2yrs for texting and killing

[RACER X]

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...e-driving?lite

Massachusetts teen sentenced to prison for texting while driving

By Andrew Mach
A Massachusetts teenager was sentenced Wednesday to two years in prison and loss of his license for 15 years for causing a fatal crash by texting while driving.


Follow @msnbc_usAaron Deveau, 18, was convicted of motor vehicle homicide by texting – the first driver in Massachusetts to face such charges, the Boston Globe reported. Prosecutors said Deveau, who pleaded not guilty, was texting on Feb. 20, 2011, when his vehicle swerved across the center line of a Haverhill, Mass., street and crashed head on into Daniel Bowley’s truck, killing the 55-year-old New Hampshire father of three.

Before imposing the maximum sentence on Deveau, District Court Judge Stephen Abany said he was sending a message of deterrence to Massachusetts drivers.

Deterrence “really seems to come to play in this case,’’ Abany said, according to the Globe report. “People really want to be safe on the highways.’’ People need to “keep their eyes on the road, keep their eyes on the road.’’

David Teater, senior director of transportation initiative at the National Safety Council, agreed with the ruling and said he believes it’s important to take a hardline approach on cases of texting while driving.

“People can violate these laws and there really isn’t much of a deterrence without examples like this,” Teater told msnbc.com. “Clearly, being distracted is an extremely deadly thing that’s going on in this country and people need to understand they just can’t do it.”

Deveau, who was 17 at the time of the crash, was initially charged with motor vehicle homicide and negligent operation of a motor vehicle, using a mobile phone while operating a motor vehicle, reading or sending an electronic message, a marked lanes violation and two counts of negligent operation and injury from mobile phone use.

Deveau’s lawyer argued there was no evidence that the crash caused Bowley’s death. In his own testimony, Deveau said he was distracted by the amount of homework he had to do and sent his last text message while parked in the parking lot of the grocery store where he worked. Furthermore, he said he left his phone in the passenger’s seat until after the crash when he called his parents.

Though he insisted he was not texting at the time of the crash and could not remember texting while driving, phone records indicate Deveau sent a text message at 2:34 p.m. and received a response at 2:35 p.m. Police said the crash occurred at 2:35 p.m., ABCNews.com reported.

“I made a mistake,’’ Deveau told the judge, according to the Globe. “If I could take it back, I would take it back. I just want to apologize to the family.’’

A survivor of the crash – Bowley’s girlfriend, Luz Roman – said she suffered emotional and physical stress after the crash and death of Bowley, the father of her three children.

“This has been giving me a lot of pain, there are no words to describe,’’ Roman said, according to the Globe. “Broken leg, broken heart.’’

“We hope this sends a message that it’s not OK to text and drive,’’ Burleigh said, according to the Globe.

Texting while driving is a crime in Washington, D.C., and 38 states, including Massachusetts.

“This is a threat that did not exist just a few years ago, and we’ve never had to understand how being connected to a mobile world was dangerous,” Teater told msnbc.com. “Unfortunately now the way we’re beginning to understand the danger of it is by people getting hurt and dying. And that needs to change.”

[Homeslice]

So the fact that he received a text one minute before the crash PROVES that he was texting or reading at the moment of the crash. Gotta love people's logic.

Where's the outcry over women who apply makeup while driving?

How about handsfree calls? Better believe people become distracted by those sometimes. But no, people ignore all that and focus their hatred on texting instead. Hypocrites.

Why can't people be punished for the act, instead of the alleged cause of that act. I'm tired of people saying that someone is "more guilty" because of HOW it allegedly occurred.

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

So the fact that he received a text one minute before the crash PROVES that he was texting or reading at the moment of the crash. Gotta love people's logic.

Where's the outcry over women who apply makeup while driving?

How about handsfree calls? Better believe people become distracted by those sometimes. But no, people ignore all that and focus their hatred on texting instead. Hypocrites.

Why can't people be punished for the act, instead of the alleged cause of that act. I'm tired of people saying that someone is "more guilty" because of HOW it allegedly occurred.

Bullshit.

A guy has a few to many happy pops at the bar, and kills somebody on the way to Piggly Wiggly, he does time.

Good, we all say. He was impaired.

By your logic, he should just do time for drunk driving, since you can't really prove he crossed a double yellow on a curve because he was drunk. Maybe there was a bee in his car, who knows?

Texting may not be on the same level of impairment as being drunk, (depending on how drunk you are) but it definitely impairs your ability to drive, since driving requires that you WATCH WHERE THE FUCK YOU'RE GOING.

I don't think it's asking to much for you to put down your idouche box 3000X, or your news paper, slutty romantic novel, Big Mac, laptop, or bong, and drive your goddamn car like there were actually other people on the fucking road.

JC

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Bullshit.

