Teen Sentenced To Prison For "Vehicular Homicide While Texting

[k-fridge]

Got this from another forum and some interesting discussion ensued.

I don't think anyone will disagree that the young man should be punished for crossing the center line and causing another person's death; but his sentence is the first from a new law in Mass and he is charged with vehicle homicide by texting.

Do you agree with the new law and how it was handled, or do you feel it's yet another law that erodes our rights and sends us down a slippery slope?

Discuss...

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...e-driving?lite

[AC5096]

Sounds like a damned good law to me. I hate these Mothers that text and drive.

[k-fridge]

Sounds like a damned good law to me. I hate these Mothers that text and drive.

I'm certainly not defending what he did. But let me ask you...are there any dangers in making such a law? What could be next, a law that can put you in prison for fiddling with your radio while you drive, or looking over at your dispatch sheet while you're driving?

Texting while driving is dumb. But what is it really? It's simply a distraction. No different than any other distraction. What will be made illegal next?

Slippery slope...

[AC5096]

It's a state law not Federal.I have no problem with it

Mass. should boarden the law to cover all distractions. Proving them in court may be another matter.

I see too many idiots driving and texting. Talking on a cell while driving isn't much better. I've came close to being in two head-on accidents lately from inattentive drivers.

Maybe I'm getting old, but when I drive, that's what I do. I leave the other extracurricular activities for when I'm not driving.

[the dangling wrangler]

I tossed my cell phone last week and have never felt better. What a stress reliever it's been. Shouldn't talk,text,surf the 'net and drive anyway. It's way too distracting.

[beshvac]

Anybody been in a car during a heated discussion where it would have been safer.....Texting.....

It's just another loss of freedom because it's easy to BLAME a kid with a cellphone....(and make him the EXAMPLE)

the police said he received a text at 2:35 and "determined" the accident happened at 2:35......I can drive a mile from 2:35:01 to 2:35:59 and not break any laws...

[Space Racer]

Texting takes longer per glance. With other things that require visual attention, you can just flash a look for say a tenth of a second and see what you needed to see. With texting, you can only retrieve a few letters of text with such a short glance. In order to understand what you are reading, you have to look at the text for a longer period of time than you would at the radio, for example, and you have to divert your mind from driving/traffic skills to understanding and interpreting written language, which requires using a different part of the brain. So texting causes two diversion problems at the same time.

Texting usually also requires a short delay for your eyes to adjust to a different focal length and different lighting conditions. Now it's a triple whammy.

When you compare these skills and requirements to those needed for reading a GPS navigator on your windshield, you can see how the GPS is much safer than texting.

With GPS,
1. You are looking at a picture of a road. No interpretation is needed.
2. You can glance at the brightly lit screen for a very short time and gather enough info.
3. You don't have to look away from the road.
4. You don't have to adjust to a small, dark LCD screen at a short focal length.
5. Your driving/traffic skills are in play. No additional skills are required.

[Space Racer]

Also, driving is one of the most dangerous things people do. It requires training, coordination, attention to a variety of changing events, experience, and judgment. Young people lack most of these, so adding texting to the skillset is a recipe for disaster. But they are the ones who are most likely to text, and they are the ones who are most likely to think they can do it without adding risk.

How do you stop a teenager from texting while driving? PUT HIM IN JAIL.

[Hugh B]

Next thing they will do is increase the penalty if it was determined to be a "hate" text!

[hearthman]

All these detailed laws are silly nonsense to be polite. Let's take these 'behave while driving' laws:

It's still legal to- change radio stations, put on makeup, reach for a drink, light a cigarette, reach for something out of the glove box, adjust your seat, roll your window up or down,, swat a bug, eat, use the visor mirror, turn on/ off the cabin light, hit the rear window defogger, pick your nose or use the steering wheel, turn indicators, wipers and lights while underway.

You can use your cell phone as long as it is 'hands free'. You still have to hold it to select the phone option, address book, the person you're calling, which of their numbers to call, whether you want to text or call then you can put it down and let the cop see your blue tooth ear piece that isn't turned on because you hate using it or it isn't charged so you're actually using the speaker phone with the phone lying on your rather rotund belly. At least that's how I do it.

Next thing you know, they'll be outlawing texting in the military. Can't drive a tank, fly a jet, plot artillery or go house to house while texting.

There are laws on the books already in most states that hold people accountable for their actions. If you do something reckless or grossly negligent, you may be fined or imprisoned. Why do we need all these BS specific laws? If you are acting irresponsibly and cause damage or injury to another person or their property you are liable. Is this concept really that hard? Hammurabi figured it out a few thousand years ago in the world's first building code. if you choose to drink and drive then cause damage or injury, you are liable. Booze or texting or listening to music as not excuses for being in control of yourself and aware of others around you.

God help us!

[the dangling wrangler]

Serious business here.

http://thestir.cafemom.com/technolog...nd_over_iphone

[Slatts]

Being allowed to drive a motor vehicle is a privileged, not a right.

In order to gian that privilege you have to prove your competence by passing a written test to prove you know and understand the rules of the road and pass a practicle test to show you are competent to control the class of vehivle your licence covers.

If some idiot crosses into the path of oncoming traffic and kills some poor bugger because he feels the need to send or read an asinine text message while driving a ton of steel down a road is locked up for a few years, well good.

If putting this fool in jail causes just 1 kid to pull over to the side of the road before using his phone instead of ploughing into a pedestrian or some similar tragedy it's well worth it.

Two years? The family of the bloke he killed have to live with the consequences of his stupidity for the rest of their lives.

Once again, they're not taking away a right, they're cancelling a privilege that this kid abused and setting an example to hopefully protect others.

There's more I'd like to say but the traffic is getting a bit heavy so it'll wait till I get a chance to pull over...

[corny]

He broke the law and the law won .........