Snapchat speed filter blamed for 107-MPH highway accident


#1

A car accident victim is blaming Snapchat’s speed filter for a crash that left him with traumatic brain injuries, according to a new lawsuit.

The plaintiff, Wentworth Maynard, was merging onto a four lane highway outside of Atlanta, Georgia when his car was struck “so violently it shot across the left lane into the left embankment,” his lawyers contend.

money.cnn.com/2016/04/26/technology/snapchat-speed-filter/

I thought I had seen everything. That girl should serve a life sentence for such a lame donkey exercise in poor judgement, high level of selfishness, and disregard for others.


#2

It’s always someone else’s fault.


#3

What an unbelievably dangerous product! This is right of there with the “Bag o’ Glass” for children. Snapchat should be shutdown in the United States until their product can be analyzed for safety by the NSC. No, you cannot sell anything. A product designed for selfie speed contests should not be permitted on the market.

And the girl, she should have her dreams stolen, knowing that the first several thousands of dollars she owns will go to pay for her mistake, serve time in jail, and have a felony conviction for her reckless assault.


#4

To be fair to Snapchat, their product was intended for use on, for example, bullet trains and subways and other public transportation options. I don’t understand how they failed to see the dangerous consequences of a “speed selfie” though, in the hands of teenagers. I’m glad no one died, though obviously it’s still a horrendous tragedy.


#5

While Snapchat’s product is irresponsible, that girl’s behavior behind the wheel is criminal.

Such accidents based on total nelegance and frank stupidity should lead to a loss of her license and jail time.

There is a major difference between an accident and negligence. She didn’t get in an accident using her phone going 55 or 60 mph. She was going over 100 mph in a 55 mph zone and trying to take a selfie. If anyone should be arrested for being stupid, it’s this girl.

:mad:


#6

This is not Snapchat’s fault in any way whatsoever, nor are they even irresponsible for this feature. It is obvious that this should not be used while behind the wheel. Anyone who thinks it’s a good idea to use this while driving should not be shielded in the slightest from the consequences of their unfathomable stupidity by blaming the technology.


#7

To be fair, it isn’t the person that drove over a 100 mph that’s blaming Snapchat. It’s the victim who is suing both the reckless driver and Snapchat in hopes that the victim would be able to pay for medical costs. I don’t know if the victim can win a case against Snapchat (depends on the what the intention of the speed filter was) , but hopefully he can get some money to help pay his medical bills.


#8

When one uses the speed filter on Snapchat, a message pops up saying, “Do not Snapchat and drive.” Or something to that effect.


#9

I think I have read of other accidents happening as a result of this and they were fatal.


#10

We have many cases where selling a dangerous product is not legal, and where companies have been held for making that product.


#11

So we can sue make up providers because women and trans are distracted putting it on, while driving?
And we can sue all fast food drive throughs because people are distracted eating, while driving?

NOPE, perhaps the activity may be done by a passenger, or the driver is expected to just follow the laws of the road.


#12

Food is meant to be eaten. Taking selfies at high speeds are meant to take selfies at high speed. So yes, the obvious answer is one can sue here. Product liability can still be found if the product was unsafe, even if the user was an idiot. Whether the suit is valid remains to be seen. I do not buy that this app was for passenger trains. I doubt a judge will either.


#13

That is a good start for her punishment. She should also get a lifetime ban from owning a phone. That would be only slightly less than a death penalty for many young people, but would also warn others that if you misuse anything in such a dangerous way, you should not be trusted with another one. That would seem perfectly reasonable for a firearm used so irresponsibly, why not for a phone?


#14

Social media can make people selfish.


#15

Drive-throughs encourage you to eat while driving, so they should be liable if you are distracted while opening a ketchup for your fries.

However the woman was doing over 100 mph, I don’t think she couldn’t have avoided the slow car that merged into her lane even if she wasn’t taking a selfie.


#16

I like that idea. I wish there was a way to ban cell phone ownership for those who use their phone while driving. Either that or take away their license. The law should mirror the DWI laws, as they have both been shown to be a similar risk.


closed #17

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.