[2dogs]

SUGGESTION FOR THE PEOPLE OF NJ:

Maybe you could have your "legislators" draw up a list of the 4 or 5 things left that you can do WITHOUT GOVERNMENT APPROVAL in your state- might save you all some time and money.:rolleyes:



http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/2127694

New Jersey law makes driving drowsy a crime
By JOHN P. McALPIN
Associated Press

BORDENTOWN, N.J. -- As if staying alive were not enough of an incentive, motorists in New Jersey have another reason to make sure they are well-rested when they get behind the wheel -- a first-in-the-nation law against driving while drowsy.

Under Maggie's Law, police will not be pulling over drivers whose eyelids look heavy. But the law allows prosecutors to charge a motorist with vehicular homicide, punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $100,000 fine, in the event of a deadly crash if there is evidence the accident was caused by sleepiness.

The law went into effect last month and was named for a 20-year-old college student killed in 1997 by a van driver who hadn't slept for 30 hours.

Recent studies estimate 51 percent of motorists feel drowsy behind the wheel, and about two of every 10 drivers say they have fallen asleep while driving in the past year.

"We are so accustomed to being fatigued and tired and sleepy that it's part of our daily life, and we think nothing of getting behind the wheel and driving despite the horrible ramifications of that act," said Marcia Stein of the National Sleep Foundation, a nonprofit research organization.

New Jersey is the first state to specifically list going without sleep as a crime, according to Darrel Drobnich, a legislative analyst for the foundation. Similar bills are pending in New York and have been discussed by lawmakers in Washington state.

[gun-fucious]

i await the post Thanksgiving Tryptophan New Jersey road check

Ma'am is that a drumstick i see on your seat?

We are going to have to administer a field test

Please watch this 20 minute clip from CSPAN...

[Preacherman]

Uh-oh... :eek:

I can just see Kalifornia and Massachusetts learning from this law, and tightening their CCW regulations to include restrictions against carrying while tired!

:fire: :banghead: :scrutiny:

[Waitone]

. . . . . and to think there are those who think "Slippery Slope" argumentation is an improper form of debate.

At least in the case of NJ slippery slope argumentation is merely prophetic utterance.

[lapidator]

hmmm... i wonder how long it will take for this thread to fall into the, "if you drive while sleepy -- you're not responsible enough to own guns and should have your CCW permit revoked!!"

then, we'll have jpg's of car-crashes with dead driveres/passangers posted, as if the pictures themselves were proof enough that driving while sleepy and CCW should be legaly exclusive.

oh, brother...

lapidator

[cordex]

*yawn*
Just reading that made me sleepy. Oh the power of suggestion.

[Carlos Cabeza]

Gee, I'm guilty of that every morning commute.....................:rolleyes:

[dinosaur]

I`m really gonna lose sleep over this. :evil:

[geekWithA.45]

Hmmm?

Perhaps there was a defense to vehicular homicide known as the "I was sleepy" defense?

What utter content free feelgood crap this is.

This state makes me sick.

[Big_R]

As someone who worked graveyard shifts for 13 years or so, I know a thing or two about being tired. I have been up for well over 30 hours (work, school, etc.) and functioned properly. I never fell asleep, or have been in an accident. What bothers me is this is only admissable in cases where an accident has occured. Then a lawyer gets to tell someone whether they were tired or not.

Ryan

[WT]

The truck driver who fell asleep while driving and killed "Maggie" was fined $200. He served no jail time for killing an innocent person. "Maggie" did nothing wrong. She did not deserve to die.

Had she been killed by a DUI I am sure the truck driver would have been sent to prison for 10 years for vehicular homicide.

[WonderNine]

I just knew it would be called something like "maggie's" law or angie's law or bobbie's law. :barf:

[cuchulainn]

and to think there are those who think "Slippery Slope" argumentation is an improper form of debate.Are you saying you approve of this law because it's just a slippery slope from letting people drive drowsy to letting them drive drunk to repealing of the laws against murder to absolute anarchy with blood and rape in the streets? ;)

Friendly ribbing aside, this is a silly law -- it's basically "double-secret vehicular manslaughter" or at best "double-secret reckless driving." I guess Maggie's parents would have been happier if the trucker lost control because he was looking down at the leggy blonde in the car next to him.

[tcdrennen]

WT:
The truck driver who fell asleep while driving and killed "Maggie" was fined $200. He served no jail time for killing an innocent person. "Maggie" did nothing wrong. She did not deserve to die.

Had she been killed by a DUI I am sure the truck driver would have been sent to prison for 10 years for vehicular homicide.

No-one EVER deserves to die. And I'm sure "Maggie" will be missed and mourned by all who knew her; we are all diminished by tragedy like this.

But

making an honest mistake (driving while tired, misjudging and dozing behind the wheel, for example) IS NOT A CRIMINAL ACT. Reasonable people can make mistakes and sometimes it leads to tragedy. That's why we have insurance and civil liabilities, if necessary, to recompense the injured and/or survivors.

DUI requires the deliberate act of impairing oneself; reasonable people are expected to know this, and THAT makes DUI a crime due to reckless disregard - though dictating by statute a relationship between % blood alcohol and impairment is not a very precise measure. I digress.

In THIS case, exactly who benefits by sending the truck driver to prison? His family and friends? Maggie's? The People Of New Jersey? NO-ONE.

The only benefit is to the encroaching power of the nanny state mentality and further erosion of personal responsibility and individual rights.

Oh, and the lawyers get richer, of course. :fire: :cuss: :banghead:

[AnklePocket]

I really might have to move. I'll let ya know on November 5th. The leadership here is scary horrible. The challenge is in getting legitimately good people to run for office.

[MarkDido]

OK, I'll play Devil's Advocate...

I actually think that this is a good law.

After retiring from the Navy in '95, I went into the trucking industry.

DOT regulations limited driving time to 10 hours before requiring an 8 hour break. Even though they're much larger, modern tractor-trailers are actually no harder to drive on the Interstates than a U-Haul van (wide turns and backing-up aside)

I logged approximately 125,000 miles every year for 5 years. That's roughly 41 times more miles than the average 4-wheeler driver during the same period.

Had I caused an accident through my own negligence because I violated the 10 hour rule and drove drowsy, I would be held responsible.

So why is it OK for Dad, Mom, the kids and the dog to pile into the mini-van and drive 20 hours non-stop while on vacation?

Should't all drivers, regardless of the type of vehicle they frive, be held to the same standard?

[2dogs]

I really might have to move.

AnklePocket

Close your eyes, drive real fast toward the Ben Frank bridge- and escape to the (comparitively) free state of PA.

I swear, these days I dread going over to Jersey for fear that I may not be able to escape again.;)

[jimpeel]

I really hate this PC mandate to name all new laws after the last person who was affected whose parent/spouse/brother/sister/significant other got all upset and immediately went in search of a friendly legislator to hoist a bill with their dead daughter's/son's/spouse's/husband's/wife's/significant other's name on it.

We have Megan and Amber and Maggie and ... oh, wait are there ANY laws with boy's names? No? I guess boys aren't PC enough. Ever heard of "Take your son to work day"? Title IX for boys?

[pax]

Can't be enforced, won't be obeyed.

pax

To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt. -- Elizabeth Cady Stanton

[El Tejon]

As a tilecrawler, I can't help but think this one would be a real humdinger to prosecute.:confused: Maybe under exactly the right facts. Don't know.

If general assembly of PRNJ wants to do, O.K. but education would help a lot more.

pax, good news for Starbuck's, vanilla non-fat lattes are now tax-deductible in New Jersey as mandatory business expense to stay awake on commute to office.:D

[Zach S]

Under Maggie's Law, police will not be pulling over drivers whose eyelids look heavy. They must have some good eyes!!!

My eyelids always look heavy, I work gravyard shift.

So why is it OK for Dad, Mom, the kids and the dog to pile into the mini-van and drive 20 hours non-stop while on vacation? Yeah, sure, I'm gonna fill out my logbook to go get a pack of smokes.

[labgrade]

Just flush the toilet.

This country is is already in the $#i++er - might as well just pull the lever.

Until we actually go by the constitution - regulated powers - & bill of rights ...

well, we're just toast.

Heinlein's Crazy Years comes to mind.

I cannot be more amazed any longer - nor more saddened.

[jimpeel]

But the law allows prosecutors to charge a motorist with vehicular homicide, punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a $100,000 fine, in the event of a deadly crash if there is evidence the accident was caused by sleepiness.
I can see this now:

Prosecutor: "Officer Clancy, you observed the defendant after the accident?"

Officer Clancy: "Yes Sir."

Prosecutor: "What time was this?"

Officer Clancy: "3:35 AM"

Prosecutor: "And you were the arresting officer?"

Officer Clancy: "Yes Sir."

Prosecutor: "What did you observe about the defendant that caused you to effect an arrest?"

Officer Clancy: "He yawned."

Prosecutor: "Thank you, Officer Clancy, that will be all."

[Quartus]

What bothers me is this is only admissable in cases where an accident has occured.


:confused:


I don't think you all are reading very carefully. Maybe you're all too sleepy? This law does nothing to restrict freedom. It does what we all SAY we want gun laws to do - it punishes those who abuse a freedom and thereby cause harm. It it the ESSENCE of a "No harm - no foul." law! You can't be pulled over for looking a little sleepy - you only get popped if you cause an accident! Oh, and since it is a CRIMINAL law, you are innocent until proven guilty. Did we forget that little detail?


So being held responsible for your ACTIONS is now a bad thing? :confused:

[Bruce in West Oz]

A variation of this has been law here for years. My father-in-law nodded off early one morning driving in the country, ran off the road and rolled his car. He and his granddaughter were the only "victims". (Both survived -- Pia with cracked collarbone and bruises; F-I-L was very lucky -- broke his neck but spinal cord was undamaged.)

Police charged him with 'negligent driving' -- he copped a fine (hefty) and a few demerit points (lose 12 points; lose your driver's licence). No-one had to prove he was actually asleep -- the fact he simply couldn't remember was obviously proof enough for the magistrate.

Bruce

[Moparmike]

I don't think you all are reading very carefully. Maybe you're all too sleepy? This law does nothing to restrict freedom. It does what we all SAY we want gun laws to do - it punishes those who abuse a freedom and thereby cause harm. It it the ESSENCE of a "No harm - no foul." law! You can't be pulled over for looking a little sleepy - you only get popped if you cause an accident! Oh, and since it is a CRIMINAL law, you are innocent until proven guilty. Did we forget that little detail?Proving one is tired in the past is an exercise in futile subjectivity. It boils down to who has the most convincing lawyer. Having a convincing lawyer isnt what should make a good case, a good case is made by cold hard evidence that is indisputable.

[Ryder]

42 hours is my limit without sleep. Only did that once. It's called "The Wall". Knowing your wall is a pretty good thing. Willness to stop when you realize you are tired is the trick. Making up your mind to continue on in denial is a bad-bad thing.

It's a conscious decision so I say if I ever hurt anyone hang me high. It's not about blaming others. So I have no problem with harsh penalties for causing an accident. I'm only aware of Virginia as already having a law against travel for more than a certain number of hours (8?). I got stopped there once and admitted that I'd been riding 12 hours. Told the trooper it was ok because I do it all the time as a hobby and then I pointed out my "World's Toughest Motorcycle Riders" plate holder. He just shook his head and said be careful with a smile. I did 1350 miles in 24 hours that trip.

I regularly do 24 hour runs without any sleepiness. In fact I always stay up several hours after a ride to wind down. I build up my endurance to withstand this, am well prepared, and am experienced at it. It's not about besting someone else, or bragging rights, it's about self improvement. My record for a 48 hours is ~2700 miles. Lots are better than me. Plenty have done 3000 miles in 48 hours. One guy hit all 50 states in 7 days. One guy rode 1000 mile days for 30 in a row. I'm not THAT crazy! :p Everything isn't for everybody. Plenty fail their attempts but crashes are extremely rare.

Some interesting case studies in sleep dep here:
Iron Butt Association (http://www.ironbutt.com)

Obligatory gun content... Walking out of a gas station restroom at 3 am in a strange neighborhood used to be a lot more scary before I got my CPL :D