Really pissed off

[thepizz]

Now you did it OP. Wait until THEPIZZ gets in this thread after work. He's going to make hamburger meat out of you.

:lol:Are you trying to bait me? Btw, still awaiting your arrival. :shrug:

 

[Mach1USMC]

Don't know how much this will help you.

I did a quick search and did not find any cases that addressed if a GPS falls within the definition of a "Portable electronic Device".

Good luck

If you read the law that you posted it EXACTLY fits a GPS.oke:

I highlighted the relevant areas..... a GPS is this by it's very definition if he was holding it in his hand. The judge may throw it out at the end of the day but the LEO was on point when he wrote the ticket. And ignorance of the law is not an excuse to break it.... or so I've heard....

You quoted:
NY VTL 1225-d (a) “Portable electronic device” shall mean any hand-held mobile telephone, as defined by subdivision one of section twelve hundred twenty-five-c of this article, personal digital assistant (PDA), handheld device with mobile data access, laptop computer, pager, broadband personal communication device, two-way messaging device, electronic game, or portable computing device.

It was for advice. And I learned that I in fact did not break the law. Thank you everyone very much


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If in fact you do become a LEO you may have to brush up on your reading comprehension not to mention your gross sense of entitlement. GL:rollseyes

 

[COBRA_ESQ]

If you read the law that you posted it EXACTLY fits a GPS.oke:

You quoted:
NY VTL 1225-d (a) “Portable electronic device” shall mean any hand-held mobile telephone, as defined by subdivision one of section twelve hundred twenty-five-c of this article, personal digital assistant (PDA), handheld device with mobile data access, laptop computer, pager, broadband personal communication device, two-way messaging device, electronic game, or portable computing device.

If only things were so simple and cut and dry.

As I understand it the law applies to "handheld device with mobile data access" which although in his hand at the time, the GPS is not intended or designed to be "handheld" and therefore it falls outside this definition, it is not a "two way messaging device" since you can not send a message and it does not recieve a message only data, nor is a GPS a "portable computing device" as it is not what is generally thought to be a computing device otherwise the definition would include anything that has a chip. There is also the presumption that the legislature knew of GPS devices and if they intended it to be included it would be specifically identified in the statute.................or so I would argue.

It would be interesting to pull the bill jacket to see if the question of a GPS was raised or if there is anything in there to help understand what was intended by the language used in the statute.:read:

That said the OP still has an uphill battle, but at least it gives him something to talk about when discussing a plea bargain.

 

[Mach1USMC]

If only things were so simple and cut and dry.

As I understand it the law applies to "handheld device with mobile data access" which although in his hand at the time, the GPS is not intended or designed to be "handheld" and therefore it falls outside this definition, it is not a "two way messaging device" since you can not send a message and it does not recieve a message only data, nor is a GPS a "portable computing device" as it is not what is generally thought to be a computing device otherwise the definition would include anything that has a chip. There is also the presumption that the legislature knew of GPS devices and if they intended it to be included it would be specifically identified in the statute.................or so I would argue.

It would be interesting to pull the bill jacket to see if the question of a GPS was raised or if there is anything in there to help understand what was intended by the language used in the statute.:read:

That said the OP still has an uphill battle, but at least it gives him something to talk about when discussing a plea bargain.

A GPS with blue tooth technology can allow you to send and receive calls and data......And it would also be up to the judges interpretation of said codes. Plus you can't get around "Mobile Data Access" that's essentially how a GPS works. - what that being said the op could still be charged with some sort of "distracted driving" charge. Since the whole INTENT behind such laws are to prevent people from driving while distracted.

NTSB Recommends Nationwide Ban On Driver Cellphone Usage | Fox News

 

[91GriggsGT]

OP, you might want to go back and read the guidelines for posting in here.

"This is a forum for information regarding law enforcement, traffic laws, current events in law enforcement, and a place for the boys in blue to hang out. This is NOT the place to flame cops or complain about the ticket you got. If you have questions feel free to ask. This forum is especially for and moderated by police officers.

From your description of what happened, you knew you should have had the GPS in a holder. The " I doubt it would have stuck to a cold windshield" excuse is just that, and excuse. Did you try it? The fact that you did not want to "dig out" the holder implies you knew what you were doing.

Did you ever think to consider the fact that maybe YOU were being the disrespectful young prick? Drawing attention to your "Blue Light" card? Sounds like the blue light was visible, probably on your dash? The cop probably was more observant than you give him credit for. If he wanted to know if you were authorized, he probably would have asked, but instead, you wanted to make a point of drawing his attention to the fact you have a blue light, almost as saying "Hey man, you need to treat me differently because I am special". Do you by chance have things on your car like a maltese cross, VFD badge, license plate frame or some other fire dept related crap? Were you wearing a fire dept coat, hat, sweatshirt, or some other fire dept clothing? I am betting the answers would be yes to some of that, if not all of that, and you still felt the need to bring attention to the fact you are a VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER!!!

I have been a medic for the last 15 years and run into my fair share of guys like you. You think because you are on a VFD, you DESERVE special treatment. Well, if that is your thinking, you are going to have a lifetime full of disappointment. I have had my share of encounters with LEOs in my off time. Not ONCE, did I bring the fact of being a medic out in the open to garner a break. If the LEO knew me, and I knew him, and he decided to cut me some slack, cool. Much appreciated. Sorry I was being a dumbass. Move on. Those that wrote me, my bad, sorry for being a dumbass. Move on.

Dude, you are 20 years old, and think you DESERVE respect??? Respect is earned, not given. Get over it. The ticket is valid, and the side of the road is not a place to debate the fact. That is why they have court. Ever think that maybe this "young prick cop" was personally affected by a distracted driver? You were in the wrong, you know it, you rolled the dice and got caught. Man up, take your licks, and quit trying to hide behind " I am on a VFD, I have a CDL, help little old ladies across the street, work full time, blah blah blah. Oh, and I am a good person so treat me differently."

As a firefighter, YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER!!!!!! Maybe that was the cop's thinking too. Ever think of that one????? How about taking the responsibility, and telling the officer " Yeah, my bad, I screwed up" and leave it at that?? Alot of the cops I know take that type of attitude better than the " treat me special because of my job/status" type of attitude.

Sorry for the rant.

 

[Outlaw99]

Please don't ever pull me out of a burning car.:dw:

In case anyone is wondering, the above is a joke.

lol...i did pull a guy out of a jeep that caught on fire at a red light, it was dripping flames from underneath and spreading like crazy.

nope, i didnt charge him with anything.

 

[FordSVTFan]

If only things were so simple and cut and dry.

As I understand it the law applies to "handheld device with mobile data access" which although in his hand at the time, the GPS is not intended or designed to be "handheld" and therefore it falls outside this definition, it is not a "two way messaging device" since you can not send a message and it does not recieve a message only data, nor is a GPS a "portable computing device" as it is not what is generally thought to be a computing device otherwise the definition would include anything that has a chip. There is also the presumption that the legislature knew of GPS devices and if they intended it to be included it would be specifically identified in the statute.................or so I would argue.

It would be interesting to pull the bill jacket to see if the question of a GPS was raised or if there is anything in there to help understand what was intended by the language used in the statute.:read:

That said the OP still has an uphill battle, but at least it gives him something to talk about when discussing a plea bargain.

Im willing to bet the purpose of the statute is prevent drivers from using electronic devices not attached to their cars in an effort to prevent distraction and reduce accidents and the modality is not as important.

 

[FordSVTFan]

OP, you might want to go back and read the guidelines for posting in here.

"This is a forum for information regarding law enforcement, traffic laws, current events in law enforcement, and a place for the boys in blue to hang out. This is NOT the place to flame cops or complain about the ticket you got. If you have questions feel free to ask. This forum is especially for and moderated by police officers.

From your description of what happened, you knew you should have had the GPS in a holder. The " I doubt it would have stuck to a cold windshield" excuse is just that, and excuse. Did you try it? The fact that you did not want to "dig out" the holder implies you knew what you were doing.

Did you ever think to consider the fact that maybe YOU were being the disrespectful young prick? Drawing attention to your "Blue Light" card? Sounds like the blue light was visible, probably on your dash? The cop probably was more observant than you give him credit for. If he wanted to know if you were authorized, he probably would have asked, but instead, you wanted to make a point of drawing his attention to the fact you have a blue light, almost as saying "Hey man, you need to treat me differently because I am special". Do you by chance have things on your car like a maltese cross, VFD badge, license plate frame or some other fire dept related crap? Were you wearing a fire dept coat, hat, sweatshirt, or some other fire dept clothing? I am betting the answers would be yes to some of that, if not all of that, and you still felt the need to bring attention to the fact you are a VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER!!!

I have been a medic for the last 15 years and run into my fair share of guys like you. You think because you are on a VFD, you DESERVE special treatment. Well, if that is your thinking, you are going to have a lifetime full of disappointment. I have had my share of encounters with LEOs in my off time. Not ONCE, did I bring the fact of being a medic out in the open to garner a break. If the LEO knew me, and I knew him, and he decided to cut me some slack, cool. Much appreciated. Sorry I was being a dumbass. Move on. Those that wrote me, my bad, sorry for being a dumbass. Move on.

Dude, you are 20 years old, and think you DESERVE respect??? Respect is earned, not given. Get over it. The ticket is valid, and the side of the road is not a place to debate the fact. That is why they have court. Ever think that maybe this "young prick cop" was personally affected by a distracted driver? You were in the wrong, you know it, you rolled the dice and got caught. Man up, take your licks, and quit trying to hide behind " I am on a VFD, I have a CDL, help little old ladies across the street, work full time, blah blah blah. Oh, and I am a good person so treat me differently."

As a firefighter, YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER!!!!!! Maybe that was the cop's thinking too. Ever think of that one????? How about taking the responsibility, and telling the officer " Yeah, my bad, I screwed up" and leave it at that?? Alot of the cops I know take that type of attitude better than the " treat me special because of my job/status" type of attitude.

Sorry for the rant.

Rant APPROVED! :beer:

 

[Outlaw99]

i place my seal of approval on this rant.

OP, you might want to go back and read the guidelines for posting in here.

"This is a forum for information regarding law enforcement, traffic laws, current events in law enforcement, and a place for the boys in blue to hang out. This is NOT the place to flame cops or complain about the ticket you got. If you have questions feel free to ask. This forum is especially for and moderated by police officers.

From your description of what happened, you knew you should have had the GPS in a holder. The " I doubt it would have stuck to a cold windshield" excuse is just that, and excuse. Did you try it? The fact that you did not want to "dig out" the holder implies you knew what you were doing.

Did you ever think to consider the fact that maybe YOU were being the disrespectful young prick? Drawing attention to your "Blue Light" card? Sounds like the blue light was visible, probably on your dash? The cop probably was more observant than you give him credit for. If he wanted to know if you were authorized, he probably would have asked, but instead, you wanted to make a point of drawing his attention to the fact you have a blue light, almost as saying "Hey man, you need to treat me differently because I am special". Do you by chance have things on your car like a maltese cross, VFD badge, license plate frame or some other fire dept related crap? Were you wearing a fire dept coat, hat, sweatshirt, or some other fire dept clothing? I am betting the answers would be yes to some of that, if not all of that, and you still felt the need to bring attention to the fact you are a VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER!!!

I have been a medic for the last 15 years and run into my fair share of guys like you. You think because you are on a VFD, you DESERVE special treatment. Well, if that is your thinking, you are going to have a lifetime full of disappointment. I have had my share of encounters with LEOs in my off time. Not ONCE, did I bring the fact of being a medic out in the open to garner a break. If the LEO knew me, and I knew him, and he decided to cut me some slack, cool. Much appreciated. Sorry I was being a dumbass. Move on. Those that wrote me, my bad, sorry for being a dumbass. Move on.

Dude, you are 20 years old, and think you DESERVE respect??? Respect is earned, not given. Get over it. The ticket is valid, and the side of the road is not a place to debate the fact. That is why they have court. Ever think that maybe this "young prick cop" was personally affected by a distracted driver? You were in the wrong, you know it, you rolled the dice and got caught. Man up, take your licks, and quit trying to hide behind " I am on a VFD, I have a CDL, help little old ladies across the street, work full time, blah blah blah. Oh, and I am a good person so treat me differently."

As a firefighter, YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER!!!!!! Maybe that was the cop's thinking too. Ever think of that one????? How about taking the responsibility, and telling the officer " Yeah, my bad, I screwed up" and leave it at that?? Alot of the cops I know take that type of attitude better than the " treat me special because of my job/status" type of attitude.

Sorry for the rant.

 

[txyaloo]

Im willing to bet the purpose of the statute is prevent drivers from using electronic devices not attached to their cars in an effort to prevent distraction and reduce accidents and the modality is not as important.

