|
I reckon the majority don't follow the news and aren't aware of the new penalties - if they're aware of any penalty at all.
|
|
There's a world of difference between proactive texting and the reactive receipt of a phone call. Indeed, I think the latter probably removes less attention from driving than actively selecting a CD or fiddling with the satnav.
Also, I cannot see much difference between using a hands free facility and hold a phone to one's ear (or attaching it to the magnet glued onto my B pillar and shouting) while steering with one hand. After all, there are plenty of disabled one-armed drivers around who seem to manage OK.
But then the law is, and always has been, somewhat of an ass.
|
But then the law is, and always has been, somewhat of an ass.
The law is the law ( to quote somebody,) and without it, there would be chaos, so until the law is changed, obey it.
I am getting older, so eyesight not as good as it used to be, reacions slower, so not phoning while driving is ok by me. I have bluetooth, can see who is calling, and ignore.
I do not want to be in front of a judge for a fatality, not because of the penalty, but because i do not want to live with the thought that my stupidity might harm another.
|
|
I think it is time for the best solution to people's inabilty to stop using their phone whilst driving. Confiscate the car.
Problem solved.
My last employer had a rather severe penaly if you were spotted using your phone whilst in the car; first offense was an official warning. Second offense you were fired. This was ten years ago!
Needless to say very few people lost their job, but some did. Their policy worked.
|
|
As is always posted - the likelihood of being caught is crucial and the level of punishment must be appropriate. ORB is spot on ; the consequences of lack of attention are horrendous.
Education - coming out of Harrogate I drifted a few miles of the limit ( early evening, no traffic, fine weather, non residential but I was at fault ) I was offered a speed awareness course which I accepted. It was excellent and a boost to my driving standards and I expressed my gratitude that the police had caught me. We need compulsory on going training and assessment to be permitted to retain our licences.
|
|
I think you were a headteacher, Scot: you must have been a very successful one, and I hope that your message of learning through experience rubbed off on generations of pupils.
You make a very good point about continuing training. I trained as a chartered accountant, and like other professionals we are required to undergo continuing professiomnal development. Some professional drivers get refreshers, but the rest of us are just as capable of endangering other people's lives and limbs by our driving. That's something that most other professionals can't do (not now that teachers no longer have wooden blackboard erasers to throw at children....).
The need for refresher training is great - but I can't see how it could ever be managed. A start could be made if certain offences carried a requirement for compulsory training and another driving test, although even that demansa resources that the country maybe hasn't got.
|
|
>A start could be made if certain offences carried a requirement for compulsory training and another driving test<
I really do not see the point, these drivers know they`ve done wrong, so a fine and loss of licence should be enough, bearing in mind some that already have bans are still on the road including those with several hundred points on the licence
So, another driving test is a waste of time to most of these drivers
As for prisons, no room so thats out????
|
|
|
I think you were a headteacher, Scot: you must have been a very successful one, and I hope that your message of learning through experience rubbed off on generations of pupils.
You make a very good point about continuing training. I trained as a chartered accountant, and like other professionals we are required to undergo continuing professiomnal development. Some professional drivers get refreshers, but the rest of us are just as capable of endangering other people's lives and limbs by our driving. That's something that most other professionals can't do (not now that teachers no longer have wooden blackboard erasers to throw at children....).
The need for refresher training is great - but I can't see how it could ever be managed. A start could be made if certain offences carried a requirement for compulsory training and another driving test, although even that demansa resources that the country maybe hasn't got.
Avant, have you thought of taking the IAM test now you're retired? I will when time allows. A wife and three teenage boys take up my spare time!
|
|
|
|
|
|
with a lack of police enforcement, I suspect as was mentioned on the news, cameras will be used to fine those drivers using a phone.
software can easily be used to tell when someone is using a phone from video camera footage.
|
|
Thanks for your comments Avant - my pupils went on to success ; hopefully I played some part.
bolt : unfortunately some drivers don't think they've done wrong. These rules only, in their minds, apply to inferior people not them. It is through education that people can improve. Forcing compliance falls down whenever people think they can get away with it. Developing commitment (through education) ensures the right attitude.
I had become a little complacent about strict adherence to speed limits, particularly if the conditions seemed O.K. One of the two excellent trainers told of a fatality at 4.00 a.m. The taxi driver involved kept saying that there was never anyone there at that time. Eventually he was shown a photograph of the dead body. The course improved my driving.
