If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   New Jersey is so serious about stopping asshats from texting and driving that they'll even go after the person who SENDS a text to a driver   (cnn.com) divider line 153
    More: Hero, New Jersey, WPIX, Appeals Court  
•       •       •

6298 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Aug 2013 at 9:24 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



153 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-29 10:42:46 AM  

skozlaw: The more you eat the more you fart: Oh..you mean like cops

No, I don't "mean like cops" because that has nothing to do with this thread.


Sure it does.

The police are ticketing people who text and drive...and the people who sent the text...while they themselves are doing far worse.
 
2013-08-29 10:43:46 AM  

rubi_con_man: You know what I want? I want cops pulling people over for use of headphones while driving ... I see that stuff all the time and it's INSANE.


Know what? I do that all the time. It makes my commute a lot more enjoyable.

So, basically, fark off.
 
2013-08-29 10:47:56 AM  

Baron Harkonnen: rubi_con_man: You know what I want? I want cops pulling people over for use of headphones while driving ... I see that stuff all the time and it's INSANE.

Know what? I do that all the time. It makes my commute a lot more enjoyable.

So, basically, fark off.


No different than playing loud music.

Dumbass sheeple always wanting more restrictions on everyone ELSE..and then complain about big government.

The stupidity never ceases to absolutely astound me
 
2013-08-29 10:50:53 AM  

Baron Harkonnen: rubi_con_man: You know what I want? I want cops pulling people over for use of headphones while driving ... I see that stuff all the time and it's INSANE.

Know what? I do that all the time. It makes my commute a lot more enjoyable.

So, basically, fark off.


I concur; your enjoyment while commuting is substantially more important than is the ability to hear the sirens of emergency vehicles.
 
2013-08-29 10:51:38 AM  

Baron Harkonnen: rubi_con_man: You know what I want? I want cops pulling people over for use of headphones while driving ... I see that stuff all the time and it's INSANE.

Know what? I do that all the time. It makes my commute a lot more enjoyable.

So, basically, fark off.


You are robbing yourself of one of the senses that might keep you safe on the road.
 
2013-08-29 10:56:52 AM  

Dimensio: Baron Harkonnen: rubi_con_man: You know what I want? I want cops pulling people over for use of headphones while driving ... I see that stuff all the time and it's INSANE.

Know what? I do that all the time. It makes my commute a lot more enjoyable.

So, basically, fark off.

I concur; your enjoyment while commuting is substantially more important than is the ability to hear the sirens of emergency vehicles.


which would be just as affected by loud music whether on headphones or not. You want a Db level at the ear regulation (sensible), not a visible signs of listening to music regulation (idiotic).

Please rethink your complaint to sound less like "Waaah!" and more like "I think this issue could be better handled by..."
 
2013-08-29 10:58:19 AM  
The issue with headphones is that you may not hear an emergency vehicle. What do deaf people who drive do in that situation? Not get out of the way?

Are you saying deaf people should be banned from driving?
 
2013-08-29 11:00:49 AM  
Attorney here (NJ one to boot).  I'm not certain this would hold up in practice, at least in criminal/municipal court (and even then, any smart attorney would just plead down to a lesser charge).  A civil action might be a better route to prosecute the texter (as opposed to the textee, whose insurance company would take the lead on the case), but this just seems like a cash grab on the part of the state.  Christie has to fund the "Stronger Than the Storm" commercials somehow.
 
2013-08-29 11:03:10 AM  
When driving a car there are many times when the car stops (stoplight, gas station, school bus, etc...). When the car is stopped and you return or generate a text is that negligent driving?
 
2013-08-29 11:04:50 AM  

dready zim: The issue with headphones is that you may not hear an emergency vehicle. What do deaf people who drive do in that situation? Not get out of the way?

Are you saying deaf people should be banned from driving?


I think emergency vehicles also have flashing lights... the sirens are only really intended for warning the blind drivers.
 
2013-08-29 11:09:52 AM  

andyofne: dready zim: The issue with headphones is that you may not hear an emergency vehicle. What do deaf people who drive do in that situation? Not get out of the way?

Are you saying deaf people should be banned from driving?

I think emergency vehicles also have flashing lights... the sirens are only really intended for warning the blind drivers.


Well that`s good, I`d hate to think only the blind drivers would get out of the way! I`m glad someone thought of that eventuality.
 
2013-08-29 11:12:51 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: You are robbing yourself of one of the senses that might keep you safe on the road.


