Using Mobile Phones Whilst Driving!
Discussion
Is it just me, or do more and more people seem to be using their phones whilst driving?
I have also noticed (as have others) that many of the worst offenders are the drivers of more expensive cars such as MB S Class, Audi A8, Jags, Porsche etc. Surely if you can afford £ 50,000+ for your car, you can stretch to £ 200 for a fully 'plumbed in' hands free kit?
I appreciate that the Police have much more pressing things to do, but it amazes me the way people just carry on using them as if they couldn't care less(whilst weaving along from lane to lane - totally oblivious of anyone else on the road).
I have also noticed (as have others) that many of the worst offenders are the drivers of more expensive cars such as MB S Class, Audi A8, Jags, Porsche etc. Surely if you can afford £ 50,000+ for your car, you can stretch to £ 200 for a fully 'plumbed in' hands free kit?
I appreciate that the Police have much more pressing things to do, but it amazes me the way people just carry on using them as if they couldn't care less(whilst weaving along from lane to lane - totally oblivious of anyone else on the road).
probably because stupid laws tend to get ignored by the majority of the population.
Not inherently unsafe to make a phone call during driving anymore than its dangerous to talk to a passenger or eat a mars bar.
It is inherently unsafe to take your attention off the process of driving though.
Media like to make 2+2 =4. Easy sums, make easy understanding for joe public, make laws.
Not inherently unsafe to make a phone call during driving anymore than its dangerous to talk to a passenger or eat a mars bar.
It is inherently unsafe to take your attention off the process of driving though.
Media like to make 2+2 =4. Easy sums, make easy understanding for joe public, make laws.
Agree totally with the last post - using a mobile whilst driving is not necessarily dangerous.
Me, I like to drive around talking on my hands free kit with my index finger in my ear and my little finger near my mouth - this is a totally safe practice because the government says so...
Me, I like to drive around talking on my hands free kit with my index finger in my ear and my little finger near my mouth - this is a totally safe practice because the government says so...
Actually, a mobile phone conversation is, generally speaking, much more of a distraction than a conversation with a human passenger.
The reason is that a human passenger will, in general, moderate their conversation in response to the road conditions; if you're about to execute a complex manoeuvre then they tend to pause.
The person on the other end of the phone doesn't.
While I disagree with making the use of mobile phones whilst driving illegal (sets all sorts of disagreeable precedents) I can see how the law got passed.
If you're on the phone, you're paying considerably less attention than you would be if the person you were talking to were in the car with you.
The reason is that a human passenger will, in general, moderate their conversation in response to the road conditions; if you're about to execute a complex manoeuvre then they tend to pause.
The person on the other end of the phone doesn't.
While I disagree with making the use of mobile phones whilst driving illegal (sets all sorts of disagreeable precedents) I can see how the law got passed.
If you're on the phone, you're paying considerably less attention than you would be if the person you were talking to were in the car with you.
Julian64 said:
Not inherently unsafe to make a phone call during driving anymore than its dangerous to talk to a passenger or eat a mars bar.
And I quote...."a recent study at the Transport Research Laboratory sponsored by insurer Direct Line has provided new evidence that driving and using a mobile phone may be more dangerous than driving whilst under the influence of alcohol.
The research showed that on average the reactions of the driver were nearly 50% slower than when driving normally and that even using a hands free kit did not completely eliminate the distraction caused by having a telephone conversation whilst driving."
Let me guess, even though there is research across the world supporting the premise that using a phone is distracting, everyone thinks it's safe when they do it. Or is it that all the research is made up, just so the 'Nick Nick' can pick on you. Yeah right.
Not only is it distracting (check out the research, it's out there) the reason someone should be nicked is for being so sad and self opinionated that they think they can't live without the phone call.
Well, I've been using hands-free phones in my cars for 14 years now and wouldn't be without one.
But I've never tried to cope with a handset whilst steering and changing gear. Even such basic old ones such as the Nokia 2110.
Now that phones have all the stupid. pointless kiddie features such as complicated displays, cameras, music players, the sheer impossibility of working one whilst driving means that a hands-free (or, if you can stand the p*ss taking, one of those Lt Uhura bluetooth things) is more essential than ever.
Had a hands-free fitted to my SLK yesterday. About £250. The microphone is discreetly mounted by the rear view mirror, the antenna is very low profile and mounted at the top of the windscreen. The phone holder is by the centre console and uses the car's audio system. The whole thing is nicely engineered and works extremely well (although not when 'making progess' with the roof down!). A great piece of kit and totally safe to use.
Now that the novelty of mobile phones has worn off, I don't personally think that they are anything like as distracting as the nannying safety nazis would have us believe.
When a friend's wife was working for a local firm in the late 80's, the crushing bore who was the MD kept showing off his yuppie car phone to her, trying to impress. So one day she arranged for her hubbie to call the MD's phone when she knew that she'd be in the car with the MD.... Ring, ring...."Hello, it's who? Err, OK, she's just here..." They then had a brief chat with lots of "Over"s etc and finished. "My dear, you don't need to say "Over" -it's a proper telephone, not a radio" oozed the MD. "Oh, but I have to when he calls from there", she replied. "Really - where was he calling from?" asked the MD. "Err, from his plane somewhere over the Atlantic Ocean - he's going to be late home so asked me to pick up a Chinese for tonight", she replied....
They'd arranged a HF phonepatch to his carphone via Portishead Radio! That shut the pompous prat up!
>> Edited by nickwilcock on Tuesday 16th August 23:12
But I've never tried to cope with a handset whilst steering and changing gear. Even such basic old ones such as the Nokia 2110.
Now that phones have all the stupid. pointless kiddie features such as complicated displays, cameras, music players, the sheer impossibility of working one whilst driving means that a hands-free (or, if you can stand the p*ss taking, one of those Lt Uhura bluetooth things) is more essential than ever.
Had a hands-free fitted to my SLK yesterday. About £250. The microphone is discreetly mounted by the rear view mirror, the antenna is very low profile and mounted at the top of the windscreen. The phone holder is by the centre console and uses the car's audio system. The whole thing is nicely engineered and works extremely well (although not when 'making progess' with the roof down!). A great piece of kit and totally safe to use.
Now that the novelty of mobile phones has worn off, I don't personally think that they are anything like as distracting as the nannying safety nazis would have us believe.
When a friend's wife was working for a local firm in the late 80's, the crushing bore who was the MD kept showing off his yuppie car phone to her, trying to impress. So one day she arranged for her hubbie to call the MD's phone when she knew that she'd be in the car with the MD.... Ring, ring...."Hello, it's who? Err, OK, she's just here..." They then had a brief chat with lots of "Over"s etc and finished. "My dear, you don't need to say "Over" -it's a proper telephone, not a radio" oozed the MD. "Oh, but I have to when he calls from there", she replied. "Really - where was he calling from?" asked the MD. "Err, from his plane somewhere over the Atlantic Ocean - he's going to be late home so asked me to pick up a Chinese for tonight", she replied....
They'd arranged a HF phonepatch to his carphone via Portishead Radio! That shut the pompous prat up!
>> Edited by nickwilcock on Tuesday 16th August 23:12
Big Fat F'er said:
Not inherently unsafe to make a phone call during driving anymore than its dangerous to talk to a passenger or eat a mars bar.
And I quote...."a recent study at the Transport Research Laboratory sponsored by insurer Direct Line has provided new evidence that driving and using a mobile phone may be more dangerous than driving whilst under the influence of alcohol.
The research showed that on average the reactions of the driver were nearly 50% slower than when driving normally and that even using a hands free kit did not completely eliminate the distraction caused by having a telephone conversation whilst driving."
Let me guess, even though there is research across the world supporting the premise that using a phone is distracting, everyone thinks it's safe when they do it. Or is it that all the research is made up, just so the 'Nick Nick' can pick on you. Yeah right.
Not only is it distracting (check out the research, it's out there) the reason someone should be nicked is for being so sad and self opinionated that they think they can't live without the phone call.
Is that the same reseach vessel that said speed cameras save lives perchance?
One thing you will learn about statistics is that most of it is funded, and most of it is pants, even by quite reputable organisations. Statistics are at their best when someone takes the human being out of the equation.
Without even looking at that study, does it not give you cause for concern that it is funded by an insurance company?
Does it not give you further cause for concern that your common sense should be tingling about a pissed out of his mind driver should be safer than me when I accept a phone call over the phone, or a police driver when he answers his radio in the car?
I'm surprised you go out of your house in the morning.
juk said:
Any thoughts on how dangerous smoking whilst driving is compared to using the phone?
Not too far removed I would've thought (and you don't even have to try & set fire to a phone before using it!)
Ban smoking whilst driving too?
Easy to get distracted when lighting a fag. Also, its rather dangerous to throw it out of the drivers window if the rear window is open, I've had fags fly back in.