There are driving schools and instructors have to be well qualified. Perhaps anyone observed driving poorly should have to take an appropriate course. Subsidising voluntary ongoing driver training would probably work out cheaper than dealing with some of the consequences of bad driving - let alone the personal cost.
|
|
Won't the real penalty be their insurance premium when they have to renew?
As long as they declare it and it doesn't encourage a new wave of uninsured drivers.
|
|
|
|
It is through education that people can improve
Normally I would agree with you, but with persistant offenders education gets you nowhere, and were not talking about speed limits here- were talking about not concentrating on the road due to use of a mobile phone
which aparently has become something some people cannot do without
|
|
Very true bolt. It is how the opportunity for improvement is applied. For example, you can only be offered speed awareness course if you've not had one in previous three years.
I agree with your point about persistent offenders. I would not like to say which is more dangerous speeding or using a mobile phone in some situations : both are.
|
|
I've seen 2 people using hand-held mobiles while driving since the penalties were toughened a few days ago. They're just people I noticed, I wasn't particularly looking out for them.
As well as the penalties I think confiscation of the phone would be a good idea. Also the police should be allowed to access your history on the phone. That would really make people think twice!
Edited by Sofa Spud on 04/03/2017 at 22:14
|
|
I would not defend texting whilst driving - it is a potentially very dangerous distraction.
But we should be aware that it is just one of many contributors to road accidents. Applying draconian penalties for this may equally be applied to (say) the man who failed to fill a pothole, allowed vegetation to obscure a street sign, police for not effectively enforcing speed limits, etc etc. All these can equally cause accidents.
It is also worth noting that keeping to British Summer Time rather than changing the clocks could save 100 lives a year - 5x mobile phone use!.
We should keep a sense of proportion - severe penalties should be reserved for stupidity resulting in actual harm, not potential harm.
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly it doesn't matter what fines are in place people will still do it. Confiscating car is a silly idea and not going to happen. Insurance premium hikes and better education is the way forward
|
Sadly it doesn't matter what fines are in place people will still do it. Confiscating car is a silly idea and not going to happen. Insurance premium hikes and better education is the way forward
As has been said, hiking insurance - which is already impossibly expensive for some - will probably encourage more to do without it.
We are all subject to a long list of 'banned' activities - things which almost everyone knows they shouldn't do, for good reason - but some people persist in doing them, usually because they can, and they know they are not likely to be caught. And even if they are caught, they may be able to afford a Mr.Loophole to get them off any penalty (how can anyone be allowed to accumulate over 50 points on a licence just to avoid 'excessive hardship'? )
|
As has been said, hiking insurance - which is already impossibly expensive for some - will probably encourage more to do without it.
I would like to see something like the Russian system in use here. You can't get a numberplate without basic insurance cover and all the neccesary documents. The best part is their basic insurance (OSAGO) is very cheap and you dont have to shop around for it as it will be the same price for you anywhere.
We are all subject to a long list of 'banned' activities - things which almost everyone knows they shouldn't do, for good reason - but some people persist in doing them, usually because they can, and they know they are not likely to be caught. And even if they are caught, they may be able to afford a Mr.Loophole to get them off any penalty (how can anyone be allowed to accumulate over 50 points on a licence just to avoid 'excessive hardship'? )
I had a conversation like this with the companies legal man about 20 years ago and he said that a drivers licence for a vocational driver is something like a work permit and that he had argued that you can't stop a person from working just because they had made a mistake. He managed to get a drivers licence cleared of 15 points because of the location of the speed camera and lack of signage.
|
I had a conversation like this with the companies legal man about 20 years ago and he said that a drivers licence for a vocational driver is something like a work permit and that he had argued that you can't stop a person from working just because they had made a mistake. He managed to get a drivers licence cleared of 15 points because of the location of the speed camera and lack of signage.
What utter and total b0110cks. Private user or business user, if you break the law the same penalty should apply. If that means you loose your licence, then your job and then your family well tough.
On Wednesday I was in a slow moving queue doing about 15 mph. The lorry behind was flashing me to speed up because I had left a 2 or 3 car gap. As the traffic slowed slightly I caught up, as they speeded up slightly a small gap appeared. Eventually I turned right and spotted in my mirror the driver of the said lorry on his phone texting.
What an impatient and law breaking pratt.
|
|
<< On Wednesday I was in a slow moving queue doing about 15 mph. The lorry behind was flashing me to speed up because I had left a 2 or 3 car gap. As the traffic slowed slightly I caught up, as they speeded up slightly a small gap appeared. Eventually I turned right and spotted in my mirror the driver of the said lorry on his phone texting. >>
He will have been telling the missus where he was, who was in front of him, and not to put the dinner on for another 20 minutes ... :-)
Edited by Andrew-T on 05/03/2017 at 15:26
|
He will have been telling the missus where he was, who was in front of him, and not to put the dinner on for another 20 minutes ... :-)
This was at about 9 am.
|
|
>He will have been telling the missus where he was, who was in front of him, and not to put the dinner on for another 20 minutes ... :-)<
It would not be the first conversation I have heard by drivers with hands free at high volume,as some like to broadcast the conversation so everyone can hear it
I`ve heard many a heated argument over a loud hands free, and can be comical to listen to, even though you dont really want to hear it
|
I had a conversation like this with the companies legal man about 20 years ago and he said that a drivers licence for a vocational driver is something like a work permit and that he had argued that you can't stop a person from working just because they had made a mistake. He managed to get a drivers licence cleared of 15 points because of the location of the speed camera and lack of signage.
What utter and total b0110cks. Private user or business user, if you break the law the same penalty should apply. If that means you loose your licence, then your job and then your family well tough.
On Wednesday I was in a slow moving queue doing about 15 mph. The lorry behind was flashing me to speed up because I had left a 2 or 3 car gap. As the traffic slowed slightly I caught up, as they speeded up slightly a small gap appeared. Eventually I turned right and spotted in my mirror the driver of the said lorry on his phone texting.
What an impatient and law breaking pratt.
The legal man at works little toe knows more about traffic law than you!
Your obnoxious replies of late Skidpan are starting to get a bit tedious, if you don't agree with someone you could try to discuss it in pleasant way.
|
Your obnoxious replies of late Skidpan are starting to get a bit tedious,
The stupid posts I read where posters appear to claim its OK to gather points and not get banned are also tedious.
How would you feel if the chap with 15 points had wiped out your family days after keeping his licence when he should have been banned.
Points are points regardless of whether you are a private or business user.
Pratts should be taken off the road.
|
Your obnoxious replies of late Skidpan are starting to get a bit tedious,
The stupid posts I read where posters appear to claim its OK to gather points and not get banned are also tedious.
How would you feel if the chap with 15 points had wiped out your family days after keeping his licence when he should have been banned.
Points are points regardless of whether you are a private or business user.
Pratts should be taken off the road.
I'll be 100% truthful with you Skidpan I dislike the driver and the legal man as much as I dislike some people who post on the internet.
However, When a person like said driver gets 15 points for what was as good as entrapment then I feel the case was right to go to court and to have the points removed. The road changes speed just before where the camera was hidden but, the speed signs at the point of speed change were invisible due to foliage which wasn't trimmed back. The camera itself was also not visible from the position of a driver. The road there does not change appearance at all to signify the need for a speed change either. So for the same driver to trigger the camera 5 days in a row doing 40mph I think it speaks for itself that he isn't doing it on purpose and that it was just not possible for him to know.
|
|
If 100's of other drivers were getting caught repeatedly at the same spot I would agree something is out of order.
If your colleague was the only driver to challenge then he is guilty.
|
|
Only an idiot would text while driving, same goes for making a call that isn't hands free. As for one armed disabled people driving, they are not disttracting themselves by using a hand they haven't got to use a phone.
|
|
I don' find skidpan has any more "poor replies" than most of our other regulars...
Bit of sarcasm is quite useful sometime,,, (not that i think that his reply is anything more than succinct!)
|
|
I'm with Wackyracer. Differences of opinion can/should be beneficial. It will be even more beneficial if discussed courteously and pleasantly.
Sadly, we now have a President of the U.S.A. whosed popularity with some people seems to be linked to his rudeness. It is a shame that this now appears acceptable to some people.
|
I'm with Wackyracer. Differences of opinion can/should be beneficial. It will be even more beneficial if discussed courteously and pleasantly.
Sadly, we now have a President of the U.S.A. whosed popularity with some people seems to be linked to his rudeness. It is a shame that this now appears acceptable to some people.
Whats the president of the USA got to do with texting while driving?.
|
I don' find skidpan has any more "poor replies" than most of our other regulars...
