Text Messaging May Be Worse Than Drunk Driving ~
KTLA.com reports that studies show driving while texting is more dangerous than driving under the influence. Recent fatalities involving texting while driving occurred in 2007 when a New York high schooler and her for fellow cheerleaders were killed due to her slamming head-on into a truck, killing all of them. The 2008 Chatsworth train collision, in which 25 people died and more than 100 were injured, was officially attributed to the engineer of the Metrolink commuter train being distracted by text messaging.
Unfortunately, the laws applicable to the problem of texting while driving reflect vital misunderstandings about why cell phone use combined with a moving vehicle can be so deadly. This was a major topic at the Transportation Department's Distracted Driving Summit on September 21, 2010.
Studies reflect that texting while driving can be more dangerous than driving while swigging Jack Daniels. In a 2009 survey, Car and Driver magazine tested two of its staffers under a variety of conditions. It found that on average, driving at 70 mph, one man braking suddenly while legally drunk (0.08 blood alcohol content) traveled 4 feet beyond his baseline performance. However, when reading an e-mail while driving sober, he traveled 36 feet beyond the baseline result and 70 feet while sending a text. In the worst case - while texting - he traveled 319 feet before stopping.
66% of respondents to a 2007 Harris Interactive poll admitted they've texted while driving, even as 89% said it should be banned.
Not to mention that our youngest drivers, who already are in far more than their share of roadway accidents and deaths, text the most, according to government and insurance industry reports.
Texting While Driving & Accidents
Texting and driving is not only dangerous, it's against the law in California. Senate Bill 28, enacted on September 24, 2008, "prohibits a person from driving a motor vehicle while using an electronic wireless communications device to write, send, or read a text-based communication."
New legislation has been introduced that could increase the fines for sending text messages and talking on handheld cell phones while driving. On June 23, 2010, California Senate Bill 1475 was passed, which would add one point to a driver's driving record.
The bill also strengthens California's hands-free and no-texting laws for motorists. The new law also extends to bicyclists. SB 1475 now moves to the State Assembly for consideration.
We all know about the dangers associated with texting while driving. Even Oprah Winfrey has joined the cause, ending each of her shows with a request that her viewers sign her pledge to not text and drive. It would be great to see ALL states implement a ban on texting while driving. Many lives would hopefully be saved and many auto accidents would probably be prevented.
Sources: Insurance Institute For Highway Safety, Highway Loss Data Institute, KTLA News.com
Continue reading "Text Messaging May Be Worse Than Drunk Driving ~" »
Drunk driving is one of the leading causes of auto accidents in the United States. That is why all fifty states and the District of Columbia have enacted strict drunk driving laws to deter impaired driving and punish offenders. Generally, the offense of drunk driving is defined as the operation, control, or manipulation of a vehicle, in a place accessible to the public, while under the influence of an intoxicating substance, such as alcohol or drugs. A blood alcohol concentration (BAC) level at or above .08% constitutes "per se" drunk driving in all fifty states, regardless of whether the driver's control over the vehicle is actually diminished by the presence of intoxicants in his or her blood.
The following is a re-print of a guest blog from
California has a strict liability dog bite statute which states that the owner of a dog is liable for damages inflicted by his/her dog if it bites a person who is either in a public place or lawfully in a private place, including on or near the property of the owner of the dog, regardless of the former viciousness of the dog or the owner's knowledge of such viciousness (California Civil Code Section 3342).





