Spyderco Forums

The Deacon wrote:That, IMHO, would be carrying things too far. Nothing forces the recipient to open and read an incoming text message. By that standard then there'd be an equal case for suing billboard advertisers and highway departments.

Clip wrote:Agreed, it's the driver's choice to answer or not.

In this case, the the plaintiff made the case that the sender knew the driver was behind the wheel when the message was sent. It's a stretch, but at the very least the sender was forced to get pay for an attorney to put up a defense and face the consequences of her actions.

Pinetreebbs wrote:...face the consequences of her actions.

I'm still of the opinion that she shouldn't have been included. By that measure, why not drag the phone maker into it, as well as the service provider? She wouldn't have been able to send the message had he not purchased a device and service plan to receive the message.

What town are you in? High or Low country? If I'm on the bike and the tailgating is bad I'll pull over for physics sake, although I did that about a week ago and as the guy drove passed he flipped me off! :p

They really need to start doing something about the whole "distracted driving" thing. People saying "it infringes on our freedoms or rights" must forget that driving is not a right it's a privilege. You don't get to make your own rules up. I get so pissed off when I see people around me (while driving) doing all kinds of other stuff. I don't care how good you think you are at doing it, you're not. You will eventually hurt or kill someone. I'm glad this guy has been convicted and will do time.

I have an iPhone and I don't text, read email, or anything else while driving. It's just too dangerous. I even find myself turning off the radio when I get into major FUBAR traffic situations.

People need to quit driving and acting like their car is another place to "chill out".

Mythbusters even confirmed that people talking on their cell phone while driving are more dangerous than drunk drivers.

I don't want/need anyone taking the life of my daughter or wife because they just had to post a cool picture to facebook while driving. Screw that.

thog94 wrote:I purposely bump into those people because they can't bother to look up and expect everyone else to move.

As do I. :)

Clip wrote:I'm still of the opinion that she shouldn't have been included. By that measure, why not drag the phone maker into it, as well as the service provider? She wouldn't have been able to send the message had he not purchased a device and service plan to receive the message.

Easy, unlike the text sender in this case, the phone maker has no idea anyone using their product might be driving, not the same conditions.

The problem isn't access to technology, it's that people with absolutely no common sense have access to the technology.

Pinetreebbs wrote:Easy, unlike the text sender in this case, the phone maker has no idea anyone using their product might be driving, not the same conditions.

Still asinine to sue the sender. Text message is there and you can read and reply anytime you wish, like voice messages, it's nothing more than rabid lawyer biting anyone he can to pad his wallet.

David Lowry wrote: People saying "it infringes on our freedoms or rights" must forget that driving is not a right it's a privilege. You don't get to make your own rules up.

Just because the Government frames it that way doesn't make it true. Driving is a privilege that was afforded by the inventor of the automobile. Why wouldn't driving be a right? Do we not have the right to be able to transport ourselves? Isn't buying a car still legal in this country? The Government mandates our driving with taxes and registrations, fees, insurances and inspections. They charge us to drive on the roads, to upkeep the roads and to build new ones. Are you really sure that driving is our "privilege"?

jzmtl wrote:Still asinine to sue the sender. Text message is there and you can read and reply anytime you wish, like voice messages, it's nothing more than rabid lawyer biting anyone he can to pad his wallet.

The driver already admitted his fault and plead guilty. His insurance was probably inadequate to cover the losses of his victims, each losing a leg. At that point their attorney would go after anyone that might share any blame. Keep in mind he was not able to prove she knew the driver was in his car at time she was sending texts back and forth.

It's been done before when party hosts and bars server alcohol to obviously already intoxicated people that later drive and have an accident. They are not behind the wheel but they contributed to the driver's impairment knowing they would be driving.

Been done before doesn't make it right, it doesn't matter if she knew the other party is driving or not, just out of control lawyers who would do anything for a buck.

Pinetreebbs wrote:Easy, unlike the text sender in this case, the phone maker has no idea anyone using their product might be driving, not the same conditions.

AND

Keep in mind he was not able to prove she knew the driver was in his car at time she was sending texts back and forth.

It's been done before when party hosts and bars server alcohol to obviously people that later drive and have an accident. They are not behind the wheel but they contributed to the driver's impairment knowing they would be driving.

I'll admit that I don't know the circumstances and I can't make that call. I'm not sure if the sender was told prior to the driver driving or by the driver during that he was, in fact, driving. Still, I'm of the opinion that the responsibility lies with the driver alone. Lawyers are another matter, some of them can't be controlled :)

I can agree that party hosts should be responsible when underage guests are served alcohol and later drive, but I think it's a gray area when everyone is of legal age. It is the host's or the bar's responsibility to cut someone off if they've had enough and arrange for them to sober up or to arrange transportation, but I think their responsibility ends at the door. In some ways, I wonder if I prefer people to have common sense and not try to pass the buck,or if it's just me trying to wash my hands of the situation.

FroOchie wrote:Just because the Government frames it that way doesn't make it true. Driving is a privilege that was afforded by the inventor of the automobile. Why wouldn't driving be a right? Do we not have the right to be able to transport ourselves? Isn't buying a car still legal in this country? The Government mandates our driving with taxes and registrations, fees, insurances and inspections. They charge us to drive on the roads, to upkeep the roads and to build new ones. Are you really sure that driving is our "privilege"?

Dude. Driving IS NOT a right. Yes it's a privilege. The state gives you a drivers license and you must obey the rules. If you don't, you get it removed. Not a right. People that think driving is a right are part of the problem.

it's where the buck stops that seems to be in question for some though. In society we've begun to feel we have no personal responsibility at times.

David Lowry wrote:They really need to start doing something about the whole "distracted driving" thing. People saying "it infringes on our freedoms or rights" must forget that driving is not a right it's a privilege. You don't get to make your own rules up. I get so pissed off when I see people around me (while driving) doing all kinds of other stuff. I don't care how good you think you are at doing it, you're not. You will eventually hurt or kill someone. I'm glad this guy has been convicted and will do time.

I have an iPhone and I don't text, read email, or anything else while driving. It's just too dangerous. I even find myself turning off the radio when I get into major FUBAR traffic situations.

People need to quit driving and acting like their car is another place to "chill out".

Mythbusters even confirmed that people talking on their cell phone while driving are more dangerous than drunk drivers.

I don't want/need anyone taking the life of my daughter or wife because they just had to post a cool picture to facebook while driving. Screw that.

I have to agree with you that people should not do the things they do while driving, myself included. I have a bluetooth set but even that is distracting. Besides texting there are too many distractions that people do that gets them or worse, others into serious trouble.

I have to disagree with driving is a privilege. It is a right to travel (i.e. walk, car, train, plane, boat) that the government has made people believe is a privilege. There are too many people that think cutting you off is their right or texting while driving is their right but that isn't the same as the right to travel.

================

cubsfan1969 wrote:I'm convinced Colorado has the worst drivers. If they are not distracted, then they tailgate you NASCAR drafting style. This is one state for sure you need uninsured motorist insurance!

Anonymous wrote:I don't know, I originally lived in Austin, TX and they were pretty bad. I've seen a few cases where the saying "if you don't like my driving...get off the sidewalk" fits. Although, I live in a small Colorado town and haven't ventured out to other places yet.

If you think those places have bad drives go to China. I've been to a city called Xian in northern China and it is just downright scary and amazing at the same time. I've been all over Canada and the U.S. and have never seen drivers as crazy as the ones there. Lets just say stop lights are a suggestion, not a rule. I was afraid to cross the street the first day I was there :)

It's not a right just like its not a right to own a Spyderco. If you have financial means to buy the good and the juvenile maturity and reflexes of a 90 year old to pass a drivers test you can get a license. That allows you to partake in the activity until you prove yourself not competent. Just think about tax dollars spent on collision cleanup and rehabilitating people injured but lacking proper medical.

Our public transportation sucks. Seriously, America's previous generations did a ton right but hosed us in mass transit. Still you can get to work on a bus and walk a block to/from the station. It's a fraction of the cost, a fraction of the danger, and should be considered more (especially for broke people).

I love this country and I didn't mean to mis-quote anyone. I was rear ended by a suburban last year and am done with crap drivers. I you can't avoid stationary objects with power brakes and abs...get off the road.

David Lowry wrote:Dude. Driving IS NOT a right. Yes it's a privilege. The state gives you a drivers license and you must obey the rules. If you don't, you get it removed. Not a right. People that think driving is a right are part of the problem.

I understand that the Government says it's a privilege as I understand you're taking their word without question. What I'm saying is that you should question the premise of that whole scenario.