Probation And Four Days In Jail For Texting Driver Who Killed Bus Driver

What? That's it! Isn't it time to lay the law down already? I probably see more texters on the roads than any of you do since I get around on a motorcycle which gives me a better view inside cars plus I jog outdoors too. I've had enough bad run ins with texters and cell phone gabbers, and cases such as this http://www.startribune.com/probatio...illed-new-prague-school-bus-driver/397338931/ prove it's not going to come to an end anytime soon. Lord only knows how many of these texters are combining it with drinking and drugs too. Fully autonomous cars can't come soon enough. Until then the death toll will rise.

 

Not a huge fan of the 'autonomous cars', but that is pretty ridiculous! I hate when people have a phone in front of their face weaving and not paying attention to the road.

I would love to see this test redone with people texting and driving.

Since I got rid of my truck, I should remake my window sticker: "Maybe you would drive better with that phone up your A%%!"

 

Texting: The root of all evil.

Really?

 

So what are you implying when you post that, especially after it was just mentioned that an innocent life was taken by a texter?

 

That you have a personal grudge against anyone who uses text messaging, and that you would not have cared about the innocent life that was lost, if it had been lost in any other way.

I'm surprised you had to ask for clarification on that.

 

I refrained from using a cell phone while driving before it even became illegal in my state since I was well aware of how dangerous it is. But now that it is illegal I'm in a state of disbelief with how many people I see doing it. In fact I almost had one kill me this year while I was going out for a jog. Which all the more reason why I support fully autonomous cars. They still don't have any on the roads yet which are completely autonomous though. I don't know if it will ever reach that point but I would appreciate if more cars were equipped with auto braking and got better and better at it. Right now it seems to be effective only at low speeds. And from what I heard it still can't tell the difference between things like a plastic bag and a rock.

 

WOW you must go crazy when you see people exceeding the speed limit or drink driving or running a red light or driving through a railway crossing when the lights are flashing or the boom gates are down or when drivers don't stop for people on a pedestrian crossing.............. maybe it would be better for your heart rate to stay away from any roads as apparently they are far too dangerous

You need to grab a bunch of reality because making something illegal never stops people from doing it as it is human nature for some people to buck the system and do it anyway regardless of the consequences. To illustrate the point, there are very harsh penalties for murder but it still happens....

FWIW if I was out driving then my preference if I was to encounter a lawbreaker would be to have that person using their phone while driving rather than them being a drug or alcohol impaired driver that has no reaction time or has flawed decision making skills.
The two biggest cuts to the road toll in my country was when they made it illegal to drive without a seat belt (although many people still do) and when they started enforcing the .05 blood alcohol rules in all states using random breath tests.

 

Well hopefully the karma police will come back and haunt and you'll learn just how pathetic these people are the hard way. How would you like for a texter to strike you and leave you in a wheelchair for the rest of your life? While the texter merrily walks out of the court room after receiving a sentence of just 4 days in jail and 40 hours of community service? Believe me you'll understand the errors of your ways after that happens.

 

All those things are dangerous, result in deaths and injuries, and more often than not the victims are children and the infirm and elderly. Traffic injury statistics show that without any doubt. Mostly the people who are apprehended, convicted and charged mostly get off very lightly.
Being concerned about those kinds of anti-social behaviour is not a sign of paranoia or obsession. People who kill through dangerous and reckless driving all too often get a much lighter sentence than for manslaughter, let alone murder.

 

Juries are often mostly made up of people who drive.

 

But when the Judge in any trial comes to pass sentence where a guilty verdict has been handed down is guided by sentencing levels that come from the office of the Lord Chancellor. Which of course is nothing to do with a jury. The problem in the UK (I can't speak for elsewhere) is not people being found guilty, it is the mess that the law is around 'dangerous' and 'reckless' driving, and the generally low levels of sentencing compared to violent crime, manslaughter and murder. There has rarely been a problem of juries - full of drivers or not - not finding people guilty of an offence. Actually, quite the opposite. The problem is not and rarely has been juries. It is the law relating to driver-caused injury and death and the sentencing guidelines.

 

Hey guys....lighten up.
I don't think the figures will be that different in your countries but here in Australia the real killers are getting away.
Heart disease, dementia, problems caused by obesity, cancer....heck over here road trauma doesn't even make it into the top 20 causes of death.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@...s~Australia's leading causes of death, 2015~3
Here are the latest government statistics for Australia (2015) and if you go to the table labelled
2.1 LEADING CAUSES OF DEATH(a), Australia - Selected years - 2006, 2010, 2015(b)
you can see a comparison between 2006, 2010 and 2015 and still no road trauma figures.