Dimensio: I concur; your enjoyment while commuting is substantially more important than is the ability to hear the sirens of emergency vehicles.


So what you guys are really saying is that you want all car stereos of every kind prohibited by law? Is that correct? Or are you just both idiots with no clear idea of what you're saying, but enjoy that satisfying rush of righteous indignation that comes with a snap judgment?
I bet I know the answer to that one.
 
2013-08-29 11:14:01 AM  

spartacus_prime: Attorney here (NJ one to boot).  I'm not certain this would hold up in practice, at least in criminal/municipal court (and even then, any smart attorney would just plead down to a lesser charge).  A civil action might be a better route to prosecute the texter (as opposed to the textee, whose insurance company would take the lead on the case), but this just seems like a cash grab on the part of the state.  Christie has to fund the "Stronger Than the Storm" commercials somehow.


This was a civil action.
 
2013-08-29 11:15:16 AM  

Baron Harkonnen: HotWingConspiracy: You are robbing yourself of one of the senses that might keep you safe on the road.

Dimensio: I concur; your enjoyment while commuting is substantially more important than is the ability to hear the sirens of emergency vehicles.

So what you guys are really saying is that you want all car stereos of every kind prohibited by law? Is that correct? Or are you just both idiots with no clear idea of what you're saying, but enjoy that satisfying rush of righteous indignation that comes with a snap judgment?
I bet I know the answer to that one.


You're kind of a raging asshole, eh?

There is some daylight between banning radios and not pumping sound directly into your skull, but I get that it's hard for infants to discern these things.
 
2013-08-29 11:16:47 AM  

dready zim: Dimensio: Baron Harkonnen: rubi_con_man: You know what I want? I want cops pulling people over for use of headphones while driving ... I see that stuff all the time and it's INSANE.

Know what? I do that all the time. It makes my commute a lot more enjoyable.

So, basically, fark off.

I concur; your enjoyment while commuting is substantially more important than is the ability to hear the sirens of emergency vehicles.

which would be just as affected by loud music whether on headphones or not. You want a Db level at the ear regulation (sensible), not a visible signs of listening to music regulation (idiotic).

Please rethink your complaint to sound less like "Waaah!" and more like "I think this issue could be better handled by..."


Headphones also dampen external sounds, even when they're not playing music.  So it wouldn't be as simple as measuring music volume at ear.  You'd have to measure sound-proofing of the car, etc.  Or just make a blanket rule against headphones because that's a little more feasible to implement.

dready zim: The issue with headphones is that you may not hear an emergency vehicle. What do deaf people who drive do in that situation? Not get out of the way?


Deaf people tend to have better visual acuity than hearing people.  They're probably still less likely to notice the ambulance than an undistracted hearing driver, but are certainly more likely to notice it than a distracted hearing driver.

/ I wear headphones on my bike all the time.  My plan if I get pulled over for it is to try and convince the cop that I'm deaf and just wear the headphones as an outward indicator to drivers that they shouldn't expect me to hear them.  I do a killer deaf voice impression.
 
2013-08-29 11:21:53 AM  
Hero Tag? Subby is an idiot.
 
2013-08-29 11:23:37 AM  
Still: who writes tickets to the cops for doing the exact same thing..and worse?
 
2013-08-29 11:27:42 AM  

Baron Harkonnen: HotWingConspiracy: You are robbing yourself of one of the senses that might keep you safe on the road.

Dimensio: I concur; your enjoyment while commuting is substantially more important than is the ability to hear the sirens of emergency vehicles.

So what you guys are really saying is that you want all car stereos of every kind prohibited by law? Is that correct? Or are you just both idiots with no clear idea of what you're saying, but enjoy that satisfying rush of righteous indignation that comes with a snap judgment?
I bet I know the answer to that one.


Your comparison is apt, as automobile sound system speakers and headphones block outside sounds to listeners with identical effectiveness.
 
2013-08-29 11:29:09 AM  
Thanks to all the asshats who simply can't refrain from touching themselves  their smart phones while driving, I guarantee that we will start seeing nanny state tech that shuts town texting while in the car.  No one's going to like this but it's what happens when too many morons roam free.
 
2013-08-29 11:31:21 AM  

Odd Bird: Hero?  [DUMBASS] tag for subby and mod


THIS
 
2013-08-29 11:31:27 AM  

Dimensio: Baron Harkonnen: HotWingConspiracy: You are robbing yourself of one of the senses that might keep you safe on the road.

