Road safety bill bans mobile phone use
Discussion
The Road Safety Bill, going through the Commons at the moment, will make using a hand held mobile phone device whilst driving an endorseable offence.
Hooray you might say, but there is a catch. Isn't there with anything B Liar is involved with. There has been some debate in the Commons that the case law surrounding being the driver means that you will be fined for using the mobile phone in the same circumstances that you can be done for drunk in charge. So, for example sitting stationary in a five mail tailback with the engine turned off will not be sufficient to stop you receiving the fine and points. You're a woman who breaks down in a dodgy area, you stay in the car and phone someone, you're guilty.
Lots of reassurances from Jamieson and co that it would all be done reasonably, but frankly I don't trust them. If an election is called for May 5th the Bill is lost until after the election because it can't be done in time.
If this one goes ahead I think it will drive a further wedge between the Government, and those who are seen to do their bidding, and the motorist.
Hooray you might say, but there is a catch. Isn't there with anything B Liar is involved with. There has been some debate in the Commons that the case law surrounding being the driver means that you will be fined for using the mobile phone in the same circumstances that you can be done for drunk in charge. So, for example sitting stationary in a five mail tailback with the engine turned off will not be sufficient to stop you receiving the fine and points. You're a woman who breaks down in a dodgy area, you stay in the car and phone someone, you're guilty.
Lots of reassurances from Jamieson and co that it would all be done reasonably, but frankly I don't trust them. If an election is called for May 5th the Bill is lost until after the election because it can't be done in time.
If this one goes ahead I think it will drive a further wedge between the Government, and those who are seen to do their bidding, and the motorist.
tvrgit said:
em... is that not the law already, as of January last year? Or is there a subtle difference that I've missed?
At the moment its non-endorseable and if you pull over with the engine off then you cannot be done for it.
However if you get caught in responsibilty with loud music or a form of fruit then its a whole different matter...
gemini said:
CAnnot get over the fact that even though the law has been in a year now there are so many dicks with phones strapped to their ears!
Its a plague - if you just look around how many are doing it?
£9.99 gets a hands free kit!
What seems odd is that this very specific cause of (potential) bad driving has had so much time and effort spent in legislation, but very little is being done about people that are simply bad drivers with or without a phone clamped to their head. The ones that PHer's see and suffer everyday, obliviouly cutting people up, meandering between lanes in a random fashion with no thought given to use of indicators etc.
gemini said:
CAnnot get over the fact that even though the law has been in a year now there are so many dicks with phones strapped to their ears!
Its a plague - if you just look around how many are doing it?
£9.99 gets a hands free kit!
Just because its illegal does not make it dangerous.
I saw a "dick" in Reading the other week. She was driving a Vectra behind me, phone to her ear, following the road directions perfectly, indicating on time, not a single problem in the whole 10 mins she was in visual range and was on the phone.
Then I got pulled out in front of by the grey haired tosser in the matiz who was not on a phone...
"Phones are dangerous" belongs with "Speed Kills" as the biggest non-statement of the century.
Ps I use a handsfree kit because I cant be arsed to hold a phone to my ear. I have no problem with people using them as long as they drive safely and with courtesy for other drivers... However the government decided to make a law for laws sake, and most police officers I know also believe its a total joke.
In fact round here most police officers in their marked cards can be seen using one while driving.,,
Not the point - its illegal and a load of publicity but they continue to use it!
We can all quote instances!
Like the one where the "dick" in the white van with the phone to his ear pulls out on me from a junction when Im riding my bike to work - broad day light!
When he gets stuck in traffic I pull up and ask him politely to cease using the phone!
We can all quote instances!
Like the one where the "dick" in the white van with the phone to his ear pulls out on me from a junction when Im riding my bike to work - broad day light!
When he gets stuck in traffic I pull up and ask him politely to cease using the phone!
gemini said:
Not the point - its illegal and a load of publicity but they continue to use it!
We can all quote instances!
Like the one where the "dick" in the white van with the phone to his ear pulls out on me from a junction when Im riding my bike to work - broad day light!
When he gets stuck in traffic I pull up and ask him politely to cease using the phone!
That's fair enough, especially in view of the fact that you suffered from his driving error.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
What Ian Reid highlights is the problem, like many Acts, on definition and interpretation. (As laws are made by the legal profession I always think that such ommissions are made to feather the nest of the rest in costly actions.)
The offence can only be committed whilst "driving a motor vehicle". But what is driving. This term is not defined. This, I gather, will always be a question of fact and decided on what extent one has control over the movement and direction of a vehicle.
In Planton v DPP [2002] it was held that a person sitting in the driving seat of a car with the engine running had been "driving". So, logically to me, parked up with handbrake applied and engine off, no longer driving?
DVD
The offence can only be committed whilst "driving a motor vehicle". But what is driving. This term is not defined. This, I gather, will always be a question of fact and decided on what extent one has control over the movement and direction of a vehicle.
In Planton v DPP [2002] it was held that a person sitting in the driving seat of a car with the engine running had been "driving". So, logically to me, parked up with handbrake applied and engine off, no longer driving?
DVD
TripleS said:
Not the point - its illegal and a load of publicity but they continue to use it!
We can all quote instances!
Like the one where the "dick" in the white van with the phone to his ear pulls out on me from a junction when Im riding my bike to work - broad day light!
When he gets stuck in traffic I pull up and ask him politely to cease using the phone!
That's fair enough, especially in view of the fact that you suffered from his driving error.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
- so he should be prosecuted for dangerous driving while using a phone, vectra woman should not... quite simple really!Dwight VanDriver said:Taking that to it's logical conclusion, falling asleep at the wheel does not constitute a driving offence because you have no control over the movement and direction of the vehicle if you are not conscious.
... This, I gather, will always be a question of fact and decided on what extent one has control over the movement and direction of a vehicle.
It could also be argued that some useless drivers are never in full control of their vehicle.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff