The reason specific legislation re phones was introduced was that for at least ten years they tried to prevent phone use relying on the careless or care and attention laws but it was enormously difficult to prove and it did nothing to change the behaviour of the stupid and selfish people who do it.
With mobile phone use the distraction is observable from outside the vehicle and if any argument the phone records are proof.
Even when they ramped up the penalties you still see a hard core of people who will do it anyway-I have even seen someone texting while in lane 3 at about 85mph and tailgating- , but there has been an improvement.
It's got nothing to do with right or left wing. You would never accuse a govt who wanted to class murder as a punishable offence as right or left wing, so why is this different?
And as far as other distractions are concerned, yes they are all true. And if enforceable specific legislation for them could be devised, I would support it. But for the time being they will have to be dealt with by the catch-all careless / c and a laws, with all of the difficulties attached.
|
|
|
I have to admit, sometimes the hands free kits can be as much of a distraction as the phones themselves. Picking them up, sticking them in your ear and fiddling about trying to work out why your bluetooth has disconnected.
A fully built in system (available even on £100 head units) might be the best compromise. Totally hands free and less distracting.
|
|
|
Should it be banned - Yes
I used to have hands free and have experience the feeling of "where am I" at the end of a call.
I gave up the hands free phone in the car four years ago and guess what - Life DID NOT stop!
Six months ago my children bought me a blue tooth hands free - It is only used to tell my wife when I will be home - nothing more complicated than that.
It is time some of you started to think about others instead of self.
|
|
|
The problem with the phone (held or not) is the content of the conversation. If you're chatting to say a relative then it might be okay and might be little different to a conversation with a passenger.
But if it involves some thought (works ones are usually like that) then you're mind is not on the road. So depending on the situation I might have a simple conversation but any more complex and involved then I call them back.
When I call colleagues and they are driving I also say I'll call back. Some say they can talk but I tend to not allow that to happen.
But talk of distractions.... you should try driving with my parents in law in the back. They highlight everything you pass with a running commentary and the mother in law will lean forward between the seats to speak to my wife. We try to stop them but they seem oblivious to any risks from distracting the driver.
|
I frequently get home and can't remember the journey. It tends to be the only journeys I remember are when I'm on the phone. If I can't make the odd call on the move (using the loudspeaker facility on the phone itself), then that is over 1/5th of the working week gone (2.5hours per day commuting)
So to me its all about common sense use of phones...
|
If I can't make the odd call on the move (using the loudspeaker facility on the phone itself) then that is over 1/5th of the working week gone (2.5hours per day commuting)
What? You are on the 'phone fot 2 1/2 hours a day?!
So to me its all about common sense use of phones...
Common sense says "don't do it".
|
|
|
I don't think it is hands-frees per se that are dangerous, rather it is the person in the car that is the problem, judging by the way some people drive when there is no phone anywhere near the car.
If you have an automatic 'box car with a fully integrated phone operated by buttons on the wheel, I really cannot see a problem as long as it is used sensibly.
|
I don't think it is hands-frees per se that are dangerous rather it is the person in the car that is the problem
I drive better when I've had a couple of pints, too.
|
|
|
I can tell you it is a problem. When I'm out on the motorbike I can spot the phone-drivers very easily - their ability to control their cars is definately compromised, and is the reason I no longer make any calls at all when driving.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're chatting to say a relative then it might be okay and might be little different to a conversation with a passenger. But if it involves some thought (works ones are usually like that) then you're mind is not on the road.
Very true, that's why I only use my bluetooth for very short conversation with family (like I'll be home in half an hour or so.) I never accept any call which require concentration, for that, I call back once I reach office/home.
But I've heard people giving interview while driving!
You can't change people's attitude just by passing laws - you need to depend on driver's intelligence also :) [i.e. when to talk or when not]
|
Distraction or inattention at the wheel don't always have obvious causes, or rather the obvious cause may not be the one that matters. But the fact is that some people don't even need to be distracted to drive inattentively. They are just like that, and there's no obvious cure.
It's obvious though that hands-free is less likely to cause a distraction than a handset. Can't possibly be any worse than turning the radio on, changing tapes, eating, smoking or scratching while at the wheel.
Of course there are some who would like to make all these things illegal, and talking as well, or allowing the passengers to talk. No doubt they mean well, but to me the whole attitude is not just boring but misguided and fatuous. Why don't they just throw in their lot with the people who want to ban cars altogether? It would simplify things greatly.
|
I use a handsfree kit, but I use it sparingly and not for indepth conversations. It does as the name suggests, leave your hands to drive and react better when physical movement is required.
I also dont start conversations on roundabouts etc.
Personally, id say that there are many dangers on the road and there are worse dangers than handfree phone kits, as such, I dont see that the issue should get too much press. An idiot driver will be an idiot regardless of the law.
More traffic cops pulling over more suspect drivers please.
|
|
|
Can't possibly be any worse than turning the radio on, changing tapes, eating, smoking or scratching while at the wheel.
It is worse, and independent scientific studies have shown beyond doubt for it to be so. The way the brain works when having a conversation on a telephone is known to preoccupy your mind in a completely different way to listening to the radio, or having a conversation with passengers.
For some reason, in simplistic terms, the fact that the person you are talking to is not in your presence makes your brain go in to an "imagination" or "dreamlike" mode and you begin to visualise the person you are talking to. If you observe someone at home or in the office talking on the phone, you will notice quite often that the person also makes involuntary movements [usually hand waving - Andrew Marr like]. The human mind seems to need to be able to visualise the absent person as if they were in their presence.
|
Quote from
www.rospa.com/RoadSafety/advice/driving/mobile_pho...m
" A substantial body of research shows that using a hand-held or hands-free mobile phone while driving is a significant distraction, and substantially increases the risk of the driver crashing.
Drivers who use a mobile phone, whether hand-held or hands-free:
are much less aware of what?s happening on the road around them
fail to see road signs
fail to maintain proper lane position and steady speed
are more likely to ?tailgate? the vehicle in front
react more slowly and take longer to brake
are more likely to enter unsafe gaps in traffic
feel more stressed and frustrated.
They are also four times more likely to crash, injuring or killing themselves and/or other people.
Using a hands-free phone while driving does not significantly reduce the risks because the problems are caused mainly by the mental distraction and divided attention of taking part in a phone conversation at the same time as driving. "
|
|
|
How do solo pilots manage listening and talking to the control tower etc?
How do policemen on motorbikes manage taking instructions from control and reporting what they're up to?
There are bigger problems to solve than this. Get all the untaxed and uninsured cars off the road for a start.
|
How do solo pilots manage listening and talking to the control tower etc? How do policemen on motorbikes manage taking instructions from control and reporting what they're up to?
Do you really think those professional activities are directly comparable to having a conversation on the mobile phone?
|
"Do you really think those professional activities are directly comparable to having a conversation on the mobile phone?"
As an ex-pilot, who used to do a lot more multi-tasking than just flying and talking at the same time, I see an exact parallel between talking on the telephone while driving and talking on the R/T while flying an aircraft. Both tasks are achieveable in safety but talking on the telephone while driving is not strictly necessary - talking while flying is!
Edited by Armitage Shanks {p} on 27/06/2008 at 19:59
|
|
|
|
|
some people don't even need to be distracted to drive inattentively. They are just like that and there's no obvious cure.
I'd like to see mandatory top-up training every 2-3 years for all drivers. I have to do it annually to remain a qualified accountant and my accounting doesn't come even close to killing anyone, unlike some drivers I see!
If no-one points out that they're tailgating, cutting roundabouts, driving without attention how will they learn? Or will we just keep cutting speed limits 'cos we can enforce those?
|
I still don't buy it, despite the bandying about of an alleged scientific basis for claiming telephones distract in some sort of specially distracting way. Even if they do, I don't think they should be banned and I don't think people's sentences for dangerous or careless driving should be any heavier if mobile phones of any type are involved.
Dangerous driving is dangerous driving, and should be judged by its results, not its causes. RoSPA's whole raison d'etre is safety lobbying, and it is naturally inclined to stress how dangerous things are, rather than how relatively safe they are. It isn't going to tell you the bottle is still half full, when it can moan that it is already half empty.
I don't want to influence anyone about this, least of all persuade anyone that it is all right to telephone while driving. I only do it myself when safely ensconced in a traffic jam or crawling traffic. Under most circumstances I ignore the call and stop when convenient to call back (or not as the case may be).
