Florida members this affects you
03-01-2007, 11:31 AM
#1
Florida members this affects you
Here are some things going on in the legislature that need our attention:
Dear Florida NMA Members,
There is a bill being considered by the Florida Legislature that requires your immediate attention.
This bill, SB2228, would ban the use of radar detectors in Florida.
An excerpt from the bill is below:
316.1907 Radar or laser speed-measuring device detectors or jammers prohibited; penalties.--
(1) A driver may not operate a motor vehicle on a street or highway in this state if the vehicle is equipped with a device that is in operating condition and readily accessible for use by the driver or any passenger and that detects, jams, or otherwise interferes with the operation of a radar, as defined in s. 316.1906, operated by a law enforcement officer.
(2) Enforcement of this section by state or local law enforcement agencies must be accomplished only as a secondary action when a driver of a motor vehicle has been detained for a suspected violation of another section of this chapter, chapter 320, or chapter 322.
(3) A violation of this section is a non-criminal traffic infraction, punishable as a moving violation as provided in chapter 318.
We urge you to contact your legislators and let them know how you feel about this bill. You can find out who your legislators are by visiting this site:
http://www.flsenate.gov/Legislators/...TOKEN=88887023
Some talking points can be found below:
Banning radar detectors is an affront to personal freedom. Everyday citizens should have the right to know if they are under surveillance.
Radar detectors do not have a negative effect on safety. The nation’s fatality rates have fallen consistently for almost two decades. Virginia, which is the only state to ban radar detectors, has not seen a more substantial drop in fatalities than the nation as a whole.
Radar detectors get drivers to slow down. If the intent is to punish speeders, then banning radar detectors would help that effort; however if the intent is to get speeds down and improve safety, then radar detectors do just that and should be available to Florida drivers.
Radar detector users are a small segment of the driving population and have very little effect on overall driving speeds. A 1987 survey showed that radar detector owners are involved in fewer accidents as a percentage of the population than are non-users.
Detectors protect citizens from unfair police tactics. The fact is that radar readings by police officers are often in error. In light of this reality, there is a strong case for citizens to be able to monitor the use of radar, so they don’t become victims of false readings.
And:
There is a bill being considered by the Florida Legislature that requires your attention.
This bill, HB27, would make Florida a "primary enforcement" state for seat belt violations, which means that drivers can be pulled over and ticketed for not wearing their seat belt at any time. Currently, Florida is a "secondary enforcement" state, which means that police may issue a fine for not wearing a seat belt only if the vehicle has been stopped for other traffic violations.
The bill would remove the following section from the current seat belt code:
However, except for violations of s. 316.613 and paragraph (4)(a), enforcement of this section by state or local law enforcement agencies must be accomplished only as a secondary action when a driver of a motor vehicle has been detained for a suspected violation of another section of this chapter, chapter 320, or chapter 322.
We urge you to contact your legislators, particularly your Senators, and let them know how you feel about this bill. You can find out who your legislators are by visiting this site. (see above)
Some talking points can be found by visiting this page on our website: http://www.motorists.org/issues/safe...belt_laws.html.
Thanks for looking, all it takes is a couple of quick emails to keep the cops and the government from reaching further into our pockets.
Dear Florida NMA Members,
There is a bill being considered by the Florida Legislature that requires your immediate attention.
This bill, SB2228, would ban the use of radar detectors in Florida.
An excerpt from the bill is below:
316.1907 Radar or laser speed-measuring device detectors or jammers prohibited; penalties.--
(1) A driver may not operate a motor vehicle on a street or highway in this state if the vehicle is equipped with a device that is in operating condition and readily accessible for use by the driver or any passenger and that detects, jams, or otherwise interferes with the operation of a radar, as defined in s. 316.1906, operated by a law enforcement officer.
(2) Enforcement of this section by state or local law enforcement agencies must be accomplished only as a secondary action when a driver of a motor vehicle has been detained for a suspected violation of another section of this chapter, chapter 320, or chapter 322.
(3) A violation of this section is a non-criminal traffic infraction, punishable as a moving violation as provided in chapter 318.
We urge you to contact your legislators and let them know how you feel about this bill. You can find out who your legislators are by visiting this site:
http://www.flsenate.gov/Legislators/...TOKEN=88887023
Some talking points can be found below:
Banning radar detectors is an affront to personal freedom. Everyday citizens should have the right to know if they are under surveillance.
