RE: A ban on hands-free devices | PH Footnote

[cidered77]

Only skimmed a third or so of the comments, but has anyone pointed out yet that MPs "suggesting" something via a report/committee, is a long long way from actual law. Especially law incredibly complicated to implement, and enforce, and one that would damage our economy further with "UK spec" cars needed, etc. if only we had some kind of wider regulatory body to handle such things we were a part of, but i digress.

it's news because it gets attention, and generates clicks and sells ad revenue. Not because it's an actual law.

It isn't going to happen, but it's just picked up by news outlets because it generates outrage. How many other MPs "suggestions" were reported yesterday?

[cidered77]

homerdog said:

Driving a car can be dangerous for all sorts of reasons, so we might just as well ban all cars. Most MPs are stupid morons, but the trouble is they think they know best.

I think "they" have actually banned is using a handheld phone whilst driving, and being pissed at the wheel. And wearing seatbelts of course. "Some MPs" made a suggestion. A st one. Like when an MP suggested all knifes should have GPS tracking. I don't recall that being passed by the House of Lords just yet...

But one clickbait headline and across all the pubs and social media sites in the UK it's "you'll never guess what *they* are banning now! whatever next!".

But let's mot let the actual truth get in the way of a good shouting...

[996jim]

Oh god, what next. Ban advertising because it can be distracting, ban attractive people from being out because looking at someone attractive is distracting, ban nice looking cars, ban the sun because it gets in your eyes. This pathetic nanny state, anything they can do to impose more laws and generate more fines, bewildering. Funny so many wasted journey's and disaster's averted (leaving something important behind) because of one simple thone call to someone with a bluetooth phone kit. How, if it becomes law are they going to impose it, have cameras hanging of motorway gantry's on the so called smart motorways. Why can't we have some adult, joined-up, sensible ideas coming from DVSA instead of this nonsense. I also lay blame at Greta Thunberg, not becvause she has anything to do with this but she deserves the blame regardless.

[mikey k]

Simple - 3 points and a large fine for anyone caught with one or more hands off the steering wheel for more than 5 seconds.
If there hands are on the wheel they aren't going to be able to fiddle with phones, infotainment, sat nav, make up, hair or pick their nose enough to be distracted
Whilst they are at it please put insurance and VED on fuel so EVERYONE is properly insured

[Harji]

havoc said:

Peanus said:

Also the committee is majority Labour. Labour have always been a busybody type of party.

Much as I despise BoJo and the nasty way the Tories are evolving right now, I have to agree with this wholeheartedly. If there's a law out there that feels designed to make your life that bit more difficult for no real reason/effect, it was probably introduced by a left-wing government...

Except this report is from a cross party group.

[anonymous-user]

mikey k said:

Simple - 3 points and a large fine for anyone caught with one or more hands off the steering wheel for more than 5 seconds.
If there hands are on the wheel they aren't going to be able to fiddle with phones, infotainment, sat nav, make up, hair or pick their nose enough to be distracted
Whilst they are at it please put insurance and VED on fuel so EVERYONE is properly insured

What about if they have full control with their knees?

[Harji]

yonex said:

Harji said:

Why? Its a fact that telephone calls are a distraction, you can find the research out on the net, 43 deaths is 43 too many because some prick is using a phone right?
We get more outrage if a cyclist caused a death.

What I see, from my car , bicycle and motorcycle is a lot of ignorance and blatant law breaking, there are not enough Police to enforce the laws we have as it is.

And you never break the law, never? Be very careful throwing these sorts of things out there, everyone makes mistakes.

43 people died because 'some prick' was using a phone.

I would argue smoking is more dangerous, I would also argue that children kicking off in the car is way more of a distraction, as is a pet roaming around, yet MP's aren 't calling for restrictions on that. It must be great being a senior MP and being ferried about with a driver. They don't have to make a living, talking whilst on the move. And that's the thing, if you're a st driver then you will not be able to talk and drive, are we now suggesting we need to be mute on every journey?

2018
1,770 reported road deaths
26,610 people killed or seriously injured
165,100 casualties of all severities, a decrease of 6%

43 with phone use as a 'contributory' factor.

Looks like a top priority! Shall we ground all flights, clearly there is a huge risk of a pilot losing control of their aircraft whilst 'on the phone' to the tower?

Bunch of liberal snowflakes.

Seriously, get over this liberal snowflake nonsense you old gits, if you cant be bothered to read the scientific research on using a hands free device then don't bother replying/ranting. This guy was in the news recently

https://www.mylondon.news/news/west-london-news/ra...

"Research into his phone usage showed that throughout the length of the journey he had been engaged in numerous phone calls that were likely to be hands-free and was engaged in a phone conversation at the time of the collision."

[Usget]

DaveyBoyDave said:

RB Will said:

Shakermaker said:

RB Will said:

Saw a piece on the BBC news about this today and was shocked how small a problem it is.

I think the stat was something like 43 deaths where phone use was involved in 2018. Left me and the wife a bit surprised as I was expecting that number to be at least 2,000

How many serious injuries?

Don't think it said on the News but I heard on the radio I think the KSI total was about 150-160 which again is surprisingly low.

Hang on, hang on, this proposal is clearly bonkers but in no way should we be suggesting 43 deaths in a year is a small problem! There is no reason for any of those deaths to have occurred, and I doubt any of those 43 sets of families would think this an acceptable thing.

If 43 people died yearly in the UK because of nuclear power, or some sort of immunisation, or even if 43 UK service people died in conflict ever year, there would (rightly) be uproar.

That said, this ban is clearly not the way to address the problem - though I suspect in reality the real proposal will have been exaggerated by the press.

The Highways agency publish detailed stats on road traffic incidents and casualties. But they don't include causation.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-...

Any idea where these stats come from?

[simonrockman]

Ironically, the way the laws are drafted, using this at the wheel is legal:

[Dave Hedgehog]

simonrockman said:

Ironically, the way the laws are drafted, using this at the wheel is legal:

headphone jack and made for iphone

[otolith]

Dave Hedgehog said:

simonrockman said:

Ironically, the way the laws are drafted, using this at the wheel is legal:

headphone jack and made for iphone

[Belfast Gipsy]

Travelled to Cardiff and back yesterday (195 miles each way) all in daylight hours and didn't see a single policeman or car. Who is going to catch these phone users when they can't enforce the legislation they currently have?

[grassisntgreener]

I think the point is being missed here...

You shouldnt need laws to tell you what you can and cant do behind the wheel of a car. The simple overall rule to this should be "you should not do something that leaves you distracted from the road". Whether that be using a hand held mobile phone, using a touch screen or picking your nose.

Only in modern society can you pile into the back of someone for whatever reason and walk away yet sit in traffic and dare to touch your phone and get prosecuted because you 'could' have caused an accident but actually cause one and get away with it.

Maybe we should listen to all the moaning whiny old gits on here who want to ban every step forward because they cant keep up with it and would like to see cars specced up like the model T? Whatevers next - banning electric windows as the winder was easier to lay your hands on? Banning climate control as the buttons are harder to use than fan speed, temperature and direction?

My car has a touch screen.. am I capable of using it safely? Yes. Do I use it to do things I shouldnt while driving and distract myself from the road for long periods? No.

The simple fact of the matter is everyone is different and not everyone is distracted the same as others. I am perfectly capable of having a conversation with someone while driving, but if the conversation gets technical or heated I stop so my driving is not impaired. If I cant stop I end the call. I am perfectly capable of using the touch screen to adjust temperature while driving. However scrolling through spotify albums or google maps to change destination I only really do while stopped or in stop start traffic. Where has the ability to make that judgement call gone?

Personally I'd like to see tougher penalty's for those who do things that impair their driving, or those who cause accidents. Minor bump... 3 points. Cause an injury... tougher penalty etc etc.

[mikey k]

grassisntgreener said:

I think the point is being missed here...

You shouldnt need laws to tell you what you can and cant do behind the wheel of a car. The simple overall rule to this should be "you should not do something that leaves you distracted from the road". Whether that be using a hand held mobile phone, using a touch screen or picking your nose.

Only in modern society can you pile into the back of someone for whatever reason and walk away yet sit in traffic and dare to touch your phone and get prosecuted because you 'could' have caused an accident but actually cause one and get away with it.

Maybe we should listen to all the moaning whiny old gits on here who want to ban every step forward because they cant keep up with it and would like to see cars specced up like the model T? Whatevers next - banning electric windows as the winder was easier to lay your hands on? Banning climate control as the buttons are harder to use than fan speed, temperature and direction?

My car has a touch screen.. am I capable of using it safely? Yes. Do I use it to do things I shouldnt while driving and distract myself from the road for long periods? No.

The simple fact of the matter is everyone is different and not everyone is distracted the same as others. I am perfectly capable of having a conversation with someone while driving, but if the conversation gets technical or heated I stop so my driving is not impaired. If I cant stop I end the call. I am perfectly capable of using the touch screen to adjust temperature while driving. However scrolling through spotify albums or google maps to change destination I only really do while stopped or in stop start traffic. Where has the ability to make that judgement call gone?

Personally I'd like to see tougher penalty's for those who do things that impair their driving, or those who cause accidents. Minor bump... 3 points. Cause an injury... tougher penalty etc etc.

I sort of made that point earlier, but gave a more draconian solution.
The problem with your suggestion is it leaves the driver to decide whether they are distracted or not.
Evidence shows the majority aren't able to do that objectively and safely, hence the requirement for a law that does it for them.
This assumes it actually gets policed though!
We've have had various traffic laws over the years that ought to have transformed our roads.
They haven't, so rather than put more resource in to enforcing them they seem to think rewriting it to make is stricter and more unrealistic will sort it out.
Clueless bunch of bureaucrats

[kiseca]

grassisntgreener said:

I think the point is being missed here...

Firstly, I've never seen you driving. For all I know you could be a safer driver than I am and of course I am missing the context of how you apply what you've written in practice. My points below are counters to your statements as I interpret them, not a judgement on your ability or success as a safe driver. With that disclaimer out of the way....

grassisntgreener said:

You shouldnt need laws to tell you what you can and cant do behind the wheel of a car. The simple overall rule to this should be "you should not do something that leaves you distracted from the road". Whether that be using a hand held mobile phone, using a touch screen or picking your nose.

I think the reason we do need laws to say what we can and can't do is this:

grassisntgreener said:

The simple fact of the matter is everyone is different and not everyone is distracted the same as others.

Everyone has different abilities and different experience, which means everyone will assess risk slightly differently, some better than others. Experience is a big teacher and laws are a way of sharing an experience someone has had with everyone else, so that all drivers learn the same lessons and the overall safety standard improves. One would hope, anyway.

grassisntgreener said:

My car has a touch screen.. am I capable of using it safely? Yes. Do I use it to do things I shouldnt while driving and distract myself from the road for long periods? No.

My take on those distractions is this, taken from watching thousands of crashes captured on Russian dashcams..... The hazard that results in the accident typically develops within a second, maybe two, from time the first clues are given until the time the crash takes place. Before that second starts, everything appears perfectly normal.

Being distracted for a single second will be enough to turn an avoidable accident into a crash if the distraction is at just the wrong time. Clearly short distractions reduce the chances for an individual because you'll miss fewer hazards, but even if there's a million to one chance that in that one second I'm fussing with the touchscreen I'll fail to identify a hazard, it means that for every million such moments shared among the drivers on UK roads, an accident happens.

So I agree that a short distraction is better than a long one of course, but even one second is too long.

[MB140]

swisstoni said:

I’d like to see details of how using a hands free phone has caused 43 deaths.

Exactly. In my local community thanks to a load of active campaigners there has just been an introduction of a speed camera site. Local media were posting about it on Facebook saying how multiple deaths had been caused by a particular junction.

When I questioned this and did a bit of research using the government crash statistic site. It turned out there had been 3 fatalities since 2014. That’s three in 5 years. Further research showed two were in the same crash with a drunk driver and 1 was a cyclist vs lorry.

So yeah 3 fatalities in 5 years none caused by speed or using a mobile.

[swisstoni]

MB140 said:

swisstoni said:

I’d like to see details of how using a hands free phone has caused 43 deaths.

Exactly. In my local community thanks to a load of active campaigners there has just been an introduction of a speed camera site. Local media were posting about it on Facebook saying how multiple deaths had been caused by a particular junction.

When I questioned this and did a bit of research using the government crash statistic site. It turned out there had been 3 fatalities since 2014. That’s three in 5 years. Further research showed two were in the same crash with a drunk driver and 1 was a cyclist vs lorry.

So yeah 3 fatalities in 5 years none caused by speed or using a mobile.

The 43 deaths are where phone useage was a contributory factor. Not the same as cause.

Also there is no breakdown of what phones were hand-held and what were hands-free.
Or what was going on with the phone at the time.

We’ve all seen tts texting, not looking at the road, swerving when they look up.

I’d put money on these types causing the majority of those 43.
And I’d like to see them absolutely hammered.

[MB140]

swisstoni said:

MB140 said:

swisstoni said:

I’d like to see details of how using a hands free phone has caused 43 deaths.

Exactly. In my local community thanks to a load of active campaigners there has just been an introduction of a speed camera site. Local media were posting about it on Facebook saying how multiple deaths had been caused by a particular junction.

When I questioned this and did a bit of research using the government crash statistic site. It turned out there had been 3 fatalities since 2014. That’s three in 5 years. Further research showed two were in the same crash with a drunk driver and 1 was a cyclist vs lorry.

So yeah 3 fatalities in 5 years none caused by speed or using a mobile.

The 43 deaths are where phone useage was a contributory factor. Not the same as cause.

Also there is no breakdown of what phones were hand-held and what were hands-free.
Or what was going on with the phone at the time.

We’ve all seen tts texting, not looking at the road, swerving when they look up.

I’d put money on these types causing the majority of those 43.
And I’d like to see them absolutely hammered.

Yep I saw a silly young lady the other month with her iPad strapped to the steering wheel watching a movie whilst driving down the A46 dual carriageway at 70mph. Heaven forbid she has an accident. Where is that iPad going when the airbag goes off. No tucking common sense. Darwin Award winner that one. If I hadn’t have been on my own I would have got a passenger to record it and dobed her in to the cops.

[anonymous-user]

Harji said:

Seriously, get over this liberal snowflake nonsense you old gits, if you cant be bothered to read the scientific research on using a hands free device then don't bother replying/ranting. This guy was in the news recently

https://www.mylondon.news/news/west-london-news/ra...

"Research into his phone usage showed that throughout the length of the journey he had been engaged in numerous phone calls that were likely to be hands-free and was engaged in a phone conversation at the time of the collision."

That was dangerous driving, one idiot doesn’t make a good case for law!

I made several hands free calls and navigated Waze over a recent journey. Why did t I crash I winder?