My company has banned ANY cell phone usage while driving.

It's a 14 page (tiny letters) FMCSA/DOT notice and request for comments in the register dated TODAY.
http://frwebgate3.access.gpo.gov/cg...ISdocID=16226526635+0+1+0&WAISaction=retrieve

 

Here in Cali its a $150 fine for using a cell without a handsfree. I haven't checked to see if its a moving violation. It wouldn't surprise me in a few years that using a cell phone even with a handsfree device will be illlegal and have a heavy fine.

 

Try it here:
http://frwebgate3.access.gpo.gov/cg...ISdocID=16226526635+0+1+0&WAISaction=retrieve

Sorry for the problem. Earlier today I was able to download and print the PDF. Don't know what's up now! It's a long boring read. I haven't completely finished it yet. Turns out the 14 pages are 14 pages of itsy bitsy font, but so far, I read some pretty good info, such as, the research that preceded the rule, the logic behind it, etc. Individuals can submit comments but I'm not sure if there is discussion among commenters. They did reference the eCornell study that's going on. I know it (the Cornell deal) allows discussion as well as comment.

 

IN the "United States of America"....We are presumed innocent "IN A COURT OF LAW". That is what the CONSTITUTION and Bill OF Rights allow. There is nothing that allows for public opinion, or a cop on the beat, or, truthfully, what you and I think when we are out in the world. BUT....In a COURT OF LAW, we, THE PEOPLE ARE CONSIDERED " INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY... This is why SUPREME COURTS JUSTICE' are so vital when they are picked. Liberals are open to "REWRITING" The Constitution. Conservatives are not. Conservatives believe it to be infallible. There is no need to change it.
Ask yourself. Am "I" more important than the GOOD of the WHOLE? There is only right & wrong. If the law says we can no longer use a phone while driving, and that law, or any law passes the standards of the supreme court, then we only have 2 options. Obey, or bring lawsuits.
Be careful, however. This issue is a small one. Those of us who started many years ago remember stopping and calling on a payphone. I think we all survived. We can survive this.
Lets focus our energies on making trucking BETTER. How many of us have been beside a truck when they swerve into our lane due to the cell phone. DON'T SAY, " 4 WHEELERS DO IT TOO!"
We only have each other. The public will see both good and bad. Lets show them GOOD. We can do it!

 

Next thing they will ban is putting the truck on auto pilot and going back and making a pot o coffee...

 

I'll be forced to quit then

 

What's this world coming to?

 

Kenworth, I have two thoughts on rebuttal here.

First, back in the 60s the Conservatives were the "Law and Order" party, and the Liberals defended the Constitution, so I was a Liberal back then. My, how things have changed. I don't agree that the Conservatives defend the Constitution as you say, but perhaps they undo it a bit slower than the Liberals which appear to be hell bent to burn it the sooner the better. I think the Libertarian party is the only party that is trying to defend the idea of freedom, and of course this party is immediately denounced by the Right and the Left of being in support of anarchy and legalization of all drugs. But you don't have to be an extreme Libertarian to be a Libertarian, just as a Conservative doesn't have to be an extreme capitalist (such as the days of slavery and child labor) or extreme left such as Socialism or Communism. A more moderate Libertarian can be for saving the constitution without having to go as far as anarchy. Libertarians just want more freedom, and less gov't. If our founding fathers were alive today I suspect they would be Libertarians.

My second argument goes to your notion of "presumed innocent" in a court of law. That only applies to criminal offenses, not civil matters. Most traffic violations are civil matters, so the prosecution does not have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, but rather only a preponderance of guilt, which is a much lower standard. A very different set of rules apply when you are given a civil citation, such as you do not have the right to have an attorney even if you cannot afford one, and you do not have the right to a jury trial. Many of the violations that truckers get charged with may be criminal offences, such as I got a scale ticket in Idaho and in that state scale tickets are a criminal misdemeanor. As a rookie driver with a low end carrier, I did not make much money and so I applied to the court for an appointed attorney; this could not be done by mail or phone, I actually had to go in person to the Post Falls, Idaho court to apply. The judge ruled that my income was low enough to qualify, but denied me anyway because he judged that my sentence was unlikely to result in a loss of freedom (jail time) although it was certainly a possibility (he would be the judge to decide my sentence). So I borrowed from my boss and hired a lawyer through TVC and on the day of the trail we had a pool of jurors to choose from and were good to go but the DOT cop didn't show up for court so it was dismissed (the prosecutor knew he was a no show, yet tried to intimidate us into copping a plea even at the last minute before court began). Anyway, what I am getting at, is through the experience of hiring lawyers over a loing career in trucking I have learned a little bit of law, and the most important lesson is to don't go thinking you have Constitutional rights to protect you. The Constitution, in my opinion, has value only into deceiving young men into thinking they have a reason to fight a war to defend their Constitutional freedoms, but in reality there have been so many exceptions and end runs provided to gov't to get around the Constitution that, sad to say, it doesn't really exist. And those end runs have been provided by Supreme court decisions by justices who were of both the Conservative and Liberal parties. I can only find a handful of justices who have ever defended freedom and opposed giving gov't more power, in my little bit of study of the matter.

The point I want to make is let's not lead driver's who are new to the road to be under any false impressions. They should join a legal defense such as Interstate Trucker or TVC or another, and get their advice from a lawyer and not from me and definitely not be deluded by any lofty ideals about having Constitutional rights (taught them by a teacher in a gov't subsidized school) because the cop always has a way to make an end run around it, and so do the courts. I had to learn too much the hard way, and the reality is a hard let down.