Orlando Personal Injury Lawyer - car accident

Helpful Hints In Selecting a Child Car Seat

Ed Normand — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 17:03:08 GMT

Baby Car Seats - Did you know...

Often parents move their child from a baby car seat to a full-size safety seat too soon. Data from crash-testing reveals that a baby is better protected in a rear-facing seat because the seat gives better support to the baby’s head and neck, and distributes the crash force over a greater area of their body. The general rule of thumb is to wait until your child is at least one-year of age, and weighs at least 20 pounds, before you move your child to a full-size safety seat. If your child weighs more than 20 pounds, but is still under a year of age, it is best to keep him/her in a rear-facing seat. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), along with car seat safety advocates, now also recommend that babies remain in a rear-facing seat as long as possible, up to the weight limit of the seat. If the weight limit of the seat is 30 pounds, these groups recommend that it is best to keep your child rear-facing until they reach the weight limit of the seat.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

More Dangers of Distracted Driving

Ed Normand — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:38:14 GMT

A client of mine was forever maimed in a recent car crash, but she wasn’t even driving. Jane was walking in her neighborhood, in broad daylight, when a car veered off the road, and mowed her down. Jane now has a broken hip, a collapsed lung, and two broken legs, a fractured spine and may never walk again. What is even more sad is that this was all completely preventable. Jane’s husband is the Home Owners Association President in their neighborhood, and has witnessed countless reckless drivers for months. In fact, he’s been trying to get help from anyone to improve safety in his neighborhood, but to no avail. Drivers have hit everything from light poles and fences, to even homes. Jane’s husband set up multiple surveillance cameras in the area before his wife’s accident, and was able to catch the entire accident on video.
Jane faces months of recovery, and most likely will never be the same. She’s in critical condition at a local hospital, with severe injuries. The video shows the terrible accident, and clearly shows how the car in question ran Jane down. The driver admitted to being distracted when he ran off the road.
I’ve blogged previously about the dangers of distracted driving. For my previous article, please visit: orlando.injuryboard.com/automobile-accidents/dangers-of-distracted-driving.aspx
It is about time the Florida Legislature does something to stop driving while texting and other forms of distracted driving. Studies have confirmed that distracted drivers are less safe than drunk drivers! Lets fix both, perhaps we need a Mothers Against Distracted Drivers group before the carnage stops.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Dangers of Distracted Driving

Ed Normand — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:24:24 GMT

With the advent of safer cars, airbags and mandatory seatbelts one would think that we are progressing toward safer roadways. Technology, however, is bringing about a new and very real danger: distracted driving.

Distracted driving can take many forms including traditional ones like eating in the car or screaming kids. Now, with the proliferation of modern communication devices we have the added danger of not just talking on the phone but also texting while driving.

At a two day summit that began today in Washington D.C., the Transportation Department is tackling the issue of distracted drivers and how the traffic laws should be reformed to stop the dangers of driving and texting. The forum will include various speakers who have knowledge on the dangers of holding a steering wheel in one hand and typing on a PDA in the other. One of the speakers is a teenage driver from Utah who crashed his vehicle while texting and killed two other people.

The statistics on automobile accidents caused by texting and driving are not clear because most drivers do not willingly offer that they were using a communication device when in a crash. Most Traffic Crash Reports do not even have a field or box where the investigating officer can routinely inquire about the use of a cell phone at the time of the crash. At a minimum the investigating officer at the time of a crash should obtain the cell phone data including phone number of the at fault driver to permit easier investigation into the possibility of texting or phone use being a contributing factor to the crash.

Technology could also come to the rescue to prevent distracted driving. Most parents want their teens to have cell phones but are worried about the use during driving. There now exist GPS devices that block the receipt of emails and texts into a PDA while a vehicle is moving. The products hold the receipt of the message until after the vehicle is stopped. This technology should be offered as an easy option for any parent to purchase for their children. While it will not stop all distractions and can keep the hands on the wheel and away from the keyboard.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Drugged Drivers are Running Rampant

Ed Normand — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:59:00 GMT

The good news is: the percentage of drunk drivers on the road is decreasing. The bad news is that drivers under the influence of drugs are more prevalent than ever. Many times drugs may impair the ability to drive safely more than alcohol use but drug impairment can be harder to detect. Now it is the return trip from the pharmacy, not happy hour, which increasingly results in a danger to motorists.

A recent governmental survey conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration revealed that there has been a steady decline in the last 30 years of the percentage of drunk drivers. The study compared the presence of drugs and alcohol in drivers since 1973 against the same data in 2007. It concluded that 2.2% of drivers in 2007 were legally intoxicated. This is a decrease from the percentage in 1973 when 7.5% of drivers were found to be legally intoxicated.

That same study revealed a growing problem with drugged driving. According to the survey “16.3 percent of nighttime weekend drivers were drug positive. The survey focused on weekend nighttime drivers and found that the drugs used most commonly by drivers were: marijuana (8.6 percent); cocaine (3.9 percent); and over-the-counter and prescription drugs (3.9 percent).” The study relied on newer drug screening techniques to detect drug use by examining the presence of drugs in a drivers system. Because drugs can be detected in the system for days or even weeks after they are used the difficulty lies in determining if the drug use resulted in impairment while driving or was merely a positive finding related to earlier drug use. Nevertheless, the surveyors concluded that drugged driving like drunk driving threatens our public health and safety.

The reduction in drunk drivers is attributed to stricter laws and penalties against drunk driving as well as greater enforcement by police and the efforts of anti drunken driving advocates such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving or MADD. Apparently these same efforts may be necessary to control the growing problem of legal and illegal drug use among drivers.

Perhaps MADD needs to add a "D” and become Mothers Against Drugged and Drunk Driving or “MADDD”.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Text Banning Bill In Florida Legislature

Ed Normand — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:50:22 GMT

A new bill will be reviewed next month in Florida that could ban texting while operating a moving vehicle following a new wave of legislative efforts to curb driving distractions. Not surprisingly, according to the National Safety Council, using a wireless communications device while driving is one of the biggest distractions that affects driving performance. The claim is that driving while texting leads to more Florida automobile accidents.

The bigger question is whether the legislature should step in and ban the use of cell phones while driving. The National Safety Council has called on drivers to stop using cell phones and messaging devices while pushing all 50 states to pass legislation prohibiting this type of use. But do we need laws against it? Among the other distractions listed were drinking and eating; if this bill is passed, who is to say drinking coffee on the way to work won’t be next? Will this provide just another pretext for law enforcement to pull over and search profiled drivers?

These kinds of movements by legislature are indicative of the changing philosophy’s of what exactly constitutes free choice and what we should and should not be told to do by those we elect to represent us. As much as a ban on texting while driving will likely reduce the amount of accidents to an extent, one might also wonder when the line will be drawn. No question that texting while driving is dumb, the issue is do we want even more governmental intrusion into our lives?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Are Elderly Drivers Dangerous?

Ed Normand — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 11:08:00 GMT

Many assume that older drivers are unsafe behind the wheel, cause more auto accidents and should be tested more frequently. Actually the truth is just the opposite. According to a study by the Rand Corporation: " drivers 65 and over are only one-third as likely as younger drivers to cause auto accidents." The data revealed that older drivers make up 15 percent of all drivers but they cause only 7 percent of the car accidents. By contrast, drivers in the 15 to 24 age group are 13 percent of the drivers but cause 43 percent of the car crashes.

In an earlier posting we discussed that about half of all young drivers admit to text messaging behind the wheel whereas only one percent of elderly drivers text and drive. With texting messaging becoming more and more prevalent these statistics will probably show even more differences in the car accident rates of the youth as compared to the elderly.

One unanswered question is if the higher youth car crash rate is the direct result of them having to pass those crummy slow old drivers hogging the fast lane. Not really, but see the report at www.rand.org.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Lobbying for a Lower Drinking Age

Ed Normand — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 11:08:00 GMT

The lowest legal age to drink alcohol in all 50 states is 21. This was not always the law. In fact in the early 80's most 18 year olds could drink in most states. Laws were passed to lower the drinking age, in part, to reduce the carnage on our highways related to teens drinking and driving. Not surprisingly, the rate of teen driving deaths from car accidents involving intoxication has been reduced since the increase in the drinking age.

What is surprising is that certain groups are advocating for a reduction in the drinking age back down to 18. No this is not the liquor lobby or the funeral industry advocating the move back to 18. One of the groups urging change is called Choose Responsibility. This group was started by John McCardell, the former president of Vermont’s Middlebury College. The apparent argument behind the change is that the higher drinking age results in teenage binge drinking with dangerous habits that did not exist to that extent before the hike in the drinking age. Now, I was a college student back in the day of the 18 year old drinking age. Not that I necessarily participated, but I certainly witnessed binge drinking. Lots of it.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration puts the lives saved at 25,000 because of the higher drinking age. I doubt that the number of increased deaths (if any) from binge drinking even approaches that number. Until we get some hard data my guess is that 18 year olds will not be able to drink for a while in this country.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Driving While Distracted, The New DWI?

Ed Normand — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 21:38:00 GMT

It appears that the recent tragic commuter train crash in Los Angeles may have been the result of inattention by the train operator to the operation of the train because he was too busy texting to pay attention to his job. The result was 125 injuries and 25 deaths.

We all know of or have seen drivers texting or checking email while at the wheel. Surprisingly, texting while driving is only against the law in 5 states (no Florida is not one of them). What is scary is the sheer number of drivers that text. In a recent study of distracted driving almost 50% of drivers in the 18-24 age group admitted sending a text or email message while driving. Think about that, that is the age group with the highest accident rates even before texting became a driving problem.

I am not aware of any data showing the percentage of car accidents involving distracted drivers but my guess is a lot. In my practice a standard procedure in auto accident litigation cases is to find out about cell phone usage at the time of the crash. Cell phone data can be obtained to determine not only the time, but the location of the call or text. That can then be compared to the time and place of the car crash providing good evidence of driver distraction during the crash.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Auto Accident Insurance Primer

Ed Normand — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 05:33:00 GMT

Many consumers wonder what insurance they should get to protect themselves if they get into a car accident. The types of insurance can be confusing. I will be discussing the basics of certain types of coverages in different entries. Contact me if you want more detailed information.

Bodily Injury Liability Coverage (BI Coverage). This coverage protects you from liability if someone else sustains a physical injury from a car accident caused by your operation of a motor vehicle or from someone else using your vehicle. Some states have minimum coverages others like Florida do not. If you do not have BI coverage you may be personally liable for the medical expenses, lost earnings and pain and suffering caused by your negligent operation of a motor vehicle. To protect yourself you need to buy BI coverage. Given the high cost of medical care and the severe injuries and death that can result from a car crash I recommend coverage of at least $100,000 per person, with a total of $300,000 per accident or at least $300,000 if you have single limit coverage. Remember if you do not have enough insurance then you can be held personally liable for damages that exceed your BI coverage. I also suggest, therefore, that you purchase an umbrella policy. An umbrella policy can protect you with over one million dollars in excess of your BI coverage. It can also protect you in boating accidents or other accidents. An Umbrella can only be purchased as excess coverage over your BI coverage and so the premiums are surprisingly low.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand