Speed Awareness Courses - Do they work?
Discussion
Awareness courses do work, at least for the police they do anyway.
Looks like the government have worked out that using a phone whilst driving is actually very dangerous and have decided to do something sensible about it and put the penalty for it on a par with no insurance, this will obviously deter most people and undoubtedly save lives, well done the government.
But the police have stood up and said "what about our money" so desperate are they to keep their hands on the loot they have said they will defy the government and carry on using courses.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4168076/Fu...
I feel much safer with out police force calling the shots already.
Looks like the government have worked out that using a phone whilst driving is actually very dangerous and have decided to do something sensible about it and put the penalty for it on a par with no insurance, this will obviously deter most people and undoubtedly save lives, well done the government.
But the police have stood up and said "what about our money" so desperate are they to keep their hands on the loot they have said they will defy the government and carry on using courses.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4168076/Fu...
I feel much safer with out police force calling the shots already.
mickmcpaddy said:
Awareness courses do work, at least for the police they do anyway.
Looks like the government have worked out that using a phone whilst driving is actually very dangerous and have decided to do something sensible about it and put the penalty for it on a par with no insurance, this will obviously deter most people and undoubtedly save lives, well done the government.
But the police have stood up and said "what about our money" so desperate are they to keep their hands on the loot they have said they will defy the government and carry on using courses.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4168076/Fu...
I feel much safer with out police force calling the shots already.
The Police are correct on this one though. There is no comparison between using a phone whilst stationary or using a phone whilst moving. They recognise that.Looks like the government have worked out that using a phone whilst driving is actually very dangerous and have decided to do something sensible about it and put the penalty for it on a par with no insurance, this will obviously deter most people and undoubtedly save lives, well done the government.
But the police have stood up and said "what about our money" so desperate are they to keep their hands on the loot they have said they will defy the government and carry on using courses.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4168076/Fu...
I feel much safer with out police force calling the shots already.
The only leap you could make is to suggest that adopting a response that allows this differentiation may result in those drivers that are prepared to risk using their phones whilst stationary then moving on to the harder drug of use whilst moving. Which is hypothetical nanny-state nonsence.
Willy Nilly said:
vonhosen said:
Willy Nilly said:
vonhosen said:
A single first aid refresher every 5 years is no bad thing.
If you book the same course 5 times in a cycle & expect to get valuable learning then you are a plank.
The system allows you to do this though, all you have to do is turn up, you can it there asleep if you like. That is the calibre of course and system we are talking about. If you book the same course 5 times in a cycle & expect to get valuable learning then you are a plank.
As I said they didn't expect 'supposed' professionals to behave like that.
It's up to you to book the courses where your knowledge or skill is lacking &/or needs refreshing, or indeed new areas you want to move into by upgrading (i.e. ADR etc). You are better placed to know that than someone else telling you which course you should do.
Take responsibility for your own training.
Willy Nilly said:
To start your career as a lorry driver you have to take a legally mandated test. When you have past you then have to take legally mandated training. You are told how many hours you can work and expected to take breaks by law, even though there is no legal responsibility for the state to provide you anywhere to take a rest. At every stage you are legally responsible for the work you are doing, even when put under extreme pressure. If at any time you make a mistake, the law will see you punished and fined all for what amounts to The Living Wage. Can you show me any other career or job that expects so much from its staff and pays so poorly in return?
Bus drivers, Police, Fire Service, Paramedics.........vonhosen said:
Take responsibility for your own training.
Unless, like thousands, you have no choice or can't afford it.As I said earlier, the system put in place forces you to hand over money and they don't care what you do after that.
What's your take on that? Pretty shocking, isn't it?
It would appear that the success of the SAC policy has attracted some police forces to extend the courses to mobile phone use - with the new "draconian" phone use laws being a suitable incentive to drivers to accept the course offered!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4168076/Fu...
http://www.northumberlandgazette.co.uk/news/campai...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4168076/Fu...
Daily Mail said:
Fury as police chiefs threaten to defy Government's tough new penalties for drivers caught using mobile phones by suggesting they do courses instead
Police chiefs threatening to defy Government over tough new penalties
From March, drivers using phones will be slapped with £200 fine and six points
But in a shock move, police chiefs say they want to defy Ministers and spare harsh punishments for drivers caught - by offering courses instead
Chief Constable Suzette Davenport, national lead for roads policing, told a conference last week that police had to be ‘proportionate’ in their response.
Meanwhile in Northumberland, councillors have become concerned that they are funding cameras, which are targeting lucrative sites, instead of roads with a history of fatal and serious accidents.Police chiefs threatening to defy Government over tough new penalties
From March, drivers using phones will be slapped with £200 fine and six points
But in a shock move, police chiefs say they want to defy Ministers and spare harsh punishments for drivers caught - by offering courses instead
Chief Constable Suzette Davenport, national lead for roads policing, told a conference last week that police had to be ‘proportionate’ in their response.
http://www.northumberlandgazette.co.uk/news/campai...
Northumberland Gazette said:
Northumberland County Council may stop paying into the Northumbria Safer Roads Initiative (NSRI), a partnership of local councils and the police which deploys speed camera vans in the North East, saving more than £100,000 a year. Coun Glen Sanderson, ward member for Longhorsley, is delighted as he has been questioning the merits of the NSRI for some time. He feels that speeding in Northumberland can be far better tackled by closer working with the police to ensure hotspots are targeted. One of the key roads, in Coun Sanderson’s opinion, is the A697 and the issue will become even more important when work to dual the A1 starts, forcing more traffic onto this route. A spokeswoman for Northumberland County Council said: “The funding arrangements for the NSRI are currently under review and are still subject to discussion with Northumbria Police and other local authority partners.
Devil2575 said:
Personally I'd be happy to see people who use mobile phones while driving dragged from their car and kicked to death.
What exactly is draconian about the new laws? Do you view mobile phone use like speeding?
Luckily for those who are happy to use their phones and get caught, Chief Constable Suzette Davenport, national lead for roads policing, thinks that some should pay to attend a course instead - a welcome addition to the SAC income.What exactly is draconian about the new laws? Do you view mobile phone use like speeding?
As mickmcpaddy said in his earlier post...
mickmcpaddy said:
I feel much safer with out police force calling the shots already.
Devil2575 said:
Personally I'd be happy to see people who use mobile phones while driving dragged from their car and kicked to death.
Out of interest would your punishment apply to all mobile phone use (including hands-free) or just to those holding the handset? Obviously hands-free is legal but personally I think it's the use of the device which is actually the main distraction; whether it's hand-held or not is secondary IMO which is why I don't quite understand why so many think one form of use is perfectly acceptable while the other deserves the death penalty! Obviously texting and e-mail is different, a complete no-no unless parked-up in my view.
JNW1 said:
Devil2575 said:
Personally I'd be happy to see people who use mobile phones while driving dragged from their car and kicked to death.
Out of interest would your punishment apply to all mobile phone use (including hands-free) or just to those holding the handset? Obviously hands-free is legal but personally I think it's the use of the device which is actually the main distraction; whether it's hand-held or not is secondary IMO which is why I don't quite understand why so many think one form of use is perfectly acceptable while the other deserves the death penalty! Obviously texting and e-mail is different, a complete no-no unless parked-up in my view.
Mill Wheel said:
Luckily for those who are happy to use their phones and get caught, Chief Constable Suzette Davenport, national lead for roads policing, thinks that some should pay to attend a course instead - a welcome addition to the SAC income.
In better news, she's quit.768 said:
Mill Wheel said:
Luckily for those who are happy to use their phones and get caught, Chief Constable Suzette Davenport, national lead for roads policing, thinks that some should pay to attend a course instead - a welcome addition to the SAC income.
In better news, she's quit.
It will not have gone unnoticed that there could be money to be made by awarding offenders a
Devil2575 said:
I don't agree with any form of mobile phone use while driving. The evidence clearly shows that it's the act of being one the phone rather than simply holding it that is the main cause of distraction.
Is there also any evidence of other driver distractions, such as children in the vehicle, music devices, and eating while driving?You have a source for this assertion right?
I don't disagree, but I would like some actual data to back up our beliefs!
Mill Wheel said:
Devil2575 said:
I don't agree with any form of mobile phone use while driving. The evidence clearly shows that it's the act of being one the phone rather than simply holding it that is the main cause of distraction.
Is there also any evidence of other driver distractions, such as children in the vehicle, music devices, and eating while driving?You have a source for this assertion right?
I don't disagree, but I would like some actual data to back up our beliefs!
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-36475180
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S...
http://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/drivers/di...
http://www.livescience.com/37098-hands-free-phones...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoLtyqa5tEg
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/10/16/han...
Edited by Devil2575 on Wednesday 1st February 12:19
Edited by Devil2575 on Wednesday 1st February 12:22
Devil2575 said:
JNW1 said:
Devil2575 said:
Personally I'd be happy to see people who use mobile phones while driving dragged from their car and kicked to death.
Out of interest would your punishment apply to all mobile phone use (including hands-free) or just to those holding the handset? Obviously hands-free is legal but personally I think it's the use of the device which is actually the main distraction; whether it's hand-held or not is secondary IMO which is why I don't quite understand why so many think one form of use is perfectly acceptable while the other deserves the death penalty! Obviously texting and e-mail is different, a complete no-no unless parked-up in my view.
