Oregon Injury Lawyer Blog

The New Year brought with it quiet news of an important development in the battle against Oregon distracted driving. Beginning this month, Oregon drivers stopped by police for using a handset while driving will no longer be able to avoid the two-year-old Oregon distracted driving law’s penalties by claiming that they were making a work-related call.

The language of the original bill passed by the legislature and signed into law by the governor allowed an exception for use of a handheld cellphone by an Oregon driver if the call in question “is necessary for the person’s job,” as the Los Angeles Times writes. This was arguably intended to be a way to protect police and other emergency services personnel whose jobs often require the use of a cellphone or hand-held radio.

In practice, however, it developed into a glaring loophole. As the Gresham Outlook noted in a recent editorial, the work exception “was that annoying escape route for ticketed drivers who used the ‘I was on a work call’ defense to get out of paying fines.”

We can all be happy that the Oregon legislature has moved to close this loophole. The fact that they have done so does not, however, make the problem of distracted driving go away – either here in Oregon or in the country as a whole. As the LA Times notes, a number of new distracted driving laws are taking effect around the country this month, even as the head of the National Transportation Safety Board is urging a nationwide ban on handheld cellphone use by drivers. Because driving is regulated by states a national ban would be difficult to institute – but not impossible. The article notes that the federal government used its authority over interstate commerce this month to put in place a ban on handheld cellphone use that “will affect an estimated 4 million commercial drivers, according to the federal motor carrier safety administration, which instituted the ban.”

While some insist on driving dangerously it is comforting to know that our courts and legal system are here to hold Oregon’s reckless drivers accountable for their actions. A Portland distracted driving lawyer can help victims and their families obtain the justice they deserve in the wake of Oregon distracted driving crashes.

Gresham Outlook: Legislature wisely hangs up on the cell phone loophole

Los Angeles Times: New laws crack down on distracted driving

A pair of recent stories from Washington go a long way toward putting Oregon’s, and the nation’s, distracted driving problem in context: last week the National Transportation Safety Board formally called for a nationwide ban on “driver use of personal electronic devices,” according to the Washington Post. This came only a few days after new data compiled by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration showed that “for all the criticism and new legal bans, texting by drivers just keeps increasing, especially among younger motorists,” according to a report filed by the Associated Press.

Both of the organizations are independent federal agencies. The NHTSA studies and promotes highway and traffic safety while the NTSB is charged with investigating transportation accidents of all types (i.e. not just cars and trucks).

The NTSB statement was particularly strongly worded, according to the Post, and followed the lengthy investigation of a crash last year in Missouri in which “a 19-year-old pickup driver sent 11 texts in the 11 minutes before the accident.” The paper adds that the NHTSA’s data show that in 2009 (the last year for which numbers are available) distracted driving resulted in 5000 deaths and half-a-million injuries on America’s roads.

In practical terms instituting any sort of nationwide ban on distracted driving will be difficult – though the federal government’s experience during the 80s and 90s in using highway funds as a lever to force states to mandate seat-belt use does, potentially, offer a useful model. The broader point, however, concerns the need to change attitudes at a very basic level. According to the Post, 35 states, including Oregon, now ban texting by drivers. A growing number (again, including Oregon) also restrict the use of handheld phones by anyone behind the wheel. The statistics will not really change, however, until people’s attitudes toward technology and its uses changes.

As any Portland distracted driving lawyer can attest, virtually everyone on the road believes him or herself to be a better-than-average driver. Laws like the Oregon distracted driving law are useful, but they, and their enforcement, are only steps – important steps, but steps nonetheless – on the road to real highway and traffic safety. Enforcing distracted driving laws is important, but the practice will not stop until people take real responsibility for their own actions.

AP via NBC4: More drivers texting at wheel, despite state bans

Washington Post: NTSB seeks nationwide ban on driver use of personal electronic devices

Resource:
Distraction.gov – Official US Government site concerning distracted driving

A fascinating article published in Slate a few days ago raises some intriguing questions regarding Oregon distracted driving laws and some of the latest technologies making their way into our cars and onto our cellphones.

The article focuses on Siri, the computerized ‘assistant’ bundled into the latest version of the iPhone. As the author notes, “Apple advertises Siri as a way to get stuff done while you’re otherwise occupied,” and notes that the company’s videos show people using the application while, among other things, driving.

The legal question for Oregonians and others raised by the article is simple: do distracted driving laws, like Oregon’s, which ban texting while driving extend to a text-by-voice service? “Voice texting could be illegal in many places,” the piece notes, because of wording in the relevant legislation that makes “it illegal to ‘send’ texts,” or, in some cases, prohibits any form of electronic communication. “Each of these versions would make Siri-based texting verboten, because even if you dictate a message, you’re still, technically, sending some kind of electronic communication.”

There is, of course, the separate issue of how distracting operating Siri, or some similar voice-recognition application, may be. Reprogramming a car’s GPS is not, presently, illegal while the vehicle is moving – but that does not mean it is not almost as dangerous as texting. A related article published in Slate around the same time as the one cited here noted that the trend toward touch-screen radios and CD players in cars also raises distracted driving issues since these often require more of a driver’s attention to operate than old-style analogue push-button radio/CD players.

The lesson for Oregon distracted driving attorneys and their clients is that all of us need to rethink the basic idea of Portland distracted driving. When seeking justice in the wake of a Portland, Eugene or Salem car accident the specifics of Oregon distracted law are important, but broader questions of negligence also often need to be considered. We need to ask whether or not motorists in particular situations were operating their vehicles in a responsible manner and hold to account those who fail to do so.

Slate: Siri behind the wheel

Legislators in Salem hope to close what has emerged as a significant loophole in Oregon’s year-and-a-half-old distracted driving law. As almost everyone knows by now, talking on a cellphone while behind the wheel is illegal in Oregon unless one is using a hands-free device.

As The Oregonian details, however, many judges are taking a broader view of one particular provision of the 2009 law than its authors intended. The Oregon distracted driving law contains an exception “allowing drivers to go on talking on their handheld cellphone – as long as they are driving for work and ‘acting in the scope’ of their employment,” the paper notes.

The legislators who wrote the law tell The Oregonian their idea was “to make exceptions for police, firefighters and others who truly need to make calls on the move.” As it turns out, however, courts have given that phrase a much wider interpretation. In many places, its effect has been to give a free pass to anyone who simply tells the judge they were making a work-related call. As a consequence, some police officers tell the paper they have stopped even issuing distracted driving citations to anyone who claims when pulled over to have been on the phone for work.

HB 3186, which passed the House by a better than 2-to-1 margin last week, seeks to close the loophole, by making it clear that the talking-while-driving exception is limited public safety and emergency personnel, tow truck drivers, utility crews and “persons engaged in agricultural operations.” If the measure makes it all the way to the governor’s desk it will be a welcome clarification of an essential law.

As a Portland distracted driving attorney my belief has always been that the focus of the law should be on the victims of distracted driving. Oregon’s distracted driving law was always designed to hold those who insist on behaving dangerously to account. Closing loopholes through which dangerous drivers may be slipping is to be welcomed.

The Oregonian: Oregon House passes bill intended to toughen state’s hands-free cellphone law

Schools in Wallowa, in the far east of Oregon, are targeting distracted driving by going directly to the source: placing students in a car equipped with virtual reality technology to convince them of exactly how real the danger is.

According to the Wallowa County Chieftain roughly 50 of the people put through the simulator on a single day at an area high school wound up being ‘victims’ of Oregon distracted driving or Oregon drunk driving accidents. The paper quotes the “impaired driving awareness instructor” who ran the event saying that in the real world “eighty percent of accidents are due to driver distraction” (a statistic which obviously goes far beyond cellphones to encompass ‘legal’ distractions – such as the radio or CD player or dealing with kids in the back seat).

The project, the paper reports, is organized by “UNITE, a Michigan-based organization that sends three teams around the nation for similar demonstrations at high schools and colleges.” The set-up involves placing students in a stationary car while wearing virtual reality goggles. Both the car and the goggles are connected to a computer. To simulate phone-related distractions and texting students use their own cellphones. Drunk driving is simulated by having the computer acknowledge a students’ actions in the car with the appropriate delay for varying levels of intoxication.

As I have written on previous occasions, a core issue when it comes to distracted driving is the widespread belief that ‘I’m very careful – the problem is with all those other people who aren’t.’ Systems like the one UNITE is taking to schools here in Oregon are an especially useful way to demonstrate to individuals that their ability to multi-task is not necessarily as uniquely high as they believe.

In the wake of distracted driving accidents an Oregon distracted driving attorney can be an essential ally of victims and their families as they struggle to put their lives back together. Drunk driving has been a problem for decades. Distracted driving, at least as it relates to cellphones, is relatively new. In both cases, however, education and justice go hand-in-hand: demanding personal responsibility before accidents happen, and enforcing it once they do.

Wallowa.com: How to text yourself to death

Do cyclists wearing headphones pose a danger equivalent to drivers using a handheld cellphone to talk or text? That is a question the Oregon legislature is poised to address during the current session.

Rep. Michael Schaufler (D-Happy Valley) has introduced a bill (HB 2602) that, according to the advocacy organization BikePortland “would create a new traffic violation for ‘unsafe operation of a bicycle’”. The offense would target anyone riding “a bicycle on a highway while wearing a listening device that is capable of receiving telephonic communication, radio broadcasts or recorded sounds.” Violations could lead to a fine of up to $90 – the same amount as violations of the Oregon distracted driving law. To judge from the coverage at BikePortland the reaction among local cyclists has been far from positive. A selection of comments posted on the blog of BikePortland publisher/editor Jonathan Maus is pretty much uniformly negative.

An interesting aspect of this legislation which has not been addressed in the media coverage, however, is the degree to which this attempt to cut down on Oregon bicycle accidents differs in fundamental philosophical ways from the existing, year-old, Oregon distracted driving ban.

Distracted driving laws focus first and foremost on the hands: the idea that operation of a handheld cellphone, be it to make calls or to text, creates an inordinately dangerous distraction for people operating a motor vehicle. That is why such laws here in Oregon and elsewhere, focus on getting drivers to use hands-free headsets (and to cut out texting entirely). In theory a cyclist using a hands-free phone headset should be no more distracted than a driver. The proposed distracted cycling law, however, is concerned primarily with the ears, rather than the hands. The problem Rep. Schaufler sees arises not from taking one’s eyes off the road while dialing but from losing the awareness of the broader environment when external noise is blotted out by a rider’s earphones.

As BikePortland notes, it is currently unclear whether the existing Oregon distracted driving law applies to cyclists (though, for the record, texting while riding a bike is one of the very few things that is even stupider and more dangerous than texting while driving a car). However, as any Portland bike accident lawyer can attest, safe riding is every cyclist’s responsibility. Even here in Portland, one of America’s most bike-friendly cities, riders need to be paying attention to the road because, as any cyclist will tell you, riders can’t count on drivers to do that job for them.

KGW.com: Lawmakers target cyclists with headphones

BikePortland.org: Another look at HB 2602, which would prohibit biking with headphones on

CNET: Wear your earbuds on the street? Get Fined.

A case headed for California’s courts offers a pointed reminder that there is more to ‘distracted driving’ than cellphones. According to the Orange County Register, a man in southern California has been charged with vehicular manslaughter for causing a baby’s death because he “was distracted by a laptop sliding off his passenger seat.” In California the charge of “vehicular manslaughter without gross negligence” caries a potential sentence of a year in jail.

According to the paper, the fatal car accident took place last September. It began when the driver, as he crossed some railroad tracks, turned his attention to a laptop sitting in the passenger seat that he feared would slide out of its bag. As a result, he “did not notice that the traffic in front of him had stopped” and rear-ended the vehicle in front of him. That vehicle, in turn, lurched forward, striking an Australian tourist who was making her way across a crosswalk with her baby in a stroller as well as her 11-year-old niece and 7-year-old nephew.

The woman and the 11 year old were struck and injured by the car at the head of the chain-reaction accident. The baby was launched from her stroller, landing “approximately 70 feet away,” the newspaper reports.

Legally-speaking, this tragedy, were it to happen here in Oregon, probably would not qualify as Oregon distracted driving, a term we generally reserve for violations of Oregon’s ban on texting and the use of cellphones without a hands-free device (California has similar laws). That would not mean the victim’s family wouldn’t have legal remedies, such as an Oregon wrongful death or Oregon negligent driving lawsuit.

From this distance, and at this time, the important lesson this case offers us here in Oregon is the reminder that cellphones are far from the only distractions drivers need to be aware of when they are behind the wheel. If you or a family member have been the victim of a motorist distracted by something besides a cellphone when they should have been paying closer attention to traffic and the road, consulting a Portland car accident attorney at the earliest possible opportunity is a key first step in protecting your rights.

Orange County Register: Distracted Driver Charged in Baby’s Death

An article published in the New York Times this week indicates that cell carriers are now looking at technologies designed to prevent distracted driving. The technology is not new per se (see this blog post, and this one from last spring); what is changing is its embrace by the companies we buy cell service from. The Times notes that this may be happening, in part, because fewer and few customers pay for their calls by the minute any more. For cell carriers margins are now found, instead, in applications and other value-added services.

Call-blocking technology usually works to prevent distracted driving here in Oregon and elsewhere by linking a piece of software to a phone’s GPS function. When the software detects the phone being in motion it automatically sends all incoming calls to voice mail and texts to an archive. In some extreme versions it simply disables the phone entirely.

The technology has an obvious appeal to parents worried about teens falling victim to distracted driving while behind the wheel. There is also, the newspaper indicates, quoting a T-Mobile spokesperson, a segment of the adult population “who know they get distracted while driving and feel responsible enough to themselves that they want help.” Designers have been working to overcome potential barriers to use: notably ways for the phone to remain usable when its owner is a passenger rather than a driver, and for other applications, such as GPS-enabled directions to remain functional.

The obvious question this development raises for those of us concerned about Oregon distracted driving is why anyone would want to pay several dollars per month for a call-blocking application when several free or pay-just-once options are already out there, offered by third parties. According to the Times the potential attraction lies in the cooperation of the cellphone companies – something which might offer significant improvements in the (until now) less-than-ideal functioning of call-blocking software.

The most telling comment in the article, however, comes from an official at the National Safety Council: “There is already a simple technology that prevents people from using their phone while driving – the off switch. But people aren’t using it.” Obvious, alarming, sad… but true. The simple fact is that technology alone will not make Oregon distracted driving go away. Nor, by themselves, will distracted driving laws like the one that went into effect here in Oregon a year ago. That is why the advice and assistance offered by a Portland distracted driving lawyer will remain crucial for many people in the wake of accidents caused by Oregon distracted driving.

New York Times: A Short-Circuit to Distracted Driving

A local fire department official had to be rescued by his own colleagues after causing an Oregon injury car wreck near Walterville, the Eugene Register-Guard reports. The Oregon car accident took place on Highway 126 last Sunday and resulted in three injuries, one of which was described as “serious” in media reports.

The newspaper, quoting witnesses and the local police, reported that a Toyota driven by Michael McCall was “weaving in and out of its lane and traveling in the opposing lane before it crashed into an oncoming Ford Taurus occupied by two Eugene residents.”

McCall, described as “a volunteer lieutenant with McKenzie Fire & Rescue” had to be rescued from the wreck by his fire department colleagues. He was transported to a hospital in Springfield and treated for serious injuries following the Oregon head-on collision. The driver and passenger in the Taurus were transported to a different Springfield hospital with injuries that were described as non-life threatening.

No explanation has yet been offered for why McCall was allegedly weaving across the road, leading to a head-on Oregon car crash. Incidents like this, however, are exactly the kind that cry out for prompt consultation with an Oregon car crash attorney as soon as possible following the incident. Regardless of whether drunk driving or distracted driving was a factor in the crash – even if it resulted from simple negligence and inattentiveness – it is important that those who cause Oregon car accidents be held accountable for their actions.

Eugene Register-Guard: Erratic driving seen before collision

KEZI.com: Three people injured in Head-on Crash near Walterville

As we head into the New Year’s Eve weekend one of the nation’s largest cellphone companies is taking a proactive stance against distracted driving. AT&T has released an 11-minute video documentary, entitled “The Last Text,” to raise awareness of the dangers of texting behind the wheel as we head into the final weekend of the holiday season.

The video can be viewed at both of the source links below, as well as on YouTube. It is part of a broader anti-texting publicity campaign sponsored by AT&T under the umbrella title “It Can Wait.” The documentary “features stories about people whose lives were adversely affected by texting behind the wheel,” according to a report in USA Today.

Oregon, of course, has had a distracted driving law in place for almost exactly one year. That law makes texting by drivers illegal under pretty much any circumstances but, as I noted in a post just last week evading the ban is relatively easy and the fine for getting caught ($90) is relatively low. The Oregon distracted driving law is still too new for any significant body of data to have been gathered concerning its enforcement.

That leaves education as one of our most important tools in cracking down on this outrageously dangerous practice. The AT&T video is the latest in a series of signs that the electronic communications industry realizes that it has a stake in urging people to use its products and services responsibly.

When education fails, however, the court system can provide another effective means of deterrence. The criminal fine for violating the Oregon distracted driving law may be low, but paying it does not exempt drivers from broader liability for the damages stemming from their reckless actions. A Portland distracted driving attorney can be an essential ally for victims seeking justice beyond that offered by our criminal courts. AT&T is to be congratulated for stepping up this New Year’s Eve – but drivers bent on continuing their dangerous conduct need to know that a sterner rebuke than a YouTube documentary awaits them if they flaunt the Oregon and Portland distracted driving rules.

PC Magazine: AT&T Releases Anti-Texting while Driving Documentary

USA Today: AT&T documentary takes on texting while driving

A terrible story from California this week reminds all of us that distracted driving laws – be they here in Oregon or elsewhere – cannot, by themselves, stop some people from behaving destructively. To be effective, the laws require enforcement by police and the accountability provided by courts.

According to a report by the Los Angeles TV station KTLA, a 20-year-old Glendale woman now faces vehicular manslaughter charges “after allegedly running a stop sign and killing an elderly pedestrian while texting on her cell-phone.” The station reports that the pedestrian, an 80-year-old man, was thrown into the air and died of the head trauma suffered as he landed on the sidewalk. The accident took place in September. Police arrested the driver a few days ago after concluding a three-month investigation.

California’s laws on cellphone use by drivers are similar to Oregon’s (in some respects they are actually stronger: California explicitly bans cellphone use by school bus drivers in all circumstances, a provision the Oregon distracted driving law omits). Like California, the Oregon distracted driving law also allows for “primary” enforcement, meaning that offenders can be pulled over solely for breaking the ban on using a handheld phone or texting while driving. The question we have to ask is how often this actually happens (texting, in particular, is relatively easy to hide by simply holding the phone low enough that it is difficult or impossible for an officer glancing through the driver’s window to see).

The accountability provided by our courts is an important part of this equation. If you or a loved one have been the victim of a Portland distracted driver you owe it to yourself to speak with an Oregon distracted driving attorney at the earliest possible opportunity. The criminal and civil justice systems provide different types of accountability. For many victims a civil case may offer their best opportunity to ensure that justice is done.

KTLA.com: 20-year-old Arrested in Texting While Driving Death of Elderly Pedestrian

Governors Highway Safety Association – Table outlining state Distracted Driving laws

An Associated Press story, reprinted in The Oregonian, offers a gut-wrenching reminder of the dangers of Washington and Oregon distracted driving.

According to the news agency, a couple and their 8-year-old nephew all died when the husband lost control of his SUV on I-182 near Richland. The report quotes the Washington State Patrol saying the driver “was on the phone moments before” the vehicle “swerved off the road and rolled seven times.” The couple’s three children – ages 10, 8 and 2 – were also in the SUV. The older children were injured and received treatment at area hospitals. The toddler was unharmed.

Washington, like Oregon, has a distracted driving law that forbids use of a handset while behind the wheel. Though both states laws allow for “primary” enforcement (i.e. you can be pulled over just for being on the phone. In some other states distracted driving enforcement is “secondary” meaning that some other alleged violation – such as speeding – has to be the initiating factor in a traffic stop), we all know that it is relatively easy to skirt distracted driving laws when there are no law enforcement officers in sight.

This accident, however, is the most tragic sort of reminder of the dangers of doing so. Washington and Oregon enacted distracted driving laws with the goal of helping keep motorists safe. The fact that one may, on a particular stretch of road, be relatively likely to get away with breaking the distracted driving law does not mean that doing so is a good idea. Distracted driving is illegal because it is unsafe – regardless of whether or not the police are watching at any given moment.

Beyond the tickets issued by police officers, victims of Washington and Oregon distracted drivers should consider the help a Portland distracted driving attorney can offer as they try to rebuild their lives in the wake of an accident caused by someone else’s recklessness. The citation issued by local police or state troopers will not make you, the victim, whole again. For that only the court system can help – and an Oregon distracted driving attorney will prove to be your best ally as you set out to navigate it.

AP via The Oregonian: Washington state patrol says driver was on phone moments before crash that killed three

A task force formed earlier this year to address shortcomings at TriMet, Portland’s public transportation authority, has issued a scathing report calling for sweeping changes in the culture of the transportation agency. In particular, the task force wants TriMet to strike the word “accident” from both its dictionary and its mindset.

“The group recommended eliminating the term ‘accident’ from its vocabulary, saying it implies that collisions are unpreventable,” The Oregonian reported. The Task Force was formed after a horrific incident last April in which a bus driver making an illegal left turn hit five people in a Portland crosswalk, killing two of them.

Among other things, the group suggested new incentives for TriMet employees to work toward improving safety performance, greater use of traffic and collision data to determine where Portland’s safety trouble spots are located, the appointment of a senior official charged only with overseeing safety issues and the development of better systems through which to assess driver performance.

According to the newspaper, the group opted not to take a position on the contentious issue of driver surveillance: the idea of training security cameras on the drivers themselves to help ensure that they are not engaging in Portland distracted driving. According to The Oregonian, “TriMet suggested the idea to the task force after firing a bus driver for reading his Kindle behind the wheel.”

We can all welcome the Task Force’s work as a good step toward improving safety on public transport. Still, when collisions do occur victims need to move aggressively to protect themselves. These are the kind of situations where the advice and assistance offered by a Portland bus crash lawyer can be invaluable. An experienced Oregon personal injury attorney with specialized knowledge of bus crashes, train accidents and other public transportation mishaps can help victims better understand where they stand in terms of the law, and help them take the actions needed to obtain justice and restore balance to their lives in the wake of an accident.

The Oregonian: Report says TriMet must change its culture to achieve new levels of safety

Regular readers of this blog know that I have been reminding Oregonians since last year of the importance of the Oregon distracted driving law that went into effect January 1. An ever-growing number of studies nationwide testify to the importance of concentration behind the wheel and the particular dangers posed by hand-held cellphones.

Last week saw a Portland car crash that highlighted these truths in an exceptionally ironic manner. According to a report on KPTV’s website a Portland driver who was talking on his cellphone rear-ended a police car. OK, it was an unmarked patrol car, not a marked cruiser. Still, if you are going to have an accident while violating the Oregon distracted law, getting collared because you hit a cop car does tend to make things look even worse.

According to KPTV the accident took place on I-205 near Foster Road early last Tuesday morning. The 70-year old driver of a Toyota was, according to police quoted by the TV station, heading south on the interstate while using his cellphone without a hands-free device when he rear-ended the police car as it cruised along at 55 miles per hour.

No one was hurt in the accident. The drivers of both vehicles involved in the Portland car accident reportedly were wearing their seat belts. According to KGW.com the driver of the civilian vehicle “was cited for careless driving and operating a motor vehicle while using a mobile communication device.”

The police, of course, can defend themselves. The rest of us do not have the same resources. That is where the assistance an experienced Portland distracted driving attorney offers can prove to be invaluable. If you or a loved one have been involved in an accident caused by an Oregon distracted driver you owe it to yourself to consult with an Oregon car accident lawyer with expertise in distracted driving cases.

KPTV.com: Distracted Driver Hits Patrol Car, Troopers Say

KGW.com: Driver on cell phone plows into cop on I-205

In a sign of the ever-growing concern with distracted driving, a San Antonio bus driver has been convicted of reckless driving for texting while behind the wheel. His city bus, moving at 34 miles per hour according to police testimony, rear-ended an SUV in rush hour traffic, according to a report in the San Antonio Express-News. After watching footage from an on-board surveillance camera that showed the driver checking and sending texts on his cellphone for a full six minutes leading up to the June 2008 accident, Jurors returned a guilty verdict in just 10 minutes.

Prosecutors are requesting jail time for the driver (he could face up to 30 days), saying he should be made an example of the dangers of how reckless distracted driving is. Sentencing is scheduled to take place in November.

The conviction is significant, in part, because texting while behind the wheel is not, in and of itself, illegal in Texas, as it is here in Oregon. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety bus drivers are, legally speaking, perfectly free to text while they drive in Texas so long as no passengers age 17 or younger are on board (which presumably rules out texting by school bus operators, but leaves municipal bus drivers in the clear). Prosecutors, however, argued successfully that texting is so obviously dangerous an activity that doing so while driving fits any reasonable standard of reckless driving, according to the Express-News.

The conviction, in some ways, confirms the findings of a study released only days earlier which found texting among adults to be more widespread than is commonly supposed. The survey by the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project sought to examine the widely held assumption that texting is largely confined to teenagers and college students. It found that while 12-17 year olds do, indeed, send five times as many texts per day as adults, a surprising 72% of grown-ups send and receive text messages. That figure is a marked increase on the 65% of adults an earlier version of the survey identified as texters in September of 2009.

Here in Oregon distracted driving in the form of texting or the use of a hand-held cellphone has been illegal since the beginning of the year. Unfortunately, it is also true that the legal penalties for Oregon distracted driving are relatively light. If you are the victim of a reckless or negligent Oregon distracted driver your best chance for achieving a just settlement lies in the civil courts. A Portland distracted driving lawyer can advise you on the best way to defend your rights and obtain the justice you deserve.

San Antonio Express-News: Texting Bus Driver Found Guilty

Pew Research Center Publications: Adults, Cell Phones and Texting

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety: state-by-state list of cellphone laws

A study released last week by AAA seems certain to add to the debate surrounding distracted driving in Oregon and elsewhere around the nation. According to the survey, as reported by the Chicago Tribune, two out of every three dog owners “said they routinely drive while petting or playing with their dogs.”

Need I mention that this is not a very safe practice?

In fact, according to Fox News (reporting on the same AAA study), an unrestrained animal in a moving car poses the same degree of distracted driving danger as texting. Texting while driving is, of course, illegal in Oregon and a growing number of other states. That is somewhat ironic since, as the Tribune notes, “there are no state laws requiring drivers to buckle up their pets or prohibiting them from holding animals on their laps.” The paper quotes a AAA spokeswoman saying the auto club considers this situation “an increasingly big problem.”

It should be said that the mere fact that no law requires a driver to restrain his dog does not exempt motorists from driving safely and responsibly. A driver who hits you because they were distracted by a dog in the car may not, technically speaking, have broken Oregon’s distracted driving law, but that does not give them a pass on what would otherwise be considered reckless or negligent driving.

The Tribune, citing National Highway Traffic Safety Administration figures, reports that approximately 6000 people “died in crashes involving a distracted or inattentive driver in 2008 and more than 500,000 were injured.” If you have become the victim of such a crash or Oregon car accident you have rights, regardless of whether or not the Oregon distracted driving law comes into play. Prompt consultation with a Portland car crash lawyer is an essential first step toward protesting your rights in the wake of any Oregon auto accident.

Fox News: We’re driven to distraction when Fido is Co-Pilot, study finds

Chicago Tribune: Dogs distract drivers, AAA warns

It was, perhaps, inevitable that distracted driving would one day be linked to the death of someone famous. Thus have celebrity watchers this week been obsessed with the Southern California car accident that claimed the life of Dr. Frank Ryan, a cosmetic surgeon well-known for operating on well-known people.

The initial reports of Ryan’s death were relatively straightforward: “The California Highway Patrol says Ryan’s 1995 Jeep Wrangler went off the side of Pacific Coast Highway near Malibu and landed on its roof Monday afternoon,” the Associated Press reported. It did not take long, however, for the nature of the story to change. Soon many media outlets were noting that California authorities are considering whether the car crash “was a result of distracted driving from texting and tweeting at the wheel,” according to a report by CBS News. According to CBS, Ryan “was sending pictures and updates to his twitter page” only “moments” before the fatal car accident.

As it is here in Oregon, texting while driving is illegal in California. Does it take the death of someone (moderately) famous to force home the message that texting while driving – even in places where it is legal (and, to repeat, that does not include either California or Oregon) is among the more insanely dangerous things one can do while also trying to operate a speeding car?

Tragedies like these are also a reminder of one of the main reasons why distracted driving laws, such as Oregon’s, exist in the first place. This accident, if indeed it was the result of distracted driving, involved only a single vehicle, but that fact is mainly a matter of luck. Oregon distracted drivers endanger everyone else on the road to almost the same extent that they endanger themselves. That is why victims of accidents involving an Oregon distracted driver are well-advised to make prompt contact with a Portland distracted driving attorney, who can help obtain the justice their injuries demand.

Part of the problem is that bans on Oregon texting and driving are relatively easy to flaunt, at least until something goes wrong while one is behind the wheel. In an ideal world, the social stigma of violating the Oregon distracted laws would, like that associated with drinking and driving, be almost as much of a deterrent to destructive behavior as the legal sanctions themselves. If the reports about Ryan’s death prove to be true, it will be a reminder of how far we still have to go before that becomes a reality.

CBS News: Did Dr. Frank Ryan die because he was tweeting?

AP: Celebrity surgeon Frank Ryan killed in car crash

A study published earlier this month by the Pew Internet & American Life Project documents what many of us probably knew in our hearts: distracted driving is more than just a teen problem. Following up the Project’s 2009 study of teens and distracted driving, the new report finds that “one in four American adults say they have texted while driving”. In fact, the proportion for adults who acknowledge having engaged in this especially dangerous activity – 27% - is basically the same as the percentage of teens – 26% - who acknowledge doing so.

Perhaps more shocking is the fact that 17% of all adults acknowledge having been so distracted “while talking or texting that they have physically bumped into another person or object” while behind the wheel.

As I have noted in a number of previous posts on Portland distracted driving, Oregon is one of a growing number of states that are attempting to crack down on the practice through legislation. With a small number of exceptions, Oregon distracted driving became illegal throughout the state at the beginning of this year. In a society where, according to the study, 82% of Americans over age 18 now own a cellphone and 58% of them text, distracted driving is likely to continue growing as an issue.

Portland, Salem, Medford and Eugene distracted driving all pose a danger to everyone on the road. While the practice is now illegal here in Oregon it would be naïve to believe that it has stopped. If you or a loved one have been in an accident involving an Oregon distracted driver it is important that you seek the advice and assistance of a Portland distracted driving lawyer as soon as possible. An Oregon personal injury attorney with a specialty in distracted driving can offer essential advice on the best way to protect your rights and receive the justice you deserve if you have been injured as a result of someone else’s irresponsible behavior behind the wheel.

The Money Times: Adults equally guilty of texting, talking as teens – study

Pew Internet & American Life Project – Adults and Cell Phone Distractions

As I have noted in a number of previous posts, the new Oregon distracted driving law which came into effect this year allows for “primary enforcement”. That means Oregon police officers can pull drivers over for talking on a handheld cellphone. In some other states, where primary enforcement is not the rule, police must first have noted another offense (speeding, for example, or reckless driving) and may then ticket cellphone use or texting as a secondary, or additional, charge after making the initial traffic stop.

While there is relatively little Oregon distracted driving data available so far (the law has not yet been in force for six months), anecdotal evidence suggests that few of the state’s police departments have made a strong primary enforcement push regarding the distracted driving law.

That, however, may be beginning to change. As the Siuslaw News reports, Florence officials have come to believe that the cellphone ban is not being taken sufficiently seriously. City police issued more than 55 warnings for violations of the Oregon distracted driving law last month alone. The paper quotes the police chief: “That’s way too many for a town our size,” and indicates that officers intend to begin cracking down.

Police officials quoted by the newspaper also warn against viewing the Oregon distracted driving law’s exemption for people using handheld cellphones “if operation is necessary to their job” as an easy way around the ban. As the local police chief notes, the actual wording of the law gives officers great discretion in deciding what constitutes a “necessary use” of a cellphone when behind the wheel.

Oregon distracted driving is a serious issue that can have civil as well criminal consequences. If you have been the victim of an accident involving a Portland, Florence, Salem or Medford distracted driver it is essential that you speak with an experienced Oregon distracted driving attorney as soon as possible after the incident. A Portland distracted driving lawyer can help you win the compensation you deserve, and ensure that reckless and distracted drivers pay for their negligence.

The Siuslaw News: Florence police say: Hang up and drive

Late last month I summarized the key findings of a New York Times article on the latest gadgets available to Oregon drivers and designed to combat distracted driving. Products like this have become increasingly important since the Oregon distracted driving law went into effect in January. As a Portland distracted driving attorney I’ve worked hard to keep on top of both the technological and legal sides of this fast-developing area of the law.

As I noted last month, one barrier to effective high-tech solutions combating Portland distracted driving is what has become known as the “passenger problem”: if your anti-distracted driving app works mainly by disabling all or part of your phone while the car is in motion (as determined by the phone’s GPS), how does that effect someone who is riding in the car but is not behind the wheel? Cutting down on Portland injury car crashes linked to distracted driving is a priority for everyone – but it is also a reality of modern life that not everyone making calls or texting from a moving car is behind the wheel.

My earlier post noted that different products deal with this issue in different ways. I mentioned that one product, Zoomsafer, allowed users to bypass its call blocking functions by completing a timed puzzle – presumably one too difficult to attempt while driving. Shortly after publishing that blog, however, I received an email from ZoomSafer’s Marketing Manager, Eleanor Jones, which reads, in part:

“Users cannot bypass ZoomSafer's software by successfully completing a timed puzzle. We believe that such a mechanism is incredibly dangerous as it encourages drivers determined to flout the block to completely disregard the road in order to regain access to their phones' texting functions.”

The system, she writes, does have a “passenger mode” which, in effect, puts “the automatic speed detection on ‘snooze’.” This, frankly, is good news, if only because lack of some route around the passenger problem threatens to emerge as a major barrier to adoption of anti-distracted driving devices in Oregon and elsewhere around the country. We are probably still a year or so away from having good statistical data on the new Oregon distracted driving ban and its effectiveness, but high tech solutions designed to address user’s concerns while keeping them safe seem like a very good start.

Continue reading "High Tech Solutions for Oregon Distracted Driving – A Follow-Up" »

Two months ago I wrote about “Textecution”, a smartphone application available for phones using Google’s Android operating system. At the time I noted that the application’s approach – using a phone’s GPS capabilities to determine whether the user is in a moving vehicle and, if so, to turn off some or all of a handset’s functions – seemed to be the wave of the future.

Sure enough, barely eight weeks later, New York Times technology columnist David Pogue has published a detailed review of four similar applications, all of which seek to address the growing problem of distracted driving. Textecution was not among the applications reviewed this week by Pogue. All of the ones he did look at, however, take a similar approach.

As Pogue notes, iZup, tXtBlocker, CellSafety and ZoomSafer approach the problem of Oregon distracted driving in differing ways but seem to be aimed at the same market: parents of teenagers (or perhaps to bosses who fear that employees on the phone while using the company vehicle will cause an Oregon car accident leading to a lawsuit). Aside from ZoomSafer, all of the applications reviewed require a monthly subscription fee. Purchase prices range from free (for iZup, though, again, there is a monthly fee) to $25.

A useful chart at the Times website compares the features of the four applications, some of which allow calls from certain numbers (such as the user’s parents) through even when others are blocked. tXtBlocker even allows users to specify a “no-phone zone” causing the phone to go dead when, for example, a teenager is on school grounds. The applications also take different approaches to what has been called the passenger problem: if the application uses the GPS to tell when the car is in motion, where does that leave people who are in the car but aren’t behind the wheel? Cellsafety and ZoomSafer allow the block to be bypassed if one solves a timed puzzle (presumably one that no one actually driving would be able to handle).

In the months since Oregon’s ban on texting and the use of hand-held phones by drivers went into effect more and more attention has been paid to technological solutions such as these. If you have been the victim of an accident involving a Portland distracted driver, however, the time has come to turn away from technology and seek the assistance of an Oregon distracted driving attorney. It is important to select an attorney skilled in the nuances of this rapidly-developing legal field, one who is up on the latest legal developments both in our state and elsewhere.

New York Times: Your Phone is Locked. Just Drive.

With Oregon distracted driving on the minds of many motorists as the state’s new ban on the use of hand-held cellphones and texting by drivers takes effect, a court case in California last week became the latest important legal decision to remind everyone how serious an issue this is.

According to the Associated Press, a 42 year old California man has been sentenced to four years in prison following a car accident in which he struck and killed a pedestrian. Martin Kuehl was texting as he drove through the southern California city of Newport Beach in August 2008. According to the AP, “prosecutors argued that he had an unobstructed view of the crosswalk” where he struck and killed the pedestrian, but “failed to slow down or break in any way.”

Interestingly, the accident took place one month before California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation banning texting behind the wheel throughout the state. That fact is an important reminder that the consequences of Portland distracted driving can go far beyond those directly related to the Oregon distracted driving law.

The criminal penalties mandated by the new Oregon distracted driving law are relatively mild compared to the civil and criminal sanctions that could result from a serious Oregon auto accident. If you, or a loved one, have been injured in a Portland, Salem or Eugene car crash the assistance of an Oregon car crash injury lawyer is a crucial part of your struggle to achieve a just outcome after falling victim to a tragedy.

AP in the San Francisco Chronicle: OC Driver Gets 4 Years for Fatal Texting Accident

San Francisco Chronicle: California bans text messaging while driving

The New York Times reported recently on efforts by the federal Department of Transportation to tighten rules governing distracted driving in Oregon and elsewhere in the nation. According to the newspaper, the department wants to make a temporary ban on texting by long-haul truckers permanent. Safety advocates, however, say those rules do not go far enough.

According to the Times, the real concern among highway safety groups focuses on the in-cab computers that have become standard equipment in much of the nation’s trucking fleet. “We want the department to continue down this road of looking at the devices that are highly distracting and take action to curb those as well,” the paper quoted Judith Stone, president of Advocates for Highway Safety, saying.

The department is currently gearing up to take public comments about making the texting rule permanent, but is reported to be receptive to input on a broader ban. Onboard computers are a common sight in the cabs of large trucks. These often combine the features of commercial GPS units with links to dispatchers at a trucking or shipping company’s headquarters.

With concern rising nationwide about distracted driving, Oregon motorists are finding there are simply more and more things to worry about when considering the other drivers on the road. If you have been involved in an accident with an Oregon distracted driver, prompt consultation with a Portland distracted driving lawyer is imperative. There are many activities (such as operating an onboard computer in the cab of a speeding semi-truck) that fall outside the scope of the Oregon distracted driving law that went into effect last January. The fact that some forms of distracted driving are legal does not, however, mean that a reckless, distracted driver cannot be held responsible for his actions. An experienced Oregon distracted driving attorney can advise you on the remedies you may have depending on the exact nature and circumstances of your Oregon distracted driving car crash.

New York Times: Banning Texting in Truck Raises Other Questions

A new high-tech device represents an early – though almost certainly not the last – attempt to solve the problem of distracted driving via technology. An application called “Textecution” can, when installed on a compatible smartphone, disable texting, email and web surfing functions while the owner is driving.

According to the tech site TMC News the application is currently available only for handsets running Google’s Andriod operating system, though versions for other platforms are anticipated. The site reports that the application is being marketed to parents as a way to promote safer driving habits among teens. A number of studies in Oregon and nationwide have shown distracted driving – specifically texting or talking on the phone while behind the wheel – to be a growing problem. The legislature has sought to crack down on Oregon distracted driving by banning texting by Oregon drivers, as well as the use of phones without a hands-free device.

As TMC points out, in its early form Textecution has some bugs that may need to be worked out. It reportedly uses a phone’s GPS capabilities to determine whether the phone is in a moving vehicle. That does not, however, make it capable of distinguishing between a phone whose owner is driving the car and one whose owner is merely sitting in the passenger seat (or riding on a bus).

Still, it seems likely that as is so often the case in the world of personal technology a clunky early version will be followed within a year or two by something that does the same thing much more efficiently. It also is an indication of the seriousness with which citizens and policy-makers alike are coming to view Oregon distracted driving (were there no perception that people are taking the issue seriously there would be no incentive for software developers to try to find a market).

Even with technology striving to help fix this problem, the legal system remains a significant deterrent to dangerous behavior. If you or a loved one has been the victim of a Portland distracted driver, consulting with an Oregon distracted driving accident attorney should be a top priority. Even if the police have not cited one party to an accident for Oregon driving and texting, if such behavior played a role in the accident you may be entitled to significant compensation to replace lost wages and salary, or to help with medical bills.

TMC News: Textecution Disables Texting, Email and Web Browsing While Driving

In another sign of the speed with which distracted driving has gone from a fringe issue to center stage, the US Department of Transportation moved Tuesday to ban bus drivers and drivers of large trucks from texting while operating their vehicles, according to media reports. The measure will exist above and beyond the Oregon distracted driving law that went into effect this month.

The New York Times reports that the ban is effective immediately and that violators will “face civil or criminal fines of up to $2,750.” Here in Oregon distracted driving, including texting and the use of hand-held cellphones behind the wheel, has been illegal since the first of the year. Similar bans exist in about a dozen other states as well as the District of Columbia. The federal government is able to go beyond these state laws because of the authority it possesses to regulate the trucking industry at the national level.

In addition to cellphones the new rules also cover the dashboard computers long-haul drivers use to communicate with their dispatchers. The move comes partly in response to an increasing body of statistical evidence of the dangers posed by distracted driving. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has been an increasingly vocal opponent of distracted driving since taking office last year.

The new regulations should also benefit drivers who have been involved in a Portland traffic accident involving an Oregon distracted driver. As laws aimed at distracted driving tighten up throughout the nation, it may become increasingly difficult for reckless drivers to justify their conduct in court. Pedestrians, motorists and cyclists injured by an Portland distracted driver should promptly consult a Portland personal injury lawyer. Beyond the criminal sanctions an Oregon distracted driver may be subject to, victims in such accidents may also be entitled to compensation for their injuries, damage to vehicles, lost income and pain and suffering.

New York Times: Government bans texting by truck and bus drivers

Reuters in Insurance Journal: U.S. bans texting by drivers of large trucks, buses

Oregon’s new distracted driving law helped earn the state the state a ‘Green Light’ – the highest rating – in the annual report card issued by Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety. For 2009 the group added a ban on texting while behind the wheel to its list of recommended state-level legal and safety measures. Oregon’s distracted driving law, which bans texting, was signed into law in 2009 and came into force this year.

Overall, Advocates judged states by the number and strength of 15 different legal areas associated with highway safety. Oregon was one of ten states (plus the District of Columbia) to earn the ‘Green Light’ designation.

Rising awareness of Oregon distracted driving and other highway safety issues was a key feature of the state’s politics last year. As the new law takes effect it raises separate questions about how it will be enforced by the state’s courts and what that may mean for drivers or pedestrians injured by an Oregon distracted driver.

If you have been involved in an accident involving a Portland, Salem or Corvallis distracted driver it is important to make contact with an Oregon personal injury lawyer as soon as possible. A Portland auto accident lawyer can help you obtain the compensation you deserve for injuries caused by a driver who was not paying enough attention to the road.

Tucson Citizen: Report card on highway safety shows more states fail, fall under more pointed scrutiny; Safety advocates call for urgent state action in 2010

With the stroke of midnight and the beginning of 2010 Oregon joined the growing list of states restricting the use of cellphones by people driving cars. In Oregon and around the country distracted driving has emerged over the last two or three years as a serious issue of public concern. The interesting question may, in fact, be why it took so long for this to happen. As the New York Times link below indicates, concern about the issue is not particularly new. AAA issued its first warning that drivers ought to pull over before picking up the phone in 1984 (yes, 1984).

Oregon’s new distracted driving law requires drivers to use a hands-free device, such as a Bluetooth headset, when making and receiving calls. Telephone use by drivers under the age of 18 is banned entirely. Also banned (for drivers of all ages) is texting while behind the wheel. More details about the new law can be found here.

While there have been a number of media reports during the last few weeks of brisk headset sales around Oregon, it will probably take some time before the real impact of the Oregon distracted driving law becomes clear. Anecdotal evidence from other states with distracted driving laws indicates that enforcement regimes vary widely (for example: New York, one of the first states to enact a distracted driving law, has a reputation for relatively relaxed enforcement while Washington DC is said to be unusually strict).

The fact that Oregon now restricts distracted driving may also make the issue the subject of more civil actions around the state. If you have been injured by someone who was inappropriately using a cellphone behind the wheel, consulting with a Portland distracted driving lawyer should be among your top priorities. Even if the police have not issued a criminal citation to an Oregon distracted driver you, as the victim, may be entitled to a substantial settlement.

Salem Statesman-Journal: ‘Hang up and drive’ starts Friday

New York Times Interactive: Timeline: The Selling of the Cellphone

The new Oregon distracted driving law that comes into effect Friday has been getting a lot of attention over the last week. This weekend, however, the state’s leading newspaper raised serious questions about whether the law already contains a fatal flaw.

An editorial in the Portland newspaper The Oregonian points out that the Oregon distracted driving law requiring drivers to use a hands-free device if they are talking on the phone while behind the wheel contains an exception for people “operating a motor vehicle in the scope of a person’s employment if operation of the motor vehicle is necessary for the person’s job.” The paper says the language was inserted at the insistence of business lobbyists, but worries that “necessary for a person’s job” is not defined anywhere in the legislation.

The loophole, the paper notes, “may well be big enough for real estate agents, contractors, FedEx drivers and just about anyone who needs a car for work.” Interpretation of the provision will lie with Oregon’s courts, and it may take some time for legal judgments under the new law to offer Oregon distracted driving attorneys guidance on what “necessary for the person’s job” means in practice.

The uncertainty likely to surround the new distracted driving law makes consulting with a Portland distracted driving attorney especially important if you are facing distracted driving charges brought under the new law, or have been the victim of an accident in which you believe the other party may have been in violation of Oregon’s cell phone ban. An Oregon distracted driving lawyer can be a key ally if you find yourself forced to navigate what, for Oregonians, is still relatively uncharted legal territory.

The Oregonian: A New Year’s Resolution on Cell Phones

On January 1 Oregon joins the ranks of states banning texting while driving as well as the use of a hand-held cellphone. A recent blog and accompanying discussion on the New York Times website, however, asks an intriguing question for Oregon distracted drivers: are you willing to acknowledge that your own behavior behind the wheel is a problem?

The Times cites a recent survey conducted by the AAA Foundation. As the paper paraphrases the results: “essentially, many people believe, ‘I can do it safely, but you’re a menace.’” This attitude, of course, is hardly confined to the question of telephone use. How many people do you know who are actually willing to say ‘I’m a bad driver’?

Examining this attitude is especially timely. Though the new Oregon distracted driving law allows for primary enforcement (i.e. the police can pull you over just for talking on a cellphone – they will not need to look for some other initial violation, such as speeding or driving recklessly) the fine for violating the law will be relatively low ($90). Moreover, in most states that already have these laws few people, in practice, get ticketed just for using a phone.

Legally speaking, of course, the answer is that Oregon distracted driving is – and ought to be – everyone’s problem. Distracted drivers make the road less safe for all of us. That is why civil liability is so important here. Above and beyond the criminal sanctions coming into force next month, people who drive while texting or talking on a handset need to know that they are exposing themselves to significant Oregon personal injury liability. A Portland distracted driving lawyer can help you recover the damages you deserve if you have been injured by an Oregon distracted driver.

Take the new law to heart both in your own driving, and in considering, after an accident, whether an Oregon personal injury lawyer can help you get the compensation to which you may be entitled.

New York Times: Do multitasking drivers have double standards?

A timely reminder for this holiday weekend comes from USA Today travel columnist Bill McGee. His headline says it all: “Distracted While Driving? Pull Over!” The law, as he notes, is only part of the issue. Oregon is among the growing number of states that have banned texting and use of hand-held cellphones while driving. But it is worth remembering that aside from endangering yourself, your passengers and everyone else on the road distracted driving can leave you open to a significant Oregon personal injury judgment if a court finds you liable for an Oregon personal injury accident. As I’ve noted elsewhere on this blog, such a finding can take place even if the police do not issue a citation at the scene of the accident.

McGee cites some sobering statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, such as the fact that “distraction was a factor in 12% of all fatal crashes in 2004, but rose to 16% in 2008.”

The good news is that recognition of the problem is widespread. An Insurance Information Institute survey last summer found that 80% of respondents supported a ban on texting while driving. For handheld cellphone use the figure was 67%. Even allowing for the fact that an insurance industry survey might be tilted toward a ban (texting leads to more crashes; more crashes lead to more claims), the logic behind the data is hard to argue with.

If you have been the victim of a Portland traffic accident injury and think the driver involved may have been distracted it is crucial to seek the advice of an Oregon personal injury attorney as soon as possible. Even forms of distracted driving that are still, technically, legal may under some circumstances be construed as negligent for the purpose of a civil court case. An Oregon personal injury lawyer with expertise in distracted driving issues can offer advice and guidance and help you obtain the compensation you deserve.

USA Today: Distracted While Driving? Pull Over!