North Carolina is working on a "Distracted Driving" Bill

And until the states can PROVE that a two way radio is equally culpable WRT "distracted driving", that the two way radio is technically the very same as the cell phone, can bring forth OTHER than anecdotal evidence, postulations, opinions. false technical data, suppositions that in and of itself causes "distracted driving", the two way radio should be left alone. Period. No one here in 14 pages has offered anything but opinions and their own suppositions to back up what they say.

That's because they are two different, separate, and distinct things: apples vs oranges. The very act of driving involves distractions, of which we must be capable. If one can operate the A/C, the FM radio, then WHY can't we operate a simple microphone? Its got 70 years going for it. Its not in the ham tests because it doesn't NEED to be. In less than 30 years we now have CELL PHONES AND DISTRACTED DRIVING. The PARALLEL lies there!

The other issue is LEGAL-which you seem to dance around every time I mention it! States may regulate driving. They may not alter, regulate, enforce existing FCC Rules without the Commission's cooperation. .............Which I think they won't GET!
Since a number of states have already exempted amateur radio, the momentum is with US.l

 

But, it causes the MIND of the driver of the lethal vehicle to be focused where it shouldn't.

University studies. But, I guess someone has to DIE for you change your mind. The concept of humans being capable of "multitasking" was debunked. We serial task or IOW, "one thing at a time".

In electronics, there is TDM (Time Division Multiplex). A human and an electronic device both can do this but, the electronic device can do it much faster. It appears to perform more than one task at a time. However, when not "focused", the device misses input, and cannot change the output. MANY accidents happen due to the human driver not being focused when (s)he needs to be. It doesn't matter what the device is that causes the loss of focus at a critical time.

I'm not the one dancing. I'm the one wanting to err on the side of safety. You think there's no issue with that. I hope you're right but, since lives could be lost, I'd rather not chance it.

States regulate driving. When you're behind the wheel, driving is the primary function. Since it's potentially lethal, the driver should not allow other things to potentially adversely affect his/her driving. Period.

That a number of states (including mine) have expressly exempted Amateur Radio use while in motion, that doesn't make it right. In fact, FWIW, my state accepted lobbying from ARRL in favor of the exemption. But, I bet folks from HQ don't have to drive in my state, and don't have to be concerned about being in an accident caused by yet another inattentive driver.

 

The cell phone is multi-tasking due its duplex nature. The two way radio IS "one thing at a time" that has an imperceptible affect on driving

IN their own words, FCC doesn't appear to agree with you; they SAID so. Hard evidence, man. Hard evidence. That is what one brings into court to prove one's point. I have Precedent (91-36), FCC's own words, history (over 70 years), the technical difference in the cell phone and the two way radio, and the very lack of PROOF that the use of a two way radio is even remotely connected to "distracted driving". And does not include FCC's historical and factual governance of not only amateur radio, but two radio itself. It is the very Part 97 Rules that give us authority to operate mobile radio (amateur), and it also applies to the other Parts as well. FCC has NEVER allowed states to enforce, change, abrogate, restrict, ban, or otherwise exert any control over our Service. I am confident as they review this case, they are not going to allow it now. The states may try it--and HAVE even tried to ban amateur radio altogether in some cases. (Delaware) And, of course, they *think* they have authority over two way radio and can pass any laws they want to--until someone has the guts to stand up to 'em. Hell, tell 'em to look at their OWN license documents and read WHO gives them the authority to operate their own "poleece" radios. It sure ain't the state! Some of them DO think that ALL two way radio is just "CB": they don't know any better!

It is just an opinion, but I believe we have enough solid evidence to force states (California, for one) to back OFF. I think we WILL get this Ruling in our favor.

 

HR or cellular telephone or whatever is ALL multitasking. No matter the distraction, since humans can't TDM (Time Division Multiplex) very fast, the chance of distraction (focusing on something else at the wrong time) is very high.

Q: And of course, they're ALWAYS right, right?
A: Not.

If something is ruled in favor of someone, it stands to reason it's not in someone else's favor. Since hams are about 0.25% of the US population, the ruling would not be in favor of the other 99.75%.

The good thing would be, hams would be permitted to put everyone else on the road in danger... so they can ragchew.

 

It may cause a WEAK mind to focus where it shouldn't, most adults aren't that weak. Police cars, fire trucks, ambulances, delivery vehicles, aircraft, rail vehicles, water craft, etc., ALL have 2-way radios. Let's remove ALL of them, even if it prevents just one accident, no matter how minor. After all, we can't have the operators of those vehicles distracted by their 2-way radio. And while we're at it.......let's remove the entertainment systems from every vehicle, anything that plays music or makes a sound or has a display or readout or creates any type of distraction whatsoever.......no GPS, no satellite radio, no video games or TV or anything that a passenger might use that COULD POSSIBLY be a distraction to the driver. EVERYBODY should suffer because a few IDIOTS might not be mature enough to be operating a vehicle and not be distracted by SOMETHING. Imagine driving a vehicle without any distractions.............nothing to break the monotony .........kinda boring, mind wanders, you possibly doze off...................that seems much safer than having a 2-way radio with which you can talk to someone. Better yet, let's eliminate all transportation completely, everyone will have to WALK to where they want to go. THAT will save a LOT of lives.

 

Maybe MOST aren't that weak. Which ones are/aren't, and how can we tell which ones are/aren't? AFAIK, a license to operate a lethal personal vehicle doesn't qualify someone to also operate a 2-way radio, and a license to operate a ham radio doesn't qualify someone to also operate a lethal personal vehicle.

Operators of those vehicles are required to use their 2-way radios and in most cases are trained in using them together. In the case of hams, neither.

Many state motor vehicle laws already deal with ancillary/accessory devices & other distractions, and restrict/prohibit usage while in motion.

 

"Laws" are no replacement for intellect. If it was that easy, we could just outlaw stupidity. You can keep on trying, but it ain't gonna work. Eventually, we reach a "point of diminishing returns" where our laws do more harm than good. You are WAAAYYYYY beyond that point.

 

Using that very premise, IF a two way radio is that distracting to the small-ER percentage that use it, then it is also "distracting" to the police, fire, ambulance, package delivery--everybody else. Ergo it stands to reason that the police themselves should be subject to the same restrictions. If it is distracting, then it is distracting. Period. BUT! It is NOT. Indeed, it is quite hypocritical for the 'poleece' and fire to be able to "engage" in a crime. Also hypocritical for the law to say, "Ah'll give y'all (hams)a ticket fer using that 'ere reddio; Ah kin do it cuz ah'm th' law, boy"! THEN turn round in the next breath, 'Uh, there's a huge fire in the canyon, a tornado that's knocked out communications an' we need ya'll to come he'p us out". You know what? With laws like that (restricting what doesn't need restricting) that do not achieve either the goals of the state OR the Feds, THIS ol' boy ain't comin.' " Y'all" coppers kin drive yer car off in the lake, cuz I ain't comin' to help ya's. No sir, you ain't givin' ME no ticket fer "driving distracted" under your cussed law!!

 

Thanks for your opinion. I see that you and one other person default to the LEAST safe position.

When acquaintances learned I frequented the drag strip w/ my hotrod, many remarked, "That must be very dangerous!". I replied, yes it is -- the most dangerous part is the haul to/from the track. I've had to change my underwear several times because of other drivers' distracted driving. We don't need to rubber-stamp another needless activity.

Again, those people NEED/MUST use their 2-way radios while in motion, and hams don't.

 

Then in the face of stupid, unnecessary "Nanny state" laws, THEY can pull off the road like everybody else. There ARE others besides government o-fishuls" that need to use theirs, too. So, if its "dangerous for the unwashed masses to do it, then it is just as dangerous for Bubba cop to do it, too. But it's not.

 

Sarcastic uncalled-for put-downs of others aside... AGAIN, some need a "nanny" state to tell them to not take chances. The rest of us know better.

 

I did not put down any individuals; only those states that have a tendency to over-regiment, over-regulate, attempt to "shear" the sheep without their consent.

I have "polled", literally, every state in the Union and asked them for their interpretation of their particular distracted driving law. Those that don't specifically exempt two way radio in the wording of their law told me that their laws were directed towards the cell phone where the problem exists. There were a few "maybe's" because, quite frankly, they hadn't thought of two way radio. A few implied that they thought the state did have authority over two way radio and seemed surprised that it is FCC that is the authority, NOT the state. They just hadn't thought it out. Most states exempt amateur and commercial radio, probably due to interaction with ARRL and in-state hams who were watching out. This is what happened in Virginia, and NC. The ones with plans to restrict two way radio seemed to feel that amateur and CB were one and the same. I pointed out to them that they were governed under Federal law under Part 97 and Part 95 respectively.
Whether it prompts a change at the state level (I doubt it) remains to be seen. The guy in California promised to look at FCC Brief 91-36. I told him he would be surprised at what it has to say about "ability to cross state lines with mobile amateur equipment to transmit on authorized frequencies..........." Their law allows commercial two way and CB, but an officer would likely ticket if he saw what appeared to be a ham, as you say, "ragchewing". But HOW would he prove what the ham was doing?

This is STILL absolutely, as I see it, against FCC Rules to supercede, change, or attempt to regulate amateur radio. Historically it has not been allowed. In cases where local police/fire communications has been interfered with (interlopers, etc), the locals called on the hams to help them DF the problem. Some thanks and a punch in the gut to ask for help in one breath and then write a ticket in the next.

As I have already said, it is now in the hands of the Wireless Bureau. I truly feel that the law is on OUR side in this issue, not on the states'.
We have solid evidence, technical differences in the two types of equipment, and a LEGAL document that states FCC's (and Congress') intent and feelings on the matter. The true crux of the matter boils down to this: Does the use of a two way radio have an EQUAL impact on driving as the cell phone. Given all the known facts (evidence) it does NOT. The burden of proving the states' cases lies in solid evidence--which they do not have. Opinions, "I think", and assumptions are not enough.

 

I wish I had a nickel for every time that a certain poster on this thread used the term "lethal vehicle".

 

You're referring to me, using an accurate term. So, according to you, vehicles aren't deadly?

ARRL isn't "watching out" for groups other than Amateur Radio operators. That includes commercial radio ops and other drivers & pedestrians.

The states regulate what can/cannot (and must/must not) be done while operating a lethal deadly vehicle on their roads. Safety should ALWAYS override ragchewing.

Let's assume two way radio has less impact (on driving) than a cellular telephone. That says it has an impact on driving. We know from university studies that focusing on anything other than driving adversely impacts driving. Since operating a ham radio while in motion isn't necessary or required in any way, I don't think I'd like to find out first-hand from an impact.

 

Obviously, vehicles aren't deadly, they're inanimate objects. PEOPLE are deadly.