Dimensio: I concur; your enjoyment while commuting is substantially more important than is the ability to hear the sirens of emergency vehicles.

So what you guys are really saying is that you want all car stereos of every kind prohibited by law? Is that correct? Or are you just both idiots with no clear idea of what you're saying, but enjoy that satisfying rush of righteous indignation that comes with a snap judgment?
I bet I know the answer to that one.

Your comparison is apt, as automobile sound system speakers and headphones block outside sounds to listeners with identical effectiveness.


The minor attenuation provided by headphones is irrelevant compared to the masking noise provided by either the speakers or the headphones. In fact, simply having your windows rolled up will block outside sounds better than wearing headphones. So, yes... speakers and headphones do block outside sounds to listeners with identical effectiveness (provided the SPL at the listener is the same).
 
2013-08-29 11:38:53 AM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: stamped human bacon: If you're unable to read a text message then you're similarly unable read any mapping/gps device.  They too must be outlawed..

/stupid

And don't get me started on those "speedometer and tachometer" thingys. Talk about a distraction... they've got those little spinny needles moving all around in front of me when I'm trying to drive.


The Chevy Volt has a video game going on in front of you called keep the green ball in the middle of the range. If you go too fast, the ball moves up the graphic and you know you're not maximizing your power. There's also a ton of other information that rivals any text message. Annoying, really.
 
2013-08-29 11:44:25 AM  

rubi_con_man: You know what I want? I want cops pulling people over for use of headphones while driving ... I see that stuff all the time and it's INSANE.


Your assessment of your own sanity is correct, you are insane for wanting people pulled over for wearing headphones.  Please seek help.
 
2013-08-29 11:50:51 AM  

Turbo Cojones: Now we are getting somewhere.  Let's hope that other states begin to classify those "accidents", which are just as much "accidents" as a guy with a .2 BAL driving 20 miles in the wrong lane on I-95 and hitting a school bus.

I hope that people begin to realize that when you take a bite of Whopper while texting with the other hand and steering with your knees all the while sitting with one foot on the driver's seat with the legs spread (to air out the vag maybe?) that an accident really is not an "accident".

It's NOT a farking La-Z-Boy recliner, douchebags.


Sometimes it is.
 
2013-08-29 11:52:53 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: You're kind of a raging asshole, eh?

There is some daylight between banning radios and not pumping sound directly into your skull, but I get that it's hard for infants to discern these things.


You know what, Susan? You can pretend like you have some sort of super scientific knowledge of stereos and headphones, but the truth is you're just pulling this out of your ass.
"It seems to me that blah blah blah." I get it. You have opinions.
 
2013-08-29 12:06:33 PM  
what we need as a society is another way to blame someone else for our own mistakes. Of course, it's the person who knowingly sent the text not the a**hat who was behind the wheel answering it.

Of course, blaming someone else is all our "representatives" in politics seem to know how to do so this law makes perfect sense to them.

HOW ABOUT SOME PERSONAL FARKING RESPONSIBILITY???

/ morons, all of them.
 
2013-08-29 12:11:34 PM  
So...what happens when someone gets an Amber Alert message while driving?

Is it the kidnapping victim's fault?
 
2013-08-29 12:12:55 PM  

mainstreet62: So...what happens when someone gets an Amber Alert message while driving?

Is it the kidnapping victim's fault?


I predict that butterflies in china will be receiving many tickets very soon.
 
2013-08-29 12:15:17 PM  

vudukungfu: If you are driving and have a cell phone turned on, you are an asshat.


Isn't it time for your nap grandpa? This will probably shock you, but in addition to the ability to make calls and send texts, modern cell phones have gps and the same navigation software that a dedicated gps has. They also enable you to stream music through your stereo using things like Pandora, Google Play etc. so you don't need to suffer through the shiat local radio and all of their commercials. They call these wonderful devices "smart phones." You should get on the Google and look them up.
 
2013-08-29 12:18:52 PM  
In other news subby is a f*cktard. Like I would have any idea what the person I'm texting is doing
 
2013-08-29 12:26:04 PM  

skozlaw: The more you eat the more you fart: Dont look down and get distracted by the speedometer either...

Knowing your speed is part of the driving process, but don't let that stop you from making terrible, brainless analogies.


Then you had better rip that evil stereo and speakers out of your car. They don't have shiat to do with the driving process. Neither do your climate controls for that matter (you should really only get a single button to turn on the defrost).
 
