Washington State legislature. You made a big difference
in the success of getting us the exemption we need to be good citizens
with our FCC licenses.

To those hams who went above and beyond in helping me to reach out to
all amateurs, regardless of whether they are ARRL members or not, thank
you!

If you know hams who are not members of the ARRL please invite them to
join. By being a member we can easily reach out to them with important
issues like the distracted driving bill.

Way to go hams in the Western Washington Section! I value each of you
and the contributions you make to our hobby.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
ARRL Western Washington Section
Section Manager: Monte L Simpson, AF7PQ
af7pq@arrl.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------

_________________
" SILENCE IS CONSENT "

Jim N7UAP - Bellingham, WA / InterceptRadio.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 3:11 pm
Posts: 265
Location: South King County or the beach, usually one or the other.
I have been out of the area. What was the final disposition of the abovementioned bills? Were we able to maintain our exemption from the distracted driving bill? Thanks to all who stood up for us.

_________________
Wayne
KF7FYL


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 5:52 pm 
Offline
Scanner Gigolo

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 2:23 pm
Posts: 2002
Location: User Unknown
Yes, successful


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by electricity. Copyright © 2013 Interceptradio.com