Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Will Illinois be the first State to Ban Ham Radio while Driving?  (Read 7425 times)
G8YMW
Member

Posts: 191




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: February 02, 2012, 02:55:40 AM »

If this is true, then who is going to nick Plod when he picks up the mike?
This side of the pond, the use of hand held mobile phones while driving is banned (Doesnt stop anybody)
2 way radios are exempt (Thank you RSGB) but you can still get done  for "Driving without due care and attention" and the onus of proof is on you to demonstrate your innnocence.
Logged
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 5871




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: February 02, 2012, 04:40:17 AM »

It's the same way on this side of the pond.  Here, it's simply letting something else pull your attention from the task of driving--distracted driving, which is just another way of saying the exact same thing you did, 'YMW.  And over here, just like I suspect it is over there, once you're accused, even if you prove yourself innocent, you still have to pony up the filing fees and other costs of fighting the charge, which sometimes comes to cost just as much if you would have simply paid the fine.

The OTHER thing that I find odd is the exemptions--police officers, (of course...) and commercial drivers--who are blamed for any accident anyway since they're supposed to be 'professional' drivers, (BTW, I AM one of those, holding a Class A license even though I don't drive commercial vehicles anymore) that are READING a message on a communications device screen.  IMO, that's just as bad as driving and reading a book or paper at the same time!

Those are two of the worst case offenders that there are--since they would not follow the law with impunity.
Logged
K7RBW
Member

Posts: 386




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: February 02, 2012, 06:34:38 AM »


Quote
Sec. 12-610.2. Electronic communication devices.
(a) As used in this Section, Section: "Electronic communication device" means an electronic device, including but not limited to a wireless telephone, personal digital assistant, or a portable or mobile computer, but does not include a global positioning system or navigation system or a device that is physically or electronically integrated into the motor vehicle.

So it's an "electronic communication device" they care about and it seems like all you have to do to operate your ham radio is to "integrate it physically into the motor vehicle." So, put your radio in your dash and keep hammin'.

Hehe..what a silly statement.  Are you a child? This needs to be explained to you?

Hehe, indeed.
With legislation, it doesn't matter what I think or you think, or even what makes sense (common or otherwise). If you read the actual proposed legislation (and not the interpretations of editorialized regurgitations of it), it says that "a device that is physically or electronically integrated into the motor vehicle" is not considered a "communication device" for the purpose of this law.

So, what constitutes "physically or electronically integrated?" That's what the resulting court cases will eventually determine. I would think, however, that hard-wiring your radio to the vehicle, connecting it to permanently mounted antennas, and mounting the radio to the car would be pretty compelling. Once one brave ham establishes a precedent, then the heat should come of the rest.

That said, I don't think it's a very well written law, but I don't think its a signal that the sky is falling, either. It would be interesting (if I lived in Illinois) to find out who was behind it.
Logged
K5BJS
Member

Posts: 50




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: February 02, 2012, 08:02:06 AM »

Cell phone users are the problem.  Especially cell phone users in urban areas.

Radio operators are not the problem.  Especially radio operators in rural areas.
Logged
G8YMW
Member

Posts: 191




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: February 02, 2012, 02:41:55 PM »

K1CJS, you are spot on comparing the UK and US laws ("Due Care and Attention" and "Distracted Driving"), to all intents and purposes they are the same.
One point about 2-way radio, if there is something needing attention just throw the mike down, your contact will not mind.
Although using handheld phones are explicitly banned from use while driving, the number I see every day with the phone WELDED to their ears.
On roundabouts, at junctions, in towns, out in the sticks.
My favourite(?) is the one driving, on the phone and gesticulating with the other hand.

The only problem is police numbers have reduced year upon year (Council budgets!!)

Cheers
Tony
Logged
K6RQR
Member

Posts: 194




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: February 03, 2012, 09:09:01 AM »

Mike -
 "Unique and perceptive observations", eh? Wow, you don't think much of yourself, do you? I have rarely heard such an intolerant, smug jerk commenting about his fellow hams. The obvious question is why do you continue to operate when you are surrounded by such alleged mediocrities? I have had many, many stimulating conversations on many amateur bands and I am looking forward to meeting with a local group tomorrow morning for breakfast. As to mobile operation I do operate out of my car but I am always parked when I do so. That allows me to deploy a very large and efficient antenna that works well.
 I have been in the hobby since the mid-60s and have never heard such disparaging comments about amateur radio operators. I would suggest that you might like to switch over to something else that would coddle your big ego - like politics.
Logged
WA4D
Member

Posts: 99


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #21 on: February 03, 2012, 11:41:03 AM »

Bruce...

