by Dick Hall-Sizemore
Included in the Governor’s omnibus transportation bill, discussed earlier here, are some major highway safety proposals that have proved controversial in the past. The administration probably thought the chance of passage would improve if these proposals were wrapped up in a big package with lots of other stuff.
The items are the following (I have plagiarized Dave Ress’ well-worded summary in his Daily Press article):
- No talking on a handheld cellphone while driving. (Currently, talking on a handheld phone is banned only in highway work zones. Typing or reading text on a handheld phone is banned anywhere.)
- No open containers of beer, wine or liquor while driving. (Currently, you can’t drink while driving; the change would mean a fine of up to $250 just for having an open container in your car.)
- Driving with your seat belt unbuckled would be a primary offense — that is, sufficient reason for a police officer to pull you over and give you a ticket. (Currently, you can be ticketed for this only after a cop has pulled you for some other violation.)
From my Soapbox
: My narrow libertarian streak leads me to oppose the open container and the seat belt provisions. It should not be illegal for a passenger to be drinking a beer. A drinking or drunk passenger does not pose a danger to other drivers. During her presentation yesterday to the House Appropriations Committee, the Secretary of Transportation got several questions about this provision. She justified the provision by pointing out that Virginia is penalized by the feds for not prohibiting open containers. She later admitted that the state does not actually lose the money; its use is restricted. (I think it must be used for highway safety programs). She wants Virginia to have unrestricted use of the money. I would not be surprised if this provision were stripped from the bill.
I don’t like the seat belt provision, either. If someone wants to risk his neck by not using a seat belt, she should have that right. Besides, I am not sure how the police could enforce this one; it is awfully difficult to tell if someone in a fast-moving car has her seat belt fastened. Also, if you don’t fasten your seat belt, your car will annoy you with those beeping noises. In summary, I don’t see the need for this provision. Ironically, it runs counter to Democrats’ other push to eliminate excuses for the police to stop drivers, especially black drivers. Cops could cite “suspicion” of a seat belt violation for otherwise stopping drivers.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.