Keep eating your fatty foods and drinking your cokes and maintain a sedentary lifestyle and you are at far greater risk than a few texting drivers methinks

I am going to take the dog for a walk....... time to move on and think about real problems

 

That's pretty far-fetched. Road traffic accidents injure and kill more people wherever cars are driven than any other form of transport. To compare it to lifestyle risk factors is disingenuous to say the least. Otherwise why have we had decades of changes in laws around drink-driving, wearing seat belts back and front and now drug use when driving. If you knew people who had been killed or permanently disabled because of avoidable driver error you wouldn't be so glib. By your argument we shouldn't bother about the mental health of pilots (like the one in Europe who caused many deaths) because pilot error is so rare. Suggesting millions of avoidable road traffic injuries and deaths across the world is not 'real life' is ignorant and offensive.

 

I think people using the high beams are worse than people texting.

I have had a few people in the last 17 years of me driving blind me from be hind.And them riding my ass for no reason.That is more dangerous than texting.

And blinding in the front both ways suck.

Some people just don't deserve to drive plane and simple.I have not any speeding tickets in 15 years and have not had any car car accidents in 16 years.I have had one in my first year of driving.

Not my fault mind you.Stop and go traffic sucks in Pittsburgh

 

UK driving problems begin with motorists being used as a cash cow by the government. Lack of law enforcement, manpower, willpower, the few that do get investigated reasonably well then have to make it past the CPS, then they get a jury loaded with drivers - before the judge has to make any call.

Drivers still on the road after accumulating well over the level for licence suspension, drivers still driving after being disqualified, still driving and causing deaths by dangerous driving after having been banned 11 times.

Motorists are getting away with murder in the UK, the rich have Mr Loophole making a mint out of it, the remainder have only to play the sympathy card and use a little victim blaming to stand a high chance of their driving peers giving them the benefit of the doubt.

 

Economically that's baseless. Purchasing and running a car is cheaper now in real terms than it's ever been. Enforcement of offences involving alcohol has never been more effective than now and independent studies show that. Drug and text/mobile phone use enforcement is developing but still poor.
You highlight rarities to wrongly try to prove a point. There is no recognised problem of failure of juries to convict and you wont find any independent organisation campaigning for road safety agreeing with you. The fault around sentencing lies with the law and sentencing guidelines, which is the firm view of all road safety organisations,

 

Well said, it worries me since I've seen too much of it. And just this year while I was jogging through a intersection and had the green light, when I saw a car starting to make a left and proceeded to come at me like I wasn't there, panic set in at that stage and that's when I noticed the driver was gabbing on a cell phone too. The driver finally heard me screaming and hit the brakes. I don't see how this driver could have never seen me unless she was just too distracted by her phone at that time. That plus the case I just brought up here is all the more reason to be concerned about this slightly new danger that we all have to deal with now.

 

http://road.cc/content/news/206924-...istic-government-review-motoring-offences-and

"Dollimore did however express disappointment that the MOJ do not propose to review the use of disqualification for non-imprisonable offences, nor the ‘exceptional hardship’ legislation by which drivers can avoid losing their driving licences despite having acquired 12 or more penalty points.

The latter was recently used by Christopher Gard, a driver who retained his licence despite eight previous convictions for using his phone at the wheel. Six weeks after the case, Gard hit and killed cyclist Lee Martin while reading a text message.

Dollimore said of the issue: “The distinction between what is truly exceptional, and the forseeable inconvenience which follows the loss of a licence for repeat offending is constantly blurred by the courts, and needs to be urgently reviewed.”

Cycling UK are independent of motoring organisations and the government.

 

From the comments I read below in that blog it appears the folks there are upset with how motorists will still be able to get away with using their cell phones even with the implementation of higher fines there. I have to concur with them since in my parts where using cell phones while driving restrictions are less than 2 years old here, I don't know if it's made much or any difference when it comes to the use of cell phones while driving here. I even ran into a cop here who is upset with the way motorists continue to ignore the cell phone laws here. Even these commercials appear to be useless

 

I wouldn't call texting anti-social behavior, since the act itself requires interacting with another person.

Stupid people who text while should be focused on driving are a legitimate cause for concern. So are the far too many drunk drivers where I live, the drivers who are exhausted and have slowed reaction times because of that, and the drivers who get so animated in their conversation with the person in the passenger seat, that they stop paying attention to the road.

I think joffa's point, which I agree with, is that databanks isn't exactly concerned. He is so furious that there is spittle and foam flying out of his mouth as he screams his hatred of texting at the world. Anyone who points out to him that he is overreacting is treated to an equally enraged "how would you like it if YOU were crippled for life?" tantrum, as if that is even relevant. It's a bit over the top, and it's rapidly going beyond annoying and into the realms of tired attempts at amusement.