Radar detectors do not have a negative effect on safety. The nation’s fatality rates have fallen consistently for almost two decades. Virginia, which is the only state to ban radar detectors, has not seen a more substantial drop in fatalities than the nation as a whole.
Radar detectors get drivers to slow down. If the intent is to punish speeders, then banning radar detectors would help that effort; however if the intent is to get speeds down and improve safety, then radar detectors do just that and should be available to Florida drivers.
Radar detector users are a small segment of the driving population and have very little effect on overall driving speeds. A 1987 survey showed that radar detector owners are involved in fewer accidents as a percentage of the population than are non-users.
Detectors protect citizens from unfair police tactics. The fact is that radar readings by police officers are often in error. In light of this reality, there is a strong case for citizens to be able to monitor the use of radar, so they don’t become victims of false readings.
And:
There is a bill being considered by the Florida Legislature that requires your attention.
This bill, HB27, would make Florida a "primary enforcement" state for seat belt violations, which means that drivers can be pulled over and ticketed for not wearing their seat belt at any time. Currently, Florida is a "secondary enforcement" state, which means that police may issue a fine for not wearing a seat belt only if the vehicle has been stopped for other traffic violations.
The bill would remove the following section from the current seat belt code:
However, except for violations of s. 316.613 and paragraph (4)(a), enforcement of this section by state or local law enforcement agencies must be accomplished only as a secondary action when a driver of a motor vehicle has been detained for a suspected violation of another section of this chapter, chapter 320, or chapter 322.
We urge you to contact your legislators, particularly your Senators, and let them know how you feel about this bill. You can find out who your legislators are by visiting this site. (see above)
Some talking points can be found by visiting this page on our website: http://www.motorists.org/issues/safe...belt_laws.html.
Thanks for looking, all it takes is a couple of quick emails to keep the cops and the government from reaching further into our pockets.
03-01-2007, 11:47 AM
#2
Registered
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So why shouldn't cops be allowed to stop and ticket non seat belt wearers? I fail to see how this is an important issue to motorists. Your supposed to wear it, so just wear it. If you don't wear it, you deserve a ticket. This just makes it easier for seat belt use to be enforced. I'm for it.
The radar issue is really don't care either way. You keep it limited to 5-10 over you should be be fine. You wanna run 90+ on the highway you need one.... so again.... just another tool to skirt the rules.....
The radar issue is really don't care either way. You keep it limited to 5-10 over you should be be fine. You wanna run 90+ on the highway you need one.... so again.... just another tool to skirt the rules.....
03-01-2007, 12:15 PM
#4
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: IAD/FLL
Posts: 2,090
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here we go...
But I can't help it...
If you're perfectly complacent with OTHER PEOPLE deciding what's good and bad for you, then don't contact your publicly elected officials to tell them this bill is unnecessary.
Otherwise, it's just another waste of time and effort that some local legislator got pressured into creating because someone probably lost their life in a car crash. And that person probably had a detector AND wasn't wearing their seatbelt so now the rest of us are at risk of losing another freedom.
Nefarious, I agree with your basic principals: the car doesn't go into gear unless all belts are clicked and I'm pretty much a +5 driver. BUT I don't need another law on the books to keep me this way.
In the end, the bill shouldn't go far.
But I can't help it...
If you're perfectly complacent with OTHER PEOPLE deciding what's good and bad for you, then don't contact your publicly elected officials to tell them this bill is unnecessary.
Otherwise, it's just another waste of time and effort that some local legislator got pressured into creating because someone probably lost their life in a car crash. And that person probably had a detector AND wasn't wearing their seatbelt so now the rest of us are at risk of losing another freedom.
Nefarious, I agree with your basic principals: the car doesn't go into gear unless all belts are clicked and I'm pretty much a +5 driver. BUT I don't need another law on the books to keep me this way.
In the end, the bill shouldn't go far.
03-01-2007, 12:43 PM
#5
Registered
Here we go...
But I can't help it...
If you're perfectly complacent with OTHER PEOPLE deciding what's good and bad for you, then don't contact your publicly elected officials to tell them this bill is unnecessary.
Otherwise, it's just another waste of time and effort that some local legislator got pressured into creating because someone probably lost their life in a car crash. And that person probably had a detector AND wasn't wearing their seatbelt so now the rest of us are at risk of losing another freedom.
Nefarious, I agree with your basic principals: the car doesn't go into gear unless all belts are clicked and I'm pretty much a +5 driver. BUT I don't need another law on the books to keep me this way.
In the end, the bill shouldn't go far.
But I can't help it...
If you're perfectly complacent with OTHER PEOPLE deciding what's good and bad for you, then don't contact your publicly elected officials to tell them this bill is unnecessary.
Otherwise, it's just another waste of time and effort that some local legislator got pressured into creating because someone probably lost their life in a car crash. And that person probably had a detector AND wasn't wearing their seatbelt so now the rest of us are at risk of losing another freedom.
Nefarious, I agree with your basic principals: the car doesn't go into gear unless all belts are clicked and I'm pretty much a +5 driver. BUT I don't need another law on the books to keep me this way.
In the end, the bill shouldn't go far.
However, I don't see any problem with the law. But one mans law is another man's lost freedom (within reason). You should be able to die and be unsafe as you want - its your life not the governments.
03-01-2007, 01:34 PM
#7
Registered
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats the point. The law already says you MUST wear it. The new law really shouldn't affect you.
The original post was about the change to the law. And like I said, the change doesn't really affect you, its for the enforcement of an EXISTING law.
The original post was about the change to the law. And like I said, the change doesn't really affect you, its for the enforcement of an EXISTING law.
03-01-2007, 02:34 PM
#8
Gold Member
Gold Member
Now lets just think about this rationally and objectively.
If the goal is to reduce speeding, then lets make radar detectors, required in every car as a
factory standard safety item, and, have every police car be a marked car with its lights on
all of the time. THIS WILL REDUCE SPEEDING.
If the goal is to catch people speeding, then lets make radar detectors illegal, and, have
police cars hide. THIS WILL CATCH AND FINE SPEEDERS.
So what is the goal? Reduce speeding or catch and fine speeders?
Now how about speed and safety, is there a correlation? Look at the German Autobahn.
It is statistically the safest super highway in the world, and its speed limit is....oh that’s
right, no speed limit in many areas,
If the goal is to reduce speeding, then lets make radar detectors, required in every car as a
factory standard safety item, and, have every police car be a marked car with its lights on
all of the time. THIS WILL REDUCE SPEEDING.
If the goal is to catch people speeding, then lets make radar detectors illegal, and, have
police cars hide. THIS WILL CATCH AND FINE SPEEDERS.
So what is the goal? Reduce speeding or catch and fine speeders?
Now how about speed and safety, is there a correlation? Look at the German Autobahn.
It is statistically the safest super highway in the world, and its speed limit is....oh that’s
right, no speed limit in many areas,
03-01-2007, 04:51 PM
#9
Are you going to have the same attitude when they decide we all need to wear lifejackets whenever we are on the boat? If it saves just one life it will be worth it right? I mean statistics show that the majority of people who die in boating accidents weren't wearing a life vest, think of all the lives that could be saved.
03-01-2007, 06:26 PM
#10
Charter Member # 55
Charter Member
First of all this belongs in The Bilge section.
The reasoning in the arguments is pretty stupid.
Radar jammers are substantially different than detectectors. Jammers should be against the law as they interfere with police enforcing the law.
"Radar Detectors get people to slow down"---you gotta be kidding. They slow down when it goes off.
Using a "survey" from 1987????????? not really a good statistical measurement.
"Protect citizens from unfair police tactics"------------thats a joke. If you're speeding and you get caught then pay the price or fight it in court.
Seatbelt enforcement as primary offense is a law in many states. It is tied to receiving federal highway funds. If you want higher taxes to pay for roads then vote against it. People should wear them. It is proven that seatbelts save lives in serious accidents. That said, I only occasionally wear mine. I would not be happy about wearing it all the time, but could live with it. Heck, I make my kids where them every time they're in a car.
The reasoning in the arguments is pretty stupid.
Radar jammers are substantially different than detectectors. Jammers should be against the law as they interfere with police enforcing the law.
"Radar Detectors get people to slow down"---you gotta be kidding. They slow down when it goes off.
Using a "survey" from 1987????????? not really a good statistical measurement.
"Protect citizens from unfair police tactics"------------thats a joke. If you're speeding and you get caught then pay the price or fight it in court.
Seatbelt enforcement as primary offense is a law in many states. It is tied to receiving federal highway funds. If you want higher taxes to pay for roads then vote against it. People should wear them. It is proven that seatbelts save lives in serious accidents. That said, I only occasionally wear mine. I would not be happy about wearing it all the time, but could live with it. Heck, I make my kids where them every time they're in a car.
