Increased Sanctions Proposed for Mobile Phone Use

[KennyN]

Confiscate and destroy the device in front of them if they are caught using a non-hands free device , it is the only way that some will take notice as the threat of fines and points doesnt seem to be getting the message through.

I dont see the actual conversation being distracting but fumbling through numerous menus to make the call is where the problem lies , including scrolling through the contact list in the speedo display. Just lucky that the Linguatronic is such a competent piece of kit.

Another thing that i am amazed at is the number of cars going about with all their windows tinted way beyond the legal level , at least it makes them harder to spot when using their phones.

Kenny

 

[Giantvanman]

I still fail to see the downside of a blanket ban of the use of mobile phones when laws exist specifically for 2 way radios and emergency services.

Surely the upside of the ban would significantly outweigh the downside?


You can use hands-free phones, sat navs and 2-way radios when you’re driving or riding. But if the police think you’re distracted and not in control of your vehicle you could still get stopped and penalised.

And there is the rub. Do we want to live in a society where there is a 'ban mentality' or one that treats us like adults and gives us the trust to behave like one? That would depend on who you asked but there are plenty out there who would A. ban any car over one litre because you don't need anything more or B. have every car speed limited to seventy because that is the maximum we can legally drive, for example.

We are actually trusted a great deal to behave responsibly and respectfully and whilst there are always the moronic who will do neither, do we really want the nasally, the tie dyed types and the weary willies in charge, banning this, that or the other?

 

[Deleted member 37751]

If they ban eating a sandwich whilst also munching a packet of crisps sat in between your legs, I'm fecked.

*only on long journeys though.

 

[cb1965]

Oh God, not this again! We just had the pedants special on this in the Driving Incidents forum just a few months ago!

 

[Stratman]

If £100 and three points is failing to dissuade offenders I can't see £150 and four points making much difference.

On the spot confiscation of the phone might.

 

[Red C220]

And there is the rub. Do we want to live in a society where there is a 'ban mentality' or one that treats us like adults and gives us the trust to behave like one? That would depend on who you asked but there are plenty out there who would A. ban any car over one litre because you don't need anything more or B. have every car speed limited to seventy because that is the maximum we can legally drive, for example.

We are actually trusted a great deal to behave responsibly and respectfully and whilst there are always the moronic who will do neither, do we really want the nasally, the dyed types and the weary willies in charge, banning this, that or the other?

There are reasonable cases for and against. There are also different perspectives on what would be appropriate or not.

I see mobile phone use in a vehicle as a similar distraction and seriousness to drink driving.

The choice of trust and respect afford to the public with regard to drink driving has been removed completely as the benefits of doing so far outweigh the downside and removal of choice (and possible infringement of civil liberty).

A reasonable adult understands the ramification of driving with alcohol in their system however any possible level of trust in this issue has been removed by the imposition of strict regulations and rightly so.

In this instance I don't see a ban on the use of phones as a nanny state or an invasion of choice. I see it as a necessity because like drink driving in the 60's,70's and 80's it has become socially acceptable to use a mobile phone whilst driving a vehicle.

Once an illegal activity drifts into a social acceptance then the choice of trust and respect has to be removed and strictly defined by legislation.

 

[leef44]

All this about increased fines. This is the same for littering and dog litter. Increased fine this and increased fine that. There are too many politicians! While the politicians vote for increased politicians and increasing need to justify their existence, the costs has to come from somewhere so they cut the frontline: headcount cuts on police force, fire service etc. So we end up with more laws and less people to police them. So these offences end up being considered too trivial in the priority line.

 

[flango]

Most police comms now run over the cellular network not radio so how does that fit with a single crewed traffic officer in a pursuit doing commentary which is often the case around here ?

 

[Red C220]

Most police comms now run over the cellular network not radio so how does that fit with a single crewed traffic officer in a pursuit doing commentary which is often the case around here ?

If you want to pick holes in minutia you'll always find a reason why it shouldn't be "right" to impose a ban.

It would be easy to alter (or update due to developments in technology) the wording of an exclusion for emergency services whilst increasing the penalties of the general populous at large. After all, emergency vehicles have exemption from speed limits during blue light calls yes? (when suitably trained of course).

Your previous argument of common sense I'm afraid is mute, you only need to drive 5 minutes down the road in any city in the UK before you see someone with a handset clamped to their ear. Common sense is devoid due to the social acceptance of use of the handset.

 

[219]

There is an exemption in law for police (and emergency services) to use radio communications whilst they are driving. If, however, they use the Airwave set to receive or make a telephone call (these sets have the capability) whilst driving, then that would, I suspect, be an offence because the communication is no longer via radio waves but via telephony (or whatever the term is).

It is not illegal in itself to make or receive a call using a bluetooth link or other hands-fee method. The illegality arises if the driver, whilst using handsfree, is involved in a collision, deemed to be there fault. This then opens them up to driving without care and attention.

This is no different to, for example, legally putting in a CD or changing radio station but as a result, cause a collision.

This is a good example of where a lawful act become an unlawful act because of the circumstances. Simples?

There is also an exemption in law for anyone to use a mobile phone in connection with a genuine emergency and where it is both urgent and impractical to stop .

 

[flango]

If you want to pick holes in minutia you'll always find a reason why it shouldn't be "right" to impose a ban.

It would be easy to alter (or update due to developments in technology) the wording of an exclusion for emergency services whilst increasing the penalties of the general populous at large. After all, emergency vehicles have exemption from speed limits during blue light calls yes? (when suitably trained of course).

