Argumentative essay on texting and driving

February 20, 2016

New york times best essays


73943154A woman transmits a text on the early phone.

Photo by STAN HONDA/AFP/Getty Images

As Werner Herzog yet others make abundantly obvious, texting while driving is an extremely stupid activity that may finish in injuries, dying, and/or civil and criminal liability for that texter. What about that person alternatively finish of this text? Will they share any responsibility for accidents that derive from texting while driving? A current decision from a Nj appellate court argues that, sometimes, the reply is yes.

In '09, a Nj teen named Kyle Best was driving and texting as he veered in to the opposite lane and collided having a motorcycle occupied with a husband and wife named David and Linda Kubert. The Kuberts, each of whom lost a leg, prosecuted Best. (At that time, Nj condition law didn't include significant criminal penalties for leading to any sort of accident due to driving while texting.) They also prosecuted Shannon Colonna, a teenage girl that Best have been texting during the time of the crash, declaring that they also bore some responsibility for that accident. The trial judge ignored the Kuberts’ claims against Colonna the Kuberts become a huge hit.

Recently, the appeals court released its decision, also it was a fascinating one. The appeals court upheld the trial court’s decision to dismiss the situation against Shannon Colonna, stating that the Kuberts unsuccessful to demonstrate that Colonna understood Best was driving a vehicle throughout their text trades. However the appeals court also discovered that, within the abstract, the Kuberts’ argument held some merit, which “a person delivering texts includes a duty to not text somebody that is driving when the texter knows, or has special need to know, the recipient will see the text while driving.” Reasoning that the actual passenger inside a vehicle may be held responsible for any sort of accident if she advised a person “to take his eyes off course and to check out a annoying object, ” the appeals court applied similar logic to remotely texting an easily distractable driver:

The sender should have the ability to think that the recipient will read a text only when it's safe and legal to do this, that's, if not operating an automobile. However, when the sender recognizes that the recipient is both driving and can browse the text immediately, then your sender has had a expected risk in delivering a text in those days. The sender has knowingly involved in annoying conduct, which is not unfair and to contain the sender accountable for the distraction.

Get CS 1.6 here

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Dolman Texting and Driving Video Essay
Dolman Texting and Driving Video Essay
Extinction
Extinction
Share this Post