Gov. Brown vetoes ski helmet, phone fine bills

[alp227]

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

Sacramento -- Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday smacked down what he called overbearing and expensive proposals for state regulations by vetoing bills that would require that kids wear helmets when on ski slopes and increase fines for people who talk on cell phones or text while driving.

The move came as lawmakers this week consider hundreds of bills before a Friday deadline. Brown took action on dozens of bills already approved by the Legislature, including signing measures requiring greater transparency in the California State University and UC systems and allowing landlords to bar renters from smoking in their units starting next year.

But the vetoes showed that the governor may be setting a high bar for new state mandates.

In his veto message accompanying the helmet bill, SB105 introduced by Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, Brown appeared to side with GOP critics who had characterized the measure as "nanny government."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/08/BAEG1L1BNF.DTL

[dtexdem]

1. Safety last ...

or never.

[snooper2]

24. You could just wrap all the children in bubble wrap, that'll keep em' safe..

If you don't let your kids get a couple bumps and bruises they end up like this--


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VhLGbxxSGNM/TmjOLDGd-MI/AAAAAAAAGxU/b5MjtgNF6p8/s400/teabag+zombies+2.jpg



“Factory made blonde Fox News Barbie who has never had a problem in her life zombie."

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Tikki]

2. Fine by me, but then parents shouldn't be allowed to sue a...

ski slope owner and or operator if their helmetless child falls down and breaks his crown.


Tikki

[JDPriestly]

5. I disagree with you, Tikki.

Slope owners and those who rent ski equipment should take the responsibility for making sure every child wears a helmet on the ski slope.

The 12-year-old son of one of our close friends died on a slope in Austria. It was absolutely tragic. The family never fully recovered. The slope owners know their terrain and should take the responsibility for enforcing their own helmet rules.

When kids ski away from official slopes, it should be the parents' responsibility.

[Tikki]

9. I am so sorry.....

Tikki

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slackmaster]

3. A fine should be painful for "people of ordinary means,", otherwise they'll ignore the law

I appreciate Jerry setting the bar high for new state mandates, but cell-phone talking and texting drivers happen to be my biggest driving pet peeve.

[saras]

16. Unfortunately, this gives the rich a free pass, while condemning the poor to years of debt

It would make more sense to simply not let them use cell phones for, say, a month to a year, depending on the severity. More direct, more related to the problem they're causing and the solution to it, probably technologically really easy, but unfortunately not something they want to admit could be done. Sure, they can always borrow someone else's phone, but that's hardly a practical alternative.

[democrat2thecore]

17. Well, I guess Jerry agreed with you - he vetoed it -nt

[slackmaster]

20. Given that a large majority of people who drive cars aren't rich, I say make the fine huge.

I hate distracted drivers. They cause accidents, and even kill people.

[JoeyT]

22. I either agree or disagree, depending on how the law is implemented.

If it requires video from the dash cam of the driver texting while driving, I'd be all for it. In fact it might be a good idea to set additional dash cams at 90 degree angles to the original. The fines can more than make up the cost.

If it's "Officer X says you were texting, and how dare you call that fine man a liar? Here's your fine of more than you make in a week." I'm glad it got vetoed. We really don't need any more "Piss off a cop, time to move to a new city" laws, especially ones that are that easy to abuse.

[saras]

26. The one thing I REALLY like is the idea of a fine being "what you make in a week". THAT seems fair

[JoeyT]

28. It works that way for many tickets that exist now

and many of those are either outright judgement calls or your word against a cop. That's what I was objecting to.

Having a kid that isn't strapped in where I am is a $400 fine for the first offense..and where I am that's more than a lot of people make in a week. And it's completely your word against a cop. They don't have to produce video of anything.

[saras]

30. My point is that someone who makes millions, a $400 fine is trivial.

So is it appropriate that the rich have the right to drive their kids around not strapped in, as long as they're willing to pay the ticket?

And is it appropriate that, while the middle-class mom does without luxuries for a few months for that $400, the poor mom loses her car, her home, and her kids?

What I'm suggesting is that the fine be according to income and not a fixed amount. Whether they're too high in general, or unfairly administrated, are different issues.