JNW1 said:
Devil2575 said:
JNW1 said:
Devil2575 said:
Personally I'd be happy to see people who use mobile phones while driving dragged from their car and kicked to death.
Out of interest would your punishment apply to all mobile phone use (including hands-free) or just to those holding the handset? Obviously hands-free is legal but personally I think it's the use of the device which is actually the main distraction; whether it's hand-held or not is secondary IMO which is why I don't quite understand why so many think one form of use is perfectly acceptable while the other deserves the death penalty! Obviously texting and e-mail is different, a complete no-no unless parked-up in my view.
For me, hand-held phones are much worse due to them being a similar level of mental distraction but a much greater physical disruption to the basic task of driving. You simply can't steer, indicate, change gear etc with only one hand being free. The existing laws are all fine, they just need to be effectively enforced IMHO.
Oh and back on topic, I still think SAC's work....
The Surveyor said:
Whatever your views are on the used of hands-free phones whilst driving, it remains a legal activity (rightly so IMHO) as well as it being impossible to detect. There are existing laws protecting the public from somebody driving without due care and attention regardless so there is no need for any more 'rules' on the topic.
For me, hand-held phones are much worse due to them being a similar level of mental distraction but a much greater physical disruption to the basic task of driving. You simply can't steer, indicate, change gear etc with only one hand being free. The existing laws are all fine, they just need to be effectively enforced IMHO.
Oh and back on topic, I still think SAC's work....
You should check out the links I posted. There is quite a lot of evidence to say that driving while using handsfree is a problem. Why rely on DWDC? We wouldn't do the same for drink driving and the science suggests that it is as bad.For me, hand-held phones are much worse due to them being a similar level of mental distraction but a much greater physical disruption to the basic task of driving. You simply can't steer, indicate, change gear etc with only one hand being free. The existing laws are all fine, they just need to be effectively enforced IMHO.
Oh and back on topic, I still think SAC's work....
Devil2575 said:
The Surveyor said:
Whatever your views are on the used of hands-free phones whilst driving, it remains a legal activity (rightly so IMHO) as well as it being impossible to detect. There are existing laws protecting the public from somebody driving without due care and attention regardless so there is no need for any more 'rules' on the topic.
For me, hand-held phones are much worse due to them being a similar level of mental distraction but a much greater physical disruption to the basic task of driving. You simply can't steer, indicate, change gear etc with only one hand being free. The existing laws are all fine, they just need to be effectively enforced IMHO.
Oh and back on topic, I still think SAC's work....
You should check out the links I posted. There is quite a lot of evidence to say that driving while using handsfree is a problem. Why rely on DWDC? We wouldn't do the same for drink driving and the science suggests that it is as bad.For me, hand-held phones are much worse due to them being a similar level of mental distraction but a much greater physical disruption to the basic task of driving. You simply can't steer, indicate, change gear etc with only one hand being free. The existing laws are all fine, they just need to be effectively enforced IMHO.
Oh and back on topic, I still think SAC's work....
I agree hand-held phones are worse than hands-free but I don't agree they're much worse. If the distraction associated with talking on a mobile phone whilst driving is rated at 10 I think being hands-free reduces that to about a 7; however, I don't think it halves the distraction or anything like because in my view it's the conversation that's the primary distraction rather than the physical holding of the handset. Therefore, personally I think the current fixation with clamping-down on hand-held mobile use is slightly misplaced; I do agree it's wrong but by focusing on that exclusively a major area of distraction is being ignored IMO.
Perhaps it's just in the "too difficult to enforce box" but concentrating on what yields easy convictions doesn't necessarily make our roads safer (the use of "safety" cameras being an obvious case in point!).
Devil2575 said:
You should check out the links I posted. There is quite a lot of evidence to say that driving while using handsfree is a problem. Why rely on DWDC? We wouldn't do the same for drink driving and the science suggests that it is as bad.
There is certainly some opinion that supports your view, but for me there isn't enough to justify a change of the law IMHO. That isn't a 'smoking is safe and asbestos is wonderful' blinkered view, just that I'm naturally critical of selected opinion being presented as factual evidence to support something I don't agree with. I'm open to have my view changed but not by a couple of limited tests, an edited article from ROSPA, and a BBC article about a single tragic incident.Talking on a hands free will certainly be more distracting that not talking on a hands free, maybe more distracting than chatting to a passenger, looking at the sun-set, changing a CD, listening to the Brexit row on Jeremy Vine etc.. but for me, not enough to justify a ban. It's a given that there will be distraction whilst your driving, some will be more significant than others and most can't be regulated by Laws.
Most new cars are sold with a blue-tooth kit and trying to suggest that nobody should be allowed to use them because it 'may' be distracting to a minority of the easily distracted is a non-starter.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff