The motorcyclist pulled up the rear of the funeral procession.  As the grieving passed by our Muni bus, the officer’s sin came into full view.  With one hand on the throttle and the visor on his helmet pulled up, the policeman clumsily pounded out the text message on his thumb.  Daniel and I did a double take in disbelief, but there it was.  We were watching a cop on a motorcycle text while driving.

Three days later, the California ban on talking on your cell with your hand went into effect.  A meager $20 for your first offense, driving while distracted is less expensive in San Francisco than forgetting to pay $1.50 for a Muni fare.  It is less severe than parking in a handicapped spot.  Further, talking on a cell phone while is, in California’s estimation less an affront to public health and safety than whipping it out and pissing on the street.

Were the assigned fine not evidence enough of the disconnect between California legislation and the sense God gave an anvil, text messaging while driving is legal until 2009.  Evidently the law only extends the definition of distraction as a phone touching the ear, failing to consider SMS.  I suppose it would be an easy thing for California legislators to miss.  After all, texting has only been part of the California mobile experience for a fucking decade.

The question begged is what this law is supposed to do.  TechCrunch’s Michael Arrington suggests that it is not meant to be enforced but to change public opinion.  With a meager fine, narrow application, and massive grace period, clearly the law was never intended to fill the docket of a traffic court.  But will it make the kind of difference Arrington suggests?

Yesterday it was acceptable to drive around Silicon Valley talking on the phone. Today, people will give you dirty looks.

I find it hard to believe driving poorly will ever be unfashionable in California.

» You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.