A driver distracted by her cellphone struck and killed a bicyclist in Michigan. As part of her sentence, the Judge barred her from using any portable communication device for two years. The Judge stated that he didn't think it was right for her to have a cellphone because it is a privilege. The driver will spend at least 90 days in jail and need to speak with new drivers about the horrors in using a cell phone while driving.

Personally, I don't think this sentence would fly in New Jersey. However, maybe that is what is needed for people to wake up and stop using their phone when they should be watching the road. How many times are you at a light behind a car that doesn't go when the light turns green because they are reading Facebook or sending a text. It is just not right. 

This week, our Supreme Court threw out the conviction of a Pennsylvania man prosecuted for making threats on Facebook, but dodged the free-speech issues that had made the case intriguing to First Amendment advocates.

Anthony Elonis, of eastern Pennsylvania, was prosecuted under a law that makes it a crime to threaten another person after he posted Facebook rants in the form of rap lyrics about killing his estranged wife, harming law enforcement officials and shooting up a school. One post about his wife said, "There's one way to love you but a thousand ways to kill you. I'm not going to rest until your body is a mess, soaked in blood and dying from all the little cuts."

Elonis claimed the government had no right to prosecute him if he didn't actually intend his comments to be threatening to others. He argued that his musings were protected by the First Amendment. But the government said it didn't matter what Elonis intended. It argued that if the comments provoked enough fear and anxiety to make a reasonable person feel threatened, that was enough to prosecute it as a crime.

Chief Justice John Roberts said it was not enough for prosecutors to show that the comments of Anthony Elonis about killing his ex-wife and harming others would make a reasonable person feel threatened. But the high court sent the case back to the lower court without clarifying exactly what the standard of proof should be. The ruling was a narrow victory for civil liberties groups that had urged the court to make it tougher to convict people who make crude comments on social media that might be viewed as threatening. Yet the high court declined to lay out broad constitutional protections for such comments. "It is not necessary to consider any First Amendment issues," Roberts wrote.

Well, I have heard of putting a lot of passengers in your car, but this is a new one. A driver in Montana was transporting thousands of Russian honeybees in the car. Instead of keeping them contained, the driver allowed the bees to fly around the car as it was moving. Maybe Russian honeybees don't sting. The police were shocked, as this was the first time they saw this scenario on the roadway. They called into the township to see if you needed a permit to transport this many bees, but the clerk said no permit needed. The cop ended up issuing a careless driving ticket to the driver.

Click here to see the photograph of the bees in the car. It's a good one!

A New Jersey lawmaker is looking to slow down the risk of second hand smoking. The goal of his bill is to stop allowing children to be exposed to tobacco products and electronic cigarettes in confined spaces. The bill was introduced last month. He states that smoking in a car with children is dangerous and needs to be stopped.

If Bill S2883 is passed, violators will be subject to a $100 fine. The good news is that a police officer couldn't pull you over for this only, but if you are pulled over for another legitimate reason, they will issue a ticket for this. Of course, if you have ever been pulled over for no reason at all, you know that "legitimate reason" is all in the eyes of the beholder.

Read full article here