**** Poll closed. See the Poll Forum for this weeks Poll. ****
It's been just over a year since a new law was introduced regarding the use of mobile phones whilst driving.
So this weeks poll, as suggested by Longdiver is now available.
"Who thinks that the mobile phone law has been a complete waste of time?"
1. Yes
2. No
3. What Mobile Phone Law
|
Having been nearly taken out a couple of times on my motorbike by young ladies busy yabbering into their mobile whilst negotiating a roundabout, I would say Yes.
Remember, speed cameras only catch those who speed, not law-breakers or criminals like these..
|
|
Report in yesterday's London Standard says there will be a doubling of the fine and points for the convicts. The word clampdown was in there somewhere as well.
|
I wouldn't say the new law has been a TOTAL waiste of time. Yes there are still people using their phones whilst driving, but there are also a huge number of people who have either stopped using their phone whist driving, of have bought a hands free kit.
|
I hate to be picky... but...
1. The question is *who* thinks the mobile phone law has been a waste of time, so surely the answers should be Me or Not Me, not Yes or No.
2. The question itself is quite emotive, almost pushing people to answer that they do indeed think it's been a waste of time.
Personally speaking, it has had some effect on me, in that I don't make calls while driving any more, but I can't see that me sending a text while stationary in a traffic jam is going to kill anyone. But lets not open that particular can of worms.
Someone mentioned prosecutions. There have been a number of them actually, but you don't get to hear about them because generally they're not dealt with by the courts, they're dealt with by means of a fixed penalty, which you just pay and get on with your life. Several forces are having crack downs to mark about 12 months since the laws came in, so expect to see those figures going up over the next few months.
|
Exactly my thoughts, pologirl - I've just searched out this thread to make my point and already found yours...but, here we go anyway:
Its a leading question which would cause problems if this were a piece of coursework for Maths GCSE. An improvement would be:
What are your opinions on the mobile phone law? Then give several non-emotive responses such as "a success", or "not working" etc.
I think these polls are interesting and worthwhile; I also thoroughly appreciate the time that is put into this site by DD and all the mods. So I hope you won't mind this constructive criticism. It is actually quite hard constructing fair questions for polls, but I personally think more thought could be put into their wording.
Splodgeface
|
|
Comments and constructive critism noted. But please don't shoot the messenger ;o)
|
I heard on the news yesterday that it is about to become an endorsable offence, three points and the fine doubling to £60.
I still answer mine if it rings, after making sure it is safe of course (no police about) but that will now stop. Thirty quid I can swallow, but I don't fancy the points.
|
|
well i voted what law only because in the south west that seems to be the way it is, there is no enforcement . i think the law is a good thing i use a bluetooth headset they are cheap enough but you still see people breaking the law even at traffic lights with a police car sat beside them (seen this only yesterday) , police here dont seem interested.
|
|
|
|
DD,
I don?t know how to answer polls like this!
I consider the legislation against phone use by drivers in cars was essential.
I think even the increased penalties are too lenient.
I would stop the use of hands free phones.
I believe even the current law is not enforced so is completely ineffective.
So voting ?Yes? to it being a complete waste of time presumably puts me in the same camp as those who were against any form legislation.
C
|
>>So voting ?Yes? to it being a complete waste of time presumably puts me in the same camp as those who were against any form legislation.
Dont see how you work that one out..If you agree with legislation. all it says is it isnt working/not your against it
--
Steve
|
>>So voting ?Yes? to it being a complete waste of time presumably puts me in the same camp as those who were against any form legislation. Dont see how you work that one out..If you agree with legislation. all it says is it isnt working/not your against it -- Steve
Steve,
So how would those who were against any form of legislation vote?
No - its not a complete waste of time?
C
|
Cardew..It is a waste of space making a point.especially when no one takes any notice/law only occasionally nicks the odd driver..Certain threads come into mind that mention mobile phone use while driving. plus those that have or drive with kids without seatbelts/even carry without any care child on lap in passenger seat..My point was meant to mean.If law or legislation introduced..it should by policing be upheld..I dont see this being the case..as we have no active policing...
--
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think I drove in the period where it wasn't illegal, and I know this'll make me unpopular, but I have done it a couple of times and found it difficult - not concentration, but logistically, I can't drive that well and check mirrors with a phone clamped to an ear or a hand. The thing I think that makes it a worthwhile law, however, is that handsfree-kits are allowed - resolving the problem of responsible checks and hands. Just thought I'd share.
|
|
|
I agree with Cardew, so I am voting;
1.Yes, it has been a complete waste of time because it is not being enforced and people are still doing it.
and
2.No, it has not been a complete waste of time, because something had to be done to try and stop people doing it, especially when they should be indicating, or something.
|
The reason it has not been enforced - and why even points on your licence will make little difference - is because the police have to actually witness the use of the phone whilst driving.
We all know what happened to traffic police.....
