Forum Home
PC World Chat
 
Thread ID: 102400 2009-08-18 04:44:00 cellphones banned, what about ipod touch? batmann (15177) PC World Chat
Post ID Timestamp Content User
802176 2009-08-19 03:43:00 You just KNOW that I am gonna warn youse all about how the laws in NZ are the result of trickle-down legislation from the US and most directly from Cal-ee-fohr-nyah . Here's a few sections from our DMV Bible:

Wireless Telephone Use: Prohibition : Persons Under 18

§23124 . (a) This section applies to a person under the age of 18 years .

(b) Notwithstanding §23123, a person described in subdivision (a) shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone, even if equipped with a hands-free device, or while using a mobile service device .

(c) A violation of this section is an infraction punishable by a base fine of twenty dollars ($20) for a first offense and fifty dollars ($50) for each subsequent offense .

(d) A law enforcement officer shall not stop a vehicle for the sole purpose of determining whether the driver is violating subdivision (b) .

(e) Subdivision (d) does not prohibit a law enforcement officer from stopping a vehicle for a violation of §23123 .

(f) This section does not apply to a person using a wireless telephone or a mobile service device for emergency purposes, including, but not limited to, an emergency call to a law enforcement agency, health care provider, fire department, or other emergency services agency or entity .

(g) For the purposes of this section, “mobile service device” includes, but is not limited to, a broadband personal communication device, specialized mobile radio device, handheld device or laptop computer with mobile data access, pager, and two-way messaging device .

(h) This section shall become operative on July 1, 2008 .
Added Sec . 4, Ch . 214, Stats . 2007 . Effective January 1, 2008 . Operative July 1, 2008

That's for minors under 18 y/o .

The new Wireless Communications Device Law (effective January 1, 2009) makes it an infraction to write, send, or read text-based communication on an electronic wireless communications device, such as a cell phone, while driving a motor vehicle .

Two additional laws dealing with the use of wireless telephones while driving went into effect July 1, 2008 . The first law prohibits all drivers from using a handheld wireless telephone while operating a motor vehicle, (California Vehicle Code [VC] §23123) . Motorists 18 and over may use a “hands-free device . The second law effective July 1, 2008, prohibits drivers under the age of 18 from using a wireless telephone or hands-free device while operating a motor vehicle (VC §23124) .

BUT - DIALING the phone - except for the National Emergency 911 - number is still against the law as it is a form of texting!

The base fine for the FIRST offense is $20 and $50 for subsequent convictions . With penalty assessments, the fine can be more than triple the base fine amount .

I've seen fines for this activity hit over $500 . 00 with the court-judge-bailiff-hourly wage for the officer on a day off at 3X their normal pay rate and such . I bet there is a "lighting and heating/AC fee" for use of the building .
SurferJoe46 (51)
802177 2009-08-19 04:24:00 Getting back to something a bit more local.

Just spent 7 days in Brisbane, was "warned" by various family members living there to watch out for the idiot drivers, they are everywhere.

Funny enough didn't get cut off once, no one tried to overtake me on a blind bend, no one tail-gated me, No one nearly had a head on with me (I usually get at least one nearly head on crash on the roads around the district) No one gave me the finger, shook their fist or swerved their car at me. A complete lack of aggressive and dangerous driving.

All in all it was a week of the most pleasant driving I have ever had, My only complaint was they weren't prepared to break the speed limit as often as I wanted to......

I'm pretty much convinced us Kiwis are just a stupid breed of people.
Metla (12)
802178 2009-08-19 04:35:00 Getting back to something a bit more local.

Just spent 7 days in Brisbane, was "warned" by various family members living there to watch out for the idiot drivers, they are everywhere.

Funny enough didn't get cut off once, no one tried to overtake me on a blind bend, no one tail-gated me, No one nearly had a head on with me (I usually get at least one nearly head on crash on the roads around the district) No one gave me the finger, shook their fist or swerved their car at me. A complete lack of aggressive and dangerous driving.

All in all it was a week of the most pleasant driving I have ever had, My only complaint was they weren't prepared to break the speed limit as often as I wanted to......

I'm pretty much convinced us Kiwis are just a stupid breed of people.

Do you think the sign: WARNING - EXPLOSIVES in 12-inch red letters on all four sides on your truck had anything to do with it. I've seen your website and I know what you do for a living.

ANYONE driving a D-9 would ALSO get the same respect I think. Or perhaps a larger-than-life poster of your avatar would get the same results.

You scare ME and you're several leagues away from me!
SurferJoe46 (51)
802179 2009-08-19 05:42:00 Getting back to something a bit more local.

Just spent 7 days in Brisbane, was "warned" by various family members living there to watch out for the idiot drivers, they are everywhere.

Funny enough didn't get cut off once, no one tried to overtake me on a blind bend, no one tail-gated me, No one nearly had a head on with me (I usually get at least one nearly head on crash on the roads around the district) No one gave me the finger, shook their fist or swerved their car at me. A complete lack of aggressive and dangerous driving.

All in all it was a week of the most pleasant driving I have ever had, My only complaint was they weren't prepared to break the speed limit as often as I wanted to......

I'm pretty much convinced us Kiwis are just a stupid breed of people.

Is Brisbane local to Whanganui?
Sweep (90)
802180 2009-08-19 05:53:00 Well it's a damn sight more local than the US, one would have thought. wratterus (105)
1 2 3