The Brentwood Board of Aldermen, on Monday, in addition to passing a compensation bill for city employees, also discussed a a bill to amend the city’s ordinance relating to ‘Careful and Prudent Driving’. There was no vote; it was a first reading.
Brentwood Chief of Police Dan Fitzgerald told the board when someone drives 10 miles per hour down Brentwood Boulevard, “We used to assume those folks were drunk, and now we just assume they’re on the phone.”
He said the main purpose of the bill is to “get folks to realize that when they’re in their car they just need to be driving. They need to be looking forward, and they need to be eliminating whatever distractions are in the car, especially the phones and other things that keep them from paying attention.”
The city’s current bill (340.160) states: Every person operating a motor vehicle on the highways of this City shall drive the vehicle in a careful and prudent manner and at a rate of speed so as not to endanger the property of another or the life or limb of any person and shall exercise the highest degree of care.
See also: Brentwood officials reject texting while driving for all ages, Brentwood police to ask for ban on texting and driving
According to the bill’s synopsis, the proposed ordinance would “more fully articulate some of the more distracting and dangerous circumstances which detract from a driver exercising the highest degree of care.”
Alderman Keith Slusser said it’s too broad.
“The city wants to make texting illegal, but texting is not mentioned once in the bill,” he said. “The language of the bill makes it 100 percent discretionary an offense has occurred.”
Slusser said if he is distracted by his son crying in the back seat he could be ticketed.
“I understand that’s not the intent of the bill, but the officer, at his discretion, could pull me over and give me a ticket,” he said. “This doesn’t solve the issue of the city wanting to eliminate texting and driving.” He said it could open the city up to more issues, including accusations of predatory ticketing. He also said it could be in conflict with state law, which allows use of GPS in a car.
City attorney, Kevin O’Keefe, said it’s not in conflict with state law, which states GPSs are allowed — just not while driving.
“The standard is — all drivers must exercise the highest degree of care — it identifies, for drivers, the kind of things that are determined to be distracting,” O’Keefe said. “The judgement officers are required to make now, is the same judgement they’re required to make under the existing bill — did the driver fail to exercise the highest degree of care.”
As a person that bikes down Manchester and sees driver after driver pass me with their eyes down at their phone, I wonder how long before a car drifts into me at 35mph.
The laws as written cited above are too vague to guide police to tackling the real problem of texting while driving. If anything the cards are stacked against police protecion of our road ways from “distracted drivers. ” The language so vague as to be contra-productive. Really, have YOU ever been a passenger when the driver was texting?? I was ONCE. We crossed the lane division, then the double yellow line and headed directly into oncoming traffic. No. Texting and driving should specifically be outlawed. when it comes to unruly kids in the back seat, i empathize with parents. What is wrong with the parent stating to the kids , ” If i have to pull this care over because you are not listening, –(then make a specific consequence meaningful to the child). ” And follow through. If something is going on, i have no problem pulling off the road and going into the back seat and “helping” kids “understand” how seriously their actions are distracting and dangerous. Texting is OPTIONAL, a driver’s elected decision and obviously a distraction, it should be a stand-alone law.