Ban on texting yields few tickets
ELKHORN Wisconsin’s ban on texting while driving has yielded only a handful of citations in Walworth County, leading some law enforcement officials to ask whether it’s time to consider changes to the legislation.
The law went into effect Dec. 1, but some feel it is littered with loopholes, making it nearly impossible to enforce.
“Ninety percent of the time we write (a citation), we write it for inattentive driving because it’s much easier to prove,” said Capt. Scott McClory of the Walworth County Sheriff’s Office.
Officers believe the law has not forced people to take preventive action. Instead, it has evolved into just another way to issue citations when crash investigations find a driver was fumbling with his cell phone instead of focusing on the road, said Greg Leck, Stoughton police chief and president of Wisconsin’s Chiefs of Police Association.
Wisconsin is the 25th state to ban texting while driving, but the law prohibits only composing and sending text messages. It doesn’t outlaw reading emails, checking navigation systems or using other functions of handheld devices. It even lets drivers send text messages, as long as they’re stopped at a traffic light or stop sign.
Those rules have tied the hands of police officers, resulting in few tickets being written. Eleven police departments in Walworth County have written fewer than five tickets. Fines range anywhere from $100 to $400 for a first offense and up to $800 for a second offense.
Delavan Police Chief Tim O’Neill said his department issued one citation in January, but the law makes it nearly impossible to stop drivers if officers observe them texting. They would need drivers to admit they were sending text messages, which rarely happens.
The sheriff’s office issued one citation since the bill became law Dec. 1. A Williams Bay man was ticked when he admitted after a crash that he had been sending a text message.
“Putting texting in the context of inattentive driving, I would say it is a very serious problem,” Leck said.
“As our roadways continue to become more and more crowded, these types of problems will only increase.”
A 2009 report from the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute found text messaging while driving is 23 times more dangerous than talking on a cell phone behind the wheel. Police also are disturbed by a study that found texting and driving is about as dangerous as driving with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent.
An estimated 16,000 people in the United States died between 2001 and 2007 from accidents caused by drivers sending text messages, according to the American Journal of Public Health.
Police don’t question the danger of texting while driving, they’re just not sure how to enforce the new Wisconsin statute.
“If the law were no texting while driving, period, I think we could all make the (determination) that it would eliminate some of the crashes caused by inattentive driving,” McClory said. “I think a more viable tool for law enforcement is not using your phone at all while driving.”
Former state Rep. Kim Hixson was one of the authors of the legislation. He said state lawmakers agreed something needed to be in place, but they didn’t want to go too far.
The idea, he said, was more about sending a message that texting is illegal and less about clamping down on violators with hefty fines.
That doesn’t mean the law won’t evolve. Hixson called it a “good start” and thought legislators might be open to amendments in the future.
“This is the first time we’ve prohibited something in this type of technology,” Hixson said. “I think you kind of walk lightly and see if this has an effect. If it doesn’t, then maybe you do need to put more teeth into it.
“I think just talking on the phone is a distraction, and studies have proven that’s true, but we didn’t look at that.”
McClory is among those who would like to see Wisconsin adopt something similar to what New York and Illinois approved. Those states ban drivers from using cell phones, forcing them to use hands-free devices or pull off the road, which McClory would like more drivers to consider.
The texting while driving ban is only 4 months old, and legislators have not yet had the opportunity to review its success. Leck said he’s not sure how the law could be made more effective, partly because of the difficulty in observing drivers using their phones.
“In my discussions with my peers, we agree that this is a necessary law but will largely not have much of a preemptive impact on crashes,” he said.
“Unfortunately, until people take driving seriously or more crash avoidance technology becomes readily available, people will continue (to be) killed and injured on our streets and highways because of inattentive behavior.”

Apr 11, 2012 at 9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
ljs64 If you are talking on a cell phone you are not paying attention to driving so that would be inattentive driving. Texting can be proven by looking at the time and date on the phone.They are not trying to get rid of the law, they want a more descriptive law. As to drunk driving How can you reason with someone that is drunk and they have no control once they reach a certain level of intoxication as to reduced brain ability AKA Blackout. The courts do their part and level fines and sentencing penalties of jail/prison. I know that people complain about this Yet how many Honestly in their lifetime had drank alcohol and drove? I know I have and I do not partake in the drinking of alcohol anymore at all. But I did my share years ago.
Apr 12, 2011 at 10:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
You're missing the point. We already have the law that covers what happens when you don't pay attention. It's impossible to legislate everything that might be a distraction although the nanny state tries. Why don't we get rid of cupholders too?
Apr 12, 2011 at 2:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Law Enforcement are exempt from the texting law.
"The law provides exceptions for the drivers of emergency vehicles, people using popular global positioning devices and for drivers who text message in cars using voice recognition equipment."
Apr 12, 2011 at 1:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
i saw a chic texting at a 4 way stop yesterday...right in front of a city cop. which one was more inattentive there??;)
Apr 12, 2011 at 7:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
hey cops are driving down the road and typing things into their computers, its the same as texting and you see them on the phone as much as kid.
They need to start the leader ship then others will follow.
Apr 11, 2011 at 8:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
What in the heck is the question??? My condo is across the street from a middle school, and last week I was walking and saw three, THREE, parents pulling out of that school while talking on the phone, and onto a busy four-lane street! NO TEXTING, NO TALKING, PERIOD! You are irresponsible idiots.
Apr 11, 2011 at 4:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Since this discussion turned to drunk driving, here's my take on the subject. a person gets drunk, then drives. we take away their ability to drive. they still drive, rack up a few dwr's, and many times end up in that vicious cycle, often losing work because of it. Would it not make more sense to take away their ability to drink? Make everyone who wants to purchase alcohol scan their i.d. so the seller is aware if they have preserved their PRIVILEDGE to drink. Make it a felony to provide alcohol to someone who is not allowed. Yes there are hassles and yes there will be cheaters and yes there will be costs. (and of course the "BIG ALCOHOL" lobbyists would be shelling out millions to their favorite politician). but it just seems like a more realistic approach to the problem.
Apr 11, 2011 at 3:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Frogger, not sure if you're being facetious or not but...
It is vastly easier to prove drunk driving than it is to prove someone was texting while driving.
People are convicted of drunk driving all the time. The problem isn't with the law itself, it is with the penalties being handed down by the courts.
Apr 11, 2011 at 2:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Drunk driving is against the law too and people get arrested OVER AND OVER and that doesn't stop them either. Maybe we should get rid of that law too?
Apr 11, 2011 at 2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
That is correct. This is no more than a bunch of politicians patting themselves on the back thinking they really made a difference. When in reality this has not, nor will it make any impact on reducing accidents or injuries on the roadway.
Apr 11, 2011 at 12:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
The law is a feel good measure, nothing more. Inattentive driving covers everything from texting, speaking on your phone, yelling at the kids fighting in the backseat, changing the radio station, spilling your coffee, etc. ad nauseum.
Too often politicians from both sides of the aisle enact laws without consulting the criminal justice system first to see if they're even viable to start with.
Apr 11, 2011 at 7:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
Eviller: What's your point? Driving while talking on a cell phone is NOT illegal. So the deputy was doing nothing illegal.
Apr 10, 2011 at 9:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Drove by a Rock County deputy earlier today.....he had a cell phone glued to his ear while driving down the roadway!
Apr 10, 2011 at 6:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
I see people doing it all the time... going slow and making traffic pass them. Its almost impossible for a cop to catch someone. They can look around and then text on their lap,. so easy to get away with.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.