I welcome your comments though we do have different viewpoints.

I too was first ticketed in mid-60's.  Learned Morse for Radio merit badge on an ARC-5!  Took my Novice test from a TV repairman/Ham down the street.  Straight out of Ozzie and Harriet or Robert Young in "Father Knows best".

Regards,

Mike  WA4D. Net
Logged
N4VNV
Member

Posts: 179


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #22 on: February 04, 2012, 07:58:05 AM »

WHEN will LAWMAKERS understand you "CANNOT LEGISLATE STUPID" out of people? And no one can afford the extra manpower to enforce these type of laws. I can just see it now, a driver on the interstate sees an accident, slams on brakes to stop (comply with the law) and make a 911 call, and causes another accident. WHAT? He's obeying the law! I'm not sure just what caused it, but "common-sense" has left an awful lot of people over the years. And more laws are not going to fix it. I've been "hamming" from my mobile for over 43 years without incident. By the way, I guess it's illegal to follow a get away vehicle and give updates on it's location now. And soon the emergency lane will be plugged up by driver's complying with the "LAW", and EMS, Fire Trucks and police will have to be flown in? "NO ONE CAN AFFORD THE MANPOWER TO DO WHAT "HAMS" PROVIDE FREE FOR THE PUBLIC WELFARE"!
Logged
N2RRA
Member

Posts: 646


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #23 on: February 04, 2012, 08:48:04 AM »

WHEN will LAWMAKERS understand you "CANNOT LEGISLATE STUPID" out of people? And no one can afford the extra manpower to enforce these type of laws. I can just see it now, a driver on the interstate sees an accident, slams on brakes to stop (comply with the law) and make a 911 call, and causes another accident. WHAT? He's obeying the law! I'm not sure just what caused it, but "common-sense" has left an awful lot of people over the years. And more laws are not going to fix it. I've been "hamming" from my mobile for over 43 years without incident. By the way, I guess it's illegal to follow a get away vehicle and give updates on it's location now. And soon the emergency lane will be plugged up by driver's complying with the "LAW", and EMS, Fire Trucks and police will have to be flown in? "NO ONE CAN AFFORD THE MANPOWER TO DO WHAT "HAMS" PROVIDE FREE FOR THE PUBLIC WELFARE"!

EXACTLY! That's what I've also been emphasizing in the other thread WA4D started.



« Last Edit: February 06, 2012, 02:45:23 PM by N2RRA » Logged
KD0PBO
Member

Posts: 67




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: February 05, 2012, 09:24:19 PM »

Still beating this dead horse?!! Geez.....

Fact of the matter is this, no law is going to get passed because every big name producer of mobile radios, be it Ham, CB, or business band, will lobby against it. Why?? because a law banning the use of mobile units will hurt sales of course!! Its all about the money folks!

And on a second point, WA4D, let me ask you this, do you have this much hatred against mobile bicycle hams?? Distracted biking is bad too!! Tongue

KD0PBO
Miles
Logged
N2RRA
Member

Posts: 646


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #25 on: February 06, 2012, 02:47:26 PM »

Still beating this dead horse?!! Geez.....

Fact of the matter is this, no law is going to get passed because every big name producer of mobile radios, be it Ham, CB, or business band, will lobby against it. Why?? because a law banning the use of mobile units will hurt sales of course!! Its all about the money folks!

And on a second point, WA4D, let me ask you this, do you have this much hatred against mobile bicycle hams?? Distracted biking is bad too!! Tongue

KD0PBO
Miles

Very good point miles!

73!
Logged
KA2UUP
Member

Posts: 388




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: February 07, 2012, 05:58:55 AM »

N4VNV is right on the money.  As I posted elsewhere, NYS was the first state to pass a law agains using cell phones and texting while driving, but people continue.  Common sense cannot be legislated.  Now, here is the difference.  NYS's law exempts "switched communications devices" (a telephone is a "switched" device, because you need to dial).  CBs, ham radios are exempt.

A well written law, instead of the dribble politicians spew due to the knee jerk reaction to protect the public is what you need.  Most of the accidents are caused by cell phone and texting.  Can anyone tell me how many accidents are caused by distracted driving due to CB or ham radio use?  I fear I will hear crickets while waiting for the answer.  The reason there is no answer is because there are more cell phones and texting devices on cars than CBs or ham radios.

Call you politicians and set them straight.  If they don't want to liste to facts, then use the term limit option, which is called "voting" to get them out of office.

Have a nice day!!!!

73 de KA2UUP   
Logged
AI8P
Member

Posts: 118




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: February 07, 2012, 09:33:19 AM »

<Insert sound of cricket chirping>

There's a very good reason why you don't hear about CB and ham operators causing accidents.   And that is simply because there is no record of CB or ham radio use.

If  you are in an accident they are going to check your cell phone record and they will KNOW if you were on the phone during or immediately before the accident - you can not avoid detection.

However, there is no legal record of being on a CB or ham radio so they can't prove anything.   That doesn't mean that it never happens, it means it can't be determined, so there aren't any statistics.

Whatever side of the issue you are on, making such transparently meaningless arguments does not help your case.

Dennis
Logged
N2RRA
Member

Posts: 646


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #28 on: February 07, 2012, 05:36:25 PM »

<Insert sound of cricket chirping>

There's a very good reason why you don't hear about CB and ham operators causing accidents.   And that is simply because there is no record of CB or ham radio use.

If  you are in an accident they are going to check your cell phone record and they will KNOW if you were on the phone during or immediately before the accident - you can not avoid detection.

However, there is no legal record of being on a CB or ham radio so they can't prove anything.   That doesn't mean that it never happens, it means it can't be determined, so there aren't any statistics.

Whatever side of the issue you are on, making such transparently meaningless arguments does not help your case.

Dennis

LOL! Talk about transparency and meaningless. Did you check yourself today?

Right from the horses mouth there are no records of accidents caused by CB/ham radio such as there would be for cell for use. I'll agree that there may have been an accident ,or two where attention drawn to adjust an option on a radio may have been the cause of an accident. Except, how do you folks that gripe ham radio use may fall into the same category as a cell phone. That's the problem!

You can't prove it because like you said there's no way of proving it. Pure speculation ,or assuming. Guess you know what happens when you assume.

Now how do I know wether or not ham transceivers may have been the cause of accidents? Based on my experience I'll agree that I'm more likely to get into an accident on a cell phone which I've come very close. No where near the same experience from operating my ham gear compared to using my phone. Can't speak for everyone else but that's based on my experience or I would say an example. Can everyone say the same? Maybe not because it doesn't apply to them. So why should this change in law apply to those that are capable operators?

I understand that any attention drawn away from your line of site is a problem, but that's just it. There are far more many other reasons to explore. This maybe just be another less problem for some, but it also can be a life saver for others.

If you wanna ban something? Ban an external GPS unit!

73!
« Last Edit: February 07, 2012, 11:18:54 PM by N2RRA » Logged
KA2UUP
Member

Posts: 388




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: February 08, 2012, 06:25:27 AM »

AI8P,

My point is that you never hear on the news that the vehicle in an accident had a CB, or ham radio, or handy talkie.  The police report can say that, and the press will speculate on the causes of the accident. The problem is that this is never reported because the MINORITY of the accidents, or none for that matter, are caused because of radio use.  Most of the time the press will speculate that the driver "might have been talking on the radio at the time of the accident" or the "the vehicle was equippped with a two way radio and it is beleived that the drive was distracted."  However, this is never the case, at least I have never seen a report like that in the local press in Massachusetts where we have plenty of accidents. 

Most of the time the accidents are caused by people using cell phones, texting, women farding (it is a word, meaning applying cosmetics), reading the paper, falling asleep, plain stupidity or doing other things that they should not be doing while driving a car.  As a previous poster said, you might as well ban GPS units, which I think are more distracting and also make people do crazy things when the thing says "recalculating" or "whe legal to do so make a U-turn."  Next thing you know, we might as well ban walking by taking on a cell phone because we may get distracted while crossing the street and be killed by a car (it happened the other day in Boston BTW).

I say again, you cannot legislate COMMON SENSE and you cannot ban STUPIDITY by legislation.  We are the ones who can only apply common sense and not be stupid.

Have a nice day!!!!

73 DE Bert @ KA2UUP
« Last Edit: February 08, 2012, 06:34:21 AM by KA2UUP » Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!