Mobile phone use.

[AMGeed]

Hang on - it is not a fact that using a Mobile Phone at the wheel causes death. If it was a lot more people would be dead.

I would agree that using a phone is a distraction that may cause death. But so are a lot of other things.

Outright statements like yours are factually incorrect.

If your 'facts' are incorrect it is best you step outside and think it through really.

OK I'll rephrase my incorrect fact if it pleases you, but you know exactly what I'm getting at and are being pedantic.

Whilst breaking the law and using a mobile phone at the wheel it is possible to cause accidents resulting in the death or serious injury of other road users.

 

[bob6600]

Phones, touchscreens, apps and everything unrelated to driving from point A to point B should be banned

But then what about Sat Nav apps?

Touch Screen Tom Tom/Garmin etc?

I see your point but may not be feasible

 

[davidjpowell]

If being factually correct is pedantic then I am prepared to accept that.

I would go farther than you though. While breaking the law, or even obeying the law it is possible to cause accidents resulting in the death or serious injury of other road users.

Why is the phone singled out as the culprit? I'll go a little further. How many of use have genuine phones rather than 'electronic organisers/assistants'. Even the language is out of date.

Why do manufacturers build in Bluetooth - especially streaming. Very hard to do this without paying some attention to the device. What about the latest generation cars with facebook integrated into the bloomin dash.

Technology is leaping ahead of the legislation. I'll say again it need someone to properly get a grip, and work out a standard and safe level of integration, that allows the useful tech to work, and resists the undesirable stuff until it's safe.

Let's look at planes. Airbus (and I think the newer Boeing's) have designed in protection to stop Pilots being distracted and/or doing daft things at critical times. If anything other than plane will not leave the ground stuff goes wrong - the pilot will not be alerted until he is in the air, wheel's up and all sorted. At a certain stage, when stopping is not possible, the plane will not even alert to a fire until it is flying in case the pilot try to stop in an unstoppable position.

With good integration this sort of technology can be built into cars and the devices. But someone needs to bang heads together to get the communication going.

 

[Deleted member 6183]

OK I'll rephrase my incorrect fact if it pleases you, but you know exactly what I'm getting at and are being pedantic.

Whilst breaking the law and using a mobile phone at the wheel it is possible to cause accidents resulting in the death or serious injury of other road users.

But what about the driver?

 

[renault12ts]

OK I'll rephrase my incorrect fact if it pleases you, but you know exactly what I'm getting at and are being pedantic.

Whilst breaking the law and using a mobile phone at the wheel it is possible to cause accidents resulting in the death or serious injury of other road users.

This is true...but just as easy to have an accident whilst not breaking the law by using handsfree. There are probably no stats on fatal or otherwise accidents occurring whilst using handsfree.

 

[brucemillar]

But then what about Sat Nav apps?

Touch Screen Tom Tom/Garmin etc?

I see your point but may not be feasible

...and herein lies the issue. Any distraction is by default a distraction and may cause an accident (see my previous posts about exactly this topic).

I think what we see happening today is a reaction to several recent high profile cases and the understandable public horror. To then be told that usage is up but convictions are down !! drives the need for something to be done.

I think banning is a good start, but that it is only a start. Education and culture change are also required. People do not feel that driving is dangerous, it only kills other people and not them. Until that culture changes, I fear that whatever we do in banning/prosecution is no more than a sticking plaster.

 

[nick mercedes]

This is true...but just as easy to have an accident whilst not breaking the law by using handsfree. There are probably no stats on fatal or otherwise accidents occurring whilst using handsfree.

Meanwhile where it's legal:

Distracted Driving : Facts And Statistics

"In 2014, 3,179 people were killed, and 431,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes involving distracted drivers."

"At any given daylight moment across America, approximately 660,000 drivers are using cell phones or manipulating electronic devices while driving, a number that has held steady since 2010"

So given here where it's illegal the tally is 88, and there it's 3179, perhaps the police aren't doing such a bad job here after all?

 

[davidjpowell]

...and herein lies the issue. Any distraction is by default a distraction and may cause an accident (see my previous posts about exactly this topic).

I think what we see happening today is a reaction to several recent high profile cases and the understandable public horror. To then be told that usage is up but convictions are down !! drives the need for something to be done.

I think banning is a good start, but that it is only a start. Education and culture change are also required. People do not feel that driving is dangerous, it only kills other people and not them. Until that culture changes, I fear that whatever we do in banning/prosecution is no more than a sticking plaster.

People love to blame touch screens. My Volvo does not have a touch screen. It does have Bluetooth and does integrate with my phone to a degree. I have to admit I find the rotary controller takes less concentration to operate - and that can only mean I have more concentration on driving.

The Range Rover has a touch screen. It's quite high up, but it is less 'instant' and takes more concentration. It's quite old tech (because it's quite old), which makes it slow. Not sure if that is a bad or good thing.

But let's look at some of the modern tech that is driving orientated.

SatNav - people love to tell us how it's not like the old days. And they are right. You don't see a driver with his map open beside him, trying to track the map. People avoid the traffic jam. They know roughly when they are likely to arrive (unless they drive a Volvo - then they know what time a racing driver will arrive).

Music - Is this driving orientated? It's debatable, but I will say yes - not many of use want to spend hours in silence. Radio's are still in cars and work in roughly the same way. Some are easier to use. But CD's/Cassettes? Remember those days - trying to find the one you wanted. Getting it out of the case, putting the other back... Was it really any better?

To my mind these are the more essential driving ones. I use a few other Apps like Audible, but it's really just music in a different format.

 

[davidjpowell]

As a seperate point, as it's been lost. The reason for this crackdown is the crash on the A34. Horrific crash, horrific effect.

But did you know that the technology exists that would have entirely prevented that crash. All of the HGV manufacturers have collision warning systems. None of them fit them as standard to all their vehicles.

Why the f**ck not?! If one of these heavy vehicles hits a car at speed, for whatever reason then the result is inevitable. This is something that could be addressed very quickly for new vehicles.

 

[190]

For those inclined to be lenient on mobile phone users I would ask that you think not as car drivers but put yourselves in the position of a pedestrian, cyclist or motorcyclist. If an accident occurs between two cars there is a reasonable chance you will not be seriously injured where as in the same circumstances the pedestrian, cyclist or motorcyclist will be dead. If you saw a motorcyclist using a mobile phone you would think he was being reckless. Well they think you are reckless too.

I'm very pleased to to see the increase in awareness but 6 points and a fine is not remotely going to solve the problem, the deterrent has to be substantially increased.

While we are at it how were "i drive" type controls ever allowed to be installed in cars for use by someone who is supposed to be concentrating on driving. Madness driven by the marketing department.

 

[davidjpowell]

For those inclined to be lenient on mobile phone users I would ask that you think not as car drivers but put yourselves in the position of a pedestrian, cyclist or motorcyclist. If an accident occurs between two cars there is a reasonable chance you will not be seriously injured where as in the same circumstances the pedestrian, cyclist or motorcyclist will be dead. If you saw a motorcyclist using a mobile phone you would think he was being reckless. Well they think you are reckless too.

I'm very pleased to to see the increase in awareness but 6 points and a fine is not remotely going to solve the problem, the deterrent has to be substantially increased.

While we are at it how were "i drive" type controls ever allowed to be installed in cars for use by someone who is supposed to be concentrating on driving. Madness driven by the marketing department.

the i drive controls are in my view a good deal better than touchscreens.

 

[MercedesDriver]

I don't know why we don't see much more of such commercials in prime time. I bet these would be much more efficient than points and fines.
http://youtu.be/pubTiDCEVZ8

 

[davidjpowell]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ridS396W2BY

[YOUTUBE HD]idS396W2BY[/YOUTUBE HD]

 

[renault12ts]

We get hard hitting ads in NI:

Powerful new road safety ads address driver carelessness in Northern Ireland - Belfast Live

 

[ash59fifty-uk]

The problem with any touch screen wether built in or on a device, is that you can easily press the wrong thing. You have to aim for the correct button or function

With something like a parrot device it has one button for answer, one button for end call either side it's easy. Also like Idrive wheels, they're easy

I did used to text and drive, before having Bluetooth and it's horribly dangerous. I rolled into a foreign couple in start stop traffic once. I was texting. Hit them at less than 0.5mph, tiny tiny scratch on their bumper. Offered them cash on the spot for the bumper, they refused and went through insurance. Fair enough. Many many months later I get four claims for whiplash! Not even worth it. Now imagine if that happened at 5mph or plus, with space infront of me to do damage to a pedestrian or cyclist

I've only ever had one close call from being distracted, would've been a 20mph collision with pedestrians at a crossing. Driving past the college and bus stops in Wellingborough, and I saw this girl which needed a second look. Screeching tyres, stern looks and a very embarrassed look on my face

Just isn't worth it IMO.

As for Nick, there's a horrid video on Facebook which I can't find, where teenagers are interviewed about using their phone whilst driving to which they admit and don't really find it serious. Then they put a young girl in front of them in the interview who suffered major injuries leaving her half paralysed, also the death of her parents from one accident caused by someone using their phone whilst driving. Perhaps if you saw that video your opinions may change

 

[190]

the i drive controls are in my view a good deal better than touchscreens.

Perhaps they are but any control that requires the driver to take his eyes off the road for several secs at a time is a distraction and a bad idea in terms of car design. I still think these things are driven by marketing aimed at the younger generation. Driving is not a video game and car designers shouldn't be trying to make it look and feel like it is.

 

[219]

I saw someone in a tipper lorry on the phone yesterday, but nobody died, was he doing it wrong?

Was it Hamilton Waste and Recycling , by any chance ?

 

[davidjpowell]

Perhaps they are but any control that requires the driver to take his eyes off the road for several secs at a time is a distraction and a bad idea in terms of car design. I still think these things are driven by marketing aimed at the younger generation. Driving is not a video game and car designers shouldn't be trying to make it look and feel like it is.

Perhaps we should go back to the 1950's with fewer features?

Of course the cars themselves were more dangerous....

 

[219]

Meanwhile where it's legal:

Distracted Driving : Facts And Statistics

"In 2014, 3,179 people were killed, and 431,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes involving distracted drivers."

"At any given daylight moment across America, approximately 660,000 drivers are using cell phones or manipulating electronic devices while driving, a number that has held steady since 2010"

So given here where it's illegal the tally is 88, and there it's 3179, perhaps the police aren't doing such a bad job here after all?

In fairness , you would need to weight the comparison to account for the different population , number of drivers , vehicles , miles driven , number and type of journeys , and a whole lot more before it would be meaningful .

 

[Deleted member 6183]

In fairness , you would need to weight the comparison to account for the different population , number of drivers , vehicles , miles driven , number and type of journeys , and a whole lot more before it would be meaningful .

That's true but it's a fair amount of work to do only to be met with a typical forum response:

'It's wrong, ban it'.