Four people were killed Friday
morning after two single-engine planes apparently collided above north Phoenix,
authorities say.
A pilot
reported seeing two small aircraft collide in midair about 15 miles northwest
of Deer Valley Airport, according to Ian McGregor of the Federal Aviation
Administration.
The
agency said it received reports of one of the downed planes at 10 a.m. Friday
at mile post 7 on New River Road, north of the Carefree Highway and east of
Lake Pleasant.
Phoenix
fire crews went to the area and found the two planes. One plane apparently had
caught fire and was destroyed. The other craft, a Piper Archer, was mostly
intact. Authorities found four people dead.
OK. Who’s at fault here?
The pilots? Very likely.
Air traffic controllers? Maybe
I am certain that the National Transportation Safety Board is
rushing its investigators to the scene to investigate.
Our thoughts and prayers go out to all families affected by this
tragedy.
Car accidents are a very real
concern for everyone in today’s fast pace society. Everyone will probably
encounter at least one, probably more, in their lifetime. However, when
you think of being in an accident, do you honestly ever think that it will be caused
by road debris? That indeed is the fact for about 25,000 people, and
approximately 90 deaths, every year. This is according to the AAA
Foundation for Traffic Safety.
Road debris can be very difficult
to control, especially on highways and freeways with heavy and fast moving
traffic. For instance, how does a driver who loses a piece of metal off
the back of his/her truck retrieve it when there is constant, steady, and fast
moving traffic? We see this happen frequently, but it is probably far more
dangerous to go back and pick it up than merely to leave it to the road
crews. Certainly, if the object creates a hazard, a quick call to 9-1-1
to alert the authorities is entirely appropriate.
In Arizona, Arizona Revised Statute, §28-1098 states:
A. A person shall not drive or move a vehicle on a highway unless the
vehicle is constructed or loaded in a manner to prevent any of its
load from dropping, sifting, leaking or otherwise escaping from the vehicle.
B. A person shall not operate a vehicle on a highway with a load unless
the load and any covering on the load are securely fastened in a manner to
prevent the covering or load from becoming loose, detached or in any manners a
hazard to other users of the highway.
A person injured due to road
debris will have to first prove the object came from a specific truck (this is
often denied by the responsible driver). In some circumstances, it may be
necessary to prove also that the responsible party was negligent in securing
the load. Assuming the identity of the vehicle or driver from which the
debris came cannot be discovered, an injured party may be able to state a claim
with their own insurance company, under their Uninsured Motorist
coverage. This will require that they prove that the falling object or
roadway debris actually came from another vehicle. (This is not always as
easy as it sounds, and insurance companies routinely make up all types of
different scenarios to suggest otherwise.)
If you or someone you know has
been injured in a circumstance involving falling or roadway debris, call a Certified Specialist in Personal Injury/Wrongful Death
law to see if you might have legal recourse. Almost all of these
attorneys work on a percentage arrangement, so it costs you nothing to see if
you might have a claim. The attorney
will have the people needed to perform a much deeper investigation, one which
may be needed if you do not know or cannot prove where the debris came
from.
Without a witness, the possible
causes of road debris are so vast in many cases even the Police Department or
Highway Patrol investigators cannot find its origin. Do not give up hope,
feeling that you will never find who is at fault or be reimbursed for your
damages; this is why a good attorney is so
vital.
Example: Claudia Avila died
after being struck in the head by a metal plate which crashed thru the
windshield of the car she was driving. The Florida Highway Patrol closed
the case without finding the origin of the metal plate. The attorney for
Avila’s family conducted an investigation, which revealed the company which
packaged the plate for shipment. This company then divulged the identity
of the company which purchased the plates, which in turn divulged the trucking
company that transported the plates. All three companies were sued and
the Avila family eventually received a $6.9 million verdict.
Road debris is a real hazard and
one that, as stated above, is very hard to control. If you are hauling
something and it becomes lose and dislodges, retrieve it only if it is safe to
do so. If it is not safe but poses an immediate danger, call 9-1-1.
If it does not pose a danger and you cannot retrieve it yourself you can call
the Department of Transportation for your
state, in Arizona that number is 602-712-7355. I would also suggest
calling the Department of transportation if you see debris come from someone
else’s vehicle in hopes of preventing any foreseeable accidents.
An average of 390 children drown each year in the United States, most
younger than 5, according to two new reports. "We are talking
about 15 preschool classes lost in a pool or spa every year. This is a national
health and safety problem that we must work to get fixed," said Inez
Tenenbaum, chairman of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Approximately 5,100 pool or spa-related injuries occur each year involving
children younger than 15. Some of those injured require life-long medical care,
resulting in millions of dollars in medical costs, Tenenbaum said.
The entrapment report also revealed that from 2008 to 2012, there were 39
swimmers caught in drains at the bottom of pools. Two people died as a result
of this "circulation entrapment," in which the force of water rushing
through the drain traps the swimmer. Three-fourths of those trapped were under
16.
Wasserman Schultz sponsored the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act,
which became law in 2007, making it the first federal pool and spa safety law.
The law established a federal swimming pool and spa drain cover standard and
other safety measures for pools nationwide.
Last year, Florida, Texas and California had the highest number of pool and spa
deaths in children up to age 14, according to the U.S. Swimming report.
Organizations such as the Red Cross, YMCA, Abbey's Hope and the Josh Project
provide free or low-cost swimming lessons to parents and children nationwide.
"Our overall goal is to reduce the number of child drowning across the
country by training children to swim and educating parents on the critical
importance of supervising children in and near the water," Wasserman
Schultz said.
The weather is warming up in Arizona. Please, be careful out there.
Remember, two seconds is too long.
General Motors Co. is recalling more than 27,000 Cadillac SUVs worldwide
because the wheels can fall off. (That's bad--right??)
The company says the recall affects the 2013 Cadillac SRX with 18-inch
wheels. Canadian safety regulators say the wheel nuts may not have been
tightened enough at the factory.
GM says the problem hasn't caused any crashes or injuries, and no wheels
have fallen from vehicles.
Dealers will rotate tires and tighten the nuts at no cost to the owners.
The recall affects almost 19,000 SUVs in the U.S. and another 913 in Canada.
The rest were exported to other countries.
Ok.
Wheels falling off. Bad. Assume someone gets hurt. Is
Cadillac responsible? Yes.
What
if the recall period occurs, an owner never hears about it and gets no notice,
and sometime later on it happens. Is Cadillac responsible? Likely,
yes.
Wheels
should stay on cars. It is generally safer that way.
Medical
malpractice payouts by doctors account for only a fraction of the nation's
healthcare expenditures, according to a recent study by a group of researchers
at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Using the National
Practitioner Data Bank, a government database that lists all paid medical
malpractice claims, the Hopkins' researchers looked at all awards over $1
million, so-called "catastrophic" payouts by U.S. doctors, between
2004 and 2010.
Their findings,
published in the Journal for Healthcare Quality, showed that catastrophic
payouts tended to attract the most attention from the public, media and tort
reform advocates, but that they accounted for an insignificant percentage of
healthcare expenditures. The high payouts added up to roughly $1.4 billion a
year, or .05 percent of U.S. healthcare expenditures, the study found.
(Note: .05 means 1/20th of 1%)
Critics suggest that far
too many tests and procedures are being performed in the name of defensive
medicine, as physicians fear they could be sued if they don't order them.
But, don't we prefer "safety" rather than "sorry"?
Don't we want doctors ordering tests, as a precautionary measure, just in
case their initial impressions are wrong? In this day and age,
"oops" and "I'm sorry I made that diagnostic mistake" seem
so unnecessary.
Instead of trying to
impose medical malpractice caps which have only a "minimal impact" on
overall healthcare expenditures, tort reform efforts should focus on defining
the so-called "standard of care" that doctors are measured against in
medical malpractice cases. That standard should focus less on what is the
practice of the average doctor and rather on what is reasonable.
Tort reform efforts
generally have not focused on the doctor's standard of care, said Robinette.
Some states, such as Georgia, have passed legislation requiring plaintiffs in
malpractice cases against emergency room physicians to prove by "clear and
convincing evidence" that the doctor was grossly negligent. This is
nearly an impossible standard for an injured victim. With this standard,
the insurance companies win. Big time!
Under most states laws,
doctors can now tell a patient "I'm sorry" and then later deny it.
Most injured victims seek fairness, not the lottery. Lets remain
safe. "I'm sorry does not and can never right the wrong."
Arizona car accident
attorney:
We can help if you are involved in a car accident where you suspect the
other driver was inattentive due to use of a cell phone.
The
popularity of cell phones has grown enormously in the past couple decade, and
it is becoming quite clear how much an impact cell phone calls and texting have
on car crashes. Talking on the phone and texting while operating a vehicle
leads to distraction and driver inattention. When dialing a phone number,
engaging in intense conversation or texting, you are being inattentive by not
watching the road. Whenever you are driving a vehicle and your attention is not
on the road, you are putting yourself, your passengers, other vehicles and
pedestrians in danger. An Arizona
car accident attorney may be crucial if you or a loved one is involved
in a car accident and you suspect that the other driver may have been
inattentive due to use of a cell phone.
Statistics
on car accidents resulting from inattentive cell phone drivers:
Almost 6,000 people are killed a year and over half-million are
injured in crashes related to driver distraction such as cell phone use.
Talking on a cell phone causes nearly
28% of car accidents.
Texting while driving is about 6 times
more likely to result in an accident than driving while intoxicated.
The majority of Americans believe that
talking on the phone and texting are two of the most dangerous behaviors that
occur behind the wheel. Still, as many as 81% of drivers admit to making phone
calls while driving.
Studies have found that texting while
driving causes a 400% increase in time spent with eyes off the road.
Many
state lawmakers have begun to implement statewide bans or restrictions on cell
phone use while driving. Although Arizona has yet to pass such laws, you may
can indeed hold the responsible party at fault for using a cell phone. Drivers
who are careless, inattentive or distracted are driving illegally. If you can
prove that the other driver was using a cell phone, and use of the cell phone
caused them to become inattentive or distracted, then you have a pretty good
case to prove that driver was negligent. Establishing that the other
driver was inattentive can be especially complex, so it is highly recommended
to contact a local Arizona
car accident attorney to assist you in your case.
Whether
a driver was distracted by a phone call, text message or for another reason, if
a driver causes an accident that harms another person, that driver is to be
held responsible for his or her acts. If you have been injured in a car
accident by a driver who was using a cell phone, it is recommended that you
contact an experienced Arizona car accident attorney today. An Arizona car accident attorney will be able to help
you prove that the other driver was inattentive and distracted and thus liable
entitling you to compensation.
The use
of seat belts has been strongly promoted in the United States for many years.
Current legislation in Arizona requires that seatbelts be used in most
situations while occupying a vehicle. Studies and experience show that buckling up can significantly increase your chances of
surviving a motor vehicle accident and preventing
serious injuries. While most of us know
that putting on our seatbelt will help prevent serious
injuries in an accident, this is not always the case. Each year numerous
individuals are injured as a result of defective, outdated or inadequately made
seat belts. If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident while wearing
a seat belt, it is important to contact an
experienced Arizona personal
injury attorney, preferably one with years
of experience handling cases against manufacturers,
where defective seatbelts have led to injuries.
Current Arizona law requires that seat belts be worn while
operating a vehicle. Arizona Revised
Statutes 28-909 and
those that follow describe the requirement of seatbelts in Arizona. The
violation of not wearing a seatbelt is a secondary enforcement, meaning that a
police officer may only cite a driver for a seat belt violation if the driver
committed another primary violation that led to the
stop in the first place.
Defective seatbelts by manufacturers
can lead to serious injuries and even fatalities. According to the
Center for Auto Safety, there have been over 180 safety recalls involving seat
belts in both passenger and commercial vehicles from 2000 through 2006. There
are a range of seat belt design flaws and inadequacies:
Belt webbing being cut by another part rubbing against it
Buckles that seem to latch but don’t
Shoulder belts that might not retract
Lap belt only designs
Seat belt may not holding an occupant in place
The retractor component of a seat belt malfunction, leaving
slack in the seat belt
Other failures of a mechanical components of the seat belt
system
As a result of defective or faulty seat belts, individuals
may suffer serious injuries:
Concussions
Spinal cord injury
Paralysis
Bone
fractures
Brain
injury
Contusions
Death
Disfigurement
Head
injury
Internal
organ damage
Paraplegia
If
you or a loved one has been injured due to a faulty or defective seat belt, you
may be entitled to compensation for your injuries. Since Arizona personal injury law is fairly complicated regarding injuries caused by defective and
inadequate seat belts, you should strongly consider
contacting an experienced Arizona personal injury, who specializes in seat belt injuries.
A decade-old benchmark for determining when a driver is legally intoxicated
-- the .08 blood-alcohol content rate -- should be lowered to 0.05, reducing
the amount a motorist can imbibe before being presumed to be drunk, federal
safety officials said Tuesday. At a
meeting in Washington, the National Transportation Safety Board is recommending
that all 50 states lower the threshold to reduce the nation's drunk driving
death toll, which has plateaued at about 10,000 deaths a year. A vote on the
recommendation is expected to take place at 11:30 a.m.
Lowering the rate to 0.05 would save about 500 to 800 lives every year, NTSB
staff members said, and is a crucial part of the board's attempt to eliminate
drunken driving in the United States. Under
current law, a 180-pound male typically will hit the 0.08 threshold after
drinking four drinks in an hour, according to an online blood alcohol
calculator published by the University of Oklahoma.
That same person could reach the 0.05 threshold after two to three
drinks in an hour, according to the calculator. (Many factors besides gender
and weigh influence a person's blood alcohol content level. And many states
outlaw lower levels of inebriation when behind the wheel.)
The NTSB will also consider numerous other actions Tuesday as part of its
"Reaching Zero" plan to eliminate alcohol-related driving fatalities. The board will consider recommending that
states vastly expand laws allowing police to swiftly confiscate licenses from
drivers who exceed the blood alcohol limits. And it is pushing for laws
requiring all first-time offenders to have ignition locking devices that
prevent cars from starting until breath samples are analyzed. All NTSB recommendations are advisory and
do not carry the force of law. But the independent agency is influential on
matters of public safety, and its action could spur action from like-minded
legislators and transportation departments across the country.
Board members -- meeting Tuesday on the 25th anniversary of the deadliest
drunken driving highway tragedy in the nation's history -- said something is
needed to jolt states into continued drunken driving reforms. In the early 1980s, when grassroots safety
groups brought attention to the drunken driving crisis, many states required a
0.15 blood alcohol content rate to demonstrated intoxication. But over the next
24 years, Mothers Against Drunk Driving and other groups pushed states to adopt
the 0.08 standard, the last state falling in line in 2004. The number of alcohol-related highway
fatalities, meanwhile, dropped from 20,000 in 1980 to 9,878 in 2011, the NTSB
said. In recent years, about 31% of all fatal highway accidents are attributed
to alcohol impairment, the board said. But
most of the decline in highway deaths occurred in the first decade, the board
said.
"We're still seeing improvement but not nearly as much," said
Robert Molloy, a supervisory transportation specialist for the board.
"Things are still being done but not at the same intensity." Safety board officials say they know a
fight for a 0.05 standard will not be easy. "I
think 0.05 is going to come. How long it takes to get there, we don't know. But
it will happen," Molloy said.
Said board staff member Jana Price: "I think eventually you'll see more
and more people acknowledging that .05 is high risk. Most countries in the
world are doing it. I think it's just a matter of time, but it's not something
that will very likely happen overnight."
The NTSB said even very low levels of alcohol impair drivers. At 0.01,
drivers in simulators demonstrate attention problems and lane deviations. At
0.02, they exhibit drowsiness, and at 0.04, vigilance problems. The current 0.08, which universal among
states, is not universal among drivers. Commercial drivers are deemed to be
intoxicated if they have a 0.04, and there is zero-tolerance for drivers 20 and
younger.
The safety board is expected to recommend to the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration that it provide financial incentives to states to
implement the changes. At Tuesday's
meeting, the safety board is also expected to champion so-called administrative
license suspension or revocation, in which police confiscate a motorist's
license at the time of arrest if the driver exceeds a blood alcohol limit or
refused to take the content test. Some 40 states already use the administrative
tool, which the safety board believes is effective because it is swift and
immediate. It also will encourage more
widespread use of passive alcohol sensors, which police can use to
"sniff" the air during a traffic stop to determine the presence of
alcohol. If the sensor alerts, it is grounds for more thorough testing.
Will .05 save lives? Maybe. I guess the question is,
how many accidents occur and how many deaths occur where it is determined that
the at-fault driver is .05-.07? If not, then perhaps this change
makes sense. If no statistics, and the facts show that most or all of
these occur at .08 and above, what’s the point?
Are people still going to drink and drive? No doubt about
it. Will .05 result in even more impaired-driving arrests and
convictions? 100% likely.
In my opinion,
.08 is not the problem. People do not go out and drink with an eye on
.08. They do not have their calculator with them to compute gender, body
weight, food intake, fatigue and number and type of drinks. They go out
and choose to drink alcohol. At the end of the night, they choose
whether they are “okay to drive” or whether they are going to try to get lucky
by not getting caught. Sometimes, at .08 or higher, they guess wrong and
cause an accident or get caught.
The erroneous
decision-making process is going to increase significantly at .05. The
question is, will it make a difference?
A picture can sometimes be worth
more than a thousand words. Not only does a photograph or portrait give the
first impression of a Law firm or Lawyer, but it shows just how “real” a law
firm can be
There are many stock images out
there. Of gavels, law books, and the scales of justice. But there is more
needed in order to give that “warm” feeling of knowing that your executives or
Law Firm have real people.
Having the right image and
portrait taken by a professional photographer is key in making sure that you
represent your business and law firm in the correct manner.
Stop with the stock photography.
There is no connection to those, and people have seen them time and time again
and will think that you are just like any other law firm or business. A
professional business/environmental portrait is key. Having the right kind of
photographer like studio520photography
for executive images and law firms is even more important.
Ideally,
the image used in professional representation should at least match the
professionalism of the business or industry represented.
Environmental portraits are
taken on location showing the professional in his or her environment. This
could be their office or other location an environmental portrait truly sets a professional apart,
making a powerful statement about you and what you do. Another environmental portrait every
serious professional should use are interactive-ones that shows them
interacting with a customer, engaged with a product or service. These types of
Images are very effective.
The best way to make sure you have
this area covered is to hire your own photographer. Make sure the photographer
has superb credentials, and make sure they have the ability to handle business
portraits for not only yourself, but also your staff as well.
These are keys to making sure you
represent your business or law firm through a photograph. You have one impression.
Make sure it’s the one you want to give!
Some people think that because distracted driving is
a problem created by technology, the solution must be technological. That’s the
viewpoint of Jeffrey H. Coben, M.D., and Motao Zhu, M.D., Ph.D., of the West
Virginia University School of Medicine. In a recent article published in the
Journal of the American Medical Association, they argue that the best solution
to help prevent more deaths is to have vehicle and/or cell-phone manufacturers
render a handheld device inoperable whenever it’s in a moving car.
That is one of a number of tech strategies for
reducing phone-based distractions. Below is a sampling of the solutions
available to help curb this dangerous behavior:
Hands-free
aids
Many cars now come with a Bluetooth system built in,
so you can wirelessly connect your phone to the car’s audio system.
Alternatives include a Bluetooth headset or an aftermarket device (see “Affordable
Hands-Free Calling,” May 2013).
Pros: They handle incoming calls easily with
the press of a button or a voice command, and some systems read messages aloud
and let drivers speak responses.
Cons: Initiating outgoing calls can be
distracting, especially if the device doesn’t recognize your command. Some
devices have phone-compatibility problems.
Smart-phone
apps
They restrict the phone from being used when the app
is switched on or when the vehicle is in motion (as detected through the
phone’s GPS receiver or Bluetooth). They’re available from major cell-phone
carriers, such as AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon, as well as from
independent providers, such as iZup and tXtBlocker.
Pros: All of the apps we’ve tried can call
911, and some are free. Some automatically activate when the car is in motion
and, depending on the app, can send automatic replies to incoming texts, e-mail
messages, or calls. And some can notify parents if the app is deactivated.
Cons: Monthly costs of $2 to $10 can add up,
and use of the phone’s GPS can drain the phone’s battery. Apps can’t tell when
a passenger is using the phone instead of the driver, they can be manually
turned off, and some don’t work with the iPhone.
Devices connected to the
vehicle's diagnostic port
They plug into a connector under the dash and
restrict phone use in a way similar to apps.
Pros: They can send an auto-reply to calls
and texts, they don’t drain the phone’s battery, and they’re tamperproof
because parents set a code to unlock them.
Cons: They can be pricey, ranging from about
$90 to $180, plus extra costs for accessories. Each works with only one car,
and they aren’t compatible with the iPhone.
Monitoring
systems
They track a driver’s behavior and speed with
cameras, special phones, and other systems.
Pros: They activate when the vehicle is in
motion. All collected information is logged, and some systems allow real-time
online tracking. Data reports are available to parents and companies that
subscribe.
Cons: Some systems require you to buy a
particular phone and pay a monthly fee of about $10. The phones can lose
battery power quickly because the GPS is constantly on, and those with cameras
and sensors can be used in only one vehicle.
Clearly, there is no universal solution.
As well, technology will never trump common sense.