Bit of sarcasm is quite useful sometime,,, (not that i think that his reply is anything more than succinct!)
Replying "utter testicles" under the guise of a combination of letters and numbers to everything you don't agree with is rude and non constructive in my book. It is little more than trolling.
Sarcasm I would enjoy, being quite a sarcastic person myself.
Certain people on this forum are very much like my elderly mother, always right regardless of facts, science or precedent to the contrary of their own person belief.
|
|
Can we keep the discussiomn constructive and polite please.
Wackyracer, I would like to think that your company's legal expert wouldn't have made the same effort to get the employee off if the offence had been driving while using a mobile rather than speeding - assuming that the speed in question wasn't dangerous.
In his case of course it was 20 years ago and the issue wasn't as common as it is now.
|
|
bolt - the issue I was commenting on was the nature of people's posts, which had been introduced to the thread.
Trump has nothing to do with texting while driving ; I am aware of that. However, he is a worrying example of the lack of thought and consideration shown by too many people. This would be for the general discussion but it was relevant in the context of previous posts.
|
Trump has nothing to do with texting while driving ; I am aware of that. However, he is a worrying example of the lack of thought and consideration shown by too many people. This would be for the general discussion but it was relevant in the context of previous posts.
As President Trump has been mentioned in derogatry terms, he is the direct result of 25 years of identikit liberal lefty politicians totally ignoring the majority of their native populations whilst they pursued their own dreams and ambitions regardless of what it did to their countries, hence a complete outsider completely opposite to those swept to victory, i suspect he'll get a second term on a bigger landslide as his sweeping changes bear fruit.
Brexit similar reasons and why the likes of Marine LePen has a good chance of sweeping home too.
We have been long overdue for change anyway, western regimes seldom last much more than a couple of decades, the elites of these last few years are fading out and it's rather comical to watch as they attempt kicking and screaming with the help of their bought and paid for useful idiots and media chums to derail the inevitable, and they have no one but themselves to blame for their demise, but don't feel to sorry for them, they won't be living with the consequences of their actions like us plebs, they made lots of money for themselves and their backers as they destroyed their own nations.
|
Trump has nothing to do with texting while driving ; I am aware of that. However, he is a worrying example of the lack of thought and consideration shown by too many people. This would be for the general discussion but it was relevant in the context of previous posts.
As President Trump has been mentioned in derogatry terms, he is the direct result of 25 years of identikit liberal lefty politicians totally ignoring the majority of their native populations whilst they pursued their own dreams and ambitions regardless of what it did to their countries, hence a complete outsider completely opposite to those swept to victory, i suspect he'll get a second term on a bigger landslide as his sweeping changes bear fruit.
Brexit similar reasons and why the likes of Marine LePen has a good chance of sweeping home too.
We have been long overdue for change anyway, western regimes seldom last much more than a couple of decades, the elites of these last few years are fading out and it's rather comical to watch as they attempt kicking and screaming with the help of their bought and paid for useful idiots and media chums to derail the inevitable, and they have no one but themselves to blame for their demise, but don't feel to sorry for them, they won't be living with the consequences of their actions like us plebs, they made lots of money for themselves and their backers as they destroyed their own nations.
You took the words right out of my mouth GB thanks, and well said!. I think we have started the ball rolling, and may it continue....
|
|
GB - I welcome discussion with people who have different views. This can often lead to improvements in understanding and development.
I will always maintain that people should be able to express theirs views courteously. My main issue with Trump is that he embodies the belief that you can say whatever you feel like, irrespective of facts and politeness. Let's discuss ideas reasonably and politely.
I will not make another post on this because I appreciate it has gone off thread.
|
Only an idiot would text while driving, same goes for making a call that isn't hands free. As for one armed disabled people driving, they are not disttracting themselves by using a hand they haven't got to use a phone.
You clearly missed my point. In receiving, not making a call, the hand is not actually using the phone, merely supporting it with absolutely no requirement for hand-eye co-ordination. There is no 'sameness' about it at all. If the law cannot distinguish between the severity of the two offences then it is indeed an ass.
As for Skidpan's disagreeable rudeness and insults, I thought we were all used to it by now!
|
|
John - Skidpan is merely saying what he thinks, which in an open forum he is welcome to do, just as you are welcome to give us your views, even if some of them are on the eccentric side of left-field.
Even if you're only answering a phone, if you don't have hands-free or Bluetooth, you are distracted from driving by two things: having one hand off the wheel, and having part of your mind on the phone conversation. Most of us can drive and have a conversation at the same time - but preferably with both hands on the wheel.
It would be a pleasure to meet you John - but I do hope it's not in a Dorset country lane near me with you coming the other way, one hand on your phone and the other driving a car with 20-year-old tyres!
|
|
Well the Americans have the idiot Trump for president but its only for 4 years and then they get the oportunity to kick him out (if he lsats that long).
But we have Brexit forever and I firmly believe it will be bad for the country in the short and long term.
Luckily for me I am of an age where I don't have to live with the repercussions for as long as the youngsters, its those I feel really sorry for.
|
Well the Americans have the idiot Trump for president but its only for 4 years and then they get the oportunity to kick him out (if he lsats that long).
But we have Brexit forever and I firmly believe it will be bad for the country in the short and long term.
Luckily for me I am of an age where I don't have to live with the repercussions for as long as the youngsters, its those I feel really sorry for.
Funny how when a person doesnt conform to some peoples way of thinking and doing things,they are immediately classed as idiots,Trump is doing what Obama should have done, and no one else has the bottle to do, with a bit of luck he may be re`elected again in 4 years (long time in politics) depending on what happens between now and then
Roll on Brexit, I dont think it will be bad for the country, we lived out of it for long enough and did fine
|
Roll on Brexit, I dont think it will be bad for the country, we lived out of it for long enough and did fine
Bolt how could you, we can't possibly survive without our collective mummy telling us what to do how to behave what to think who we can deal with etc etc.
:-)
Serously though, lets hope we get a real Brexit, the present elite arn't going to give up their control of the world without a dirty fight, and i do not have a lot of faith in the (so often empty) words of previously remainer tories suddenly reversing their coats, Sir Nige can't go yet, he may yet be needed more than ever.
|
Funny how when a person doesnt conform to some peoples way of thinking and doing things,they are immediately classed as idiots
Very true. Trump isn't stupid and he is the rough diamond that is needed to knock the over confident others back into their places.
Roll on Brexit, I dont think it will be bad for the country, we lived out of it for long enough and did fine
I agree, plenty of other countries do fine outside of it. If Le Pen gets in Brexit might just be the little snowball that started an avalanche.
|
Funny how when a person doesnt conform to some peoples way of thinking and doing things,they are immediately classed as idiots
Very true. Trump isn't stupid and he is the rough diamond that is needed to knock the over confident others back into their places.
Roll on Brexit, I dont think it will be bad for the country, we lived out of it for long enough and did fine
I agree, plenty of other countries do fine outside of it. If Le Pen gets in Brexit might just be the little snowball that started an avalanche.
It's actually a shame, should have worked, needed a strong and wise person to gel things together - something we just don't have. But we are where we are and what we voted to leave was incapble of adequate change to make it worthwhile remaining.
Back to use of phone in car, I have a "brodit" dedicated cradle for the phone behind steering wheel, on/off control for bluetooth next to the cradle, no need to touch the handset to answer, but must touch screen if making a call - (never did set up voice activation). Still reading emails or text messages is a definate no-no, even sat-nav is out of the question. (use the built in instead).
I totally agree punishment of £200 is inadequate deterrant for use of a handheld mobile whilst driving, or using the text in a moving vehicle - confiscation of the device is the only way to get the message across, 7 days first offence - upwards, in tandem with a network blocking of the sim card for the same time period. As we have seen recently points don't make prizes and too many drivers are being allowed to drive with over 12 points.
Followed by a permenant network blocking of the number for repeat offenders. The current advertising campaign to put the phone in the glovebox is so weak, the message will only be understood when the pain of using handheld devices is acute - this is less than a gentle slap across the wrist!
|
|
confiscation of the device is the only way to get the message across
Problem is, there is such a thing as buying a payg phone/sim card so if the phone is taken away You have a spare hidden away. I think a larger fine is the only way, and if you cannot afford to pay, or, wont pay- prison- or threat of, may soften opening the wallet
Or pay as you go fines with the threat of prison if you miss a payment
|
But we have Brexit forever and I firmly believe it will be bad for the country in the short and long term.
I have hopes that the politicians will get themselves to a point where the terms of separation are so clearly unfavourable that they will decide not to Brexit after all. The referendum was never legally binding, but they will have played along with it for long enough to satisfy appearances.