Incidentally, one couple who were spotted using a mobile phone were both fined; the girlfriend was holding the mobile to the driver's ear and she was judged to have been aiding and abetting the offence.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
Stuart,
Your latest post may be correct - but this thread is about the poll.
If you feel that the law should not have been passed, how do you answer?
|
>>If you feel that the law should not have been passed, how do you answer?>>
You can bet your sweet life that I wholeheartedly agree with the law having been passed - merely pointing out that unless it is actually enforced it's all a waste of time.
We all regularly see the contempt with which so many drivers ignore the mobile phone legislation.
In fact, in my area, it's even more rife and not just because all the local taxi firms have gone on to computerised bookings; the drivers (using their mobile whilst driving of course) provide clients with a set number of rings that they are just about to pull up outside the door.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
In fact, in my area, it's even more rife and not just because all the local taxi firms have gone on to computerised bookings; the drivers (using their mobile whilst driving of course)
Ah yes, one of my favourite rants.
And why do they NEVER wear seat belts? Even the private hire car Vectras/Mondeos.
And how come they always do at least 50 in a 30?
(Except of course when they do not have passengers, in which case it is 26 in a 40 - in rush hour)
|
>>And why do they NEVER wear seat belts?>>
I can understand your view. However, IIRC, it is allowed and for a good reason.
That's the safety of the taxi driver if he/she is threatened in any way by a passenger or passengers he/she has at least some form of escape or to take some action.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
Thanks for that Stuartli - I shall now avoid minicabs, for the same reason I would not go into a bar that thinks it needs bouncers to vet it's customers!
|
|
|
|
When the compulsory seat-belt use laws came in, exceptions were made for people who either had medical reasons to not use a belt, or who had jobs where they were so frequently in and out of the vehicle that it would be too much buckle/unbuckle .
In practise this was taken to mean taxi drivers and van drivers were exempt .Even though many taxi drivers would spend hours without leaving the vehicle , as would van drivers ; in fact , taxi passengers who migh tonly be on board for 5 minutes are more likely to be done than the guy driving them .It's truly stupid.
On my last trip to France I noticed how many lorry drivers were now belted ; there must have been some new law or conspicuous enforcement going on . Imagine trying to get lorry drivers here to do it !
I don't know why police forces don't just put a couple of officers at traffic lights once in a while ...they would easily hoover up loads of fixed-penalty tickets for non-wearing , at minimal danger and cost
|
|
|
|
>>If you feel that the law should not have been passed, how do you answer?>> You can bet your sweet life that I wholeheartedly agree with the law having been passed - merely pointing out that unless it is actually enforced it's all a waste of time. We all regularly see the contempt with which so many drivers ignore the mobile phone legislation.
Stuart,
I obviously did not make my point clear in my initial post.
My original comment was not about the merits/demerits of the law on mobile phone use, but the way the question was posed.
Those like you and I might answer "yes it is a complete waste of time" reasoning that the waste of time aspect was down to the lack of enforcement, not the legislation as such.
Others might also answer "yes ...." on the grounds that the legislation was unnecessary should never have been passed in the first place.
Thus people with totally opposite views on that particular law giving the same answer.
It seems to me the only people who would answer "No it is not a complete waste of time" are those who think the legisltion was correctly framed AND is being adequately enforced.
C
|
|
|
|
|
It's been a total and utter waste of time.
Enforcement? Where are the cops? You can't catch mobile 'phone users with speed cameras...
El Dingo.
|
|
|
Yes - Waste of time, not enforced. If it was, I'd be a happier road user.
This is why......
Each day, I walk through Liverpool Street Station from one end to the other. In the melee of people trudging to their work, about 30% of them have their head down, looking at their mobile whilst they are texting or looking for a number. If you could trace their route, you would find that they wander over the place and often stop in front of you without warning. Not a care in the world except what is going on in their little space. This is at 1mph! Imagine some twonk in a car at 30, 40, 50 or worse mph, on the phone "yaddah yaddah yaddah buy, sell", "blah blah, nice lipstick in Selfridges, had to buy it", "Yack, yack, home in 10 mins, etc
|
I voted it was a waste of time..Though in truth some have been caught..point raised about enforcement..where is the enforcement..though I think same applies to other laws..point is we dont have enough Police..untill we do. suspect most laws will be broken. And at the end of day will be gotton away with due to not enough police..Cry is. WE need more and doing the job they are employed to do.Not sitting in office filling in paperwork
--
Steve
|
point is we dont have enough Police..untillwe do. suspect most laws will be broken. >>
Don?t have enough police? Well we have more police than at any time in our history.
Many of the motoring related tasks previously carried out by Police are catered for by parking attendants and cameras.
Statistically it is safer to drive on our roads than(again) at any time in our history.
Perhaps in the grand scheme of things our masters are correct in moving the emphasis from motoring to other areas of enforcement.
|
All this debate!
MY BRAIN HURTS!!
Answer from me = NO, not waste of time.
Easy as that, see!!
VB
|
|
|
|