That seems like the legislative intent. I wonder if NYS has any case law that defines what a portable computing device is?

I think COBRA_ESQ would know if they did.

 

[FordSVTFan]

That seems like the legislative intent. I wonder if NYS has any case law that defines what a portable computing device is?

I think COBRA_ESQ would know if they did.

I am willing to bet that is the legislative intent. Additionally, statutes that are meant to be all inclusive say so. Also, as with most police agencies they have in-services on new laws and discuss their application. I bet this has come up before.

 

[silver03svt]

That seems like the legislative intent. I wonder if NYS has any case law that defines what a portable computing device is?

I think COBRA_ESQ would know if they did.

I am willing to bet that is the legislative intent. Additionally, statutes that are meant to be all inclusive say so. Also, as with most police agencies they have in-services on new laws and discuss their application. I bet this has come up before.

Damn you both for bringing reason and logic in here.

 

[codycat91]

So I'm wrong in my thinking. I get it. It was a heat of the moment time to vent. So cut the shit with the insults.

On a serious note, does anybody know if there is any case law that involves whether or not a gps is considered to be that?

 

[COBRA_ESQ]

I am willing to bet that is the legislative intent. Additionally, statutes that are meant to be all inclusive say so. Also, as with most police agencies they have in-services on new laws and discuss their application. I bet this has come up before.

That seems like the legislative intent. I wonder if NYS has any case law that defines what a portable computing device is?

I think COBRA_ESQ would know if they did.

This question has intrigued me, so...

I looked at the Bill Jacket and there is no mention of GPS or any of the other examples used in the statute. The bill was part of legislation that addressed new drivers. The main thrust of the legislation was enacting "Graduated Drivers Licences" for new drivers, increasing the number of hours of practice before an application for a licence can be made, limiting the number of passengers a new driver can have, etc. and most every reference to "portable electronic devices" is paired with comments about the dangers of texting.

I researched the case law a bit more and found nothing on point. I agree with FordSvtFan that this probably has come up before, but most lower court decisions on VTL issues are from the bench and/or not reported and the issue has not been decided by an appellate court or if it has it is an unreported decision. Although the legislative intent can not be determined for purposes of a trial, I suspect most judges will interpret the law to include GPS devices in these situations.

 

[Mach1USMC]

This question has intrigued me, so...

I looked at the Bill Jacket and there is no mention of GPS or any of the other examples used in the statute. The bill was part of legislation that addressed new drivers. The main thrust of the legislation was enacting "Graduated Drivers Licences" for new drivers, increasing the number of hours of practice before an application for a licence can be made, limiting the number of passengers a new driver can have, etc. and most every reference to "portable electronic devices" is paired with comments about the dangers of texting.

I researched the case law a bit more and found nothing on point. I agree with FordSvtFan that this probably has come up before, but most lower court decisions on VTL issues are from the bench and/or not reported and the issue has not been decided by an appellate court or if it has it is an unreported decision. Although the legislative intent can not be determined for purposes of a trial, I suspect most judges will interpret the law to include GPS devices in these situations.

Thanks for running that down and clarifying for us.... I'm pretty surprised that the GPS isn't included especially since GPS is used on many phones- I know it's not exactly the same but the principle is, at least in my mind. No offense was intended by my previous comments.:beer:

 

[Blade Runner]

OP, you might want to go back and read the guidelines for posting in here.

"This is a forum for information regarding law enforcement, traffic laws, current events in law enforcement, and a place for the boys in blue to hang out. This is NOT the place to flame cops or complain about the ticket you got. If you have questions feel free to ask. This forum is especially for and moderated by police officers.

From your description of what happened, you knew you should have had the GPS in a holder. The " I doubt it would have stuck to a cold windshield" excuse is just that, and excuse. Did you try it? The fact that you did not want to "dig out" the holder implies you knew what you were doing.

Did you ever think to consider the fact that maybe YOU were being the disrespectful young prick? Drawing attention to your "Blue Light" card? Sounds like the blue light was visible, probably on your dash? The cop probably was more observant than you give him credit for. If he wanted to know if you were authorized, he probably would have asked, but instead, you wanted to make a point of drawing his attention to the fact you have a blue light, almost as saying "Hey man, you need to treat me differently because I am special". Do you by chance have things on your car like a maltese cross, VFD badge, license plate frame or some other fire dept related crap? Were you wearing a fire dept coat, hat, sweatshirt, or some other fire dept clothing? I am betting the answers would be yes to some of that, if not all of that, and you still felt the need to bring attention to the fact you are a VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER!!!

