Attorney decides to test legality of texting while on Autopilot

[S4WRXTTCS]

I love jokes of lawyers being stupid.

Thanks to the OP for the priceless story.

 

[cpa]

I can see this thread as being placed into evidence in a trial along these lines at some future date. :tongue:

 

[AmpedRealtor]

No you're not technically "driving". All comes down to how the law is written your state. He is the "operator" of the vehicle. As someone quoted a law from one state above, they have this covered in stating that you may not text while "operating" a vehicle. In this case, he is guilty. Other other states however state you may not text/talk while "driving" a vehicle. So it just depends on how the law is written in his particular state. As a "driver" he's not guilty, if he can prove that auto-pilot was engaged at the time of the occurrence. As an "operator" of the vehicle, he is guilty, regardless.

I think you are trying to make a distinction without a difference. When TACC is engaged, you are still operating and driving the vehicle. When Autopilot is engaged, you are still operating AND driving the vehicle. Taking your hands off the wheel does not delete you as the driver of the vehicle. You are still responsible for where the vehicle goes, the speed at which it gets there, and for emergency intervention in the event that the Autopilot misbehaves. However, in the eyes of the law, you are still the responsible party.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, since we're making up ridiculous scenarios, what about this:

You get in the car with the seat belt buckled but tucked behind you because you hate seat belts. You're driving along on 6-lane (3 on each side) divided highway with a speed limit of 70 MPH, going 70 MPH. You engage autopilot. Now, you're driving along and you end up in tons of traffic. The car stops behind the car in front and you're stuck for a while. Well, you decide to climb out the driver side window because your door is broken and you need some fresh air. You're sitting on the guard rail playing on Facebook when all of a sudden traffic starts moving again. Much to your surprise, your car goes too since you never took it out of gear or disengaged autopilot. Now your car is gone, 70 MPH behind the car it was tailing. Speed limit drops to 55 MPH and a cop tries to pull your car over. Eventually he lucks out and is able to by jumping in front of it and slowing to a stop while the car followed his car. To his surprise, no one is in the car that has driven for 10 miles by itself.

While the puzzled cop is trying to figure out what to do, you, having hitchhiked a ride to catch your car, pull up and go over to your car. You explain that it's your car and it took off by itself and drove the last 10 miles on its own.

Who gets the speeding ticket? Were you driving still? You weren't even in the car. (For simplicity we'll say no one else was either)

My answer would be you should get some reckless endangerment type of ticket for being an idiot... but what if you never showed up? There's no proof you set the car in motion. The cop only ever saw the car with no driver, so no witness to say you were the driver. The car was obeying the law aside from the speed limit change. What gives?

Wouldn't the butt sensor prevent this scenario?

 

[Chris TX]

Lawyers, lulz.

 

[wk057]

Wouldn't the butt sensor prevent this scenario?

Nope: Tesla Autopilot Stunt w/driver in back seat - DO NOT ATTEMPT - YouTube

 

[anxman]

He deserved the ticket. Glad he got one.

 

[Larry Chanin]

I was having lunch with a couple of attorney friends the other day and asked their thoughts on the legality of texting while NOT driving. E.G., autopilot is handling the driving duties and you're just sitting in what was traditionally called the drivers seat. Note that this was a theoretical discussion — all three of us have been involved in writing legislation to ban texting while driving (and I'd like to ban any phone use including hands-free, but that's another topic).

One decided to explore this a bit more practically when he was driving home last night when he noticed a state trooper coming up behind him. He was already in auto pilot and so made a good show of holding his phone up quite high so that it was obvious he was using both hands to hold his phone and paying more attention to his phone than the road. As he desired he got pulled over. He carefully explained that he wasn't really texting while driving as he wasn't really driving. The car was driving.

He ended up spending nearly 30 minutes explaining to the trooper that the car really does have auto-pilot, showed him some videos, etc. He offered him a demo ride but that was turned down. He still ended up with paper and is unsure if he'll press the point in court. I'm guessing he will.

As a lawyer involved in writing legislation to ban texting while driving, it is not clear what your friend's point would be to oppose the ticket in court. How does that advance his cause?

I'm guessing that he will eventually see that it doesn't help the cause, nor his career, and he will not press the "point" (whatever that is) in court.

Larry

 

[Quantum`]

Nope: Tesla Autopilot Stunt w/driver in back seat - DO NOT ATTEMPT - YouTube

Whacky.

Now expect your insurance to be canceled.

 

[wk057]

Whacky.

Now expect your insurance to be canceled.

lol?

 

[CHG-ON]

Argue as many of we may, the person in the driver's seat is still, under current law, completely responsible for safely conducting the vehicle.

Please talk amongst yourselves!

:cursing:

 

[mobe]

In Missouri, if the keys are in the vehicle, the vehicle is pulled off of the roadway and you are sleeping but you are under the influence of drugs or alcohol you will be charged with "driving under the influence". This happened to a co- worker. Was the person operating the vehicle? No. Was the person driving the vehicle? No. Were they charged for driving under the influence? Yes.

 

[bonnie]

California is looking ahead: California draft regulations: Self-driving cars must have steering wheel, licensed driver.

Vehicles can't be totally self-driving. The draft calls for a licensed (human) driver and working steering wheel in every autonomous vehicle on the road.

The idea is for this regulatory framework to stay in place from current prototype tests through a transition to broader consumer use, since companies like Google and Tesla are promising customer-ready models within a few years. The draft calls for manufacturers to offer customers supplemental training courses that award certificates of completion and are recorded on individuals' driver's licenses.

 

[skilly]

this story sounds bogus. I can't believe that an attorney would test this in the manner described. There is no logic to the claim he wasn't really driving...just sounds made up to stir dialogue.

 

[cpa]

In Missouri, if the keys are in the vehicle, the vehicle is pulled off of the roadway and you are sleeping but you are under the influence of drugs or alcohol you will be charged with "driving under the influence". This happened to a co- worker. Was the person operating the vehicle? No. Was the person driving the vehicle? No. Were they charged for driving under the influence? Yes.

California asserts our DUI statutes (23152a and 23152b) similarly. A good friend of a client of mine was hauling his boat trailer behind his pickup when the right rear wheel of the trailer went off the road. He pulled over onto the shoulder of the road and left the truck/trailer to go to my client's cabin to call AAA. The driver was stone cold sober while he was driving. AAA said it would be about 90 minutes before the tow truck could meet them at the site. So, the pickup driver got pretty lit up during the wait. When it was time to meet AAA, my client, his 21-year-old son and the pickup owner piled into my client's car.

Lo and behold, CHP was waiting when everyone arrived. The plan was to have my client drive the pickup/trailer, and his son drive his car back. CHP saw them arrive separately with my client driving. The pickup owner was arrested for DUI. The trial lasted about half a day. The jury returned in 10 minutes with a not guilty verdict. The arresting officer was pilloried upon cross examination by defense counsel.

 

[brucet999]

In Missouri, if the keys are in the vehicle, the vehicle is pulled off of the roadway and you are sleeping but you are under the influence of drugs or alcohol you will be charged with "driving under the influence". This happened to a co- worker. Was the person operating the vehicle? No. Was the person driving the vehicle? No. Were they charged for driving under the influence? Yes.

If he wasn't DUI and yet tested over the limit when police arrived, how had he and his car gotten there?

 

[mobe]

If he wasn't DUI and yet tested over the limit when police arrived, how had he and his car gotten there?

That I do not know. Although one would speculate that he was toasted when he pulled over to sleep it off.

 

[stopcrazypp]

If he wasn't DUI and yet tested over the limit when police arrived, how had he and his car gotten there?

Right. When you are the only person there (which was not the case mentioned by cpa) then that is circumstantial evidence you were DUI at some point, even though the officer didn't see you driving directly.

Of course it is possible you drove there, pulled over, and then started drinking, but good luck proving that and providing a explanation why you would want to do that.

To be fair, the situation is a bit different for the OP lawyer. While that lawyer had to also drive to get to the point where autopilot is activated, the anti-texting laws typically require the officer to witness both happening (officer can't cite you if you are pulled over and not in traffic). I suppose that is what the lawyer is trying to challenge.