100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
| Topic: You can be held liable for your texting... | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
Serchin4MyRedWine
on
Sat 08/31/13 08:18 AM
|
|
In another step to control every aspect of your life, The N.J. Appellate Court has ruled that you can be responsible for a car crash if you SEND a text message to someone who is driving!
They state that by texting a driver, you are "electronically present" in the vehicle. http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-new-jersey-texting-20130829,0,527876.story This has become a big problem in this country where responsibility seems to always be diverted from the one who actually commits the act or crime. Maybe this is the liberal idea that it "takes a village to raise a child", so now the village is responsible not the person. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yep,guess the Texter is telepathic and instantly aware that the Peron who he is texting to is in fact engaged in the operation of a Motor-Vehicle!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ban cell phones! They are causing car accidents!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yep,guess the Texter is telepathic and instantly aware that the Peron who he is texting to is in fact engaged in the operation of a Motor-Vehicle! Yes the law is too vague and open to interpretation. The court says if a person has reasonable knowledge that the person they are texting is driving they can be liable. The really bad part of this law is now even if you didn't know, you will still be included in a law suit and have to hire a lawyer to prove you had no knowledge. One more law lawyers will love! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ban cell phones! They are causing car accidents!! Yes, "Cars don't kill people...cell phones do" 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ban cell phones! They are causing car accidents!! Yes, "Cars don't kill people...cell phones do"  Actually there is technology that can disable cell phones in vehicles. It would save a lot of lives. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Serchin4MyRedWine
on
Sat 08/31/13 09:51 AM
|
|
Ban cell phones! They are causing car accidents!! I agree texting while driving is certainly dangerous but this is a whole new scope on individual responsibility. Also the court saying texting is "electronically present in the vehicle" does this mean that soon they will hold others in the vehicle also responsible if they talk to the driver? where does it all end..  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in reading the article TWO Things stand out
1. The plaintiff LOST the case against the texter,,, and 2. The court's language says "when the sender 'has actual knowledge or special reason to know' ... from prior texting experience or otherwise, that the recipient will view the text while driving, the sender has breached a duty of care to the public by distracting the driver." I agree, WHEN THE SENDER KNOWS,, and continues to be a distraction,, they should hold accountability.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in reading the article TWO Things stand out 1. The plaintiff LOST the case against the texter,,, and 2. The court's language says "when the sender 'has actual knowledge or special reason to know' ... from prior texting experience or otherwise, that the recipient will view the text while driving, the sender has breached a duty of care to the public by distracting the driver." I agree, WHEN THE SENDER KNOWS,, and continues to be a distraction,, they should hold accountability.... If that's the case, I agree too. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Serchin4MyRedWine
on
Sat 08/31/13 10:15 AM
|
|
in reading the article TWO Things stand out 1. The plaintiff LOST the case against the texter,,, and 2. The court's language says "when the sender 'has actual knowledge or special reason to know' ... from prior texting experience or otherwise, that the recipient will view the text while driving, the sender has breached a duty of care to the public by distracting the driver." I agree, WHEN THE SENDER KNOWS,, and continues to be a distraction,, they should hold accountability.... If that's the case, I agree too. Let's say you txt your wife because you forgot to tell her something you want from the store while she is shopping. You expect her to read it once she gets to the food store but she reads it while driving and has a crash. The court may say "you knew your wife was on her way to the store" even though 1. you may not really know if she made it to the store yet. 2. You expected her to read it while shopping. The thought a Texter would be responsible for another's behavior is too much. Even if you KNOW someone is driving...you are NOT forcing them to read or respond to your text. where is personal responsibilty???? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in reading the article TWO Things stand out 1. The plaintiff LOST the case against the texter,,, and 2. The court's language says "when the sender 'has actual knowledge or special reason to know' ... from prior texting experience or otherwise, that the recipient will view the text while driving, the sender has breached a duty of care to the public by distracting the driver." I agree, WHEN THE SENDER KNOWS,, and continues to be a distraction,, they should hold accountability.... If that's the case, I agree too. Let's say you txt your wife because you forgot to tell her something you want from the store while she is shopping. You expect her to read it once she gets to the food store but she reads it while driving and has a crash. The court may say "you knew your wife was on her way to the store" even though 1. you may not really know if she made it to the store yet. 2. You expected her to read it while shopping. The thought a Texter would be responsible for another's behavior is too much. Even if you KNOW someone is driving...you are NOT forcing them to read or respond to your text. where is personal responsibilty???? from a drivers point of view, if you KNOW I am driving and you continue to text me you are RESPONSIBLE for knowingly being a distraction,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMO, if someone has an accident while texting or talking on a cell phone, they should get the same penalty as a drunk driver.
If someone gets pulled over and texting is proven to have happened while driving, they should be charged the same as drunk driving. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ban cell phones! They are causing car accidents!! Yes, "Cars don't kill people...cell phones do" Actually there is technology that can disable cell phones in vehicles. It would save a lot of lives. great idea. at work, we are not permitted to have any technology on the floor perhaps it should be required to have cell phones disabled while driving, just like its required that alcoholic beverages not be open in the car would save plenty of lives,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMO, if someone has an accident while texting or talking on a cell phone, they should get the same penalty as a drunk driver. If someone gets pulled over and texting is proven to have happened while driving, they should be charged the same as drunk driving. I agree, the person driving is ultimately responsible for his or her OWN actions! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in reading the article TWO Things stand out 1. The plaintiff LOST the case against the texter,,, and 2. The court's language says "when the sender 'has actual knowledge or special reason to know' ... from prior texting experience or otherwise, that the recipient will view the text while driving, the sender has breached a duty of care to the public by distracting the driver." I agree, WHEN THE SENDER KNOWS,, and continues to be a distraction,, they should hold accountability.... This brings to mind a quote from the character of District Attorney McCoy on the Law and Oder series: "Never underestimate the depravity of the American family" Never let morality get in the way of doing what you feel like doing or what is right. Never mind if it is against the law, no moral depth is too deep to be left unexplored. Love the reasons people (texters) use when behind the wheel. So far six have been killed by drivers texting just in this city this year. Hell, why bother with even having lights; it's just too much for the drivers to keep an eye on while driving....let the carnage rise. |
|
|
|
|
