N.J. Bill Seeks Crackdown On Distracted Driving By Forcing Drivers To Hand Over Phones: Legal Experts See Possible Showdown Pitting Safety Vs. Fourth Amendment: So removing a cell phone from a citizen after the event has occurred can make that event -that has already occurred- safer? Time travel, there’s an app for that!
View Comments (12)
If some idiot hits me while talking or texting then the cops should grab the phone. It can be used as proof against the fool that hit my car so I can sue his ignorant ass off.
If the idiot is just caught talking or texting let him keep the phone. Along with a $500.00 "driving stupid" ticket. In case ya'll haven't got the message, I can't stand fools who think they have to talk or text while they are driving. If the truth were known I bet more people are killed by "distracted" drivers every year than are killed by drunks.
If you have to talk to someone that bad pull off the damn road and talk. It works for me every time and I haven't killed or hurt anyone while doing it.
One of my vehicles has an old air horn and P.A. System from a police care installed with the speaker behind the grill..I have lots of fun on the freeway saying "get off the phone you moron" or "hang up the damn phone and rive your car"..Then I just look around trying to act as surprised as the guy/girl I was yelling at. In heavy traffic it is funny when you see them drop the phone....I am just evil that way.
Hahaha!Come to San Antonio. There is so much bad driving here including texting and phoning while driving. You would have a ball!
Can we say Police State? So what's next, confiscation of your phone for suspicion of distracted driving?
If the police confiscate your phone I wonder what happens next. How long can they keep it? How do you get it back? What about the non-accident related information on your phone---pre-set numbers, pictures, etc---are they safe from police review? Do the police have access to information on your phone that is not relevant to the accident? If your phone is confiscated and you have to buy a replacement while the police are holding your phone, can you bill the police department for the replacement?
Does the Forth Amendment have any meaning in this age of soft facism?
" a cell phone from a citizen after the event has occurred can make that event -that has already occurred- safer?"
Well, no -- it's meant to be a deterrent in the first place, and in the second place can provide evidence as to whether an offense was committed resulting in damage or death.
Actually reading the story it doesn't sound like as big a deal -- this is NOT wiretapping or anything like the lunacy that's been going elsewhere -- it is seizure of evidence at a possible crime scene -- like grabbing a broken liquor bottle to determine if it was open prior to a crash.
Grabbing a liquor bottle and scrolling through private/sensitive data without a warrant hardly seems like the same thing. This is a very different understanding of plain view than the one that was stressed when I was in law enforcement. I guess incident to arrest could apply, if they already could show that a crime had been committed. But this worries me. Like everything else this will be abused. And I for one do not want to turn local law enforcement into the TSA
That's my issue. Having neatly been killed on several occasions by a moron on the phone makesme support anything that would make that stop. I just don't think it wouldn't be abused. Unless its a burner phone couldn't couldn'tthebget a warrant to check if the driver w as s on thephone at the time of the accident?
I agree that this -- or any measure -- is liable to abuse. I would also agree that scrolling through private information could be inappropriate for the purpose of gathering information. However, the distinction is being made (perhaps I ought to say the distinction SHOULD be made, and I am assuming it is) between searching for private information and simply ascertaining whether a certain device has been used or not. t seems a bit absurd to say that texting while driving is illegal yet not allow an officer to make a determination of whether that crime may have been committed. An officer can both impound a broken bottle for evidence, but also require a driver to undergo a field sobriety test.
I would also liken the difference say, to an officer determining that a weapon found at the scene of a crime had been fired recently, and asserting that it was the weapon actually used to commit a crime -- it's two different things entirely.
BTW I'm not saying I'm in favor of this this or that I like it, nor am I denying it is another uncomfortable encroachment of The Law. Just that we shouldn't make more of it than it is.
As long as it is treated just like any other evidence of wrongdoing, it shouldn't be a problem. If I were mowed down by a texting moron, I'd like a chance to prove that he was breaking the law at the time.
Are the cops going to check your car radio to see if the presets are set to conservative talk stations?
Are the New Jersey cops gonna sell them oversea's like the people who rob phone stores and steal phones here in Kalifornia? A used I-phone is worth $700 plus in Asia..Maybe this is just another revenue stream for Governor Krispy Creme.