I have been a medic for the last 15 years and run into my fair share of guys like you. You think because you are on a VFD, you DESERVE special treatment. Well, if that is your thinking, you are going to have a lifetime full of disappointment. I have had my share of encounters with LEOs in my off time. Not ONCE, did I bring the fact of being a medic out in the open to garner a break. If the LEO knew me, and I knew him, and he decided to cut me some slack, cool. Much appreciated. Sorry I was being a dumbass. Move on. Those that wrote me, my bad, sorry for being a dumbass. Move on.

Dude, you are 20 years old, and think you DESERVE respect??? Respect is earned, not given. Get over it. The ticket is valid, and the side of the road is not a place to debate the fact. That is why they have court. Ever think that maybe this "young prick cop" was personally affected by a distracted driver? You were in the wrong, you know it, you rolled the dice and got caught. Man up, take your licks, and quit trying to hide behind " I am on a VFD, I have a CDL, help little old ladies across the street, work full time, blah blah blah. Oh, and I am a good person so treat me differently."

As a firefighter, YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER!!!!!! Maybe that was the cop's thinking too. Ever think of that one????? How about taking the responsibility, and telling the officer " Yeah, my bad, I screwed up" and leave it at that?? Alot of the cops I know take that type of attitude better than the " treat me special because of my job/status" type of attitude.

Sorry for the rant.

As a former "jolly vollie", and a current CDL holder, I thoroughly approve of this message..... :banana:

 

[codycat91]

OP, you might want to go back and read the guidelines for posting in here.

"This is a forum for information regarding law enforcement, traffic laws, current events in law enforcement, and a place for the boys in blue to hang out. This is NOT the place to flame cops or complain about the ticket you got. If you have questions feel free to ask. This forum is especially for and moderated by police officers.

From your description of what happened, you knew you should have had the GPS in a holder. The " I doubt it would have stuck to a cold windshield" excuse is just that, and excuse. Did you try it? The fact that you did not want to "dig out" the holder implies you knew what you were doing.

Did you ever think to consider the fact that maybe YOU were being the disrespectful young prick? Drawing attention to your "Blue Light" card? Sounds like the blue light was visible, probably on your dash? The cop probably was more observant than you give him credit for. If he wanted to know if you were authorized, he probably would have asked, but instead, you wanted to make a point of drawing his attention to the fact you have a blue light, almost as saying "Hey man, you need to treat me differently because I am special". Do you by chance have things on your car like a maltese cross, VFD badge, license plate frame or some other fire dept related crap? Were you wearing a fire dept coat, hat, sweatshirt, or some other fire dept clothing? I am betting the answers would be yes to some of that, if not all of that, and you still felt the need to bring attention to the fact you are a VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER!!!

I have been a medic for the last 15 years and run into my fair share of guys like you. You think because you are on a VFD, you DESERVE special treatment. Well, if that is your thinking, you are going to have a lifetime full of disappointment. I have had my share of encounters with LEOs in my off time. Not ONCE, did I bring the fact of being a medic out in the open to garner a break. If the LEO knew me, and I knew him, and he decided to cut me some slack, cool. Much appreciated. Sorry I was being a dumbass. Move on. Those that wrote me, my bad, sorry for being a dumbass. Move on.

Dude, you are 20 years old, and think you DESERVE respect??? Respect is earned, not given. Get over it. The ticket is valid, and the side of the road is not a place to debate the fact. That is why they have court. Ever think that maybe this "young prick cop" was personally affected by a distracted driver? You were in the wrong, you know it, you rolled the dice and got caught. Man up, take your licks, and quit trying to hide behind " I am on a VFD, I have a CDL, help little old ladies across the street, work full time, blah blah blah. Oh, and I am a good person so treat me differently."

As a firefighter, YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER!!!!!! Maybe that was the cop's thinking too. Ever think of that one????? How about taking the responsibility, and telling the officer " Yeah, my bad, I screwed up" and leave it at that?? Alot of the cops I know take that type of attitude better than the " treat me special because of my job/status" type of attitude.

Sorry for the rant.

Very well put. Thank you

 

[COBRA_ESQ]

No offense was intended by my previous comments.:beer:

None was taken, nothing wrong with a good natured debate.