Come off it, eMBe. If someone has a mobile and it rings while they are driving they can choose to ignore it if they think using it would place them in danger. They can also give a quick "Hang on while I pull" in to the caller. A drunk driver will be drunk all the time he is behind the wheel, and will be a danger till he leaves the car.
Holding an involved conversation on a phone does indeed impair your ability to concentrate on the road, but a quick few generally doesn't. The accident rate has been falling or holding steady for many years. If mobiles were a dangerous as the report suggests, it would have gone sky high in recent years.
Why don't these "Experts" have the honesty to put their point across without overstating it with a ridiculous pack of lies?
|
I heard an 'expert' on the TV yesterday say that statistically you were more likely to be run into by someone on a mobile phone than by a drunk driver!
I suspect this might have something to do with there being rather more mobile phone users per square foot than drunken drivers.
I am not condoning the use of phones while driving - it does seem downright silly and there is already sufficient legislation to stop it - but too often statistics get in the way of common sense. A man with his head in a hot oven and his feet in the fridge is, on average, feeling fine!
|
|
|
While the distraction caused by having an involved conversation is a problem not only for phones but also with a passenger seated near the driver. The simple fact is that with a hand held phone you cannot have full control of a vehicle and be able to steer, change gear and cope with unexpected situations.
While current legislation allows for driving without due care and attention, this is not applied by the police or more importantly understood by the public. Having a simple punishable offence relating to phone use makes it much easier to understand by car drivers and the law becomes self policing.
Personally I am not too bothered by the use of hands free phones for short calls, but holding a mobile phone to you ear when in charge of a car is like trying to drive with one hand tied behind your back and having a conversation with a passenger you cant see.
Why do people do it?
The driver in my personal example didnt even stop to apologise...she (with two children in the back) drove off without even putting the phone down. Unfortunately I didnt get the full reg. number.
Ian L.
|
|
|
Come off it, eMBe.
Tom Shaw: I presume you have read the links I referred to. If you have, and remain unconvinced, by all means carry on doing what you believe to be right.
My point is simply that "unnecessary" legislation is sometimes needed even in civilised societies to moderate the behaviour of law-abiding citizens. Seat-belts are an example quoted in the linkd. Stopping distances while "Drink-driving vs using-mobile-phone" are also shown.
There are laws which say that stealing/theft is illegal. Whether these laws are necessary, or policed suffiently, whether the deterrents applied are enough or not, these are points people can and do argue about.
At the end of the day, I believe that your average law-abiding person does not need a law to tell them not to steal, but having the law helps society in general. I think it is the same with mobile-phone use. If drivers want to carry on driving without wearing seat belts, want to continue using phones, don't want to insure or tax their cars, drive without MOTs, and so on; - then that is their choice to break the law.
|
I have to agree with eMBe on this one. (It does happen). Is it more dangerous than drink driving? Probably, for the period you are on the phone - although that might be 30 seconds of a one hour drive, and phoning someone to say you'll be late might deter you from driving like a bat out of hell to get there on time.
Driving without due care and attention is adequate for prosecuting drivers who use their mobile dangerously at the moment. The problem is that the evidential burden of that is higher - did the driving fall below the required standard, etc. - than "I saw him driving on his mobile and this video proves it."
Equally, most people have no idea that they are driving without due care and attention. That doesn't mean they're not guilty of anything, because they damn well should know, but making it an offence is therefore no deterrent to them. On the other hand, some people either don't want to break the law or don't want to be caught, so making it a specific offence to use a mobile phone - at least clamped to the ear or with headphones - will make them aware of the problem and may even deter some of them.
As long as it is enforced.
|
|
|
|
|
I think that it was Ian L above who mentioned employers expecting their employees to answer mobile phone calls whilst on the move.
Well, in our depot we have various notices reminding us that it is against company policy for drivers to use a mobile phone whilst driving and anyone found doing so will be subject to disciplinary action. Guess who rang me the other week while I was driving my bus? Go on, guess! Yup - my boss. The very man who signed the afore-mentioned notice. I despair, I really do.
Rob
"Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast."
|
|
BtB. The answer then is either to leave your phone behind or don't have it switched on! If your boss orders you not to answer it that seems to be the way forward!
|
I sent a letter out to all my staff saying that if they answer a call on their phones whilst driving it was down to them. Because they are on site for most of the day there seemed little point in installing hands free kits so they were just informed not to answer the phone until they had stopped or just to ring the office when convenient.
It's now down to them.
|
Marcos,
I am in the same position.
You need to have Ps&Ps which reaffirm that. You need to point out in the letter that they are there. You need to point out that it is their duty to comply with them. You need to send out reminders.
