|
Did you know for Vodafone if you want to leave a voicemail (even if the phone is on an receiving calls) you can if calling from another Vodafone phone!
|
"...hands free mobile phones are NOT deadly.
Stupid people who use them, either to call or receive a call, at an inappropriate time and place are deadly.
here are situations when a 30 second call is not in any way dangerous but I expect, as with many motoring regulations, laws will end up being brought in because a large number of people cannot tell when something is safe or not."
Good point. In the same vein, overtaking is not in itself dangerous, but because some drivers cannot be relied on accurately to assess the safety of this manouvre on some stretches of single carriageway we have double white lines.
Speed is not in itself dangerous, but because some drivers cannot get their speed right for the situation, we have speed limits enforced by cameras.
And so on. The law is of necessity a blunt instrument in this respect. Speed limits tend to apply at midnight as well as at noon and apply to a learner as well as to an advanced driver.
I don't have an axe to grind on this one. I accept that it is the inevitable result of hugely overcrowded roads and the irresponsible behaviour of a minority. As a result, probably motoring is less enjoyable now than it was years ago.
|
Speed limits tend to apply at midnight as well as at noon
This is an area where we could do things differently. The US and Canada have had Day and Night speed limits at least since the 1960s (unless they have abandoned them since?), usually 5 or 10 MPH less at night, and reflective signs which emphasise the appropriate limit.
I suppose dusk introduces a point of contention though.
|
If hands-free mobiles get banned, I suggest that smoking and driving is also banned!
Smoking whilst driving is very dangerous, how many times have you spotted someone struggling to get a fag out of the pack and light it........let alone when hot ash drops on to them or the seat/carpet!!
|
Just as an aside:
Don't we have one of the best road safety records in the world?
Is it not improving on average, though probably not year on year?
Don't we have a high, and increasing vehicle number?
And haven't we had an exponential increase in mobile telephone and text usage?
I'm not necessarily saying that mobile use when driving is safe, but we should keep a sense of proportion.
However, I don't do it myself, because I can appreciate the lower attention level it engenders in me.
|
|
In summary, use of any kind of mobile phone while driving should be banned, along with smoking while driving.
|
|
... and talking to passengers, and listening to the wireless, and playing tapes or discs, and adjusting your spectacles, and scratching your genitals, and having non-motoring thoughts, and...
|
On a danger scale of 1 to 10, having a conversation on the mobile while driving would have to go from a 5 to a 10, depending on a vast array of circumstances, but any distraction - even a momentary glance at a sign on an overhead gantry - scores somewhere on the scale.
As well as the everyday ones like changing a cassette or CD, "demisting" the windscreen with a sleeve, nose picking, retrieving a Polo, Werther's Original or Mentho Lyptus and popping it into our mouths - things we've, ahem, nearly all done - there are accounts of drivers applying makeup, filling in a crossword or sudoku, cooking and eating food - none of which come in under 8 or so IMHO.
But how about this for the ultimate 1950s driver distraction? tinyurl.com/pnj64
Edited by Bilboman on 04/03/2009 at 01:54
|
An illustrative public-service ad is about 18 minutes into Saturday's (14 March) Pick of the Week (Radio 4):
tinyurl.com/MobilePhoneDriving
Edited by Roger Jones on 16/03/2009 at 12:44
|
|
I would listen to this, vbut can't find it - have you a direct link?
|
Am I alone (I usually am) in thinking that sending someone a text when you're completely stuck in traffic like I was on the M60 the other day (due to an accident ahead, and no I don't know if it was caused by using the phone!!) is completely lacking in any danger and yet in the strict word of the law sense, ie you are sitting in your car, it is illegal and PC Pedant could do you for it? I did it, by the way, and still think I am going to heaven, but then I long ago took away the link between legality and morality.
As an aside, it appears to be legal in the USA to use a hand-held "cellphone", am I correct in this? No opinion, just asking....
|
You are not alone in thinking that stevied, or in doing it and being prepared to send any critic away with a flea in his or her ear.
I have to say though that (as I don't use intuitive texting, can't do it with one hand and have to change my spectacles to see the screen properly) I don't do it myself. But I do make and answer calls under those circumstances.
|
|
But even using a mobile phone to talk when holding it is illegal if sat in the car and the engine is running. You need to be parked.
|
|
It may be illegal rtj, but stevied's point (and mine) is that since it poses no risk at all the law in this case is an ass and asking to be flouted by sensible people.
|
I am not disagreeing Lud. Just pointing out that being stationary with the engine running makes it illegal to talk let alone text.
But using even hands free to talk when driving can cause distraction. It depends on the conversation etc. Texting whilst on the move is obviously wrong.
|
Texting whilst on the move is obviously wrong.
... not to say completely impossible with only two hands. I would need about five. And the rapid alternation of reading and seeing-further-than-two-feet spectacles would be a bit of a distraction too
:o}
|
.. not to say completely impossible with only two hands
No it's possible but entirely unsafe.
|
But using even hands free to talk when driving can cause distraction.
It causes exactly the same amount of distraction as having the same conversation handheld. The only difference is whether you hold on to the phone or not and holding on to the phone doesn't cause any more distraction, it causes a reduction in ability to control the vehicle.
Texting whilst on the move is obviously wrong.
Although no more wrong than getting out a cigarette and lighting it, or changing a CD.
|
Lud, the vision you have put in my head of you texting has made my day! I imagine you text like my aunt. I bought her a new mobile Christmas 2007 and the first text I received (March 2008) was along the lines of "JKHKJH &*&GHF HJKHKJ". This she had sent by accident. She can, as of March 2009 and given a leisurely afternoon, just about send a text normally but flipped out when I tried to teach her predictive/intuitive text. I might get her an i-Phone for her birthday.
On a more serious, and relevant note, I am glad you saw what I meant about legality. Some people just get flustered: "but but it's ILLEGAL... don't you UNDERSTAND" yes I understand, but the law and those who enforce it need desperately to be less asinine and nannying, and actually concentrate on those who recklessly endanger others. Not only would they gain order, but also respect. Rant over.
|
I just don't know how anyone can txt when they're driving. As it is, I have to use both hands to pour whiskey from the bottle to the glass and have to use my knees to steer. However, steering with knees is a lot easier at speed...parkings a pig.
Ted
|
steering with knees is a lot easier at speed...parkings a pig.
I hope this is on your motorbike, and not in a car! It could be dangerous....
|
It causes exactly the same amount of distraction as having the same conversation handheld
Exactly. It's the conversation that is the problem. At junctions then holding a phone is an added issue, especially a manual car, but the danger is using a phone.
>>>> Texting whilst on the move is obviously wrong.Although no more wrong than getting out a cigarette and lighting it, or changing a CD.
You might be able to change a CD without looking at the CD player (I say might) but to text you need to read the screen of the phone.... and hit small buttons. So not quite the same.
|
|
Read research results from the TRL and others worldwide.
|
You might be able to change a CD without looking at the CD player
I think a lot of people write text messages without looking at the screen too. You might get the odd textonym (home instead of good , for example) but I imagine if you're used to writing messages like that, you're used to decoding them when you receive them.
|
Lovely example on the M74 yesterday.
Jaguar passed us doing about 85, phone to ear. About a quarter mile later he is passing a lorry, his brake lights come on, he slows to pass behind the lorry and go down the slip road. Nearly missed his junction.
Bet he believes that the phone does not affect his driving.
|
Bet he believes that the phone does not affect his driving.
Maybe it doesn't. I've seen plenty of people able to drive like that without the assistance of a mobile phone.
|
But even using a mobile phone to talk when holding it is illegal if sat in the car and the engine is running. You need to be parked.
I have made a short call while waiting at a red light in London (Handbrake on, ignition off - so parked but in a queue of traffic.)
Would have made in interesting conversation with a policeman, or a magistrate.
|
>>Lovely example on the M74 yesterday. Jaguar passed us doing about 85, phone to ear. >>
But that's not hands-free, is it? And as for texting with one hand while driving with the other. Hasn't that got to be a lot more complicated and attention demanding than talking to a person on a hands-free phone?
|
Horrific example on a busy roundabout in the middle of Kingston, in the middle of freshers week and in the rush hour.
Stupid lass trying to do a "U" turn round a roundabout while trying to operate a mobile phone in each hand.
Others just managed to miss her as she ignored priority and with no slowing down just went straight in to the roundabout flow.
I watched it all happenjust on my right from a grandstand seat on a bus.
Thanks to this escape I feel sure she will consider it OK to do it again. :-((
|
It's a bit like the anology of
"guns kill"
NO
People kill , with guns.
Anyway
If hands free is as dangerous as driving whilst over the limit
and EVERYONE ( virtually) is doing it
Why is drink driving considered so serious?
Yes, I too, have observed them attempting to negeotiate a junction whilst using the mobile whilst smoking a ciggy and also concerned that the nail varnish they have just applied dries evenly.
Doh indeed
As for txting...
