Notices
Like Tree70Likes

Texting Driver Hit My Kids; Now it's Personal

Old 10-08-2019, 02:05 PM
  #41  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Hanahan, SC
Posts: 8,141
Default

intexticated driving
schoolsout1 is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 02:09 PM
  #42  
C3D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,190
Default

Sorry for your child's injury. Yes it should be illegal, but until stupidity is made impossible the law won't help.
C3D is online now  
Old 10-08-2019, 02:10 PM
  #43  
C3D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,190
Default

Would bet whoever hit your child et al had either no insurance or minimal insurance?

C3D is online now  
Old 10-08-2019, 02:12 PM
  #44  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: westchester ny
Posts: 2,822
Default

^^^^ The trouble with that is the passengers could not use their phones either.
phillipgo is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 02:21 PM
  #45  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Fish'nFool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Anywhere but here...
Posts: 25,080
Default

This subject is a little personal to me. A few years ago my brother and his wife were killed when they were rear ended by what we believe to be a driver utilizing social media on his phone. They left behind their two sons.

Proving it is problem number one, it is very difficult, I know we went through it. And some state laws have not evolved fast enough to keep up with technology and social trends. As difficult as it is to believe, while some states have "no texting" laws, unfortunately that leaves the door open to social media and the like, all of which still results in distracted driving.

It is a systemic problem and considering the number of people that are on the road doing it every day, ignoring any laws that are in place, I will go so far to say the threat is not only real, but it poses a broader danger than drinking and driving.

All that said, I am glad to hear that your kids and the other passengers are generally okay.
chrispnet likes this.
Fish'nFool is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 02:28 PM
  #46  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Todd, NC
Posts: 1,049
Default

wish insurance companies would offer dummy proof front & rear dashcams -- hell auto MFRs could insert dashcams into our parking aid cameras, mirrors, lane assist, cruise assist etc -- <$50 of tech in a $30,000+ new car with the option to record or not by the consumer

next, insurance companies could offer rewards/discounts for an app that puts your phone into "driving mode" when you activate -- tie in with andoid/apple carplay where the car automatically puts you in that mode

sure you can ignore all these options, just like you can drink and drive -- i'm not calling for enforcement, just options to protect you and others

i shame as many people as I can with my dashcam channel on youtube, search for your license plate to see if you've made the cut!

just waiting on the big brother/china conspirators to shoot me down
porcha is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 02:46 PM
  #47  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 251
Default

The other issue is very low insurance limits. Sue the crap out of them and u end up with an empty judgement .

Jail time should be a must for injuries
bluedart is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 02:48 PM
  #48  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suffolk, Va.
Posts: 17,350
Default

Originally Posted by nccoaster View Post
You have one job and that is to drive the car. Your privilege to sit behind the wheel does not extend texting, reading, putting on mascara, drinking etc.
Well then we need to remove all items from the car that distract drivers and lets see how that goes.
fishingfun is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 02:50 PM
  #49  
Admirals ClubCaptains Club Member Admiral's Club Member
THT sponsor
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Miami Fl / Washington NC
Posts: 2,103
Default

The driver, a beautiful young woman, had her face lacerated and covered with blood, her nose broken and knocked unconscious and the car ended up 290' from the point of impact. Anything but OK.
In my mind the analogy is firing a gun down a public street. As long as you don't hurt anyone is it OK? No of course not. What is the deterrent?

A seat belt violation in N.C is $25.50 plus $153.50 Court costs. Fair to say we all use them. Likely few personal injuries to others are caused by violators.
Texting while driving is a violation with a $100 fine. So far not so successful. A French Boat builder employed here tells me talking on a phone while driving in France is 300 Euros and points.
I got a copy of the police report and the violation was cited "failing to reduce speed". I wish to attend the traffic court to hear that explanation.

An impaired driver can damage property, and put people in the hospital or the morgue.

I would lobby that texting while driving is no different than driving intoxicated. Why should the consequences be less?
Driving While Impaired

Information Concerning Alcohol and Driving While Impaired

There are five levels of misdemeanor Driving While Intoxicated. Level I is the most serious and Level V the least.Level V

Punishable by a fine up to $200 and a minimum jail sentence of 24 hours and a maximum of 60 days. A judge can suspend the sentence but upon completion that the driver spend 24 hours in jail, perform 24 hours of community service or not operate a vehicle for 30 days.Level IV

Punishable by a fine up to $500 and a minimum jail sentence of 48 hours and a maximum of 120 days. A judge can suspend the sentence but upon completion that the driver spend 48 hours in jail, perform 48 hours of community service or not operate a vehicle for 60 days.Level III

Punishable by a fine up to $1,000 and a minimum jail sentence of 72 hours and a maximum of six months. A judge can suspend the sentence only upon completion that the driver spend at least 72 hours in jail, perform 72 hours of community service or not operate a vehicle for 90 days.Level II

