[LordOpie]

Why ruin the life of two people? One is horrible enough.

people used to say that about driving drunk.

 

[luken8r]

Sure, take his lisence away. But to throw someone in jail for 20 years? No way. The kid made an awful mistake,
he shouldn't pay for it for the rest of his life.

RIP

Lets replace the cellphone with booze. If you are driving whilst drunk, you have the same reaction time and general awareness as someone on a cellphone.
If the kid was DUI and killed the guy, he would be put away for a while; just because he was on his phone he gets off?

He killed someone, it wasnt his phone. If youre drunk, you shouldnt drive; same with cell phoning. He should rot in jail.

 

[narlus]

i agree that cell phones are a definite distraction when driving (and i've been guilty of this too), but if there are laws put into place, they will definitely be another unenforceable law.

 

[Echo]

Sure, take his lisence away. But to throw someone in jail for 20 years? No way. The kid made an awful mistake, he shouldn't pay for it for the rest of his life.

RIP

Jim Price paid for this kid's mistake with his life. Jim Price's family is paying for this kid's mistake for the rest of their lives. I don't understand why you think this kid should get off easy.

 

[luken8r]

i agree that cell phones are a definite distraction when driving (and i've been guilty of this too), but if there are laws put into place, they will definitely be another unenforceable law.

Its illegal in NY as well as several towns in MA, however I do agree that is is virtually uninforcable. A cop coulnt be parked at the side of the road with his radar gun and pick people out with cell phones, they would have to be in traffic and see them in action. Same as DUI

 

[SkaredShtles]

i agree that cell phones are a definite distraction when driving (and i've been guilty of this too), but if there are laws put into place, they will definitely be another unenforceable law.

There are already laws in place. They're generally "careless" or "reckless" driving violations. I think the police should be able to pull anyone over who is fu**ing around with their phone and cite them for careless driving. If they cause an accident and were on the phone, toss reckless at them. Out here reckless driving is a $hitload of points.

 

[LordOpie]

Jim Price paid for this kid's mistake with his life. Jim Price's family is paying for this kid's mistake for the rest of their lives. I don't understand why you think this kid should get off easy.

The answer is simple...

If this kid pays the proper price, then all kids will be required to act and think a little more responsibly. Kids don't want to be held responsible to that level for a "mistake".

It's the same with guns... when a kid shoots his friend cuz the parent didn't lock up his gun properly, the parent doesn't want to go to jail for "someone" else's "mistake". Replace gun with pitbull or anything similar.

It was just a mistake.

 

[narlus]

There are already laws in place. They're generally "careless" or "reckless" driving violations. I think the police should be able to pull anyone over who is fu**ing around with their phone and cite them for careless driving. If they cause an accident and were on the phone, toss reckless at them. Out here reckless driving is a $hitload of points.

and if anyone is indicted on these charges, i'd bet 99% are reactionary rather than preventative (ie, after a crash/accident/injury has occurred).

 

[Echo]

The answer is simple...

If this kid pays the proper price, then all kids will be required to act and think a little more responsibly. Kids don't want to be held responsible to that level for a "mistake".

It's the same with guns... when a kid shoots his friend cuz the parent didn't lock up his gun properly, the parent doesn't want to go to jail for "someone" else's "mistake". Replace gun with pitbull or anything similar.

It was just a mistake.

I don't understand the reasoning in your example. This wasn't someone else's mistake.

And involuntary manslaughter is a crime.

 

[Wumpus]

Colorado Law:

Felony Minimum Sentence ----- Maximum Sentence

Class 1 Life imprisonment ------ Death

Class 2 8 years / 5,000 dollar fine ---- 24 years / 1,000,000 dollar fine

Class 3 4 years / 3,000 dollar fine ---- 12 years / 750,000 dollar fine

Class 4 2 years / 2,000 dollar fine ---- 6 years / 500,000 dollar fine

Class 5 1 year / 1,000 dollar fine ---- 3 years / 100,000 dollar fine

Class 6 1 year / 1, 000 dollar fine ---- 18 months / 100,000 dollar fine


Misdemeanor

Class 1 6 months / 500 dollar fine or both ---- 18 months / 5,000 dollar fine or both

Class 2 3 months / 250 dollar fine or both ---- 1 year / 1,000 dollar fine or both

Class 3 Fifty dollar fine ---- 6 months / 750 dollar fine or both


Petty Offenses


Class 1 6 months / 500 dollars or both

Class 2 Specified in section defining the offense

 

[LordOpie]

I don't understand the reasoning in your example. This wasn't someone else's mistake.

sorry, my post was a bit convoluted. Basically, I'm saying people want to avoid responsibility. While it wasn't someone else, it was something else. Eh, just ignore me, I'll figure it out later

 

[hooples3]

i think that too many of these accidents happen and that its the vivtim that really only gets hurt. If the laws were more firm and this kid does some serious time and let him suffer for what he did it would be better all around. This way a kid would think twice while driving.. and pay attention to the road not his cell phone. If you keep giving slaps on the wrist it becomes no big deal... tell that to the family of the guy that got killed.

 

[SkaredShtles]

I think that a *mandatory* result of a crime like this should be revocation of driving priveleges for life, in addition to some prison time.

 

[I Are Baboon]

I think the kid should get at least five years in prison, even if it's minimum security prison (I don't imagine maximum security would really be necessary).

The minimum age to start drivers education should be 18. 16/17 year olds shouldn't be driving.

 

[LordOpie]

The minimum age to start drivers education should be 18. 16/17 year olds shouldn't be driving.

If you think that, then driving tests should be harder and the elderly shouldn't be cut any slack.

 

[SkaredShtles]

I think the kid should get at least five years in prison, even if it's minimum security prison (I don't imagine maximum security would really be necessary).

The minimum age to start drivers education should be 18. 16/17 year olds shouldn't be driving.

I disagree - 16/17 year olds should be driving, but not by themselves or with friends. Kids should have a mandatory 2 year "learner's permit" during which they can drive with another licensed adult in the car. Actually, it should only be with a licensed adult guardian/parent.

At 18 they should be given a difficult road test.

And they should be taught that the left lanes on an express way are for *PASSING* only. :mumble:

 

[Echo]

If you think that, then driving tests should be harder and the elderly shouldn't be cut any slack.

Write it down, we agree

 

[I Are Baboon]

18, yo.

 

[sanjuro]

i agree that cell phones are a definite distraction when driving (and i've been guilty of this too), but if there are laws put into place, they will definitely be another unenforceable law.

I believe it is an after-the-fact law, similar to the seatbelt law. It is rare to be pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt, but if you get into an accident or pulled over for another reason, this can be tacked on.

The cell phone is the same way. For example, someone gets into an accident while on the cell phone. That person is now liable because he/she gets a ticket for being on the cell phone.

 

[narlus]

I believe it is an after-the-fact law, similar to the seatbelt law. It is rare to be pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt, but if you get into an accident or pulled over for another reason, this can be tacked on.

The cell phone is the same way. For example, someone gets into an accident while on the cell phone. That person is now liable because he/she gets a ticket for being on the cell phone.

that's my point; it's a reactionary law, and doesn't help the poor schmoe who got mowed over. a better approach would be a preventative one.

 

[luken8r]

I believe it is an after-the-fact law, similar to the seatbelt law. It is rare to be pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt

Ive been pulled over for not wearing my seatbelt. It was one of the only times that I didnt wear it too. I had this big, honking Ram Charger in high school and the seatbelt didnt retract properly so it was always hanging down, so I didnt like to wear it all that often. Sure enough, I was driving up the on-ramp on the highway and a cop pulled me over just for that. The dude already had the ticket written up, I didnt even know why I got pulled over until he walked up the the window and said "Son, wear your belt. Heres your ticket" and walked off.

 

[berkshire_rider]

How about not using the phone at all while driving unless you absolutely have to? "Practice" or not, you cannot concentrate as well if you're fiddling with a phone or talking on one.

Or, maybe using this grand new feature called voice mail? It's painfully easy to spot the drivers on the road on the phone.

 

[OGRipper]

Trying to text message while driving is so stupid that if you kill someone as a result, you should be held to the same standard as it you intentionally mowed somebody down for kicks. 20 years is not enough. The notion that he could get less than 5 years for KILLING SOMEONE makes me sick.

A mistake? Boo-friggin-hoo! WTF is wrong with some of you people? Does it have to hit closer to home for you to see that some mistakes are not forgivable? And I don't care if the family has announced forgiveness. Some people use forgiveness to deal with their grief. I am not a religious person and I don't think this happened "for a reason" or that forgiveness will make it all right.

I would like to see what the text message was about. Must have been pretty important. I'm sure it was worth a life.

Yeesh, maybe the phone companies should be required to make phones that dismantle when in transit or something. I don't like the idea but people are obviously too stupid to control themselves.

 

[The Kadvang]

I'm at school so I can't respond in depth but all I have to say is, you cannot compare talking on a celllphone while driving to driving drunk. One is legal and stupid, while the other is idiotic and illegal.

Once again, my condolences to his family.

 

[LordOpie]

I'm at school so I can't respond in depth but all I have to say is, you cannot compare talking on a celllphone while driving to driving drunk. One is legal and stupid, while the other is idiotic and illegal.

Driving drunk was legal at one point.

And frankly, killing someone cuz you were texting is more offensive than drunk driving. You're clear thinking enough to realize that it's dangerous and stupid.

You're defending the kid cuz you figure you'll do something stupid soon and want to have a precendent to avoid jail time.

 

[OGRipper]

Kadvang, the only difference is that one is illegal. Since when has that been where you draw the line? Maybe you can fill us in when you're driving home...

 

[splat]

You're defending the kid cuz you figure you'll do something stupid soon and want to have a precendent to avoid jail time.

Either that or he doesn't relize that there is real resonsibility with driving a car.

 

[Wumpus]

Cell phone use while driving:

Colorado -- Teens with restricted licenses are banned - but can only be stopped for another violation first.

Does the use of a cell phone while driving increase crash risk?
A recent study found that the risk of collision when using a cell phone was four times higher than the risk when a cell phone was not being used. Crash risk was higher both for units that allowed the hands to be free and hand-held units. Other studies have shown that drivers who use cell phones while driving have higher crash rates, even if the use of a cell phone is not implicated in the crash.

Source: Redelmeier, D. A. and Tibshirani R. J. 1997. Association between Cellular-Telephone Calls and Motor Vehicle Collisions. The New England Journal of Medicine 336 (7).

Source: Laberge-Nadeau, C. et. al. 2002. Wireless telephones and the risk of road crashes. Presented at the 6th World Conference on Injury Prevention and Control. Montreal, Quebec. May, 2002.

Source: Wilson, J., Fong, M. & Cooper, P. 2002. Collision and violation involvement of drivers who use cellular telephones. Presented at the 6th World Conference on Injury Prevention and Control. Montreal, Quebec. May, 2002.

 

[hooples3]

I'm at school so I can't respond in depth but all I have to say is, you cannot compare talking on a celllphone while driving to driving drunk. One is legal and stupid, while the other is idiotic and illegal.

Once again, my condolences to his family.

both are irresponsable... be responsable for your actions..

 

[sanjuro]

Ive been pulled over for not wearing my seatbelt. It was one of the only times that I didnt wear it too. I had this big, honking Ram Charger in high school and the seatbelt didnt retract properly so it was always hanging down, so I didnt like to wear it all that often. Sure enough, I was driving up the on-ramp on the highway and a cop pulled me over just for that. The dude already had the ticket written up, I didnt even know why I got pulled over until he walked up the the window and said "Son, wear your belt. Heres your ticket" and walked off.

You're right. You definitely can be pulled over for no seatbelt, as well as chatting on the phone (in states with the law).

 

[sanjuro]

I'm at school so I can't respond in depth but all I have to say is, you cannot compare talking on a celllphone while driving to driving drunk. One is legal and stupid, while the other is idiotic and illegal.

Once again, my condolences to his family.

I agree, there is a huge difference between getting behind the wheel drunk vs being chatty.

However, I do think he should be prosecuted to fullest extent, whether it is a year or 5 years. The dude killed someone while text messaging!

 

[splat]

One thing that has not been said , that the Punishment not only does it Punish the offeneder , but it is also to send a Message and be a deterent to others.

you know if some of his classmates see him get off with a slap on the wrist ,they won't think twice before they text while driving , but if they see him doing time , they may think twice .

 

[The Kadvang]

You're defending the kid cuz you figure you'll do something stupid soon and want to have a precendent to avoid jail time.

Personal attacks are dope. You don't know me so shut the **** up.

 

[The Kadvang]

Kadvang, the only difference is that one is illegal. Since when has that been where you draw the line? Maybe you can fill us in when you're driving home...

I won't lie and say I obey the law in all things because I definitely don't. But I do it responsibly. What that kid did was irresponsible and idiotic to the extreme, I just don't feel he should spend 20 years in jail for it.

 

[The Kadvang]

Either that or he doesn't relize that there is real resonsibility with driving a car.

I appreciate the insult to my intelligence.

 

[The Kadvang]

However, I do think he should be prosecuted to fullest extent, whether it is a year or 5 years. The dude killed someone while text messaging!

I agree. All I feel is that 20 years is defintely excessive.

 

[The Kadvang]

So I'm right then, huh?

Happy killing!

Sure. Elaborate please, as you have never met me. Lets re-read your first post.

You're defending the kid cuz you figure you'll do something stupid soon and want to have a precendent to avoid jail time.

If you were serious you are an idiot. Maybe it was just a really, really bad joke?

 

[splat]

You never answeared the Deterent argument and what type of message it sends to others.

 

[The Kadvang]

You never answeared the Deterent argument and what type of message it sends to others.

Missed it, hold up a second.

 

[The Kadvang]

First:

A 17-year-old likely will face misdemeanor charges after allegedly losing control of his car while text messaging and hitting a bicyclist.

or

The driver could face a charge of careless driving resulting in death, Stanton said. Under Colorado law, the teen could face up to a year in prison.

Which is it? That is a pretty wide range of punishment.

However,

One thing that has not been said , that the Punishment not only does it Punish the offeneder , but it is also to send a Message and be a deterent to others.

you know if some of his classmates see him get off with a slap on the wrist ,they won't think twice before they text while driving , but if they see him doing time , they may think twice .

The very fact I read this article has made me vow to never talk on my cellphone again while I drive: regardless of his punishment, the kid took a life. That is horrifying in itself. That in itself is enough deterrent, for me at least.

Secondly, a year in prison on paper is just a slap on the wrist, in the real world it is far more than that. Even that little would destroy the vestiges of the kids childhood. He deserves it. But that jail time is a deterrent far disproportionate to its size. The idea of spending one year in jail scares the absolute sh1t out of me, as it does to almost everyone. If I heard a classmate went to jail for something as seemingly innocent, however idiotic as it was, as text messaging, it would certainly make me think twice. One year is doing time, however short it may seem to you adults. He should do time for what he did. But even one or certainly five years is a long, long time to sit in a cell and reflect on what you have done.