A guy has a few to many happy pops at the bar, and kills somebody on the way to Piggly Wiggly, he does time.

Good, we all say. He was impaired.

By your logic, he should just do time for drunk driving, since you can't really prove he crossed a double yellow on a curve because he was drunk. Maybe there was a bee in his car, who knows?

Texting may not be on the same level of impairment as being drunk, (depending on how drunk you are) but it definitely impairs your ability to drive, since driving requires that you WATCH WHERE THE FUCK YOU'RE GOING.

I don't think it's asking to much for you to put down your idouche box 3000X, or your news paper, slutty romantic novel, Big Mac, laptop, or bong, and drive your goddamn car like there were actually other people on the fucking road.

JC

Australian and UK studies show that talking on a cell phone is roughly equivalent to having 3 'standard' alcoholic drinks in you (call it around BAC 0.10). Texting is infinitely worse.

[Homeslice]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

Australian and UK studies show that talking on a cell phone is roughly equivalent to having 3 'standard' alcoholic drinks in you (call it around BAC 0.10). Texting is infinitely worse.

I am calling bs to that one, but whatever.

I'd be willing to bet that most people only have 1 hand on the wheel the majority of the time. Therefore, holding a cellphone isn't all that bad except for the conversation/distraction bit. And you would be just as distracted by a handsfree call as you would be a handheld call.

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

Bullshit.

A guy has a few to many happy pops at the bar, and kills somebody on the way to Piggly Wiggly, he does time.

Good, we all say. He was impaired.

By your logic, he should just do time for drunk driving, since you can't really prove he crossed a double yellow on a curve because he was drunk. Maybe there was a bee in his car, who knows?

Texting may not be on the same level of impairment as being drunk, (depending on how drunk you are) but it definitely impairs your ability to drive, since driving requires that you WATCH WHERE THE FUCK YOU'RE GOING.

I don't think it's asking to much for you to put down your idouche box 3000X, or your news paper, slutty romantic novel, Big Mac, laptop, or bong, and drive your goddamn car like there were actually other people on the fucking road.

JC

First, a reference to a more well-known grocery chain (not Piggly Wiggly ) might have helped make your point better

Second, well I guess you got me there

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

I am calling bs to that one, but whatever.

I'd be willing to bet that most people only have 1 hand on the wheel the majority of the time. Therefore, holding a cellphone isn't all that bad except for the conversation/distraction bit. And you would be just as distracted by a handsfree call as you would be a handheld call.

First, a reference to a more well-known grocery chain (not Piggly Wiggly ) might have helped make your point better

Second, well I guess you got me there

Check the citations. I've read several of the referenced studies.

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/dri...830105036.html

Try venturing east of the Mississippi and south of the Mason/Dixon sometime. You might even find that you like pork rinds and Hardee's.

[askmrjesus]

Originally Posted by Homeslice

I am calling bs to that one, but whatever.

I'd be willing to bet that most people only have 1 hand on the wheel the majority of the time. Therefore, holding a cellphone isn't all that bad except for the conversation/distraction bit. And you would be just as distracted by a handsfree call as you would be a handheld call.

I don't care if people drive with one hand. I'm more concerned about what the non-driving hand is blocking. Most of the people I see yakking on cell phones, have the phone up to their left ear. In that position, your peripheral vision is compromised, and you don't have the same range of motion on that side.

Try putting your left hand up to your ear, and turning your head to the left, all you're going to see is your elbow.

I don't ride an elbow, so that's no fucking help to me at all.

Originally Posted by Homeslice

First, a reference to a more well-known grocery chain (not Piggly Wiggly ) might have helped make your point better

Piggly Wiggly rocks, just for the name alone.

Originally Posted by Homeslice

Second, well I guess you got me there

No shit.

JC

[dubbs]

He sent a text at 2:34 and received the response at 2:35.. The crash happened at 2:35.. He was texting.

[shmike]

Originally Posted by dubbs

He sent a text at 2:34 and received the response at 2:35.. The crash happened at 2:35.. He was texting.

Yep.

Talking on the phone may be distracting but there is no way that it compares to people texting. In addition to the distraction of a conversation, people are taking their eyes off the road for extended periods of time when sending or reading texts.

Sure, 'slice, if it was a chick applying make-up or a dude reading the paper, the same penalty should apply but texting is a major concern currently and I would not be surprised to see more verdicts like this.

[tommymac]

Originally Posted by shmike

Yep.

And if it was a chick applying make-up or a dude reading the paper, the same penalty should apply.

Talking on the phone may be distracting but there is no way that it compares to people texting. In addition to the distarction of a conversation, people are taking their eyes off the road for extended periods of time when sending or reading texts.

I still cant see how someone could drive and send a text at the same time. Still not sure if this will be a deterent, se ehow all the stiffer drunk driving penalties havent done a whole lot.