6 years in jail for texting

[Fingolfin269]

I wonder if the sentence is so harsh because it's the current 'taboo' to text while driving. What if someone was chowing down on a Big Mac? Would they get 6 years? Putting on make-up in the car? Hell, screwing with the CD player?

I think texting while driving is stupid as hell but the penalty should be no harsher than doing anything else in the car that distracts your eyes from looking where you should be looking.

 

[Evadman]

brb jail.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
I wonder if the sentence is so harsh because it's the current 'taboo' to text while driving. What if someone was chowing down on a Big Mac? Would they get 6 years? Putting on make-up in the car? Hell, screwing with the CD player?

I think texting while driving is stupid as hell but the penalty should be no harsher than doing anything else in the car that distracts your eyes from looking where you should be looking.

She KILLED someone. Anyone who kills someone else because they were too lazy/stupid to pay some fucking attention and gets only six years in prison (probably 2-3 after parole) should consider themselves lucky.

If I was part of the family of the person who was killed I would be asking for a much harsher sentence, but you take what you can get. Hopefully a few years in the slammer will knock some sense into her.

 

[Genx87]

Good, she was reckless.

 

[Alone]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
She KILLED someone. Anyone who kills someone else because they were too lazy/stupid to pay some fucking attention and gets only six years in prison (probably 2-3 after parole) should consider themselves lucky.

I'm gonna say something that's probably going to piss you and a lot of people off, but it's the honest truth.

Shit happens.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
I wonder if the sentence is so harsh because it's the current 'taboo' to text while driving. What if someone was chowing down on a Big Mac? Would they get 6 years? Putting on make-up in the car? Hell, screwing with the CD player?

I think texting while driving is stupid as hell but the penalty should be no harsher than doing anything else in the car that distracts your eyes from looking where you should be looking.

She KILLED someone. Anyone who kills someone else because they were too lazy/stupid to pay some fucking attention and gets only six years in prison (probably 2-3 after parole) should consider themselves lucky.

If I was part of the family of the person who was killed I would be asking for a much harsher sentence, but you take what you can get. Hopefully a few years in the slammer will knock some sense into her.

Did I say it was ok that she killed someone? Fuck no. I'm just saying that if we're going to give someone 6 years for killing someone while texting then we need to roll that out to any incident where the death is caused by someone not paying attention while driving. If you're looking down and changing the song on your ipod and plow someone you should go to the slammer. If you're staring at the mirror trying to make your eyes look pretty and you kill someone then you should enjoy 6 years in the pokey as well. Etc. etc. etc.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: Alone

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
She KILLED someone. Anyone who kills someone else because they were too lazy/stupid to pay some fucking attention and gets only six years in prison (probably 2-3 after parole) should consider themselves lucky.

I'm gonna say something that's probably going to piss you and a lot of people off, but it's the honest truth.

Shit happens.

Why would that piss me off? Yes, shit happens. Shit like getting killed by someone who was texting. Or shit like getting sent to jail for a few years for killing someone because you were texting while driving.

What is your argument exactly? Do you say it would piss me off because you think the texter should have gotten off easier than she already did? If so, why would you think that? Because "shit happens"?

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Did I say it was ok that she killed someone? Fuck no. I'm just saying that if we're going to give someone 6 years for killing someone while texting then we need to roll that out to any incident where the death is caused by someone not paying attention while driving. If you're looking down and changing the song on your ipod and plow someone you should go to the slammer. If you're staring at the mirror trying to make your eyes look pretty and you kill someone then you should enjoy 6 years in the pokey as well. Etc. etc. etc.

No, I understand. I am not familiar with typical jail sentences for situations like this. I agree that six years with the chance of parole is about fair as long as we're talking about a perfectly avoidable death due to negligence, where the person being sentenced is totally at fault. It shouldn't matter if you're texting or anything else.

All I'm saying is that if the punishment for killing people due to other types of distracted driving is less, those sentences should be increased to match this one, not the other way around.

