What is the best TV in motion option

JCL · #1 09-07-2009, 10:15 PM

Best response to this question (copied from another site):

Cut off the seat belts, and remove the airbags. Then, the TV will work automatically while driving. (And if you get the windshield and all side windows tinted, the screen reflections will be reduced, improving the viewing experience.) Yes, it is technically possible. Yes, offenders should be prosecuted.

Penguin · #2 09-07-2009, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCL

B Yes, it is technically possible. Yes, offenders should be prosecuted.

I assume it is illegal in most states. In Illinois:

"HB 960Mandates that a vehicle equipped with visual media technology cannot be operated if the technology is on and the screen is visible from the driver's seat. Which means if someone has one of those video screens to play movies in the car, it better not be in the driver's line of sight. "

Not to be overly dramatic, but it would not be good if the EMT's or Policeman pulling you out of a wrecked X5 noticed Batman playing on the display, particularly if someone died.

JCL · #3 09-07-2009, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penguin

I assume it is illegal in most states.

it is also illegal in Australia, where the original poster is from.

AVATT · #4 09-09-2009, 12:12 AM

I bought my BMW56CAN from TVNAV2GO out of New York for $400. It is also a newer version than NAV-TV's. It has PIP for our 8.8 Screens. If you couple the CAN with NAV-TV's VehicleDock, you can play videos off your IPOD and control the IPOD thru the I-Drive and steering wheel.

See my thread:

http://www.xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-foru...hicledock.html

You can also find the CAN's at Alibaba.com for as low as $290 but be very weary of the source ... lots of scammers.

berniec · #5 10-10-2009, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penguin

I assume it is illegal in most states. In Illinois:

"HB 960Mandates that a vehicle equipped with visual media technology cannot be operated if the technology is on and the screen is visible from the driver's seat. Which means if someone has one of those video screens to play movies in the car, it better not be in the driver's line of sight. "

Not to be overly dramatic, but it would not be good if the EMT's or Policeman pulling you out of a wrecked X5 noticed Batman playing on the display, particularly if someone died.

would have to prove it was on prior to the crash and not caused by the impact itself and/or objects flying around inside the cabin. not something that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt

Penguin · #6 10-10-2009, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by berniec

would have to prove it was on prior to the crash and not caused by the impact itself and/or objects flying around inside the cabin. not something that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt

That would be up to a jury. I would not want to bet either way. Please note that in civil cases the criteria, I believe, is not "beyond a reasonable doubt," but, "preponderance of evidence."

AVATT · #7 10-11-2009, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penguin

That would be up to a jury. I would not want to bet either way. Please note that in civil cases the criteria, I believe, is not "beyond a reasonable doubt," but, "preponderance of evidence."

Penguin:

Two entirely different issues. In the case of a statute under criminal procedure, merely having it on while driving is in of itself a violation subject to penalty. The proof of intentionally having it on while driving as Berniec states would have to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

In the case of civil matters, where there was an accident and resultant harm for which a civil action was brought, the issue is one of negligence, proven as you correctly state by a preponderence of the evidence. Merely having it on would not, of itself, lead to liability. There would have to be a showing of driver negligence where the screen distracted the driver and therefore the driver was negligent by becoming distracted. It is the distraction which is negligent, not the mere fact that a video source was on. There has to be a causal relationship. There is no strict liability under civil procedure for merely having it on, as I read a version of the pending HB 960.

Also as a HB (House Bill) that would be a bill introduced to the House for consideration. it is not yet the law of the land. I do not know if it has since been been passed. I know this was one of a series of Driver Distraction legislation being considered. It may have very well been passed, my rather fast and superficial research this morning however did not find it as an actual passed statute. Perhaps you know more of this? I would like to read the actual statute if it has been passed.

wnrussell · #8 10-28-2011, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penguin

That would be up to a jury. I would not want to bet either way. Please note that in civil cases the criteria, I believe, is not "beyond a reasonable doubt," but, "preponderance of evidence."

I'm not so worried about a crash as I am about a trooper seeing it from beside or behind the car at night.

FSETH · #9 09-12-2009, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCL

Best response to this question (copied from another site):

Cut off the seat belts, and remove the airbags. Then, the TV will work automatically while driving. (And if you get the windshield and all side windows tinted, the screen reflections will be reduced, improving the viewing experience.) Yes, it is technically possible. Yes, offenders should be prosecuted.

I agree with this 100%. The last thing I need is someone trying to change the TV settings because their kids are screaming that they have seen this episode of the Wiggles already while they are also talking on their cell phone and the GPS is barking out orders on the road at the same time as me.