[JoeyT]

34. That's actually one of the most awesome ideas I've ever heard.

It had never even occurred to me that tickets should be based on income, though now that you bring it up, it's blatantly obvious why they should.

[Thor_MN]

27. Simple enough to get cell phone records.

The texts or calls are timestamped and if you are cited and your cell was in use at the time, you really can't say that you were not using it. If you were not using it, your cell phone records will proove that you were not. Should be simple enough to create a system where the officer uses your phone to call a system that would be able to log the number and time for use in court. Potentially the system could query the records and respond as to if the phone was in use in the last 10 minutes. In any case, the evidence is remotely logged via your cell phone company and can proove or disproove the crime.

[Ter]

4. Good for him

There is some common sense in CA after all. Brown is a fantastic governor.

[karynnj]

6. Years ago when my children were little, they wore ski helmets

the few times they took ski lessons. Why? There was a doctor in NJ who was advocating for a similar law when his daughter died in what should have been a minor ski accident. I don't remember if he succeeded in getting a law passed, but the articles were enough that we brought helmets with us.

At the family ski resort, they were among the few with helmets - mostly kids from NJ - for the same reason. This really is a common sense precaution that has relatively little downside. I know - and knew then - that hundreds of kids ski with no helmet and have no problems. But the rare consequence of brain injury or death was too great a cost not to do the simple thing needed that could possibly prevent it.

[FiveGoodMen]

7. I never occurs to anyone that kids can fall down at any time; not just on ski slopes

We should make it mandatory for all children to wear helmets at ALL TIMES.

Before the next poor kid gets hurt.

[democrat2thecore]

18. No, no, no

Never let kids get out of bed in the morning. Put rails around the bed. Free Xbox to give them something to do.

[cali]

32. Although I don't believe ski helmets should be legally mandated

I do believe any parent who doesn't outfit their kid with a ski helmet is an idiot. I'm a firm believer in letting kids get bumps and bruises and my son had a very rough and ready childhood, but yeah he wore a helmet while skiing- and now at 24 and a ski patrol member, he wouldn't dream of heading for the slopes without it.

[Auggie]

8. I would have signed the phone bill

And upped texting while driving to a misdemeanor. There's no valid reason for texting while driving.

[SoapBox]

11. Super ditto.

...I travel for work...

TWICE in about 2 months, the hotel van driver (in Southern states, where there seem to be no laws) were on their phones and ALMOST ran off the road.

Let me tell you, after the screaming stopped, we started SCREAMING at the assholes to get off the f-ing phone...called the hotels to complain and got...it's not illegal here.

FINE their asses for talking and texting.

Thanks for the Safety Last Jerry.

[alp227]

14. Limited government down south? Hmmmm?

Interesting story right there. Do libertarians ever think outside their own bubble?

[Cool Logic]

15. "(in Southern states, where there seem to be no laws)"

Anti-Southern bigotry...?

[Chan790]

33. Zenger defense.

The truth is an absolute defense against allegations of slander or libel. It's not bigotry if it's true.

[Bigmack]

10. If they don't like a "nanny government"...

why are the Repubs all up inside a woman's uterus?

If they are so against "nanny government", why are they trying to enforce their own beliefs about sex, sexuality, and drugs?

Answer: Because they have the introspective ability and rationality of pig shit.

[Politicalboi]

12. They're only looking out

For you, because they know best. :sarcasm:

[truthisfreedom]

13. Kid's helmets should be available for sale and rental at skiing locations, just as a matter of

courtesy. Seriously.

[Xithras]

25. They are.

I don't normally rent my equipment, but AFAIK every ski resort in California that offers equipment rentals, offers helmets as an option.

[democrat2thecore]

19. I think Brown's right

Good old-fashioned common sense:

"While I appreciate the value of wearing a ski helmet, I am concerned about the continuing and seemingly inexorable transfer of authority from parents to the state. Not every human problem deserves a law."

[Modern_Matthew]

21. Keep up the good work, Jerry! nt

[SpartanDem]

23. "Not every human problem deserves a law."

I couldn't agree more the ski helmet is thing is just basic good parenting, you can't and shouldn't legislate every conceivable danger.

[krabigirl]

31. Good for him.