2013-08-29 12:29:18 PM  

FrankenPC: Thanks to all the asshats who simply can't refrain from touching themselves  their smart phones while driving, I guarantee that we will start seeing nanny state tech that shuts town texting while in the car.  No one's going to like this but it's what happens when too many morons roam free.


Which will be followed shortly by a hack to remove such ridiculous restrictions.
 
2013-08-29 12:36:34 PM  
I farking hate people who dick around with their phones while they drive, but this sounds like bullshiat even to me.

Here's all you have to do to keep from distracted by a phone: put it away and don't touch it until you get to your destination and put the car in park. I do it every day. It's not hard.
 
2013-08-29 12:56:31 PM  
So the sender of the text had a lot more money than the receiver in this case?
 
2013-08-29 12:59:14 PM  

Dr J Zoidberg: In other news subby is a f*cktard. Like I would have any idea what the person I'm texting is doing


Subby did not introduce the law, some f*cktard legislator in NJ did that
 
2013-08-29 01:05:31 PM  

monoski: Dr J Zoidberg: In other news subby is a f*cktard. Like I would have any idea what the person I'm texting is doing

Subby did not introduce the law, some f*cktard legislator in NJ did that


Subby decided that this stupid law  was worth a hero tag
 
2013-08-29 01:09:20 PM  

monoski: Subby did not introduce the law, some f*cktard legislator in NJ did that


So, basically, you didn't even bother to RTFA even though you seem to have a very strong opinion on it.
 
2013-08-29 01:16:20 PM  

Baron Harkonnen: HotWingConspiracy: You're kind of a raging asshole, eh?

There is some daylight between banning radios and not pumping sound directly into your skull, but I get that it's hard for infants to discern these things.

You know what, Susan? You can pretend like you have some sort of super scientific knowledge of stereos and headphones, but the truth is you're just pulling this out of your ass.
"It seems to me that blah blah blah." I get it. You have opinions.


Do you always lash out like a baby when someone points out your asshole tendencies?

Cry harder.
 
2013-08-29 01:19:53 PM  
I think humanity is going to look back at the invention of the cell phone as the point when our species nearly destroyed itself.
 
2013-08-29 01:27:06 PM  

skozlaw: I don't see the problem. If it can be proven that the other side participating knows that the person is driving then they are willingly part of the distraction and if that distraction causes a crash they should be held liable for their part.

You can't just do whatever the fark you want and not expect consequences. If you caused a crash because you were sitting in the passenger's seat flailing your arms around in front of the driver like an idiot you'd be held jointly liable, I don't see how this is fundamentally different. If you're a distraction you're a distraction, it doesn't really matter what the mechanism behind your distracting behavior is, only that you knew you were a part of the problem and didn't make any attempt to correct your behavior.


You are a nanny-state statist.  You are everything wrong with modern society in a nut shell.  Please do not have children. Fortunately. other statists like you are in favor of eugenics.
 
2013-08-29 01:29:08 PM  

serial_crusher: Sounds reasonable to me, as long as the proper exceptions are made.  In this case, they were having a multi-text conversation.  If she knew he was driving and continued to engage in the conversation, that's bad.
Now, if I know somebody's driving and send them a single text intended to be read after they get where they're going, that's a different story and I'd better not get in trouble for it.


How about the driver show some responsibility and not answer until they are not driving?

You liberals ban sugar, large sodas, popcorn, salt and choice. You would have it where adults simply are not accountable for their own actions.  You are a child. You are a cancer to society.

/This is what happens when liberals control our failing education system for decades.
 
2013-08-29 02:06:27 PM  
My fiancee does that shiat all the time. Ill IM her;

"Ok, leaving to pick you up from work".

I get there

"Did you stop at X and get Y?"
"Uh, no... didnt know i was supposed to?"
"I texted you right after you left!"
"Yeah, i heard it, I was driving."
"Oh yeah..."
 
2013-08-29 02:09:29 PM  

Nemo's Brother: serial_crusher: Sounds reasonable to me, as long as the proper exceptions are made.  In this case, they were having a multi-text conversation.  If she knew he was driving and continued to engage in the conversation, that's bad.
Now, if I know somebody's driving and send them a single text intended to be read after they get where they're going, that's a different story and I'd better not get in trouble for it.

How about the driver show some responsibility and not answer until they are not driving?