IMHO it was a daft idea from the start. We elected a parliament to make difficult decisions on our behalf. They couldn't be sure which way to jump, so they asked millions of even less informed people to choose, then washed their hands of it. Rather like asking the turkeys to vote for Christmas.
Now that some things are taking shape - PSA and Vauxhall - and the other car makers may well say that manufacturing in UK will need taxpayers' money to continue, perhaps the consequences of Brexit may be less desirable than just keeping out a few unwanted immigrants.
|
But we have Brexit forever and I firmly believe it will be bad for the country in the short and long term.
I have hopes that the politicians will get themselves to a point where the terms of separation are so clearly unfavourable that they will decide not to Brexit after all. The referendum was never legally binding, but they will have played along with it for long enough to satisfy appearances.
IMHO it was a daft idea from the start. We elected a parliament to make difficult decisions on our behalf. They couldn't be sure which way to jump, so they asked millions of even less informed people to choose, then washed their hands of it. Rather like asking the turkeys to vote for Christmas.
Now that some things are taking shape - PSA and Vauxhall - and the other car makers may well say that manufacturing in UK will need taxpayers' money to continue, perhaps the consequences of Brexit may be less desirable than just keeping out a few unwanted immigrants.
There will be riots if we dont leave
You may have elected this parliament, but I didnt, I wouldnt waste a vote on this lot, they are so far up their rear ends I suspect they can see the sun the other side.....
if you dont know what brexit is about other than control of our borders I suggest you read up on it, as I am sick of hearing the rubbish remainers keep coming out with!
|
|
<< You may have elected this parliament, but I didnt, ... >>
No doubt. But equally, you may have voted for Brexit, but I didn't. Cameron only sponsored a referendum because he thought he would get what he wanted. He should have allowed for the unexpected. You don't like politicians, but there has to be an elected system to make political decisions - they should have bitten the bullet.
|
<< You may have elected this parliament, but I didnt, ... >>
No doubt. But equally, you may have voted for Brexit, but I didn't. Cameron only sponsored a referendum because he thought he would get what he wanted. He should have allowed for the unexpected. You don't like politicians, but there has to be an elected system to make political decisions - they should have bitten the bullet.
Please dont put words in my mouth, because I wouldnt vote for them doesnt mean I don`t like them, I do not trust them, Cameron thought he had a clear majority in favour of remain as I recall an interview he had on TV
I also recall our new PM was not elected by us, as for a system, it seems to be doing rather well in destroying the NHS and yet the chancellor can save up billions for the effects of brexit, kinda says what they think of there own....not a lot!
|
|
<< ... because I wouldnt vote for them doesnt mean I don`t like them, I do not trust them, ...
I also recall our new PM was not elected by us, ... >>
Not sure whether you can like them while not trusting them, but let that pass.
We never 'elect' any PM. He/she has been elected by a constituency, and later chosen by a majority party or coalition. It often seems that in a general election many people imagine they are voting for a PM (that often seemed to be true with Tony B of fond memory). Maybe the basic problem is that most MPs spend relatively little time representing their constituencies.
Edited by Andrew-T on 07/03/2017 at 12:24
|
It would be a pleasure to meet you John - but I do hope it's not in a Dorset country lane near me with you coming the other way, one hand on your phone and the other driving a car with 20-year-old tyres!
Ho ho - you clearly missed my post saying I replaced my 23yr old tyres - in 2011, so they are now only 6 yrs old. As it happens I shall be piddling around Dorset on Aug12th for a wedding, probably distracted, perfectly legally, by my sat nav.
|
Only an idiot would text while driving, same goes for making a call that isn't hands free. As for one armed disabled people driving, they are not disttracting themselves by using a hand they haven't got to use a phone.
You clearly missed my point. In receiving, not making a call, the hand is not actually using the phone, merely supporting it with absolutely no requirement for hand-eye co-ordination. There is no 'sameness' about it at all. If the law cannot distinguish between the severity of the two offences then it is indeed an ass.
Making/taking it makes no difference. I stand by my thoughts on people who think this is acceptable. I don't understand why people who think it is acceptable can't think of others, obey the law and spend the few ££ to buy a hands free kit. I've had a few near misses of people coming around corners on the wrong side of the road because they can't be Wengered to buy a hands free kit. The most stupid are the ones holding their phone to their left ear with their right hand!!!!!!!! Clearly not from planet earth.
