7/1/09 - new state laws today

[LuckyBrush]

Originally Posted by level.eleven

So, is this a primary offense or not? Are LEOs now given the discretionary power to judge the age of a driver by simply looking at their face as they drive by?

Good question. Now I'm not trying to argue, I just want to add my The cell phone law, give me a break. Talking on the cell phone is no different than talking to a passenger (provided its a hands free convo.). LEOs will go to good people's homes to tell them about the loss of a new driver regardless. Those surveys, and studies done on the crashes resulting from cell phone use, HA, they didnt do a study on how many crashes happen when a teen is merely talking to a passenger did they? I bet the results would be the same. Think about the last 50 years. How many teen drivers died in crashes? I seriously doubt that number has increased that dramatically since cell phones came into play. Plain and simple fact is, government is out of hand, period. Thats all they are doing, making more laws. This is one more loss of freedom. Kids and cell phones? Thats a PARENT'S responsiblity, not a police officer's/law maker's.

[Denny347]

It's a primary offense.

Originally Posted by level.eleven

So, is this a primary offense or not? Are LEOs now given the discretionary power to judge the age of a driver by simply looking at their face as they drive by?

Seatbelt laws were sold to the public as secondary violations. However, over the years, we have seen them escalated to primary violations in many states - mostly in the name of recieving federal funding.

[level.eleven]

Primary offense. Interesting. It would be interesting to get a vibe from the LEO community on how they feel about this new law. Are LEO now expected to judge whether a driver is 18 or 19 while they, the driver, are driving down the road with a hand grasping a cell phone covering up half of their face? If the driver produces a state issued drivers license stating that they are above the age of 18 be enough for them to be on their way? Or, will the license be ran as well as the plates since a stop was made. Sorry if I seem cynical, but I can't get on board with this one...

[Denny347]

Originally Posted by level.eleven

Primary offense. Interesting. It would be interesting to get a vibe from the LEO community on how they feel about this new law. Are LEO now expected to judge whether a driver is 18 or 19 while they, the driver, are driving down the road with a hand grasping a cell phone covering up half of their face? If the driver produces a state issued drivers license stating that they are above the age of 18 be enough for them to be on their way? Or, will the license be ran as well as the plates since a stop was made. Sorry if I seem cynical, but I can't get on board with this one...

If we believe the person is under age we can stop them. However, if we discover they are of age, we are supposed to let them go at that point with nothing further done (run license...etc). It's the same procedure for running some plates. I see a paper temp plate and it looks like it is expired. I pull them over only to discover when I walk up to it that it is still valid. They get kicked as soon as I explain why I stopped them. The investigation ends at that point. If it did not, it is quite possible that anything that comes from that stop will get throw out in court. It was an honest stop but once it is discovered that the stop was in error, it is over and the driver is free to leave.

[LuckyBrush]

Originally Posted by Denny347

If we believe the person is under age we can stop them. However, if we discover they are of age, we are supposed to let them go at that point with nothing further done (run license...etc). It's the same procedure for running some plates. I see a paper temp plate and it looks like it is expired. I pull them over only to discover when I walk up to it that it is still valid. They get kicked as soon as I explain why I stopped them. The investigation ends at that point. If it did not, it is quite possible that anything that comes from that stop will get throw out in court. It was an honest stop but once it is discovered that the stop was in error, it is over and the driver is free to leave.

Unless you smell alcohol or marijuana or some other illegal activity of course.

[VN Vet]

I think just about all governments think that throwing more money or laws at something will make things better. Come on guys, just how many laws do we need?

I wonder how many laws do our "lawmakers" make each year and how many are on the books?

If "they" think we are always in need new laws then how come the laws "they" made in the past don't work? That is why I guess they think we new ones. It sure keeps them in business year after year.

God gave us all the laws we need. We need to enforce those laws and the whole world would be just find. If God thought we needed more, He would have give us move.

If our teachers and our bosses kept letting us try things to see if we could get it right, we would flunk out of school or be fired.

Hey, that is a good idea, lets fire the idiots and the stupids that think we are always in need of more laws. I like it.

[Boilers]

From other posts, it seems that LEOs run plates like crazy all the time. So, no biggie if they run the plate, imo.

[LuckyBrush]

Originally Posted by Boilers

From other posts, it seems that LEOs run plates like crazy all the time. So, no biggie if they run the plate, imo.

Traitor! Kidding.

[Boilers]

Not really. I would rather have a 'right to ANONYMITY', but until that becomes reality, I will have to say that anything viewable in public is fair game. So, license plates and their checking seem to be okay under present rules.

[mrjarrell]

It's time to join in on the Moratorium. A Constitutional Amendment to freeze any new laws for a period of 100 years. With draconian penalties for politicians who try to step around it.