Slashdot Mirror


Honolulu Now Fines People Up To $99 For Texting While Crossing Road (theguardian.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: The Hawaiian city of Honolulu has resorted to fining people up to $99 for staring at the devices, to try and force people to look up from their phones while crossing the road. The new law gives police the power to fine people up to $35 for their first offence, $75 for their second and $99 thereafter, perhaps expecting it to take quite some effort to get people to take notice. The bill, which comes into force today after being rubber stamped by the Hawaiian city's mayor in July, states that "no pedestrian shall cross a street or highway while viewing a mobile electronic device." Mobile phones are included as well as any "text messaging device, paging device, personal digital assistant, laptop computer, video game, or digital photographic device" but audio equipment is excluded. Holding a conversation on a phone while walking is still permitted, as is using a device in an emergency, but crossing the road while texting, reading or Facebooking -- as millions around the world do every day -- is not.

19 of 131 comments (clear)

  1. I wonder... by olsmeister · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Will they deliver these fines to people in their hospital beds if they are struck while crossing? Or are their immediate relatives on the hook to pay if the person is fatally injured?

    1. Re:I wonder... by dreamchaser · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They should get the fines regardless, and yes, their families should pay rather than taxpayers. It's about time people get their face out of their phones while they are walking around.

    2. Re:I wonder... by torkus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed. They might accidentally wander on to your lawn too.

      This law is pure 'for the children' type protectionist crap. Should someone watch while crossing the street? Yes of course. Could they get hurt by not looking? Yep.

      Do you need a LAW and FINE to tell people to do what they already know they should be doing? ... and furthermore punishment for something where there is no victim? Not at all.

      Now, if someone causes an accident there are already ways to hold them responsible (protip: a $35 fine isn't it). If they don't cause an accident, then no-harm, no-foul. This law will be enforced for 15 minutes then forgotten except when they decide to 'crack down' and 'do something' like target minorities.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    3. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree with you, but do YOU want to be the person driving the car?

      I have had a person in my family who was in an accident where someone was killed. He was completely not at fault but the burden had a devastating effect.

      I am all for natural selection to weed out the stupid, but do not want to hurt someone even if I am right.

      Sometimes you have to hit people in the pocket to make them wake up.

  2. In other news... by freeze128 · · Score: 5, Funny

    In other news, Amazon reports that shipments of paperback books to Hawaii have increased by 80%.

  3. why did the texter cross the road? by turkeydance · · Score: 3, Funny

    road? what road?

  4. Re:Faces in phones by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 4, Funny
  5. Darwin at play? by Mr.No · · Score: 2

    How about letting idiots disappear?

  6. Re:Faces in phones by Baron_Yam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >I think it's kind of interesting that Millennials and other constant users of smart phones, especially singles, who walk around all day looking at a screen, complain that they can't meet any decent people

    Oh come on, that problem pre-dated smart phones... we just outright ignored everybody instead of being entranced by our electronics.

    Being 'dating age' sucks, because only welcomed approaches are socially acceptable and you don't know if your approach will be welcomed until after you make it. We don't really have great social customs for young people to meet; it's "be in the same class" or "get drunk at the local meet/meat market".

    I'm well and truly happy to be past all that shit and I don't envy young people who - like me - aren't naturally gregarious but still would like to have a partner. ( I still have no idea how I ended up married with children).

  7. Re:Faces in phones by geoscodin · · Score: 2

    I lived in Kailua (Oahu) from 2000-2001 and worked in Honolulu. More than once I grabbed somebody by the arm to keep them from obliviously walking out in front of The Bus. I didn't understand it then, but it seems like it's probably much more common in the age of texting.

  8. better than fining them... by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...simply legislate that any such action makes it impossible to sue.

    Take away peoples' right to sue the crap out of whatever driver hits them if they're texting while crossing the street, and they'll stop. Americans don't go where they don't have lawyer-armor.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:better than fining them... by swillden · · Score: 2

      Take away peoples' right to sue the crap out of whatever driver hits them if they're texting while crossing the street, and they'll stop.

      That's not enough. These people clearly don't believe they'll get hit, which means they either believe they have magical invulnerability or because they believe that drivers will take responsibility for avoiding hitting them. If they believed that drivers only avoided hitting them because the drivers were afraid of the ensuing lawsuit, you might have a point. But drivers also fear various forms of criminal charges.

      So to make your plan work you'd need to remove both civil and criminal liabilities for drivers who injure or kill texting pedestrians. It would be effective at convincing pedestrians to avoid texting, but, much like my proposal to reduce vehicular accidents by removing all driver seat belts and air bags and affixing a razor-sharp spear point to the center of the steering wheel, aimed directly at the driver's chest, there would be some down sides.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  9. Photography by darkain · · Score: 2

    As someone who dabbles in urban photography as a hobby... *FUCK*THEM*

    Running into the middle of the cross walk when the little person on the sign turns white, something that is perfectly legal, becomes ILLEGAL all of a sudden if you stop, take a pic, and continue on while still during the safe crossing time!?

    1. Re:Photography by Teun · · Score: 2

      No problem, don't use a digital camera but one with film because they are not on the list :)

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  10. Re:Faces in phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    nobody is able to catch anyone's eye anymore, so potential connections are missed. What a shame.

    Because anything so much as "hi" to some stranger is considered sexual harrassment

    Hi.

  11. Why use commercial pricing schemes? by TimothyHollins · · Score: 2

    Why $99? Are they trying to sell as many as possible?

    I get why stores would want to price products at $99.95, but since when did Law Enforcement need incentive for fines? Are they trying to reach a quota by having a sale? Is it this week only and then back to $129.95 a pop?

  12. Re:Faces in phones by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

    I am soooo glad I found my soulmate and married her before the PC Police went full retard.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  13. let's punish the victims by spoggle · · Score: 2

    Honolulu has had a problem with inattentive drivers hitting and killing people in the crosswalks.

    Many of these fatalities are people legitimately in crosswalks, a few not, but in most cases the driver claims to have never seen the pedestrian.

    Rather than deal with distracted driving, and as a driver and a pedestrian in Honolulu I can tell you it's rampant, they've taken to punishing the victims. As with most political moves in Hawaii, this appeases the mass of drivers who can't be bothered to look up from their cellphones (Hawaii has more cars than licensed drivers). I can't think of a pedestrian fatality that was caused by a pedestrian lost in their cellphone. Yeah, they're annoying, but not the root cause of Honolulu's problem.

  14. Re:Faces in phones by Altus · · Score: 2

    Yeah its ridiculous for someone to cross the street without looking. Thats why blind people aren't allowed to walk around in Honolulu.

    Look, if you have the light it shouldn't matter if you are looking at your phone or the news paper or a book or the back the the head of the guy in front of you.

    --

    "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson