Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Communications Transportation

NJ Court: Sending a Text Message To a Driver Could Make You Liable For Crash 628

Posted by Soulskill
from the pendulum-swinging-hard dept.
C0R1D4N writes "A New Jersey Appeals Court has ruled that both sides of a texting conversation which resulted in a car accident could be held liable. The ruling came as part of a case in which the driver of a truck received a text message shortly before striking a motorcycle carrying two passengers. The court ruled that while in this case, the person sending the text wasn't liable, they could be if the circumstances were a little different. '...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.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NJ Court: Sending a Text Message To a Driver Could Make You Liable For Crash

Comments Filter:
  • by chocho99 (552877) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @02:04PM (#44698931)
    ...why not make the phone companies liable for transmitting the text to you while you are in a moving car. It's not like they don't already know where you are at all times.
  • Re:Idiocracy (Score:5, Interesting)

    by flayzernax (1060680) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @02:30PM (#44699293)

    Its the drivers duty to turn off their phone and ensure they are not distracted while driving. The responsibility falls on the drivers of the vehicles. If they cannot preform this duty. They should not be driving. We don't even need special rules or laws. Just hold people accountable for when they fuck up. Make it clear to everyone what will happen if you are not responsible.

    Suddenly people become more responsible.

    Also discourteous irresponsible people should get killed early in life.

  • Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anarchduke (1551707) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @02:37PM (#44699367)
    Does this mean I won't be receiving Amber Alert messages on my cellphone anymore? Because they are sending it to all cellphones, they know for certain some people will receive the text while driving.
  • Re:Idiocracy (Score:1, Interesting)

    by shiftless (410350) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @03:01PM (#44699627) Homepage

    The court said that you share responsibility if you have good reasons to believe the text receiver is not merely driving, but will read the text while driving.

    Which is commonsense.

    When I clicked on this story, there were no comments yet, but I was saddened because I knew that dumb asses would chime in to post dumb shit like you just did.

    No, it's not "commonsense." What you just posted is complete bullshit.

    You seem to be working under the assumption that texting while driving is always dangerous. Except it's not. I've done it thousands of times and never once caused a fender bender, let alone a 57 car pileup. That's because I'm safe about how I do it and don't text people while navigating through tricky situations. That is my responsibility to handle, not the person who's texting me. If a text comes in at an inopportune time and I check it, thus causing an accident...it's MY FUCKING FAULT and nobody else's.

    People like you talk about personal responsibility like you have a clue what it is. You don't. Your brain is mush from all the government propaganda you've been absorbing.

  • Re:Idiocracy (Score:5, Interesting)

    by fuzznutz (789413) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @03:22PM (#44699871)

    Making it illegal not to hang up if you know somebody is driving would make more sense.

    No it wouldn't. You fall into the same logic trap as the Jersey judge thinking that more laws/liability will fix human behavior that we don't like. It's already illegal to text and drive in my state, and every day I see at least 3 drivers on my four mile work commute doing it. Every other driver is talking on the phone at 5:00 during their drive home.

    Does anybody seriously think the answer to all life's problems is more laws? Must we always advocate yet another statute on the books every time we see something we don't agree with or don't like? Maybe we need to just grow up and realize we are never going to live in a perfect world where nothing bad happens.

    The law and order crowd is turning our world into a police state.

  • Re:Idiocracy (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Wednesday August 28, 2013 @04:42PM (#44700875) Homepage Journal

    My wife suffers from Celiac Disease; essentially, she's highly allergic to all forms of gluten, be it from wheat, barley, malt, what-have-you. Not deathly allergic, but pretty damn close. Say what you want, but until you've spent 2-3 days shitting and vomiting almost non-stop from something as simple as accidentally ingesting a small amount of bread or taking a sip of a malt, you have no idea what she deals with and should subsequently shut your fucking mouth.

    Anyway, we understand that her condition is our problem, not anyone else's, and thus she pretty much keeps it to herself as she's not a completely narcissistic bitch. I.e., "people like you."

    P.S. "Rights," whether real or perceived, have nothing to do with it - nobody is responsible for your health or safety but yourself.

  • Re:Idiocracy (Score:4, Interesting)

    by JWSmythe (446288) <jwsmythe@jwsmyth ... minus physicist> on Thursday August 29, 2013 @06:55AM (#44705131) Homepage Journal

        I happen to be allergic to something that someone wears or uses at work. Last week, I had to spend some time outside, because they walked by my office, and I started sneezing constantly.

        I have no idea who it is, or what it is. Since it doesn't last all day, I assume it's someone reapplying their stink.

        I mentioned it in conversation with one of the executive's assistants. Well, because I was sitting outside sounding like I had a nasty cold that cleared up in about 15 minutes. They told me all I had to do was complain and they'd reinforce the policy against perfumes. I told them I won't complain, and would address it with the person directly if I ever find who it is.

        I was already able to definitely track one stink. It was room air freshener that someone used. I had suspicions. It was confirmed when I walked back into my office and started sneezing just a couple minutes after they had sprayed it. They still use it, but sparingly, and that doesn't make me sneeze. Problem solved. No official paperwork, and no hard feelings. :)

10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.

Working...