He also already had nine penalty points on his licence, meaning the three added for his latest offence would mean it being revoked
I don't know how they can do or say that. Endorsable FPN are not given to peopole where they liable to totting up disqualification for the very sane reason that the Courts are the only ones who can "revoke" licences. Sounds a bit like some spin involved here. Maybe Westpig and others can comment or have I missed something here.
|
|
Just checked my own facts and I am right. He should be reported for summons. Either misissued or downright lies.
|
|
|
|
Surely if you can afford that soet of motor you can afford a handsfree kit?
and indeed will something of that sort not be built in on such cars? I'm glad someone else has noticed this. In this area, based on my observation, the drivers of Mercedes coupes and 6-series BMWs seem to be particularly prone to this sort of thing.
|
|
|
Why is it that the majority of idiots I see with phone stuck to ear while driving drive 'expensive' cars? Surely if you can afford that soet of motor you can afford a handsfree kit?
IMHO it's part of the "rules are for plebs, not me.... look at ME in this, I'm inportant I am." mind set.
If it has a personalised plate too, just take it as an early warning.
|
Not all MB/BMW drivers are the same.
As the driver of an MB320 I have the hands free kit installed and its quality is excellent. Part of the problem is the rip off prices MB charge to fit this "added extra" at £1000....It should be fitted as standard the same way seat belts are
The plonkers who give high end car drivers a bad name drive us all crazy with there couldnt care less attitude. Its not the car its the driver and they probably act the same way when out of the car.
--
\"Eagles may fly in formation but Weasels dont get sucked into jet engines\"
|
"Surely if you can afford that soet of motor you can afford a handsfree kit?"
Only the other day I saw the driver of a Bentley Continental GT using a phone. You would really think if you can even afford to insure one of those (let alone buy9 you could afford a handsfree solution.
|
|
|
Not all MB/BMW drivers are the same. As the driver of an MB320 I have the hands free kit installed and its quality is excellent. Part of the problem is the rip off prices MB charge to fit this "added extra" at £1000....It should be fitted as standard the same way seat belts are
How did you arrive at £1000? The wiring is £430 and the cradle is something like £150.
A simplified bluetooth connection is being introduced as standard starting with the new C Class.
|
|
|
|
|
Surely if you can afford that soet of motor you can afford a handsfree kit?
It does not really matter, though, whether it's hands free or not - it's still dangerous to be on the telephone whilst driving, whatever.
|
>>hands free or not - it's stilldangerous to be on the telephone whilst driving whatever.
Garbaggio, surely? No worse than talking to a passenger.
When necessary a sane driver can always switch everything else off and concentrate 100% for perhaps just a few seconds.
So if you can't talk when driving, well, you need a bit of practice is all I can say.
|
No worse than talking to a passenger. >>
A passenger quickly realises when to keep quiet.
Using a mobile phone in a car, whether held to the ear or hands-free, is an unwanted and mostly unnecessary distraction from maintaining maximum concentration on what is happening on the road ahead of you (or behind, or to each side for that matter).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
|
>>hands free or not - it's still >> dangerous to be on the telephone whilst driving whatever. Garbaggio surely? No worse than talking to a passenger.
No. I have already referenced in this forum the TRL Report on using the telephone when driving, however I can't find it from a site search.
Using a hands free phone whilst driving was found to be more dangerous than driving whilst over the drink-drive limit:
tinyurl.com/3abgnh
Worth a read. Go to page 8 if you're in a hurry.
|
Using a hands free phone whilst driving was found to be more dangerous than driving whilst over the drink-drive limit:
It's probably lethal for some people to have a random thought while they are driving. It's sure to distract them from the extremely difficult and demanding task in hand.
Others however are competent drivers. This claim is quite simply nonsense.
|
Surely the fact that it is NOT illegal in many countries to use a phone suggests that, as ever, the British consider laws and rules to be a "moral" issue rather than just legislation?
It's like the speeding thing: it is no safer to drive at 120mph in Germany on a de-restricted autobahn than it is for me to drive down the M54 in the middle of the night at 120, as I didn't do the other night. It's just legal in Germany.
My views on phone use? I'm with Lud..... it depends on the driver. Instead of relying on spurious, costly and blanket legislation which is ultimately unenforceable, we should have a driving test system that isn't scared to tell people who are unsuited to driving that they really shouldn't drive.
IMHO.
|
|
|
>> Using a hands free phone whilst driving [...] whilst over the drink-drive limit:
Others however are competent drivers. This claim is quite simply nonsense.
Everyone thinks they're competent. Most drivers think they're above average. To say "this claim is simply nonsense" when there is a large body of research showing that using a hands-free phone wile driving is more dangerous than DUI in the UK is - well, very silly. Perhaps you should actually read the TRL report, and others from the UK and abroad:
www.rospa.com/roadsafety/info/workmobiles.pdf (p.2)
www.swov.nl/rapport/Factsheets/FS_Mobile_phones.pdf
www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2003/06/593...1
www.thinkroadsafety.gov.uk/advice/mobilephones.htm
networks.silicon.com/mobile/0,39024665,10002617,00...m
www.news.uiuc.edu/news/04/1112cellphones.html
www.edp-uk.com/newsletters/mobilephones2.htm
etc.
|
A lot of that first ROSPA report is a load of New Labour spin nonsense and tripe.
"... managers should set an example and not use their phones whilst driving"... this includes hands-free systems as is staed. One word: WHY?
This is like the ever-more tedious smoking debate. IT IS NOT ILLEGAL TO USE A HANDS-FREE SYSTEM IN A CAR. So, why on your chosen deity's green earth do ROSPA want managers to make some smug self-righteous point about not using the phone?
Wooly pseudo-political nonsense. If those in power wish us to feel bad about yet another everyday activity, why don't they ban it, instead of making the "law" so open to misreading? I will continue to use the Bluetooth in my car (with a fixed point for my phone to sit in) because, heaven forfend, I can speak and drive at the same time. I am not disputing that in certain circumstances, and with certain drivers, it may be an issue. Please refer to my earlier comments for clarification on that. The more we remove people's discretion and instead impose pointless bureaucratic legislation on every aspect of modern life (and I'm with Blur on that one, rather than Blair) the more you create a nation whose mantra is "Where's there blame there's a claim".
Drinking coffee, smoking, talking to the rugrats in the back seat...... I see no difference between that and conversing with someone who doesn't happen to be in the car with you.
|
A lot of that first ROSPA report is a load of New Labour spin nonsense and tripe.
Did you only read the couple of sentences you quoted, then? No commend on P2 of that report, or the others quoted, or indeed any of the other world-wide resaearch, other than "a load of nonsense and tripe"?
Perhaps - tinyurl.com/2nluqm
|
Perhaps I have read it all and didn't type every single thought that I had on it, merely commented on that which I thought relevant to this debate? : )
If you want every nuance of my opinions on this, then be prepared for a very long post! Happy to do it! Just give me the word.
Incidentally, and with respect, why do I have my head in the sand, in addition to wearing a very dubious suite and tie combination? Did YOU read what I wrote? I think that, even if you disagree with my views as you so obviously do, I stated very good reasons as to why I think them.
Do you want me to expound these heinous non-PC libertarian views further?
|
|
|
|
Everyone thinks they're competent. Most drivers think they're above average.
I know FT. The fact remains however that some, and I mean some, really are competent.
a large body of research showing that using a hands-freephone wile driving is more dangerous than DUI in the UK is - well very silly.
Agreed. This large body of research claiming to show that is indeed very silly.
|
Indeed Lud. Also, as you have said before, how can one quantify "using a hands-freephone wile driving is more dangerous than DUI": if someone is just over the legal limit and less affected by alcohol than some then that is NOT the same (and don't bleat it is because it isn't) the same as someone who is up to their neck in alcopops and affected a great deal by alcohol is it? I am not justifying DUI, I don't drink when I drive at all, as I don't want to risk my licence, plus on a more altruistic note, I am somewhat affected by even a pint. To me a zero tolerance makes more sense, in the same way that I think banning hands-free, whilst not in keeping with MY beliefs, is a clearer decision than wasting rainforest on pointless reports.
Clear motorway, using hands-free. How is that dangerous? Go on, tell me. I am intrigued. Is my cognitive ability any more affected than when I am daydreaming about Emmanuelle Beart, something I do far more often than use my phone?... I doubt it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