But from personal experience here in my local town while on a hands free kit
I three times have forgotton to turn off to some particular destination, in no way driving dangerous but def distracted
Ps
This with thirty two years accident free driving behind me ( aged 50)
Removed the swearing! You should know the site rules by now.
Edited by rtj70 on 25/09/2009 at 09:53
|
>...in no way driving dangerous but def distracted
How can you separate those two? What you mean is you got away with it because nothing unexpected happened; if it had, you might not have reacted in time. Henry's roundabout circler might use the same argument as yours - "There wasn't an accident, therefore what I did wasn't dangerous."
|
Ok
Apologies for the totally appropriate, but inappropriate language.
Point taken.
Re the difference between distracted and dangerous
Hmmm
Having covered a signifent no of mixed miles of driving in 32 accident free years
I PRIORITISE
First, i leave an good distance between the veh in front and myself
Gives me additional Reaction time
Second I constantly scan, especially at schools etc
Again buys more reaction time
& Often driving slower than 30 if appropriate
But the key issue is that my destination comes behind my conservation
This DOES NOT mean that I am not concentrating on DRIVING SAFELY
PS
i quite often do NOT have the radio on
I often drive with the window down at times
and pour down the windows at a road in the rain
This for better visibility
|
|
I once had a bump after having cereal for breakfast, I have found that most drivers who crash have also had cereal for breakfast. It should be banned.
Edited by Hamsafar on 25/09/2009 at 12:02
|
Excellent there Hamsafar
A well spotted corrolation
My ould Uncle Arthur always said " Stay outta bed, most people die in beds"
Irrufutable that.
And also as the bloke on Axmen said last night
"You cant fix stupid"
i like that
Unfortunalely on that basis I see many unfixable drivers on a daily basis.
as in yesterday while driving home, a long wide straight stretch of road with one blind crest
and a car parked thereon whilst matey talked on the phone
he was not only a foot out from the wide flat grassy verge, but also not more than a car length past a wide hard paved gateway into a field
He COULD/SHOULD have had his car in off the carriage way completely
But he THOUGHT ......hey I'm not going to cause an accident by driving whilst on the phone
Even though this would actually have been safer than his chosen course of action
Doh indeed
Right better get back to polishing my Halo
I'ts coming up right nice
Edited by dieseldogg on 25/09/2009 at 12:39
|
>I once had a bump after having cereal for breakfast
Yes, Hams - and blind drivers cause far fewer accidents than sighted ones. My statement doesn't prove that blind drivers are safer any more than yours supports the idea that using a phone while driving is safety-neutral.
The point is this: of course humans can rotate and prioritize their attention, and there are situations while driving when it's reasonably safe to carry on a telephone conversation. But about the only two I can think of are when travelling sedately on an almost clear motorway, and when shuffling forward in bumper-to-bumper traffic, and in either case it would have to be a brief and simple conversation.
In practically any other situation, hazards and decision-making situations will arise so frequently that you won't have enough attention to go round. And the places people most feel the need to make phone calls - busy town traffic and congested motorways - are where these hazards will arise the most.
Let's look at this another way. After six pints, I could probably drive my car the 400m to the end of my road without hitting anything or anyone. But does the fact there there a few situations where a dangerous condition won't cause an accident make it OK to behave in that dangerous way anywhere and everywhere? Society accepts that excess alcohol impairs hazard perception and car control, so it's made it illegal. If - as research seems to show - hands-free phone use is at least as harmful to driving ability, shouldn't the same apply?
|
I dont drive after two
and wouldnt after three
and would have fallen over before I got to six.
However I had an Uncle who drove home from the pub on a regular basis ( since deceased)
He NEVER had an accident, this despite being"unable to bite his own finger"
But to reasonably extend some of your argument
Women ( & indeed men) should NOT be allowed to transport children in cars
FAR more distracting
As our two weans while they were at that questioning stage.....boy they picked the MOST inappropriate moments to ask searching questions.
And to my preception our "parents" brains are programmed to respond
PS
Why is considered acceptable for concerned school run mummies to double park outside a rural country school
this near a bad corner
jat
M
Edited by dieseldogg on 25/09/2009 at 13:01
|
Since it wont let me edit
I intended to say
rural primary school
doh indeed
|
That's quite true about children's questions - mine do the same and it takes an effort of will to say, "Not now, Ermintrude*, I have to concentrate on driving." But it can be done, because carrying passengers - even talkative ones - is what a car is for. Using it as a mobile office, so your employer can require you to work and travel at the same time, is a different matter.
*Name invented for illustrative purposes. I wouldn't name a child Ermintrude, of course - mine are named Herod and Jezebel.
|
|