I am just saying for the record that I think far too many things are officially banned already. The list needs to be radically shortened, not allowed to lengthen eternally.
|
I am just saying for the record that I think far too many things are officially banned already. The list needs to be radically shortened, not allowed to lengthen eternally.
I agree with most of what you said in that post. Note that for those who do not have a closed mind, or care, or are bothered to check it out, it is not an "alleged scientific basis".
The problem is that most sensible people know when something is wrong and will not do it. Laws are usually enacted to cater for the minority of people who
either do not have the sense know that a particular activity is wrong or dangerous
or if they do know, decide that they are a "superhuman" and therefore immune and it does not apply to them.
|
jbif asked: >> Do you really think those professional activities (police and pilots) are directly comparable to having a conversation on the mobile phone?>>
I don't know. Talking to someone else who's not there while performing an activity must involve broadly speaking the same areas of the brain whether you're a policeman or a driving natterer.
Edited by Optimist on 27/06/2008 at 19:43
|
|
|
Well, it has been claimed here that people making phone calls on a handsfree, let alone texting on a handset, do things like wandering from lane to lane, varying their speed at random, suddenly applying their brakes for no good reason, etc.
The real problem is the number of people who drive like that when they aren't on the phone or trying to focus on their ill-located pratnavs. I accept that dangerous phone users have become a measurable minority. But while not quite a drop in the ocean, they are outnumbered by other categories of dangerous and annoying driver about which, apparently, little can be done.
I quite liked the suggestion that unlicensed and uninsured drivers should be taken off the road first. Perhaps they could be locked into huge lightweight neck-yokes like the ones vets put on dogs to stop them gnawing their own gonads, making it impossible to drive a car. That'd learn'em.
|
Y'know Lud, that wishy-washy liberalism of yours is going to lead to problems.
Speaking only for myself, I'd have 'em in a more robust hemp neck ornament. Now that would learn 'em. Course it might be too good for 'em aswell.
|
How do solo pilots manage listening and talking to the control tower etc? How do policemen on motorbikes manage taking instructions from control and reporting >>what they're up to?
It's a different mode of communication - half duplex. The thing that affects the brain negatively is full duplex - as in telephone calls. In half-duplex you have to press a button to transmit and can choose whether to do so or not. In full-duplex you don't have that choice and the brain devotes far more of its resources to visualising the person being talked to.
My phone is out of reach when I'm driving. If I hear someone ring I'll make a mental note that I need to stop at some point and see if there's a message. No phone call is more important than your responsibility to other road users.
|
It's a different mode of communication - half duplex.
Thanks for that Dyane6. I had been toying with the idea of posting as an old minicabber who used to do two rushhours a day in Central and South London - well all over it really - consistently beating the traffic and having often to thumb the button on the mike under the dash and shout stuff in response to the squawk box, without feeling it was especially dangerous. I knew it wasn't quite the same as a mobile, but couldn't put my finger on it.
Half-duplex... I love it.
Come to think of it my nickname in the firm was Biggles. Make of it what you will...
Edited by Lud on 27/06/2008 at 21:43
|
Half duplex? That'll be Simplex then!
|
Erm no. Simplex is one-way only.
There are two contradictory definitions - what the ITU-T calls Simplex, ANSI calls Half-Duplex. The ANSI definition is the more common in modern usage. - probably because most commercial radio systems are American in design.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_duplex
|
If I can't make the odd call on the move (using the loudspeaker facility on the phone itself) then that is over 1/5th of the working week gone (2.5hours per day commuting)
>>>>>What? You are on the 'phone fot 2 1/2 hours a day?!
I'm generally on the phone for probably about 4-5hours a day. Its a big part of my job, dealing with reps and internal/external clients, no other method of communication comes close YET. I'm working on a system that would allow me to work from home, but it needs some government tax incentives. I would love to stop doing the 35K per year, mainly commuting miles (110miles per day), but can't as yet...
|
If I can't make the odd call on the move (using the loudspeaker facility on the phone itself) then that is over 1/5th of the working week gone (2.5hours per day commuting)"
Is commuting part of your "working week"?
|
Given that technology never stops evolving, and that telecoms companies thrust every new gadget at us with massive advertising campaigns and if all else fails , simply give away numbers of their products to get us hooked...
How long before this "need to visualise" the caller is addressed by fitting in-car video phones? I've seen very slick inbuilt TVs which fade out once the car starts moving and presume there's a simple way round this, so follow the curve and
"Hello, darling, I'm on the M25 - Lasagna tonight? Great! Has the man been round yet about the central h..." Crash! Bang! Wallop!
|
|
As an ex-smoker, I can tell you that smoking behind the wheel was far more dangerous than driving using a hands-free. The occasional smoldering fag-end landing in your nether regions was quite a distraction to safe driving, I can assure you!
|
|
Well said, boxsterboy. My thoughts exactly. The lighting up process isn't exactly without danger either.
|
or
>>Hello, darling, I'm on the M25 - Lasagna tonight? Great!
Just a mo while I link my phone to my Hi Def wide screen built in Sat Nav then I can see the kids before they go to bed.
"Say bye bye Daddy" ...........................................
....
Please leave a message.....Please leave a message......................................
|
This evening I followed a cigarette smoking guy out of a drive thru takeaway, and within in seconds they were on the phone, I wondered how they decided what to do first, eat, smoke, speak or indicate,well surprise surprise it wasn't the last !!
I use new handsfree,a system that tells me who's calling and only requires a quick button press, no more thinking than changing radio channels -now if they banned radio's I'd give up driving- its the only thing that keeps me sane - especially tonight during a 40+ mile M25 tailback from M1- junc 10
|
Why can we not simply ban idiots rather than looking for things idiots cannot use properly to ban?
Using a hands free phone is not hard. It is not challenging and it is not distracting provided you have an IQ greater than that, it would appear, of the average lorry driver.
The guy was clearly a complete fruitloop who shouldnt have been on the road anyway - although one has to wonder why if it was entirely the phone to blame why he hadn't crashed at any of the corners he succesfully negotiated during his 20 minute telephone call.
Or why another truck had decided to park on the inside lane. Or why the two people behind the truck were unable to find a gap into traffic in which to move around the stationary truck within the 70 seconds the court was told they were stationary for.
|
"Using a hands free phone is not hard. It is not challenging and it is not distracting provided you have an IQ greater than that, it would appear, of the average lorry driver."'
But that's not true is it? The evidence - both empirical and from research - is that using a telephone while driving has a significant impact on processing capability and makes accidents more likely.
You're free to present an opposing view but you have to state your source of evidence.
If one view is backed up by evidence and the other is simply what you think, one is far more likely to be true than the other.
A very good demonstration that I've seen is this;
1) Play Tetris or a similar game while listening to the radio.
2) Play the game while talking to someone next to you.
3) Play the game while talking on the phone to your boss about a piece of work.
Most people will perform equally well at tasks one and two - and will have a much poorer result at test three.
Tetris is a good example as it requires spatial co-ordination, timing and anticipation. It's nowhere near as hard as driving a car - so if you performance at that is hampered by using the telephone, imagine what it does to your driving.
|
"Using a hands free phone is not hard. It is not challenging and it is not distracting provided you have an IQ greater than that it would appear of the average lorry driver."'
High cognitive ability is not required for driving. I've met genuine thickos who were good, brisk, safe drivers, and rather more distinguished intellectuals whose driving was indescribably terrible although they were strangely unaware of the fact (not counting others who couldn't even manage to conduct a car well enough to start driving lessons).
The reason I cast doubt on the RoSPA study in an earlier post was that I don't think it's a simple matter to quantify things like interference between two simultaneous but different activities. It's not difficult to prove that there is such interference, but the basis for saying something like 'phone use makes an accident four times as likely' is almost certain to be unsound.
|
Using a hands free phone is not hard. It is not challenging and it is not distracting provided you have an IQ greater than that it would appear of the average lorry driver.
You forgot to add "IMHO".
I remember reading an article in New Scientist magazine about some research done in Germany. Two groups of subjects had to sit in a driving simulator and drive through a town with all sort of hazards. One group were left to get on with it and the other group had to conduct a simple handsfree phone conversation (they were asked about their last holiday, what food they liked etc etc). The group holding the conversation performed far less well in their responses to hazards and their general hazards perception.
It seems the brain (or at least the concious part) is not really wired up for 'parallel processing'.
I believe there have been other studies that show similar results.
Personally, when I use my BT handsfree, I definitely feel that I 'zone out'. Its not too bad if its a simple domestic call of the 'what time will you be home' type. But I've had lengthy work-related calls which required considered responses to questions and that is very definitely distracting. For that reason I now leave the handfree turned off most of the time and let calls go to VM and collect them later.
|
But is 'parallel processing' what should really be going on, or something more like digital interleaving?
In previous threads about drivers being distracted by conversation with passengers, some (including me) have pointed out that a properly-adjusted urban autopilot makes a driver automatically aware of situations where the conversation has to be completely switched off for a few seconds or even a bit longer. I don't find it hard myself. You just have to say: 'Sorry, what was that?' If you are the one rabbiting at the time, you just stop and resume later if you can remember what you were saying.
Edited by Lud on 28/06/2008 at 15:52
|
Will hands free phones be banned ? I really, really hope they are. My reasons are not ones of safety but of preference. I have always had what might loosely be called field based occupations. I have been using car and mobile phones pretty much since they were invented. On a daily basis I make or receive numerous calls in the car. It is a deeply ingrained habit in the culture of my work. I can see the validity of the safety argument but I guess, as some have mentioned, if you are well practised in driving and concurrently dealing with calls, the dangers are actually minimal. Well, I've never had a problem in a history of vast mileages and many years anyway. Touch wood.
My wish for the banning of phone use by drivers of moving vehicles is inspired by a selfish wish for some peace ! Gone are the days when it was commercially acceptable to be out of touch for a while. The modern requirement to be instantly reachable is one of the least attractive aspects of our business culture. Most incoming calls are from people who either have a problem or need information. Few are actually good news. Most calls could have been equally, if not better, handled by a suitable desk pilot at a head office but people tend to call the person they have actually met. This poor fool then has to call someone else ( usually the dept. which could have been called in the first place ) to sort the situation anyway. Then there is the follow up E-mail culture where the phone call is to tell you that you have an E-mail on the same subject or a subsequent E-mail confirms the phone call you have already had.............. " Diaper Management " I think it was once called. Or "cover your.............."
No doubt about it - If I could disinvent anything it would incoming mobile phone calls and incoming E-mail. Well to my phone and computer anyway. I would still like the convenience of being able contact other people and ruin their days !
|
Very succinct Shoespy.
Sounds like a case for keeping your mobile number off your usual visiting card, and only letting people have it as an honour, making it clear with a stream of charming but pointed jokes that you don't want to be called all the time about any old rubbish.
I know that senior academics these days tend to get masses and masses of what are more or less spam emails.
|
Actually, thinking about this a bit more. I really wish I had the guts to put the following message or some version of it on my voicemail greeting.........
"Thanks for your call. I may be driving or involved in some other activity which causes it to be inconvenient or indeed downright dangerous for me to take your call. If you would like to leave a message and it is interesting enough I may well call you back sometime if I ever get out of this wretched traffic. Failing that, you could try calling this number.........where there is a team of customer service representatives eagerly awaiting your enquiry. They are equipped with land lines, computers and filing systems which will ensure a far more satisfactory result for you than struggling to speak to me on a crackly mobile in a noisy car. Please speak after the tone if you still think it absolutely necessary."
|
|
Passengers do have their uses, and receiving and making phone calls for you while you drive is one of them.
|
Why can we not simply ban idiots rather than looking for things idiots cannot use properly to ban?
Largely because until the day arrives when someone creates a fully-functioning idiot detector all we can do is ban the things that idiots do. Remember too that sensible people sometimes do idiotic things - if somethng is banned it gives the sensible person an indication of what they have to do to avoid being an idiot.
|
|
... and they don't always twig even then. Sensible people are greatly overrated in my opinion...
|
I make a point, when I'm with clients,that if a call comes in, esp from SWMBO, who should know better -that I will NEVER , EVER answer it -it goes to VM.
So unless its a call from my office or work colleague,when I'm driving, ie not a heavy conversation all calls go to VM.
Like shoespy -most incoming calls from customers , are problems that only H/O/ can sort out -so I just transfer the query to the relevant person there -and get them to call the customer -shoespy -you really need to train your customers better !!
|
|
I really wish they would behave better but you know what they are like wotspur ! My problem in reality is that I am a freelance "one man band" business and act on behalf of various mainly non UK based companies. Despite my fantasy of training them to call direct they, naturally enough I suppose, want to call their UK contact. I have, however, perfected the art of imitating Norman Collier if I really don't want to speak to someone at that moment !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