In addition you must be sure that you follow the procedure and that you never encourage them to break the procedure by either calling them knowing that they are in the car, or by allowing a conversation to continue if you realise that they are in a car. Neither must you breach the polucy yourself.
Your behaviour could be used as an indication of condoning another's behaviour and leave you open to problems, irrespective of what is written down.
In addition, if you perceive there to be a risk you may have to install car kits even if you have told them not to make calls on the move.
I'm afraid that simply telling them its down to them is not enough.
Mark.
|
|
What about pedestrians though - these are a menace when yapping on phones whilst walking. I was pulling away from a kerb the other day and some bloke was walking down the middle of the (quiet) road on his phone. I had two choices, follow him at a walking pace or wake him up with a Teutonic blast of the horn, I chose the former and followed him as he ambled towards a junction I wanted to use, I left him still engaged in conversation.
|
I have been a mobile phone user for 8 years now and have experienced driving with phone to ear, full handsfree car kit, and ear pieces, and my experience backs up what the research has found.
I learnt in the first few weeks of being a mobile owner that driving with it to my ear was stupid. I was acutely aware of just how lacking in concentration on what was going on around me I was.
When I got the full handsfree kit installed in 98 I was much happier to make and take calls, and the fact that the phone would auto answer and could be voice dialled meant I didn't have to look at the phone to use it. However, there were still sometimes when I arrived at my destination and realised that I hadn't a clue of how I arrived there because of the nature of the conversation. And that was with both hands in control of the vehicle.
Since getting a new car I haven't had the handsfree reinstalled, as I don't want to ruin the dash just yet! I use an earpiece at the moment, which is somewhere in between using the handsfree and phone to the ear. I only ever use it when I consider it to be absolutely essential (usually 999 calls), and only when road conditions permit. Most of the time I just let the phone ring. I do have voicemail afterall.
If any friends call me from their mobile and they are in their car, I refuse to talk to them, as I don't want to be at the end of the phone if they have an accident.
To those who disagree with the research, I think that you are kidding yourselves if you think that you can give 100% concentration when driving on the phone, handsfree or not.
|
what about cyclists driving on the pavement while using a mobile ?
dont remember ANY prosecutions of them ?
oh no that'll be right because that does not meet the anti-car agenda
cyclists get away with causing death and injury routinely
yet drivers get banned for doing a few mph over some arbitary limit while driving SAFELY
think we need to re-examine our standards here
most issues are caused by basic bad driving, not speeding, not useing a mobile, BAD driving, and normally terrible road design (notice anyone get prosecuted for causing death by poor road design?)
the anticar lobby are nutters wasting our money, and this is just another manifestation
|
Erm, how is this anti-car just because it doesn't apply to cyclists on pavements?
>most issues are caused by basic bad driving, not speeding, not >useing a mobile, BAD driving,
In my mind using a mobile while driving is basic BAD driving. They are one and the same. As I said in an earlier post, I used to use the phone on the move and was aware of how it altered my driving standards, and now I only do it in emergency situations.
Why is it so important for people to use phones while driving. Blimey, how did we ever cope before the use of the mobile phone became so prolific? I guess we used to wait an extra half an hour until we got fed!!!
|
|
|
|
Since getting a new car I haven't had the handsfree reinstalled, as I don't want to ruin the dash just yet!
Not cheap but try a
Bluetooth kit and phone.
Plus
a dashboard bracket
www.dashmount.co.uk/
www.brodit.co.uk
www.ken-godwin.co.uk/dashmount.htm
This leaves a tiny control with a sticky pad and a dangly curly cable to the power socket. NO holes in the dash required
I have such an installation in a Focus. Things have moved on.
|
Interesting point henry, but I don't think a bluetooth kit counts as a fixed installation. Would be interesting to know if our legislators have even heard of bluetooth.
I've used mainly a fixed car phone installation for a few years over thousands of miles and I don't see what the fuss is about. I'm with the folk who think a mobile conversation is like talking to a passenger.
H.
|
The only thing I would add to this is that on the rare occasions I receive a phone call and the person at the other end is not amenable to continuing the discussion at a later time then switching into commentary mode, (ie giving a live driving commentary) doesn't half get them to realise how unreasonable they are being.
Also I guess a lot of people don't realise how good hands free kits are though. About 18 months ago I had as passenger in the car a class 1 senior traffic plod retd., when SWMBO rang up.
After he had seen the phone automatically switch off the radio - answer the call - listened to the haranguing as to why weren't we outside Debenhams yet! - volume adjusted automatically according to vehicle speed - then when SWMBO ended the call noticed the phone hang up and then turn radio back on - all untouched by human hand his only comment was;-
"Beggar me (or something similar) they really are totally hands free! All those years blatting about with one hand on a comms handset, ahem!!!!"
|
Actually I think anybody driving around with their phone switched on needs their head examined, unless of course they are quite happy for Our Rulers to know exactly where they are, how fast they are travelling and all those sorts of things. (Of course, if you are doing nothing illegal you have nothing fear... right?)
There has already been talk about using the GSM network to track people for the purpose of getting them to pay their country-wide congestion charge (much more reliable than satellite data). If you want further scary evidence see this BBC article:
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3012170.stm
But to add my 2pw to the rest of the comments, I agree driving and talking to any kind of phone is clearly distracting from the task at hand, which is to drive safely - it must be at least as bad as having to watch your speedo every inch of the way for fear of the cameras. And I also agree that there is perfectly adequate legislation to cope with the offence that is being committed (driving without due care...) and no chance of any enforcement. But why let little technicalities like that stand in the way of a few more votes...?
|
There is no way that a mobile phone can give anyone a fix on your position unless you tell them where you are. You can get a fix to the nearest cell and if the cells overlap in any way then you would get two cells coming up so you would know the rough area within about a kilometer.
You would certainly not be able to track anyone with any accuracy at all using a GSM system.
|
they can triangulate your position from the nearest 3 transmitters if they want to...
in big cities the cells are small enough so that just knowing the cell is good enuf
|
The emergency services must also use a similar system as there have been several times I have called to report an accident to be told my location before telling them.
Triangulation has always been possible, but it was always a matter of the cost, software, dataprotection etc, which prevented widespread use.
|
At the moment in the UK using a mobile doesn't allow the phone company to locate you accurately. But it's coming.
Anyway I think the authorities already have the capability to track your car on motorways by means of gantry mounted cameras and number plate recognition software.
In America the law will soon require all phones to support location services. This is so that emergency services can work out where you are. Similar systems are under development around the world.
|
In a city you could get a fix with about a 300 mtr accuracy if you had 3 or 4 cell positioning.
300 meters in a city is an awfull lot of streets and alleyways.
It certainly is not accurate.
|
|
Slight correction, In rural areas you are right about the cell coverage, but the phone comapnies can usually track you to within a kilometre or so. In urban areas however a whole new ball game, you can be triangulated to within a few hundred metres. With propagation delay tecniques they can get much closer. There are companies offering services to track individual cell phones and overlay them on a map.
|
I think it's a great law, as far as it goes. Of course you could deal with speeding with careless driving laws, but it's much easier to have a black and white law to enforce. Why waste police time following people to see if they do something careless while on a phone, make sure they have enough evidence and then potentially go to court?
Part of the reason people have started using mobiles while driving is that driving has been made less involved. Have you tried using a mobile to ear with no power steering?
I think banning power steering would have many more beneficial effects than a limited law like this, but suspect it's not going to happen. I think power steering has led to more accidents than mobile use etc. It would stop all kinds of inattentive behaviour (eg eating, coffee) as it would enforce the two hands on wheel principle more often. It would tend to slow people down on corners, roundabouts etc where power steering does not remind people of the demands they are putting on the cars.
Ban mobile use...good start...but look at why the multitasking while driving is occuring in the first place.
One finger effort gear changes- great! Couple of finger effort steering - should be banned.
Now that would solve the enforcement problem to some extent wouldn't it?
|
Gen,
I agree with some of these points but power steering ban? Most PS is no different to ordinary steering at higher speeds on straight roads - which is where the coffee drinking/smoking/palm pilot use/map reading etc happens.
I'm with the new law - the main problem is phones pressed to earholes. I'm OK with a hands free that accepts calls, but wouldn't MAKE the call while on the move. Those who actually text on the move ought to be locked up.
I can't personally see how receiving calls, especially as most phones allow automatic answering, can be any worse than talking to passengers.
However, those that think otherwise would do well to consider radio control use, CD/tape changing, or adjusting dials for temperature - they are just as distracting. Should we outlaw any of those? What about Sat Nav - how distracting is that?
|
They have heard of Bluetooth, and the last I heard (tho not mentioned in yesterdays news) is that Bluetooth won't be counted as handsfree. Trouble is, you could have the phone in your pocket and it would work, so it would mean fidding about to find the phone before answering.
