Slashdot Mirror


Nevada Lawmakers Want Police To Scan Cellphones After Car Crashes (apnews.com)

An anonymous reader quotes the Associated Press: 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... If the Nevada measure passes, it would allow police to use a device known as the "textalyzer," which connects to a cellphone and looks for user activity, such as opening a Facebook messenger call screen. It is made by Israel-based company Cellebrite, which says the technology does not access or store personal content. It has not been tested in the field and is not being used by any law enforcement agencies. The company said the device could be tested in the field if the Nevada legislation passes...

Opponents air concerns that the measure violates the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure. Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst at the American Civil Liberties Union, also raised questions over how the software will work and if it will be open sourced so the public can ensure it doesn't access personal content...

Law enforcement officials argue that distracted driving is underreported and that weak punishments do little to stop drivers from texting, scrolling or otherwise using their phones. Adding to the problem, they say there is no consistent police practice that holds those drivers accountable for traffic crashes, unlike drunken driving.

1 of 263 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Cop can stand by the side of the road. Every 5m by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Yeah, it's about determining whether a driver's texting, or phone usage was a contributing factor in a car accident they were involved in after the fact. This has ramifications for determining if extra charges need be levied against the driver in a criminal case, or determining liability in civil litigation like a wrongful death suit. Put away the tinfoil hat.

    I suppose we need this because the cell phone providers does not record EXACTLY when, for HOW LONG and EXACTLY you make a call, send/receive a text or use the web from your phone. I mean it is not like cell phone providers are charging you for using your phones capability. I guess it is also IMPOSSIBLE to get a warrant from a judge to have the cell phone provider give a suspects phone records.

    NO TIN FOIL HAT REQUIRED. Cell phone providers have exactly the information law enforcement needs to document whether phone usage was a contributing factor, all that is necessary is a warrant. You must be another lazy ass cop or lazy ass prosecutor not wanting to your job, but want to get paid and respected