• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

NJ says you can be liable for car accidents if you send a text to a driver

ImTheCaptain

ImTheCaptain

I disagree with you
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
57,844
Reaction score
9,774
Location
Carlisle
lolwut

New Jersey Appeals Court: Text Sender Can Be Held Liable

"“We conclude that a person sending text messages has a duty not to text someone who is driving if the texter knows, or has special reason to know, the recipient will view the text while driving,” Superior Court Appellate Division Judge Victor Ashrafi wrote.

Ashrafi was joined in the decision by Judge Michael Guadagno. It upholds a Morris County Superior Court judge’s decision tossing out legal claims filed against Shannon Colonna of Rockaway, who was 17 at the time of the September 2009 crash."
 
Last edited:
Bad decision. Why not sue newspapers for drivers reading them while driving? Or fast food joints in case you spill coffee and have an accident? The burden is on the person driving to use care. Someone sending a text has no part in their decision to do something stupid.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
as in, person sitting at home texting the person driving
Click to expand...

The person sitting at home sending the text would not be the recipient, the person receiving the text while driving would be the recipient.
 
they're saying if i text you at home (initiatiating the convo) and i'm driving you're the recipient and respond, you can be held liable for negligence
 
ImTheCaptain said:
they're saying if i text you at home (initiatiating the convo) and i'm driving you're the recipient and respond, you can be held liable for negligence
Click to expand...

in this context the driver is the recipient, and the sender of the text is being held liable for distracting them with a text message. The person at home commits no crime without sending a text. Its just like a phone call: if your phone rings you are the recipient of a phone call.
 
No way this lasts very long. I'm all for reducing texting while driving, but this isn't the answer. How about the NSA uses its metadata, determines the rate of speed at which you're moving from tower to tower, assumes that you're not running/walking 45 mph, and if it sees a text, sends you a ticket? Sort of half-kidding. But if they can do red light and speed cameras, why not something similar for texting? Yea yea, big brother. And I get that you could be the passenger in the car. Maybe they can send a drone to your car and snap a pic to see if you're the driver or not.
 
If the car is running and the phone is within 24 inches of a sensor in the driver's side door, the phone's texting capability, send or receive, is disabled. Tampering with or overriding the sensor or this setting is a felony. Boom - how hard is that?
 
MDMH is right: your title makes no sense. You mean to say that text senders will be held accountable.

Recipients, in many states, are already held accountable in the event of an accident.
 
And the thread title is wrong, the court finding was that the texter (Sender) could be held liable if they knew or had special reason to know that the recipient was driving. Very dumb decision. I text people when they are sleeping, I don't expect them to read it until they wake up. I text people when they are driving, I don't expect them to read it or respond until they stop. One advantage of texting over voice calling is its asynchronous nature.
 
scooter84 said:
If the car is running and the phone is within 24 inches of a sensor in the driver's side door, the phone's texting capability, send or receive, is disabled. Tampering with or overriding the sensor or this setting is a felony. Boom - how hard is that?
Click to expand...

But with my idea, they could do drone strikes against repeat offenders.

It's one of those issues where people are going to be too idiotic/selfish to police themselves, so if the government wants to ensure public safety, they're going to have to step in and do something that Tea Partiers will complain about.

Another issue is that it isn't just texting. Let's say they shut down texting, people can use Snapchat, regular email, Google Hangouts, Facebook Messenger, hell, even Skype. To shut it down you'd have to disable all data, which is hard on those who use their phones for the sole purpose of gps navigation.
 
RevDeac06 said:
But with my idea, they could do drone strikes against repeat offenders.

It's one of those issues where people are going to be too idiotic/selfish to police themselves, so if the government wants to ensure public safety, they're going to have to step in and do something that Tea Partiers will complain about.

Another issue is that it isn't just texting. Let's say they shut down texting, people can use Snapchat, regular email, Google Hangouts, Facebook Messenger, hell, even Skype. To shut it down you'd have to disable all data, which is hard on those who use their phones for the sole purpose of gps navigation.
Click to expand...

Can't shut down the boards, though. Amirite?
 
RevDeac06 said:
But with my idea, they could do drone strikes against repeat offenders.

It's one of those issues where people are going to be too idiotic/selfish to police themselves, so if the government wants to ensure public safety, they're going to have to step in and do something that Tea Partiers will complain about.

Another issue is that it isn't just texting. Let's say they shut down texting, people can use Snapchat, regular email, Google Hangouts, Facebook Messenger, hell, even Skype. To shut it down you'd have to disable all data, which is hard on those who use their phones for the sole purpose of gps navigation.
Click to expand...

Scooter's idea would work if you block all data within a certain distance of the sensor. Then someone can still mount their phone outside said distance and use it for GPS, but it's out of reach for texts, calls, email, etc.

Of course then you'll have geniuses reaching across their car trying to answer a text and swerving into oncoming traffic.
 
scooter84 said:
If the car is running and the phone is within 24 inches of a sensor in the driver's side door, the phone's texting capability, send or receive, is disabled. Tampering with or overriding the sensor or this setting is a felony. Boom - how hard is that?
Click to expand...

Probably could do something similar with drunk drivers if they wanted to.
 
scooter84 said:
If the car is running and the phone is within 24 inches of a sensor in the driver's side door, the phone's texting capability, send or receive, is disabled. Tampering with or overriding the sensor or this setting is a felony. Boom - how hard is that?
Click to expand...

Pretty useless unless everyone on the road (especially teens) will be driving brand new cars with this new tech. Any tech that helps limit texting while driving can't be "tied" to a car due to the time it would take to implement.
 
Last edited:
scooter84 said:
If the car is running and the phone is within 24 inches of a sensor in the driver's side door, the phone's texting capability, send or receive, is disabled. Tampering with or overriding the sensor or this setting is a felony. Boom - how hard is that?
Click to expand...

lol drivers would reach out to the passenger side and right hand text which would be even more distracting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top