I agree that a handsfree mobile conversation is like talking to a passenger, and I am also sometimes distracted by passengers, but the distraction is different when on the handsfree.
|
They have heard of Bluetooth, and the last I heard (tho not mentioned in yesterdays news) is that Bluetooth won't be counted as handsfree. Trouble is, you could have the phone in your pocket and it would work, so it would mean fidding about to find the phone before answering.
There seems to be some misunderstanding re Bluetooth.
The control of the calls in and out is via a tiny control pad that is half the footprint of a two bar Kit Kat. A sticky pad is is on the back of the control so no drilling holes.
Voice activation if available can be used to make calls.
NO need to touch the phone at all.
Totally optional at extra cost is to have a holder inserted into the dash again with no holes drilled. Phone is then mounted in a postion similar to the existing old fashioned hard wired add on phones.
In my earlier posting I forgot to add that the curly cord is purely if you wish to recharge the phone in the holder.
I would be absolutely amazed if Bluetooth was not classed as hands free. I would suggest that a considerable number of current installations require handling the phone to make/take calls.
|
|
|
|
|
>>The answer then is either to leave your phone behind or don't have it switched on! If your boss orders you not to answer it that seems to be the way forward!
I know!!! I was just attempting to illustrate the hypocrisy of the situation - one moment my boss is putting his name to notices warning of the consequences of talking on your phone whilst driving and the next he is ringing me up while I am on the road!
And I have to take my phone with me as a breakdown (the bus not me) is inevitable and our buses aren't fitted with radios. Perhaps I should just leave the phone behind and if (when) the bus breaks down walk to the nearest phone box in the time honoured fashion!
Cheers
Rob
"Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast."
|
|
I've got a great idea. Instead of banning phones, smoking, power steering, speeding etc. let's just ban cars! The accident rate is sure to drop and if you're doing nothing wrong, what have you got to fear?
|
well as most pedestrian casualties are drunk, im sure even banning cars completely wouldnt stop these drunk people wandering the streets finding ways to kill themselves, they would only walk under buses, trains etc instead
still at least car drivers wouldnt get blamed then?
|
It's all a question of competence. Most of you will have noted that most drivers don't have a lot. The problem is that those drivers will often see themselves as being the safest drivers on the road. Take the person doing 50mph when they reach the top of the motorway slip. Anybody who drives a lot will have seen them. Look in your rear view mirror next time. (unless that gets banned as a dangerous distracting activity in the near future) You will see traffic bunching up. cars and lorries having to brake hard and change lane. If only you could ask the driver of the car I'm pretty sure they would consider themselves to be very cautious and safe drivers.
Same applies to mobiles. Some can do it safely, some can't. I notice cruise control is under attack at the moment as well - some can, some can't.
|
|
Exactly, but how can you differentiate between the competent ones and the not so competent. As I said before some people can talk to a passenger whilst driving and still concentrate on their driving but some people talk to a passenger whilst driving and become totally oblivious to the fact that they are actually still driving a car.
|
|
I know several people who find it impossible to talk to you unless they look at you. This is a little un-nerving when you are sitting in the back seat and they are driving!
|
nokia bluetooth kits has several issues
i) you don\'t have an aerial connect and are just using the phones built in aerial, which means in remote areas you will have more problems getting signal
ii) not connected to anything for charging phone, although obviously you can connect cig lighter charger in if u want
iii) phone must be one of the shortlist set to go with that car, you can\'t quickly swap different phones in according to who is driving
as to dialling, mostly I use 1 key dialling and its no more dangerous than hitting a light switch or whatever
as to being distracted I again point you at the mothers talking to brats on the back seat as a far more dangerous group of drivers!
|
nokia bluetooth kits has several issues i) you don\'t have an aerial connect and are just using the phones built in aerial, which means in remote areas you will have more problems getting signal
The phone has no aerial.
The kit has no provision for an aerial.
I think things have moved on.
ii) not connected to anything for charging phone, although obviously you can connect cig lighter charger in if u want
If required it is simple enough to wire the holder into the car power.
iii) phone must be one of the shortlist set to go with that car, you can\'t quickly swap different phones in according to who is driving
No. The phone may be any make of Bluetooth phone provided it's identity is simply programmed to the car unit.
My 3 year old hard wired Vodaphone car kit only accepts a very limited range of Nokia phones and the last of those is out now.
This standard is to be discontinued. This means I am stuck with a soon to be out of date phone if I want to use it in the car kit. The range of Bluetooth Phones will expand and they can all work in the car within seconds.
as to dialling, mostly I use 1 key dialling and its no more dangerous than hitting a light switch or whatever
No different if the phone is in the holder and it supports this function.
It is a sales pitch, a USP, to say you can, IF you wish, leave the phone in your pocket, handbag or briefcase.
|
All good points. The thing I don't understand is once I saw a traffic cop programme where a particularly officious patrol driver was on the lookout for drink drivers. (i've got no problem with that) He stopped a car late at night which had nearly mounted the kerb. Looked at first as though he had got a target.
I was amazed when he wandered back to the car minutes later with a big smile on his face saying to his mate 'it's ok, she was just lighting up a fag.'
So, if you mow down a line of people on the pavement I recommend you plead lighting up and not mention that you were just giving her indoors a quick call to let her know you are 10 minutes away and she can put the spuds on.
|
The phone has no aerial. The kit has no provision for an aerial. I think things have moved on.
No they havent, it does have an aerial, its just built in and not obvious to you - read the manual and note where you\'re not supposed to put your hand (they all tell you where youre not supposed to put your hand blocking the aerial and exposing yourself to more radio waves)
No. The phone may be any make of Bluetooth phone provided it\'s identity is simply programmed to the car unit.
yep but in a car used by many, it is a pain to have to keep setting phones to the car, there can only be a small number (about 6 isnt it?) that can be \"associated\" with the car kit at any one time - this may not matter to you, it does to me
My 3 year old hard wired Vodaphone car kit only accepts a very limited range of Nokia phones and the last of those is out now. This standard is to be discontinued. This means I am stuck with a soon to be out of date phone if I want to use it in the car kit. The range of Bluetooth Phones will expand and they can all work in the car within seconds.
It is a sales pitch, a USP, to say you can, IF you wish, leave the phone in your pocket, handbag or briefcase.
yea and you can\'t see who is phoning you if it\'s in your pocket
I think there is better sound quality on a normal wired kit anyway
pays your money and takes your choice!
(post amended so people can see who said what.) DD
|
The phone has no aerial.
My mistake - the phone has no Aerial SOCKET
Hence there no provision in the kit for an aerial
It avoids those aerials glued on elegantly at all sorts of angles.
there can only be a small number (about 6 isnt it?) that can be "associated" with the car kit at any one time - this may not matter to you, it does to me
I accept that it is a problem to you and maybe a company pool car
But I suspect there are not many households that have more than six users of a car.
yea and you carnt see who is phoning you if its in your pocket
I repeat IF YOU WISH, leave the phone in your pocket.
Of course if you have eyes in your rear it may not be a problem.
|
Re "It avoids those aerials glued on elegantly at all sorts of angles. "
i like the tax disc holder aerials myself, good recepetion and nothing on the outside of the glass!
once again you pays your money
|
>> The phone has no aerial. My mistake - the phone has no Aerial SOCKET Hence there no provision in the kit for an aerial It avoids those aerials glued on elegantly at all sorts of angles.
Phones with internal aerials have a poorer reception that those without. Also, when in your metal cage (car) the signal between the inside and outside of the car is further reduced. It's a Faraday Cage.
Because most vehicles have metal roofs and largely come with factory tinted glass, your vehicle can act as a faraday cage and concentrating reflector, amplifying RF density like a microwave oven, not letting the RF radiation escape through the metal body and tinted glass, and then concentrating the microwaves into your body at much higher EM intensities.
Go on, Google for it.
|
To quote Jeds "...once I saw a traffic cop programme where a particularly officious patrol driver was on the lookout for drink drivers. (i've got no problem with that) He stopped a car late at night which had nearly mounted the kerb. Looked at first as though he had got a target.
I was amazed when he wandered back to the car minutes later with a big smile on his face saying to his mate 'it's ok, she was just lighting up a fag..."
Of course that's OK, we don't have to think any more about what's dangerous, it's being defined for us by the control freaks.
As I've said before, driving without due care and attention doesn't seem to be an issue any more, an actual act which is said to be dangerous is defined separately as an offence, for example, driving while using the 'phone, very low speed limits everywhere with no allowance for common sense and so on.
So, from now on, to catch up on some work, I'll use my laptop while driving...there's no law to say that I can't so it must be OK.
|
Let's be clear..
In a civilised society not everyone can have unlimited freedom to do what they want. Someone using a hand-held phone is limiting my freedom to be safe on the road.
it's true there are other distractions,, but that's not an argument for not acting on this.
I live in a rural area with windy roads and I can't remember a journey when I haven't seen oncoming or following drivers engrossed in conversation on hand-helds .That includes lorries .
A couple of times I've pulled into lay bys to let them go past .
I find the idea of texting while at the wheel quite incredible.
I also can't understand why someone in a car costing £30K with all kinds of naff extras can't find £10 to get a hands free and set the phone to automatic answer .
|
|
|
|
|
|
