What is the purpose of the Snapchat Speed Filter/app, and is it destined to be eliminated after being blamed and involved in lawsuits blaming it for car crashes?

No. The girl was using her phone while driving—that was the problem.

The purpose, as stated by Snapchat, is in your article:

“The speed filter has plenty of uses, and that many people take snaps while running, and while passengers in various vehicles.”

It’s some stupid social thing that people do on their phone. It doesn’t take responsibility of people who do stupid things. If that isn’t enough, “the Snapchat filter clearly states “please do not snap and drive” when activated.”

As much as I agree with @dxs, the cost of defending it in lawsuits will lead to its quick elimination.

A statement that starts with “please do not…’ is not sufficiently robust to be considered a warning of fatal consequences.

@zenvelo Don’t you think it’s common sense though? It’s a warning, but I’d think most people with half a brain would already know that, especially with all of the messages nowadays on texting and driving.

@dxs Product Liability is generally based on people with less than half a brain and no common sense.

Texting and driving is not universally outlawed, so one can’t use that argument. If the crash was in Arizona or Montana, two states that have wide open freeways where excessive speed is common, one could say, “it’s not illegal, so how could it be dangerous if Snapchat says it is okay by installing it?”

@zenvelo Very true.

I am so old I remember going for days without taking a picture.

How can we blame an app, and not the cell phone companies who provide us with the phones to use those apps? It’s all on the driver. It really is.

For that matter, how are the cellphone companies to blame?

Just because you can use an app like snap chat while driving doesn’t mean that you should.

I agree with you that the responsibility is all on the driver.

Thar being said, I can see snap chat eliminating that feature in the future if only to protect morons from their own excesses (and their innocent victims as well)

It’s not as if the principal of free speech is at stake here. Nobody on earth really NEEDS to be doing this. Just because they may WANT to, isn’t sufficient justification.