The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://www.texaschlforum.com/
So we can still surf porn and watch videos in traffic?AJ80 wrote:OK I think I found the answer to my questions
(c-1) An operator may not use a hand-held wireless
communication device to read, write, or send a text-based
communication while operating a motor vehicle unless the vehicle is
stopped.
Someone already beat you to it.KD5NRH wrote:So we can still surf porn and watch videos in traffic?AJ80 wrote:OK I think I found the answer to my questions
(c-1) An operator may not use a hand-held wireless
communication device to read, write, or send a text-based
communication while operating a motor vehicle unless the vehicle is
stopped.
I should have heeded the warning. I could have gone all day without reading that.loadedliberal wrote:Someone already beat you to it.KD5NRH wrote:So we can still surf porn and watch videos in traffic?AJ80 wrote:OK I think I found the answer to my questions
(c-1) An operator may not use a hand-held wireless
communication device to read, write, or send a text-based
communication while operating a motor vehicle unless the vehicle is
stopped.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/ ... otic-crime" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Warning the link is PG-13.
Looks like you're good to go.JNMAR wrote:Is there a list somewhere of the bills he vetoed? In particular I'm interested in the bill making portions of the Brazos River off limits to airboats. It passed the House and Senate and I'm wondering if he'll sign or not or veto.
After California passed their ban, I still saw numerous people on my commute texting. I don't think there's been any appreciable reduction in traffic fatalities as a result of the law.JNMAR wrote:And that really surprised me that he did...It's not that I'm for more laws but if we had to have another one I don't think it'd be a bad one to have. I don't think there's any question that it would have saved peoples lives who'll get run over by the texters.
IMO, it still leads to the same problem that I objected to when the local ordinance was passed; you can't make a laundry list of distractions and expect it to be effective. Applying makeup, daydreaming, shaving, and dozens of other things cause just as much distraction, and you'd never be able to keep up with all the banned items. IMO, we should follow the lead of all the states and cities that have a more general offense of driving without due care or attention; no need to list everything, or to wait for another session to add some new distraction.JNMAR wrote:And that really surprised me that he did...It's not that I'm for more laws but if we had to have another one I don't think it'd be a bad one to have. I don't think there's any question that it would have saved peoples lives who'll get run over by the texters.
Thanks for the link, RttlTrap. Actually I don't have one and wouldn't have been offended if he'd signed it. However I have a couple of neighbors who do have airboats and were quite offended at the prospect of not being able to use them at night to keep everyone else awake. LOLRttlTrap wrote:Looks like you're good to go.JNMAR wrote:Is there a list somewhere of the bills he vetoed? In particular I'm interested in the bill making portions of the Brazos River off limits to airboats. It passed the House and Senate and I'm wondering if he'll sign or not or veto.
http://governor.state.tx.us/news/veto/16277/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;