Alaska: $10,000 fine for texting while driving

[agentsteel53]

http://gizmodo.com/a-state-by-state-map-of-the-penalties-for-texting-while-1452060085

on one hand, I agree the behavior should be penalized, but:

1) 10,000 dollars and no other punishment?  why not a license revocation, or a jail sentence?  10,000 is the sort of fine that accompanies 2-3 years in jail for tampering with nutrition labels, using a Priority Mail box contrary to its intended purpose*, or some other esoteric felony.

2) when will this be a general ban on "driving like a dipshit"?  texting, bad.  reading the paper, putting on make-up, feeding your backseat-occupying spawn... all fine.

* says so right on the box!

[Billy F 1988]

How about just simply license revocation, community service, and revocation of cell phone services? Does that not seem fair enough?

[hotdogPi]

Alaska? Why not something like Texas? It should be Texas because they're populous, they have to be big with everything, and driving is more dangerous in Texas.

[getemngo]

2) when will this be a general ban on "driving like a dipshit"?  texting, bad.  reading the paper, putting on make-up, feeding your backseat-occupying spawn... all fine.

Are you for or against this? My sarcasm meter is broken today (no, seriously, I can't tell).

I agree that texting while driving is not okay, much like how drunk driving is very illegal for a good reason. These things should carry reasonable punishments because you're endangering others. But where does it end? Everything else you named is a distraction.

Spending too much time adjusting the radio or GPS is a distraction.
Driving while incredibly tired is a distraction.
Driving while crying because your spouse just broke up with you is a distraction.
Driving while you really have to poop is a distraction.

Do we ban all of these things, or maybe add a generic "distracted driving" civil infraction to the books, so you can get pulled over when you're not facing straight forward with both hands on the wheel?

You can never enforce against all bad driving, nor should you. At the same time, I worry that if the laws get too numerous and too specific, drivers will start seeing things in terms of "It must be okay unless there's a law against it!" Where exactly to draw the line is another question, one I'm not sure how to answer.

[corco]

That's why I favor results-based enforcement to distracted/impaired driving. We don't waste resources looking for people who are causing problems, but if they do get into an accident then they get nicked for a ridiculous amount if it turns out they were impaired/distracted, with the fine being weighted against the seriousness of the crime (texting could be the Alaska  $10,000 fine, drunk driving would mean immediate license revocation, etc).

The problem with a $10,000 fine for just folks texting is that officers are a lot less likely to ticket for it too. You'd have to be a pretty big dick to give somebody a $10,000 fine just for texting if they aren't breaking any other laws. I feel like even the most obnoxious and power hungry of cops would be reluctant to give a $10,000 fine. It also clogs the legal system- if I got a $10,000 ticket you can damn well be sure I'd get a lawyer and try to get the charges reduced.

driving is more dangerous in Texas.

Is it? Don't forget that most of Alaska's population lives in urban areas (admittedly nowhere near as dense as Texas though) and unlike Texas the roads are bad a good chunk of the year.

[kkt]

The problem with results-based enforcement is that so many people doing dangerous things aren't thinking about consequences.  If it was legal to drive through red lights as long as no accident resulted, there would be people who would do exactly that and then be all surprised when they had to pay a huge fine when they did get in an accident.

That said, you're right, a $10,000 fine is way too much and will result in officers not writing tickets, jury nullification, and lengthy court battles rather than swift and certain justice.

[Sykotyk]

The problem with results-based enforcement is that so many people doing dangerous things aren't thinking about consequences.  If it was legal to drive through red lights as long as no accident resulted, there would be people who would do exactly that and then be all surprised when they had to pay a huge fine when they did get in an accident.

That said, you're right, a $10,000 fine is way too much and will result in officers not writing tickets, jury nullification, and lengthy court battles rather than swift and certain justice.

Stop and go at a light isn't actually dangerous. And very rarely does a cop catch someone doing that. What most cops catch (or, the side of another car catches, actually) is when a car proceeds straight through without even slowing down (for whatever reason).

Texting is illegal, and a $10k fine. But, what about if you held an iPod? Or, a pack of gum that looked like a phone to an unsophisticated cop going the other direction. Sure, you HAVE a cell phone in your car. And he claims he saw you holding it while he drove past you. But, how exactly does this result in anything other than forcing a day in court?

Here's where these rules get lost. This should be a 'contributing factor' fine. Get into an accident while texting, $10k fine. Drive recklessly, weave, leave your lane, speed, failure to stop/yield, etc... $10k fine.

That's where this should come into play. Not a fine for and of itself.

[Duke87]

Texting is illegal, and a $10k fine. But, what about if you held an iPod?

The text of the law says that any device with a screen is included. This means using your camera while driving also can get you this penalty if a cop sees you doing it.

Now here's the thing: note we're talking about maximum penalties. They can hit you with up to a $10,000 fine and a year in prison - I imagine the actual penalty in the vast majority of cases is much less.
What is perhaps more cause for concern is that it is a class A misdemeanor - this means a conviction gets you a criminal record.

[jeffandnicole]

I was going to say - that had to be some sort of maximum.  NJ's fine is $400 according to that map, but again, that's a maximum.  The minimum is still high - $200, but the map is technically incorrect...and surely done purposely to infuriate people.