 

[Evadman]

Originally posted by: Alone
I'm gonna say something that's probably going to piss you and a lot of people off, but it's the honest truth.

Shit happens.

shit happens is when you hit a pothole and you hit the car next to you; not sending email on your phone and you run into a car that is stopped in front of you.

Shit happens is when you are at a firing range and a richot off the clip holding the target, killing the person next to you; not when you point the gun at the guy next to you and reload your weapon, and it goes off because you have poor trigger control.

Shit happens is when you back your car into and run over a garbage can; not when you back into and run over the neighbor's kid.

One is exactly that, shit happens. The other is a stupid person killing someone.

 

[Alone]

I probably would push for a minimum of 2-3 years spent in prison. She already learned her lesson and probably won't do it again, but there should be a minimum of time spent. But 25 to life? That's excessive. Pointless.

My point is that had the distraction been anything else (eating, gps, changing a song/cd, etc) the reaction of everyone here would have been SO different. But because it was labeled as texting while driving, which is the new thing to hate, the reactions are just that much more extreme.

 

[Alone]

Originally posted by: Evadman
One is exactly that, shit happens. The other is a stupid person killing someone.

You clearly disagree with me, so what do you think her prison sentence should be?

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: Alone

Originally posted by: Evadman
One is exactly that, shit happens. The other is a stupid person killing someone.

You clearly disagree with me, so what do you think her prison sentence should be?

It should match whatever the normal prison sentence is for someone who kills someone else due to driver negligence. It should NOT be inflated simply because texting while driving is the current taboo of the day. I have no idea what the sentence would be if you did this while screwing with the radio but whatever the precedent is for that should be what this person gets as well.

 

[Alone]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
It should match whatever the normal prison sentence is for someone who kills someone else due to driver negligence. It should NOT be inflated simply because texting while driving is the current taboo of the day. I have no idea what the sentence would be if you did this while screwing with the radio but whatever the precedent is for that should be what this person gets as well.

So you and I are on the same page, but what about everyone else?

 

[TheShiz]

change the misleading title, the 6 years is for manslaughter, not texting alone. if there was a wreck and no one died and she was texting she would not get 6 years.

 

[Rubycon]

Fine just charge more per text as the phone moves faster. $1.00 per text at 20 mph and $30 per text at 85 mph. If the phone is not on a roadway (indicating use on plane, train, etc.) then use would be unrestricted.

:laugh:

 

[Alone]

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Fine just charge more per text as the phone moves faster. $1.00 per text at 20 mph and $30 per text at 85 mph. If the phone is not on a roadway (indicating use on plane, train, etc.) then use would be unrestricted.

:laugh:

So passengers are right fucked in these situations?

Also, what if I were on a bus?

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: Alone
I probably would push for a minimum of 2-3 years spent in prison. She already learned her lesson and probably won't do it again, but there should be a minimum of time spent. But 25 to life? That's excessive. Pointless.

My point is that had the distraction been anything else (eating, gps, changing a song/cd, etc) the reaction of everyone here would have been SO different. But because it was labeled as texting while driving, which is the new thing to hate, the reactions are just that much more extreme.

Yeah, I agree. I'm basically with you and Fingolfin in saying that I don't think it should be inflated simply because she was texting as opposed to any other distraction. However, I am saying that any form of manslaughter due to distracted driving should carry a similar penalty to what this person is getting. If people are getting 6-18 months for killing someone due to distracted driving, then that needs to change. A minimum sentence of 2-3 years in prison sounds good to me. And again, that should be for any form of distracted driving. Like I said, I don't know how much of a penalty you'd normally get for causing a fatal crash while applying makeup or adjusting your iPod, so if those are 6-18 months but the same end result due to texting is 6 years, then there's a problem. But I'd say the other things should be raised, not the other way around.