Avant has hit the nail on the head. Anyway, common sense is all that's needed in this instance. Downside of common sense is it isn't standard fit in every human. For some it's an impossible fit, arrogance can be the alternative. :(
|
|
My company has recently banned all use of mobile phones, including hands free whilst driving on company business. They quoted a study showing that the distraction from having the conversation is more significant than whether or not you were actually holding the phone. More significantly, they said that hands free kits encourage people to talk for longer, and have more complex conversations, massively increasing the period exposed to greater risk. Very few people would hold a phone to their ear for an hour and a half whilst driving down the motorway, as it would get seriously uncomfortable. However, we were getting people routinely joining long phone conferences from the car.
Initially the heavy users hated it, but fairly quickly realised that they can now spend their journeys listening to the radio and not really thinking about work. They now schedule longer stops (and get paid overtime) for conversations which previously would have been done whilst driving.
|
Avant has hit the nail on the head. Anyway, common sense is all that's needed in this instance.
No such thing. Common sense is arguably neither common nor sense.
Basically, this thread is now discussing both legal and illegal distractions from driving.
I remain to be persuaded as to why having a conversation while briefly holding a piece of plastic against one's ear is considered to be an offence, while equipping a car with a large television screen and expecting drivers to take their eyes off the road and hand off the wheel to poke and prod it, is not.
It seems to me the latter is much more of a dangerous distraction than the former and I shall not be surprised to see the incidence of accidents rise in proportion to the increase in number of vehicles on the road with this technology.
|
I remain to be persuaded as to why having a conversation while briefly holding a piece of plastic against one's ear is considered to be an offence, while equipping a car with a large television screen and expecting drivers to take their eyes off the road and hand off the wheel to poke and prod it, is not.
I tend to agree with you John, what is the difference between a person talking to his passenger and fiddling with the radio, heater controls or just driving one handed and a person talking with a phone held to his ear? I've been in cars with drivers that spend half their time looking at the front seat passenger they are talking to which I think is far more dangerous.
The problem I guess is everyone has to be classed as the lowest capability. Russian marshrutka drivers seem to be able to multitask extremely well while driving by using their mobile, talking on the CB to other drivers and taking money and giving change with tickets to passengers all while driving.
|
|
Couldn't agree more with JohnF and Wackyracer, its high time this country abandoned its one size fits all mantra, so much is based on the most incompetent nitwit and we're all assumed to be the same...mind you considering the lunatics that the electorate have put in over the last 20 years they might be right after all.
Edited by gordonbennet on 07/03/2017 at 19:10
|
Couldn't agree more with JohnF and Wackyracer, its high time this country abandoned its one size fits all mantra,
Who is going to decide who can phone and text whilst driving then?
With bluetooth being standard in most cars now and simple handsfree kits costing peanuts I cannot understand why I see so many people hold a handset to their ear, especially so called professionals driving large lorries.
|
|
With bluetooth being standard in most cars now and simple handsfree kits costing peanuts I cannot understand why I see so many people hold a handset to their ear, especially so called professionals driving large lorries.
You would be surprised (or not) a lot of people do not know how to use them, or even want to use them, I know some women that have smartphones but do not know how to connect them to bluetooth.
for some a mobile is complicated and do not have a clue how to use them apart from texting and making calls, I have relations that when someone explains how to make bluetooth connection, they tell them not to bother as its too complicated...
this world of high tech is getting too much for some people
|
For some a mobile is complicated and do not have a clue how to use them apart from texting and making calls, I have relations that when someone explains how to make bluetooth connection, they tell them not to bother as its too complicated...
I fall into that category, mainly because I have no need to do more than send texts or make calls. While driving I have a mobile in case I need it, having no intention to take a call, as I am not in a tight schedule making deliveries, or whatever. It's interesting that the 'classic' Nokia has been revived, as phones have become cameras with calling and internet capability.
|
for some a mobile is complicated and do not have a clue how to use them apart from texting and making calls, I have relations that when someone explains how to make bluetooth connection, they tell them not to bother as its too complicated.
Had 5 cars with bluetooth now and pairing the phones has been simple enough whatever brand of car and whatever brand of phone we have had at the time. Once its done it connects automatically the next time you turn on the car (providing bluetooth is turned on in the phone).
RTFM.
|
|
|
|
|
