Posted: November 27th, 2013
Banning of Texting while driving by State of Nevada
The United States is a federal state that allows individual states to make their own by-laws. This is a positive thing to cherish because of the diverse cultures in various states given that specificity of the laws would be advantageous to a state. The recent law banning texting while driving in the state of Nevada has taken effect and raised serious concerns. The law is only but trying to change the characters and behaviors of the residents of the state who drive. However, what is clear is that the State of Nevada should not have banned texting as it has more of negative effects than positive to both the resident drivers and those from other states. The authorities in Nevada feel that this would greatly help reduce accidents in the state. However, the effect that the law would have on motorists and security personnel, specifically the police, would be varied (Sturnquist 49).
First, the execution of such a law is not an easy thing due to the nature of context under which it operates. While the Government in Nevada could be having good reasons in mind while passing this law, the law presents a difficult aspect in terms of implementation. Given that texting is specifically on driving, it is very difficult to see a driver texting. For one to see the driver texting, they must be very close to the driver so that they can see and verify that he is actually texting. This is a difficult thing all together to implement unlike the ban on calling.
The decision to ban texting while driving presents another difficulty to the executing body (Walker & Clement 133). The traffic police will find it difficult to detect whether a driver is texting or not. Given that texting is not something that can easily be detected, confirmation of whether somebody texted or not will always be necessary (Jekel, Joann & David 354). This means that the authorities will always have to work together with mobile telecommunication companies if they have to prove their case or have their evidence brought out in court. This is likely to be a rigorous activity that may make the whole exercise to be very expensive.
Another thing that makes the execution of this law difficult is the fact that mobile phones are personal gadgets. This means that the police have no obligation, even as provided by this law, to take a phone forcefully out of a motorist’s possession. They can only do this through consent from the motorists. Even where the driver has seen the motorist texting, it is a completely difficult thing to get the specimen (Walker & Clement 432).
This law has positive things to admire. The main thing that pushed for passing of this law is road safety. However, this law tends to be one sided as it does not put into consideration the side of the driver. While the driver may be driving, there might be an emergency need that he would need the driver’s attention. Slowing down of the vehicle and texting would be the better option for this, yet this law had ruled this out. This would imply that the driver might not be able to respond to urgent matters that would require his attention (Society of Automotive Engineers 71).
A quick survey shows that, very few people are following the provisions of this law. Very few arrests have therefore been made over the same. This however does not imply that motorists do not break this law. In fact, an interview carried out on motorists and drivers in Nevada still indicates that they (drivers) are still using mobile phone texts while driving. What is clear is that this law gives the traffic police a difficult time to implement. The police find it difficult to stop a driver on speculation that he could be texting. This is supported by the fact that mobile phones are small and do not need the user to be too close to them for them to text (Jekel, Joann & David 354).
Another difficult thing that comes with the law is the fact that many of the states in the United States have no by-laws banning texting while driving. This is getting a number of motorists in shock as they drive to or through Nevada, after they discover that texting while driving is unpermitted. This is opposed to the residents’ motorists that are aware and familiarized of the provisions of the law. As such, motorists from the other states would have undue disadvantage when it comes to application of this law (Sturnquist 64).
Many motorists have now adapted new ways of escaping the police dragnet over flouting this law. This is so especially on the highways. Many motorists in roads in Nevada are using other ways that cannot allow the police to note whether they are texting or not. This is through driving in the middle lanes of highways where a police might not easily note them while texting. Others text while having their phones placed on hidden angles on the dash boards of the vehicles. This makes it difficult for the police to note if they are texting or are using other vehicle peripherals such as music players. The police would avoid stopping such motorists, because they are not quite sure if they were texting or using the vehicle peripherals (Juhlin 121).
The law banning texting while driving presents various challenges to the executing authorities. This means that the execution of the law might not be effective enough. The intention of putting up the law is good but its implementation may not be successful. The law also presents a very difficult scenario to the motorists who are being denied any form of communication even during emergencies. This is because calling while driving is unlawful in Nevada and texting was the only option available. The authorities in Nevada need to rethink and change their position over this law. Therefore, Nevada should not have banned texting while driving.
Jekel, James, Joann Elmore, and David Katz. Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Preventive Medicine. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 2001. Print.
Juhlin, Oskar. Social Media on the Road: The Future of Car Based Computing. New York: Springer, 2010. Print.
Society of Automotive Engineers. Automotive engineering international. New York: SAE, 2005. Print
Sturnquist, Daniel. Mobile phones and driving. Nevada: Nova Publishers, 2006. Print.
Walker, Timothy, and Clement Bates. Introduction to American Law: Designed As a First Book for Students. Boston: Little, Brown, 1905. Internet resource.
Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.