Your previous argument of common sense I'm afraid is mute, you only need to drive 5 minutes down the road in any city in the UK before you see someone with a handset clamped to their ear. Common sense is devoid due to the social acceptance of use of the handset.

I meant common sense will apply in how the legislation is developed. I totally agree with you on these intellectually devoid f*ckwits using handsets while driving.

But Hands free is a different matter two data sets exist one which says it's a distraction the other says no more dangerous than talking to a passenger and the other point of the passenger being able to read the road conditions is also mute, what if they are not a driver?

 

[boxbrownie]

Would you believe I saw a girl texting (or looked like it) whilst riding a scooter last night? She was crossing give way lines and junctions but didn't look up once!

After our experience it makes me shudder when I see things like this, we had a DPD delivery driving following us this morning and I could see he had an A4 sheet of paper reading from it over the steering wheel.......I just made sure I didn't need to stop fast! Total tosspot.

 

[219]

Bizarre, isn't it? The overall exemption for two way radio is because many government agencies use these devices which have limited range (unless part of a network e.g. police) so Yorkie munchers (sorry, couldn't resist) and mini cabs are also exempt.

Two way radio , where there is a PTT button was originally seen as sufficiently different to telephone conversations since such conversations were expected to be brief and to the point .

 

[219]

Confiscate and destroy the device in front of them if they are caught using a non-hands free device , it is the only way that some will take notice as the threat of fines and points doesnt seem to be getting the message through.

I dont see the actual conversation being distracting but fumbling through numerous menus to make the call is where the problem lies , including scrolling through the contact list in the speedo display. Just lucky that the Linguatronic is such a competent piece of kit.

Another thing that i am amazed at is the number of cars going about with all their windows tinted way beyond the legal level , at least it makes them harder to spot when using their phones.

Kenny

Of course the conversation is more distracting !

Not sure what kit you're using ?? But with my Bury kit I only have to touch one button and speak the instruction to dial any contact in my phone - having said that , I very rarely initiate calls whilst driving since I can choose to pull over before making a call , and I normally don't take calls whilst driving either .

Even my old Nokia 6310 had a one touch dial facility with which I could programme frequent contacts to each of the front buttons on the phone .

 

[markjay]

As for police use of Radio... at the time when the hands free legislation was first introduced (I think around the late '90), it was specifically said that two-way radio systems were exempt because by then they were in very little use among the general public and were mostly found in emergency services vehicles. So the result is that the legislation regarding use of mobile phones does not apply to two-way radio. Hence the police drivers are not committing an offence when they use their radio while driving.

 

[mat8n]

I think we should ban driving, there's no fun in it anymore.
i could live without my car.
I couldn't live without my phone.

I've been done twice on the phone! My cars are auto with hands free but I got caught dialling.

You don't need to ban phones or prosecute speeders.

You need to ban idiots who can't drive safely. Each circumstance is different.

People crash in all kinds of ways below the speed limit simple because they are poor drivers who don't concentrate and are oblivious to everyone else and obviously don't know the highway code.

Yet dare I say! Some people can drive above the limit while talking on a hand held phone and still be a good driver.

I still use my phone in the car, it's where I feel comfortable and relaxed.

I'm not defending phone and driving use, just playing devil's advocate and pointing out its not always black and white.

 

[190]

Surely any form of distraction is "driving without due care and attention"
Some years ago I had a guy drive into me because he was shouting at the kids in the back. Understandable distraction but it will have cost him for years on his insurance. He should have left it to his partner to keep the kids in order.

You will all have seen this - following a car at 25MPH because the driver is having an in depth conservation with the passenger and spending more time looking to the side than at the road ahead. Besides being inconsiderate to other road users that's a significant distraction to the task at hand just like mobile phones and texting. They are all offences in my book because they increase the chance of the driver killing or injuring someone. Being in control of a 1.5 tonne object in motion is not a trivial undertaking. What's surprising is that there are not more accidents.

 

[badj]

Surely any form of distraction is "driving without due care and attention"
Some years ago I had a guy drive into me because he was shouting at the kids in the back. Understandable distraction but it will have cost him for years on his insurance. He should have left it to his partner to keep the kids in order.

You will all have seen this - following a car at 25MPH because the driver is having an in depth conservation with the passenger and spending more time looking to the side than at the road ahead. Besides being inconsiderate to other road users that's a significant distraction to the task at hand just like mobile phones and texting. They are all offences in my book because they increase the chance of the driver killing or injuring someone. Being in control of a 1.5 tonne object in motion is not a trivial undertaking. What's surprising is that there are not more accidents.

This is it exactly. Well, any distraction that is affecting your driving, rather than assuming that something is a distraction and will affect your driving.

It'd be far more useful to the greater cause to implement compulsory retesting, as opposed to increasing penalties, as people continue habits because they refuse to accept they will ever be caught - not because the risk isn't great enough.

It therefore follows that there are an abundance of drivers on the road who lack the ability and knowledge to drive a car safely, regardless of whether they are talking or not.

 

[Druk]

Oh God, not this again! We just had the pedants special on this in the Driving Incidents forum just a few months ago!

Yawn. Go make a cup of tea or something but stay off threads that don't interest you.

 

[zipdip]

Well I never make calls from my car,I do accept them,by pushing the button on the steering wheel,I never text in the car also,if I need to make a call I pull over,I do not believe hands free will be taken to court,the police will have enough nicks with the idiots using the phone and texting,I would also add the people who read maps and books or delivery notes as they drive along,I got a grandstand view of them the other week as I was in a coach going down the M4