Recently, a woman in Minnesota, Olga Franco, was sentenced to 12 years for killing four children when she ran into a school bus. Why she did that is undetermined (was she distracted? Simply a poor driver? Driving recklessly?). She maintains that she wasn't driving at the time and that it was her boyfriend, but forensic evidence showed otherwise. Anyway, that's three years per death caused. Seems fair to me.

Where'd you get the 25 to life number though? That's excessive unless you're talking about a huge number of deaths or willful intent.

 

[Alone]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
Where'd you get the 25 to life number though? That's excessive unless you're talking about a huge number of deaths or willful intent.

Some in this thread were saying 25 years, 30 years, and others saying life.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Alone

So passengers are right fucked in these situations?

Also, what if I were on a bus?

Look technology exists TODAY to make sure you cannot text if you are OPERATING a motor vehicle. PAX would not be affected.

The point is none of this should be necessary. If they spent a quarter the resources that RIAA/MPAA spends on fighting "piracy" I believe a common sense pill could be developed in a few years. 😛

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: Alone

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
Where'd you get the 25 to life number though? That's excessive unless you're talking about a huge number of deaths or willful intent.

Some in this thread were saying 25 years, 30 years, and others saying life.

Eh, typical ATOT overreaction. Like the people who want to have people who are cruel to animals put to death, or any number of other topics... the extreme emotional reactions of certain people make the more reasoned responses fade into the background.

 

[seemingly random]

Sure, we shouldn't care about people who are cruel to animals. Except, it's one of the three pillars of a serial murderer. But, let's not overreact. Unless, a loved one is in the wrong place and becomes a victim. Then, we'll be singing the "we under-reacted" tune.

How many years is your life worth? What's the current punishment for killing someone while driving drunk?

 

[meltdown75]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: meltdown75
ATOT texting rage > road rage

simmer down, tots.

Road rage is awesome, so texting rage is awesomer?

should have been more clear on that one.

i was just poking fun @ the text haters. the angst against texting makes my road rage seem puny by comparison. then again, i don't really road rage as i'm numb to all traffic dumbfuckery these days. i've seen it all. the worst i've seen is a middle-aged woman doing her makeup in the mirror, driving with her knee, talking on the phone and adjusting her GPS device suctioned to the windshield - all at once.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: endscape

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Most phones have GPS enabled and thus can determine speed. Why not lock out certain features when the phone is traveling more than 10 mph?

What if you're a passenger?

Big fucking deal. God forbid you're out of touch with your idiot friends for 15-20 minutes...:roll:

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: FelixDeKat

Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Her last message as she was being lead away was: BBIAW.

BRB jail

:laugh:

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: endscape

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Most phones have GPS enabled and thus can determine speed. Why not lock out certain features when the phone is traveling more than 10 mph?

What if you're a passenger?

Big fucking deal. God forbid you're out of touch with your idiot friends for 15-20 minutes...:roll:

Many people commute by train and have hour-long train rides (or more!). For them, being able to use their phones is more than "being in touch with idiot friends." What if you do a lot of traveling for work and need to be able to keep in touch with clients while you're on the move? I don't think there's any way of preventing you from using a phone ONLY if you're driving and not if you're a passenger without extremely intrusive technology.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: endscape

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Most phones have GPS enabled and thus can determine speed. Why not lock out certain features when the phone is traveling more than 10 mph?

What if you're a passenger?

Big fucking deal. God forbid you're out of touch with your idiot friends for 15-20 minutes...:roll:

Many people commute by train and have hour-long train rides (or more!). For them, being able to use their phones is more than "being in touch with idiot friends." What if you do a lot of traveling for work and need to be able to keep in touch with clients while you're on the move? I don't think there's any way of preventing you from using a phone ONLY if you're driving and not if you're a passenger without extremely intrusive technology.

Meh, too bad. What did you do before there were cell phones or texting? You sat and read the newspaper...or talked to people next to you. Is that really so bad? Is your work so important that you cannot be away from it for 1 hour a day?

It always amazes me that people walk around with those bluetooth devices sticking out of their ears. Bunch of slaves if you ask me.