Punishable by a fine up to $2,000 and a minimum jail sentence of seven days and a maximum of one year. A judge CANNOT suspend the minimum sentence.Level I

Punishable by a fine up to $4,000 and a minimum jail sentence of 30 days and a maximum of two years. A judge CANNOT suspend the minimum sentence.Level I and II drivers are repeat offenders, persons whose license are revoked, impaired drivers, impaired drivers who are transporting young children and impaired drivers who hurt someone in a crash. Impaired drivers must complete a substance abuse assessment and comply with any recommended treatment as a condition for having their drivers license restored at the end of the revocation period.Felony DWI

For Habitual DWI offenders, drivers who have had three prior DWI convictions within the past seven years, DWI becomes a more severe felony. But more importantly, the Habitual DWI statute now mandates a minimum active jail term of one year -- a sentence that CANNOT be suspended. Offenders must also go through a substance abuse program while in jail or as a condition of parole.Seizure and Forfeiture of Vehicles

The Governor's DWI Initiative takes away from repeat DWI offenders the means to drive while impaired; namely, their cars. Under the new provision, a law enforcement officer can seize a driver's car if the officer charges that person with DWI and that person was driving while his or her license was revoked due to a previous impaired driving offense. The seizure happens at the time of the arrest and NOT after the case has come to trial.If a court convicts the driver of DWI and of committing the offense while driving with a revoked license due to a previous impaired driving offense, the judge will order the vehicle forfeited. The school board can then sell the vehicle and keep the proceeds, sharing the money with any other school systems in the county, or keep the car for its own use. The law does allow vehicle owners to get their cars back if they were not the driver convicted of DWI but only if they satisfy the court that they are an innocent party.Zero Tolerance for Commercial Motor Vehicle Drivers

It's unlawful for the operator of a commercial motor vehicle to drink and drive. The first offense results in a 10 day disqualification to operate a commercial motor vehicle. The second or subsequent offense revokes the drivers license to operate any vehicle. Zero tolerance for school bus and school activity bus drivers and child care vehicle drivers drivers.It is unlawful for school bus and school activity bus drivers and child care vehicle operators (day care van etc.) to drink and drive.Offenders Under Age 21

Prior to the enactment of the new statutes, North Carolina had already taken a zero-tolerance stance against drivers who were under the legal drinking age who nevertheless drank or used drugs illegally and then got behind the wheel. People under age 21 simply cannot drive with any alcohol or illegally-used drugs in their systems -- period. Any amount of alcohol will result in an immediate 30 day pretrial revocation. If an underage drinking driver refuses to take such a test, he or she now need only have the smell of alcohol on the breath to be convicted of driving after drinking. Offenders will have their licenses revoked for one year but can get limited driving privileges instated by a judge if the driver was at least 18 years old at the time of the offense and did not have a prior conviction.Drug Testing

The Initiative also recognized North Carolina's inability to prosecute and convict someone for driving while impaired by something other than alcohol. Under the new provision, law officers can now order chemical tests for drugs. It also amends the old law to allow for the revocation of a driver's license if he or she refuses to take such a test.Drivers License Revocation

All persons charged with DWI who refuse to take an Intoxilyzer test or has results of 0.08 or more, 0.04 if commercial motor vehicle, or under age 21 and the results are above 0.04, will have their license revoked immediately for 30 days. There is a limited driving privilege available after 10 days. Upon conviction of DWI for first offense, the license is revoked for one year. A limited driving privilege may be granted by the judge, but only if the driver did not hurt anyone, did not have a child under sixteen years of age in the car at the time of the drunk driving, and the driver obtains a substance abuse assessment. In order to have a license restored at the end of one year, the driver must go to treatment or school as recommended by the assessment. Upon conviction of a second offense within three years, the revocation is four years.Refusing a Test

A driver who is stopped by a Trooper or other officer for certain alcohol-related offenses will be requested to submit to a breath test or blood test or both to determine alcohol concentration or the presence of drugs in the blood. The results of the test will be used in court.If the driver refuses the test, an immediate 30-day revocation is imposed and an additional one-year revocation is imposed after an opportunity for a hearing. Even if the driver is found not guilty of DWI in court, the one-year revocation is imposed for refusing the test.

A limited driving privilege may be granted but only after a six-month revocation period.

