After three-months of issuing warnings, police are getting tough on some drivers who use hand-held devices. But police and many other professional drivers will remain exempt.
It’s hard to convey a ‘get tough’ attitude when virtually no driver has been fined since the ban came into effect three months ago, and drivers continue to use them, whether they are exempt or not.
Until this month, police have been unable to give out fines because the Ministry of Transportation had not set an amount for the fine.
Now, the $155 fine may come as a shock to some drivers who have been breaking the law since the ban came into effect.
In the rare cases where a ticket was issued in Ontario, it was given under provisions for dangerous driving and it was left up to a judge to determine a punishment or fine.
A law that lacks teeth will make it difficult to change deeply ingrained social attitudes. In the modern age of instant communication, the need for speed and convenience often trumps common sense.
According to the Ministry of Transportation “a driver using a cell phone is four times more likely to be in a crash than a driver focused on the road.”
But the ban is riddled with exemptions.
Police, emergency personnel and public utility drivers are allowed to use hand-held devices if they are used in the course of their duties.
It makes sense in an emergency situation, but what about during a non-urgent phone call?
For instance, cycling through downtown the other day, I was nearly struck by an unmarked police cruiser as it parked abruptly – and then remained there in no apparent hurry. The officer was having a cell phone conversation with one hand. His other hand was busy steering.
Adding insult to injury, the officer gave me the finger after I raised a hand in disbelief.
Police, the officer explained, are allowed to use their phones while driving.
If the government wants to change social attitudes in the new era of instant communication, it would help if police acted more like role models than rogues.
In the many groups that are exempt, some will undoubtedly take advantage of the exceptions.
For the next three years, those exceptions will include motorists using two-way radios, and certain professions requiring the use of handheld technology like taxis, tow-trucks and couriers.
The courier industry basically relies on its drivers checking on their phones for text updates on destinations they need to get to.
“I get orders and updates, like, every five minutes,” says James Campbell, who drives and dispatches for a local company. “Unexpected calls will pop up en-route; if you don’t check your messages constantly you’ll miss jobs.”
“With high-priority deliveries, that’s not good for business,” he adds.
Other businesses could argue a similar point.
Journalists need to keep in touch with sources as they’re heading to a developing story and many corporations, like marketers, need to keep in touch with employees and clients through emails.
The ban won’t be effective because it doesn’t set a clear standard that everyone must heed.
“As soon as the ban came out, people started freaking out at me saying they were going to call the police,” says Gary Watson who dispatches for his own courier company.
“I’m a professional,” he says. “If I get fined I’ll just put it on my income tax.”
To be effective, the ban must either have reasonable exemptions or none at all.
Otherwise the ban risks making renegades out of ordinary commuters who may continue to ask themselves: “if everyone else is doing it, why can’t I?”