"Gadgets in Emergency Vehicles Seen as Peril"

[Colin Parkinson]

Zipperhead
So you are telling me that that Police Services (ie Police Chiefs, etc) had absolutely no input into this law, sorry but that I can’t buy. In fact if I where to go to the consultation records for this Act. I bet I would find a submission from Police Associations and/or Police chiefs (along with EHS,fire) that sec. 214.3 should be added. I would also bet that the submission was based on their need to use their vehicle radio microphone, not talking on a cellphone.

As for the level playing field, it may be optics, but it will be optics that will cause you a world of grief and can get people in deep trouble. Police services are getting bad press, this just does not help. I hear people in my office making critical comments about this very issue. Care to have your department spend more valuable time trying to educate the public on this as well as everything else?

As for the bitter taste, I have to enforce regulatory Acts on people and corporations, for me I despise regulations and Acts that exempt select groups, especially government. If the servants of the people are not willing to abide by a law, then there is something wrong with it. That belief applies to me in my job as well. I have taken flak for promoting such beliefs as well during recent legislation drafting.

As for Bluetooth being an issue when getting into fights, how many fights do you get into while driving down the road talking on the phone? I think most officers are capable of yanking it off themselves before getting out of the vehicle. 

Medtech thanks for posting the regs, the BC Gov servers were hanging on me, must not like Fed servers.

Under "fun" I also think having you picture taken while pretending to arrest some hot aussie tourist girls is perfectable acceptable.  :nod:

 

[Sheerin]

Are you seriously complaining becuase police, paramedics and (for some reason) fire are exempted from this law? 

Jeez.  Okay, you're a tax paying individual, just think of the additional expense police, EMS and (to a lesser extent) fire would have to take on if we weren't exempted from the cell phone bill.
You want to outfit each cop and medic with bluetooth headsets so when we're driving and need to make a call we can do so.  Well a decent bluetooth would cost about $100, to give you an idea the service I work for has 400+ paramedics, that's a capital expenditure of $40,000.   
Now you're thinking "why do we need one for each medic", well, do you really want to use the same bluetooth headset as someone else?  I don't.  Hell, I don't even share my stethoscope. 

And you know what, if you did outfit us all with bluetooth, we'd still be in violation of the law because of our radio's which we operate while driving, becuase of our computers and navigation devices. 

edited to fix bad math lol

 

[Greymatters]

I will take a look at the BC regs to see if an exemption is in place for them as well. 

Our BC regs have that exemption.  Of note, many organizations, including the police and other services, are now playing catchup on getting bluetooth and built-in communication devices so that they dont have to use handheld devices while in vehicles...

 

[Greymatters]

... that's a capital expenditure of $400,000 (or the equivalent of ~2 ambulances). 

Also equivalent to the salary for one senior executive of a government organization or major enterprise - pretty cheap when compared to the big picture and considered well-spent if it means a lower number of safety-related incidents...

 

[zipperhead_cop]

So you are telling me that that Police Services (ie Police Chiefs, etc) had absolutely no input into this law, sorry but that I can’t buy. In fact if I where to go to the consultation records for this Act. I bet I would find a submission from Police Associations and/or Police chiefs (along with EHS,fire) that sec. 214.3 should be added.

Fill your boots.  Then you wouldn't be talking out of your arse.  But that doesn't negate the fact that nobody in emergency services WRITES laws.  Of course they would have input.  You really think that the exemptions were created so we can check our Facebook accounts and text our girlfriends while we are going lights and sirens to a call? 

I would also bet that the submission was based on their need to use their vehicle radio microphone, not talking on a cellphone.

I would bet there wouldn't be a cell phone exemption if a bunch of people who are all familiar with risk management didn't think that it was a good idea.  If radios were the issue, it would have come up before this since we've had them since the 60's.  What else should we bet on?  Oooo!!  Who do you think is going to win the Stanley Cup? 

As for the level playing field, it may be optics, but it will be optics that will cause you a world of grief and can get people in deep trouble. Police services are getting bad press, this just does not help. I hear people in my office making critical comments about this very issue. Care to have your department spend more valuable time trying to educate the public on this as well as everything else?