Otseg is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 02:50 PM
  #50  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suffolk, Va.
Posts: 17,350
Default

Originally Posted by porcha View Post
wish insurance companies would offer dummy proof front & rear dashcams -- hell auto MFRs could insert dashcams into our parking aid cameras, mirrors, lane assist, cruise assist etc -- <$50 of tech in a $30,000+ new car with the option to record or not by the consumer

next, insurance companies could offer rewards/discounts for an app that puts your phone into "driving mode" when you activate -- tie in with andoid/apple carplay where the car automatically puts you in that mode

sure you can ignore all these options, just like you can drink and drive -- i'm not calling for enforcement, just options to protect you and others

i shame as many people as I can with my dashcam channel on youtube, search for your license plate to see if you've made the cut!

just waiting on the big brother/china conspirators to shoot me down
Maybe the insurance co could offer an app to give safe drivers an award check every six months.
fishingfun is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 03:00 PM
  #51  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Somewhere in the middle of Michigan
Posts: 10,491
Default

Yesterday, I was driving a 2-lane state highway with typical speeds of 60 mph. An oncoming driver crossed the centerline and came right at me. As I was on the brakes and heading for the ditch, he looked up from his phone and jerked the car back into his lane. Just luck that didn't turn out a lot worse.
yarcraft91 is online now  
Old 10-08-2019, 03:18 PM
  #52  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Fuquay Varnia, NC Beaufort NC
Posts: 1,957
Default

Has anyone bought a camera that monitors front and rear. Sounds like we all need to get one.
SeaNile Boater is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 03:19 PM
  #53  
Senior Member
 
Lprizman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: RI
Posts: 6,181
Default

Fishnfool....manhug...damn

Just came back from the store out of 60 or so cars I passed about 7 or 8 weren't on the phone or staring at it....and we are a hands free state....scary
Fish'nFool likes this.
Lprizman is online now  
Old 10-08-2019, 03:23 PM
  #54  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: CT
Posts: 4,586
Default

Originally Posted by Otseg View Post
Our dear friend was car-pooling five young children (two of mine) home from school and was stopped awaiting on coming traffic to make a left turn. She was rear-ended by a car at an estimated 40-45 mph by a driver that never hit their brakes. They ended up 290' from the intersection as our friend was knocked out and suffered a broken nose and face lacerations. All the children have bruises, sore necks and head aches. Fortunately she properly had not turned in awaiting traffic or a T-bone after being driven into oncoming traffic could have been a certainty.

The driver was believed to be texting

I am a big proponent of free will and minimal legislation but the use of smart phones while driving makes you impaired no less than driving under the influence of alcohol and it seems to me the penalties should be the same.

Get the kids medical treatment and contact a lawyer. There is no other recourse possible that doesn’t hurt you in the long run.
Mpellet is online now  
Old 10-08-2019, 03:27 PM
  #55  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Ft. Myers, Fl
Posts: 234
Default

Originally Posted by bluedart View Post
The other issue is very low insurance limits. Sue the crap out of them and u end up with an empty judgement .

Jail time should be a must for injuries
One does not preclude the other . . .
RIDE2GETHER is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 03:36 PM
  #56  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Ft. Myers, Fl
Posts: 234
Default

Originally Posted by mitchk View Post
I'm confused by this statement. If you believe in free will and minimal legislation, why don't you believe in individual responsibility instead of collective punishment due to the incompetent act of an individual?
So how do you feel about open container laws? Are they collective punishment due to those who can't hold their liquor?

I question how upping the penalties for being an impaired driver due to texting to the same as those due to alcohol impairment is "collective punishment"?

RIDE2GETHER is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 03:43 PM
  #57  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,486
Default

Originally Posted by bayrunner16 View Post
This is why I basically only drive my old truck anymore.

I have decided that I am no longer giving way to drivers that choose to try and assault me.

I am assaulted with a deadly weapon everytime I venture out into the world these days by these idiots using pocket telephones while driving.

Pocket telephones should be banned.

You aren't that important, you don't need a phone in your pocket round the clock. Get over yourself.
......
Gary999 is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 03:48 PM
  #58  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 28
Default

I drive a ton with my job. I have two Garmin 45 dash cams; one under my rearview mirror and one on my back hatch. I was rear ended about a year ago by a teen driver who swore to the trooper I had jammed my brakes on in front of her and she didn't have time to stop . . . I pulled the back camera and it showed her looking down (couldn't see at what) up to the point of impact.
Because he couldn't see the phone being used, he told me he could only cite her for failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident. I turned the video over to State Farm and we'll see what happens.
kimbo is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 04:09 PM
  #59  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,739
Default

Sure glad all survived without worse injuries. Maybe the young women that was at fault can become a spokesperson for not doing what she was engaged in.

Punishment is certainly a deterent of sorts. It is only after the fact though. Educating the young drivers about this should be a big deal in high schools, not just mentioned in passing.

I coach at a high school and will bring this up at practice Thursday to see how it is received.
muskrattown is offline  
Old 10-08-2019, 04:13 PM
  #60  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Garett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 24,318
Default

If they are proven to have been texting sue the living crap out of them and then sue them again and again!

I Seriously do NOT understand why the government is so lax-i-daisy on those that use their cell phones while driving? Cell phones and driving kill more people than drinking and driving.
Garett is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.