Woman Looking at Apple Watch Found Guilty of Distracted Driving

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by Megalith, Jun 3, 2018.

  1. KarsusTG

    KarsusTG 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,012
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Dude, the definition of driving is literally, operating the vehicle. Is it running with you in it? You are by definition driving...

    How could anyone possibly be against driving drunk or high, but completely ok traveling hundreds of yards at ludicrous speeds or sitting still in the middle of a road with hundreds of thousands of pounds of lethal steel rolling past them while being completely oblivious to the world. It's such an unbelievably arrogant sense of security.
     
    MrGuvernment and auntjemima like this.
  2. MMitch

    MMitch Gawd

    Messages:
    775
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    Also, if the car is in the middle of the road, even at a red light, you're driving... PARK to play with your junk :)
     
    MrGuvernment likes this.
  3. M76

    M76 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,478
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    So according to you, if say your car brakes down at a red light and you cannot move it on green, then you're responsible if anyone plows into you? Is that correct?

    Pfff, you're completely off the rails with the ludicrous adjectives. How can anyone be rolling past you at "ludicrous" speeds at a red light?
     
  4. MMitch

    MMitch Gawd

    Messages:
    775
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    No, the vehicle hitting your rear is responsible.
    Let's use meaningless comparison like this then, would it be ok if I parked my car and toyed with my cellphone for hours in front of your driveway and not move because hey I can do it even if you need to get out with your car ?

    Don't twist everything, it's irresponsible to do it end of story.
     
  5. KarsusTG

    KarsusTG 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,012
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    I don't understand how you got that from my post... If you are stopped at an intersection with a light, I would assume there is a green light for the cross traffic... Or control lights for the turn lanes... I have never seen an intersection where it was just 4 red lights that just never change... It's ridiculous that you even came to that conclusion.
     
    MrGuvernment likes this.
  6. Dekoth-E-

    Dekoth-E- [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,599
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    You are the one twisting things here Bud. Just because your doing something other than staring strait ahead with both hands on the wheel doesn't automatically mean you aren't paying attention and are going to miss the light. Sorry but not all of us are shitty drivers. Punish the shitty ones and leave the rest of the fuck alone with overreaching, poorly written nanny bullshit laws that treat everyone like children.
     
  7. KarsusTG

    KarsusTG 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,012
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    lol, that is not how human vision works. You can only focus on one thing.. The rest of your vision is decreasingly accurate / coarse. That is why you cannot read a book with your peripheral vision, and your peripheral vision has terrible depth perception. Movement will draw your focus, which is why you wiggle your mouse when you lose it on large screens/multi monitor setups..

    Also, there is no such thing as multi tasking. You are just changing your focus from one thing to the next. Being a better driver doesn't give you the ability to do multiple things at once, its just not the way humans are built.

    I am with you when it comes to poorly written laws, but I have been doing the emt thing again for a while and holy crap, nearly every car accident is primarily or partly because of the GD phones.

    Here is a good one that happens EVERY day. Commuting down the freeway and some jackass jumps lanes like the jackass always does. Traffic behind him brakes, increasingly harder the further down the line it goes. The other jackass on the phone doesn't see the line of cars have dramatically decreased in speed until it's too late to stop in time. Bam, rear ended someone on the freeway. Every single day without fail, at least one bad enough to call in a bus just in our area on my shift.

    Here is one I responded to a few weeks ago. Mom was driving and texting boyfriend after picking up the kid. She "didn't see the light" and blew through an intersection and got hit by an acura. T-boned at ~35mph in a mini van that rolls over. Kid in back seat dies on the way to the hospital, driver of acura rushed and arrives in critical condition. She's hospitalized in stable condition, and will not only have to deal with the loss of her kid, but undoubtedly charged when she gets out of the hospital. The police found her cell phone broken, but functional. The text the kid died for was "wwd tnite". Why did a kid have to die for that? The shit is out of control.
     
    Uvaman2, MrGuvernment and GoldenTiger like this.
  8. Dekoth-E-

    Dekoth-E- [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,599
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    I'm not arguing against moving violations. I'm arguing against stupid shit like this thread. I have over 3/4 of a million miles logged in my life. In that time I have exactly zero at fault accidents and zero moving violations. I've also seen and dodged plenty of stupid shit both pre and post cell phones. Again, no issues at all with texting while driving laws. Punishments in parked cars be it a traffic light or parking lot is just plain nanny state nonsense.
     
  9. MMitch

    MMitch Gawd

    Messages:
    775
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    I understand and agree with you but you know how people are right ? It will start with oh it's not moving... and then oh it's only 5km/h ... and then ahh the heck I'm a good driver. Those nanny laws are because most people can't do s... by themselves and need to be directed. Yes it's a pain to pay the price for them but oh well.. we have to.

    Here they slowed down roads from 50km/h to 30km/h in most of the city .. WTF !? Pisses me of but hey it seems some people can't drive properly and some can't bother not jaywalking.

    Also, pisses me off when I miss a green light because the car is not moving lol (That's why I don't want them to play with their phones on red light, I know nobody will get killed by a non-moving car).
     
    MrGuvernment likes this.
  10. MrGuvernment

    MrGuvernment [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    19,169
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    You are not parked when your at a traffic light, you are stopped. Sure, you are a great driver, and how many people have said that as well who have now caused accidents cause they are on their phone, all it takes is a few seconds. Your driving your focus needs to be on the road and those around you, not staring into a device taking your complete attention away from that.

    One example would be if something happens while your stopped but because your busy looking at your phone you can not react and now you end up dead, sure it is not your fault, but perhaps if you were aware of what was going on, you could of reacted to save your life or not become injured..
     
  11. Dekoth-E-

    Dekoth-E- [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,599
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    I don't live my life in fear of unlikely scenarios. I also don't respect anyone who does.
     
  12. MMitch

    MMitch Gawd

    Messages:
    775
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    You never lost someone close because of this type of attitude right ?
     
  13. Dekoth-E-

    Dekoth-E- [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,599
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    No, because my attitude has nothing to do with it. Further laws that address situations that have about the same odds as winning the lottery are poor laws. You cannot and you should not legislate every possible scenario. Sorry but I don't want to live in the kind of world where we have no freedom all in the name of "keeping people safe". At a certain point you have to grow up and accept the fact that sometimes bad shit happens and no amount of law passing is ever going to change it.
     
  14. MMitch

    MMitch Gawd

    Messages:
    775
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    I meant losing someone because of an incident caused by someone with a careless attitude but you clearly don't understand and minimize those people's lost in the name of checking facebook at a red light ?
    Those stupid laws are written for people with no common sense. You need to grow up.

    Wasting my time here, oh light turned green, need to press on the gas.
     
    Uvaman2 likes this.
  15. Exavior

    Exavior [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,657
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    Define unlikely? My sister used to hit people every other month because of stuff like this. She would stop at a light and start playing with the radio, wouldn't realize she lifted her foot some and would roll into the car in front of her. The first 3 years she had a license did this about 10 times. Never caused any damage luckily. Years later when she got a phone and did it a few mores times. Once started to roll in front of a semi when she started to roll into an intersection. So this is an issue for some people, even if it isn't for you.
     
  16. Hagrid

    Hagrid [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,456
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    What about looking at your radio or dash?
     
  17. auntjemima

    auntjemima [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,037
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2014
    Legally, you are not allowed to adjust your radio while driving either. You are expected to set it before driving.
     
  18. Dekoth-E-

    Dekoth-E- [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,599
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    The only one who needs to grow up here is you. It is a far more complex subject than "checking stupidbook at a stoplight". You are using the same dumb argument the anti gun nutters use. " well person a can't be trusted so instead of addressing the real problem let's use a bandaid fix ". The real problem is driving is treated like a right in this country and licenses are issued to people with piss poor training and next to no driving skills. Combine that with the problem that it is damn hard to lose that license once you have it and you have a recipe for what we have today. Under qualified drivers running around in half ton death machines with zero concept at how bad they are.

    Your sister is a shit driver and should have had her license revoked. That is the core problem here, as I've mentioned. Driving is treated to lightly in this country. Again her problem like most people this kind of crap legislation targets had the problem before cell phones. If it isn't the phone it's the radio, if it isn't radio it's a book or food or putting on make-up or any one of a thousand stupid things I've seen people do while driving. Laws like this don't fix the problem, they don't even remotely address the problem. They are just nanny state bullshit that makes the uneducated fell better but do nothing but strip their rights and line the city coffers with more money. This doesn't improve safety in the slightest. You are woefully ignorant on the subject if you believe it does.
     
  19. MMitch

    MMitch Gawd

    Messages:
    775
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2016
    Well you're right on some points but it isn't because "you" are a good driver that error of inattention will never happen to you. Those nanny laws scare some bad drivers and they might at least think 2 times before doing it, so that's a win.
    And I lost someone because of this type of attitude and problem, so I wish having harsher rules would prevent others from living this.

    Sorry if it pisses you off but it's for the person that can't drive that those are there, and yes a lot should not drive but who decides that, you ? The government ? Lol.
    Anyway, just continue to use your cell and don't mind, one day you will just have no license.
     
  20. _l_

    _l_ I Am A Cock

    Messages:
    1,151
    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2016
    Stopped, at a light and she gets fined for looking at her watch? I don't believe that story at all ... is [H] becoming another National Enquirer ???
     
  21. Darunion

    Darunion 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,741
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2010
    I am against citing people for looking at a phone. If they hit someone, treat them for being at fault. I too have had plenty of idiots swerve in front of me or run signs etc before and after cell phones. My sister is notorious for looking behind her or to the side to talk to passengers (which is why I don't ride with her anymore lol). It is a common thing to see too. So once we 'solve' the cell and watch problem, will we cite people for not focusing?

    I get more distracted by the giant light up display billboards at night. Maybe the next step is installing eye tracking systems in cars to ensure you never take your eyes off the road unless neccessary. No more glancing at bikini girls with car wash signs!
     
  22. cjcox

    cjcox [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,295
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Devices like these can be extremely dangerous as they take a person's attention away from the task at hand, driving. This why I support legislation preventing the use of things like phones, watches and the Tesla model 3 dashboard.
     
  23. Dekoth-E-

    Dekoth-E- [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,599
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    You continue to dodge the point of this doesn't address the real problem. Since you want to just argue with emotions instead of logic and facts, I'll just ignore you. If you can show me a single instance where these laws did anything to actually improve safety and not just serve as a means to fill city coffers, we can talk. Until then good day.
     
  24. NIZMOZ

    NIZMOZ [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,657
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    So what about all these cops I see typing on laptops at lights or even while driving? That is worse than using a cell phone or watch. lol. They need to be fined too.
     
    Travolta likes this.
  25. Master_shake_

    Master_shake_ [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,436
    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    they get exemptions.

    but not just them. a lot of people do.
     
    auntjemima likes this.
  26. auntjemima

    auntjemima [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,037
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2014
    There is always one. Took longer than I expected.
     
    kirbyrj likes this.
  27. NIZMOZ

    NIZMOZ [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,657
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    And what does that supposed to mean?
     
  28. auntjemima

    auntjemima [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,037
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2014
    It means there is always someone who mentions the police without taking even a second to think about WHY a police officer might need to in the line of duty.

    Nope, not an ounce of thought used.
     
  29. NIZMOZ

    NIZMOZ [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,657
    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    Got nothing to do with doing their job. But one got in a bad accident here locally for doing it recently. So, the issue still stands. They shouldn't be doing it either.
     
  30. Hagrid

    Hagrid [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,456
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    Holding the police to the same standard, like that has ever worked. So while driving they should be liable and at a stop light should be ok.
     
  31. mope54

    mope54 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,437
    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    sure, but as a moving violation--not when someone is parked or sitting at a light
     
  32. Exavior

    Exavior [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,657
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    But when the light turns green and you aren't moving, or you stop in the middle of a busy highway blocking traffic. What then?