You liberals ban sugar, large sodas, popcorn, salt and choice. You would have it where adults simply are not accountable for their own actions.  You are a child. You are a cancer to society.

/This is what happens when liberals control our failing education system for decades.


You conservatives ban medical privacy for half the population and marriage for a twentieth. I wouldn't throw any stones if I were you.
 
2013-08-29 02:12:39 PM  

Headso: "We hold that the sender of a text message can potentially be liable if an accident is caused by texting, but only if the sender knew or had special reason to know that the recipient would view the text while driving and thus be distracted," the court said.

Ok, so almost nobody would ever been actually charged with this...sounds like yet another pointless law


If you knew that they would check it? What the hell? One of the great things about text messaging is that you don't have to answer right away. It's a faster and more efficient version of sending a damn letter/e-mail. It's entirely reasonable to expect someone to wait until they're not in traffic to look at and/or respond to a text.

vudukungfu: If you are driving and have a cell phone turned on, you are an asshat.


That's a really shortsighted statement. I use my phone to stream and/or play music, podcasts, etc to my car stereo. My phone is also my only GPS, which I window mount when in use. There are perfectly valid reasons to have your phone on when driving.

It's up to the driver to not do anything to distract themselves when in traffic. What that distraction is doesn't matter and it's asinine to single out phones as being completely a bad thing in a car.

I usually drive with 2 phones on me; my personal phone and my work phone. One of them is usually doing one of the things I listed above. Even so I don't check or respond to messages when in traffic and I've never had any close calls due to me being distracted.

Personal responsibility. It's a thing.
 
2013-08-29 02:22:47 PM  
This is why I always ask during cell calls if the person is driving, especially if I know the person I'm talking to has a habit of talking or texting while driving. They know that if I hear any traffic or other car noises I will hang up ASAP, even if right in the middle of a conversation. I ask them the same thing when texting. When I have my phone in the car, I shut it off. No call or text is that important, it can farking wait until I stop the farking car.
 
2013-08-29 02:24:46 PM  

Nemo's Brother: You are a nanny-state statist. You are everything wrong with modern society in a nut shell. Please do not have children. Fortunately. other statists like you are in favor of eugenics.


Out of curiosity, have you ever posted anything that might even be temporarily mistaken for an intelligent thought?
 
2013-08-29 02:42:45 PM  

Theaetetus: Nemo's Brother: serial_crusher: Sounds reasonable to me, as long as the proper exceptions are made.  In this case, they were having a multi-text conversation.  If she knew he was driving and continued to engage in the conversation, that's bad.
Now, if I know somebody's driving and send them a single text intended to be read after they get where they're going, that's a different story and I'd better not get in trouble for it.

How about the driver show some responsibility and not answer until they are not driving?

You liberals ban sugar, large sodas, popcorn, salt and choice. You would have it where adults simply are not accountable for their own actions.  You are a child. You are a cancer to society.

/This is what happens when liberals control our failing education system for decades.

You conservatives ban medical privacy for half the population and marriage for a twentieth. I wouldn't throw any stones if I were you.


I'm not pro-texting-while-driving.  I'm pro-choice-of-whether-or-not-to-text-while-driving!
 
2013-08-29 03:02:05 PM  
This is completely insane.  The legal system at its worst.

The lawyer who thought of naming the text originator in the lawsuit is epitome of the stereotypical vile garbage all the jokes come from.
 
2013-08-29 03:02:57 PM  

rewind2846: This is why I always ask during cell calls if the person is driving, especially if I know the person I'm talking to has a habit of talking or texting while driving. They know that if I hear any traffic or other car noises I will hang up ASAP, even if right in the middle of a conversation. I ask them the same thing when texting. When I have my phone in the car, I shut it off. No call or text is that important, it can farking wait until I stop the farking car.


What if your text asking if they are driving causes the wreck?
 
2013-08-29 04:11:38 PM  

Dirtybird971: what we need as a society is another way to blame someone else for our own mistakes. Of course, it's the person who knowingly sent the text not the a**hat who was behind the wheel answering it.

Of course, blaming someone else is all our "representatives" in politics seem to know how to do so this law makes perfect sense to them.

HOW ABOUT SOME PERSONAL FARKING RESPONSIBILITY???

/ morons, all of them.


And just what do you have against 12 step plans to total responsibility abrogation?
'Tween those and some real law enforcement with zero tolerance, people WILL learn their lesson.

And then we can all feel safe.
 
Displayed 50 of 153 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report