Maybe some people need to worry about their own lives and let the people who protect them get on with it.  I don't see this being a huge issue.  I also don't see a lot of enforcement going on, at least around our parts.  So maybe, just maybe, discretion will kick in and not everybody will get a bun for using a phone.  Yes, that terrifies some easily intimidated people who for some implausible reason manage to get themselves a ticket every time they get stopped.  They also always blame the police for the enforcement action they talked themselves into.  So you'll have to forgive me if I don't get ramped up by your nattery gossip around the water cooler in your office when I'm on my phone trying to talk to a suicidal person in their home as I'm on the way to the call.  Doubtless, the dour looks would cause me to lose sleep if observed  :

As for the bitter taste, I have to enforce regulatory Acts on people and corporations, for me I despise regulations and Acts that exempt select groups, especially government. If the servants of the people are not willing to abide by a law, then there is something wrong with it. That belief applies to me in my job as well. I have taken flak for promoting such beliefs as well during recent legislation drafting.

Where do you work, Algebra Canada?  Sounds like a drag. 

As for Bluetooth being an issue when getting into fights, how many fights do you get into while driving down the road talking on the phone? I think most officers are capable of yanking it off themselves before getting out of the vehicle. 

Yeah, but then again we don't need a blue tooth because we are exempt. 

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Actaully it's a frigging great job, where I get to review project from Mom & pops dock to multi-million dollar mines projects.

As for talking out my arse, we have agreed that yes, police service routinly have input into proposed laws and amendments. I agree that the street level officer has little or no input but I am sure you are all to familar with this group of lobbyists http://www.cacp.ca/index/main

They have been busy enforcing it here. People might be a tad annoyed being ticketed for offense which was claimed by many Police Services PR persons as a apparent overwheleming safety issue, then watching the ticketing officer pass while talking on a cellphone. .

This subject is been well beaten, but I will depart with these words of advice, ignoring public opinion does not mean it goes away.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

So there ya go.  We haven't been worrying about it that much, so people aren't going to be all that bothered.  But if we do use our phones, I'm sure I don't have to explain "operational necessity" to you. 
If it makes you feel any better, I don't enforce speeding either since it would be hypocritical of me. 

 

[mariomike]

Regarding the term "L.E.O." 
I never heard it used in Emergency Services. "Police" was the only word used on 9-1-1 calls.
Out of curiousity, I looked it up :
"The Municipal Law Enforcement Officers' Association":
http://www.mleoa.ca/Default.asp?Key=1

L.E.O.'s are responsible for many things:
Business and trade licensing
Noise Abatement and Control
Woodlot/Forestry Conservation
Weed Control
Fireworks
Animal control including DOLA ( Dog Owner's Liability Act )
Parking and Traffic
Property Standards
Building
Fire Protection
Lottery Licensing
Swimming pools and Fences
Tree cutting
Livestock and poultry
Waste Management and Recycling
Handicap Permits
Taxi Licencing
Signs and Advertising Devices, etc...
Smoking - Parks - Building and Plumbing - Public Halls - Environmental Pollutants - 
Off-Road Vehicles - Zoning - Sewers and Septic Systems - Drainage - Heating - Weed Contol Act etc. etc.

 

[medaid]

LEO is more of an American term that's being slowly adopted up here.

Down south it describes Law Enforcement Officers as in Police, Corrections, Sheriff, CBP/BP Agents and so forth. By Law is not considered as LEO in the traditional sense.

 

[mariomike]

LEO is more of an American term that's being slowly adopted up here.
Down south it describes Law Enforcement Officers as in Police, Corrections, Sheriff, CBP/BP Agents and so forth. By Law is not considered as LEO in the traditional sense.

Thank-you for the clarification. My understanding of L.E.O. is as you explained it. Officers - such as the ones you mentioned - who are trained and equipped in the Use of Force.
By-Law officers do not use force ( as far as I know ). Although, they may be trained in self-defence. At least, that's the way I understand it.

 

[Greymatters]

When we use the term LEO in our company we are refering to officers from multiple departments.  Its easier to say LEO than to name off the six or so municipal and federal police departments working in the area.  In general we're refering to someone who has the authority from the city, province, or federal government to carry a weapon and to arrest someone. 

If someone in bylaw enforcement handing out parking tickets wants to call themselves an LEO, you really cant stop them from doing it, but thats not who we would be refering to...