Nevada considers technology to scan cellphones after crashes

[JacksinPA]

Nevada considers technology to scan cellphones after crashes

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) — Most states ban texting behind the wheel, but a legislative proposal could make Nevada one of the first states to allow police to use a contentious technology to find out if a person was using a cellphone during a car crash.

The measure is igniting privacy concerns and has led lawmakers to question the practicality of the technology, even while acknowledging the threat of distracted driving.
===============================================
First Amendment right to privacy? Searching your property without a warrant signed by a judge? There are several angles involved here that will likely be the subject of a lot of debate & lawsuits. But I know from personal experience that trying to place or answer a call on a cell phone while driving is asking for an accident to happen. Driving in urban areas is dangerous enough without people yakking on their cells, which we all see every day. I want a bumper sticker that says HANG UP AND DRIVE.

 

[gulfman]

There should be technology that stops cell phones from working while driving.

 

[Praxas]

Nevada considers technology to scan cellphones after crashes

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) — Most states ban texting behind the wheel, but a legislative proposal could make Nevada one of the first states to allow police to use a contentious technology to find out if a person was using a cellphone during a car crash.

The measure is igniting privacy concerns and has led lawmakers to question the practicality of the technology, even while acknowledging the threat of distracted driving.
===============================================
First Amendment right to privacy? Searching your property without a warrant signed by a judge? There are several angles involved here that will likely be the subject of a lot of debate & lawsuits. But I know from personal experience that trying to place or answer a call on a cell phone while driving is asking for an accident to happen. Driving in urban areas is dangerous enough without people yakking on their cells, which we all see every day. I want a bumper sticker that says HANG UP AND DRIVE.

Not sure how this would work. I use hands feee on my car all the time and take calls often. So since my cell phone is connected to the cars Bluetooth, if I were in a crash, that doesn’t mean I had the cell phone in hand but it would show in use.

 

[Praxas]

There should be technology that stops cell phones from working while driving.

Why? You can use Bluetooth and never have the phone in your hand and still take or make calls.

 

[JacksinPA]

Not sure how this would work. I use hands feee on my car all the time and take calls often. So since my cell phone is connected to the cars Bluetooth, if I were in a crash, that doesn’t mean I had the cell phone in hand but it would show in use.

I think the fact that the driver was USING the cell at the time of the accident is what they are after. If you're on the phone you can't be 100% concentrating on your driving.

 

[gulfman]

Why? You can use Bluetooth and never have the phone in your hand and still take or make calls.

You are in a car to pay attention where you are going.No need for any distractions.

 

[Praxas]

I think the fact that the driver was USING the cell at the time of the accident is what they are after. If you're on the phone you can't be 100% concentrating on your driving.

The same thing could be said about having a passenger in the vehicle or taking a drink of a beverage or loud music. You planning on banning all those things as well?

 

[Praxas]

You are in a car to pay attention where you are going.No need for any distractions.

Having a passenger in the car, drinking a beverage, or music is a distraction as well. You planning on banning all those things as well?

 

[JacksinPA]

You are in a car to pay attention where you are going.No need for any distractions.

I agree with someone who is an avowed Very Conservative? Incredible. But he is correct. Driving is a continual challenge, especially in big parking lots. PA has a fondness for 4-way stop intersections & I've run through at least one & watch people just run through them 6 cars at a time. And driving at night on unfamiliar roads is particularly hazardous. Additional distraction is not needed & the cops should have the ability to identify & punish offenders.

 

[Xelor]

Nevada considers technology to scan cellphones after crashes

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) — Most states ban texting behind the wheel, but a legislative proposal could make Nevada one of the first states to allow police to use a contentious technology to find out if a person was using a cellphone during a car crash.

The measure is igniting privacy concerns and has led lawmakers to question the practicality of the technology, even while acknowledging the threat of distracted driving.
===============================================
First Amendment right to privacy? Searching your property without a warrant signed by a judge? There are several angles involved here that will likely be the subject of a lot of debate & lawsuits. But I know from personal experience that trying to place or answer a call on a cell phone while driving is asking for an accident to happen. Driving in urban areas is dangerous enough without people yakking on their cells, which we all see every day. I want a bumper sticker that says HANG UP AND DRIVE.

So, when I first read the OP, I thought about plane crashes, not car crashes...LOL So what follows pertains to that context.

Does one need a warrant to search the dead's property? AFAIK, by and large, the deceased have almost no rights -- one cannot defame/libel the dead, for instance.​

• 
  [*=1]Rights of the Dead

There is also the matter that a homicide (or suspected one) scene is generally one exception to the Constitution's search and seizure proscription. I think the proximity of "stuff" to a scene comes into play, but the area of a plane crash is pretty big.

Too, the Federal Privacy Act is very clear. The deceased have no right to privacy with regard to anything the Act covers because it explicitly states its provisions do not apply to dead people. HIPAA, on the other hand, extends 50 years past one's expiration.

It's hard to imagine what practical value there is to prohibiting the search/scanning of a dead person's cell phone, particularly if doing so aides in some investigative matter pertaining to the plane and it's crash.​

As for ground vehicles, well, wouldn't the search yet be covered under the crime scene exclusion?

• United States v. Eatherton

 

[Rogue Valley]

Hang around. In a few decades or so all cars will be driverless.

 

[gulfman]

Its hard to text,tune radio,eat big mac and fries ,use lap top computer and worry about where you are going eh?

 

[AlphaOmega]

There should be technology that stops cell phones from working while driving.

How would your phone know you were driving?

 

[jimbo]

Why? You can use Bluetooth and never have the phone in your hand and still take or make calls.

But you're still distracted. You still need to answer. You still need to check to see who's calling.

If wheels are turning you are the captain of a two ton missile travelling at dozens of feet/second. That requires 100% of your thinking time.

How many of those calls are worth your or my life?

 

[JacksinPA]

The same thing could be said about having a passenger in the vehicle or taking a drink of a beverage or loud music. You planning on banning all those things as well?

I think have an amorous & overly attentive female passenger at the time of the accident might be against the law also.

 

[JacksinPA]

But you're still distracted. You still need to answer. You still need to check to see who's calling.

If wheels are turning you are the captain of a two ton missile travelling at dozens of feet/second. That requires 100% of your thinking time.

How many of those calls are worth your or my life?

They can always leave voice mail & you can call them back after you are parked. The timely launching of an ICBM does not rest on your answering your cell every time it rings.

 

[Praxas]

But you're still distracted. You still need to answer. You still need to check to see who's calling.

If wheels are turning you are the captain of a two ton missile travelling at dozens of feet/second. That requires 100% of your thinking time.

How many of those calls are worth your or my life?

So I take it you never have passengers in your car then less you are distracted. Also calls can be answered via voice recognition.

 

[Praxas]

I think have an amorous & overly attentive female passenger at the time of the accident might be against the law also.

Just talking with someone in the car is a distraction.

 

[PirateMk1]

Nevada considers technology to scan cellphones after crashes

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) — Most states ban texting behind the wheel, but a legislative proposal could make Nevada one of the first states to allow police to use a contentious technology to find out if a person was using a cellphone during a car crash.

The measure is igniting privacy concerns and has led lawmakers to question the practicality of the technology, even while acknowledging the threat of distracted driving.
===============================================
First Amendment right to privacy? Searching your property without a warrant signed by a judge? There are several angles involved here that will likely be the subject of a lot of debate & lawsuits. But I know from personal experience that trying to place or answer a call on a cell phone while driving is asking for an accident to happen. Driving in urban areas is dangerous enough without people yakking on their cells, which we all see every day. I want a bumper sticker that says HANG UP AND DRIVE.

The accident is past tense. Therefor there is no time restraint on LE. They can find out if some was driving and texting by pulling the records from the carrier with a subpoena.

 

[PirateMk1]

I think the fact that the driver was USING the cell at the time of the accident is what they are after. If you're on the phone you can't be 100% concentrating on your driving.

Same if you are eating a hamburger, doing your make up, talking on the CB, listening to the radio, paying attention to the GPS, looking in your mirrors, looking at your automotive gauges, or talking to the person sitting next to you. Should we ban all that as well?

 

[jimbo]

They can always leave voice mail & you can call them back after you are parked. The timely launching of an ICBM does not rest on your answering your cell every time it rings.

Exactly.

 

[jimbo]

So I take it you never have passengers in your car then less you are distracted. Also calls can be answered via voice recognition.

I have passengers. But when I'm driving I'm driving.

 

[PirateMk1]

You are in a car to pay attention where you are going.No need for any distractions.

If such is the case, all autos should be made with minimal gauges/ instrumentation (Speedo only) mounted line of sight, no radios, no displays, and separate passenger/ cargo compartment.

As a professional driver I find your comment to be asinine. By the fact that if you look in the mirrors of your vehicle are distracted from looking in your path in front of you, therefore blind in that sector till you resume looking through the windscreen.

 

[PirateMk1]

But you're still distracted. You still need to answer. You still need to check to see who's calling.

If wheels are turning you are the captain of a two ton missile travelling at dozens of feet/second. That requires 100% of your thinking time.

How many of those calls are worth your or my life?

Do you converse with your passengers, do you use a GPS, do you eat or drink? I reflect your question back to you.

 

[KevinKohler]

Then having kids screaming in the back seat should be illegal as well.