Julian64 said:
Is that the same reseach vessel that said speed cameras save lives perchance?
One thing you will learn about statistics is that most of it is funded, and most of it is pants, even by quite reputable organisations. Statistics are at their best when someone takes the human being out of the equation.
Without even looking at that study, does it not give you cause for concern that it is funded by an insurance company?
Does it not give you further cause for concern that your common sense should be tingling about a pissed out of his mind driver should be safer than me when I accept a phone call over the phone, or a police driver when he answers his radio in the car?
I'm surprised you go out of your house in the morning.
Trust me, I know about statistics (don't ask). I am also able to spot when someone tries to justify that their actions are safe, by saying all the research is incorrect. Guess you/they/whoever all know better. When you say 'most of it is pants' have you got any evidence to support this, or is it yet another case of you knowing best. Pesumeably it's a gift.
I'm also honest enough to admit (even if you're not) that I have been distracted using a phone (years ago, before I knew better). I decided not to use one long before the research came it. It was a personal decision. However, the research does back it up. But I just know that you will say you've never been distracted...maybe you're just lucky! Or maybe I'm just honest.
Guess what....I ain't fooled by your attempts to use emotive arguments to bolster a weak case. Don't try and tie in pissed up drivers with mobile phones. I happen to think they are both wrong. I think the distraction caused by a phone is less than being drunk, but it's still a distraction. Thats why I would fine you, but send the drunken P******K down. For good.
Not everybody is dangerous. But until we start getting tougher, everyone has to suffer. Like the TW*T in the BMW that drove around the small roundabout (almost full lock) near me the other day (in a residential area next to a shop...look out schoolkids!!!) driving one handed, 'cos he was talking on the phone holding it in the other hand. Great stuff, driving like an absolute cretin, and distracted as well.
I can go out in a morning, 'cos I tend to look out for myself by assuming I'm going to meet thick as S**T drivers (and don't quote 'ladders of inference' and NLP at me). I keep meeting 'em, but end up having others defend 'em. I ain't got much time for the Old Bill, but I would rather have them, than those that seem to think they are so good that all the rules apply to someone else.
Finally, I know they are thick, as demonstrated by the guy at work. He's moaning, 'cos he was done speeding. He was doing about 38mph in a 30mph zone. Get ready for this...the zone is residential with streetlights (check the code). There are 30mph signs. There is a big sodding yellow box. There are numerous white lines across the road. I don't mind the discussion with you, the fact you are on here suggests you can read and write. But the D***H**D above that got done gets right up my nose.
I don't use my mobile whilst driving but this law particularly annoys me because it's legislating to accommodate the lowest common denominator. It's a bit like banning calculus because some people aren't good at maths.
Instead they should make driving whilst using a mobile phone a part of the driving test. Regardless of whether or not it should be legal to do, I think anyone who doesn't have the mental capacity and physical coordination to drive safely whilst using a mobile shouldn't be allowed on the road.
Instead they should make driving whilst using a mobile phone a part of the driving test. Regardless of whether or not it should be legal to do, I think anyone who doesn't have the mental capacity and physical coordination to drive safely whilst using a mobile shouldn't be allowed on the road.
Its an arument with no end as bigfatf'er has shown. I must look like and idiot because I sound like one law for them and one for me. Its not that way really.
I suppose my gripe is that the police have ample powers to judge anyone as unsafe and fine them or stop them accordingly. Its called careless or dangerous driving.
There doesn't need to be a law to say whats dangerous because if you demonstrate your lack of control to a passing bib he will pull you regardless.
But the idea that its impossible to take a phone call and be safe on the road is ridiculous. Its also ridiculous to suggest its comparable with drunk driving. As this is obviously a commonly held view and since the advent of cameras you are unlikely to meet the bib on a road people are using phone as much as ever.
Statistics should be used only to fill in the blanks in our knowledge why we devise better ways to extend the knowledge into those areas, not to replace common sense by trying to apply statistics to the blatently obvious.
So why not ban smoking in cars, mobile phones, talking to your passengers and even picking your nose while driving. Legislate for each one in turn because I guarantee you can find statistical proof that all of those interfer with driving.
Why not, becuase its bloody stupid to do so and eight out of ten cats prefer not to.
I suppose my gripe is that the police have ample powers to judge anyone as unsafe and fine them or stop them accordingly. Its called careless or dangerous driving.
There doesn't need to be a law to say whats dangerous because if you demonstrate your lack of control to a passing bib he will pull you regardless.
But the idea that its impossible to take a phone call and be safe on the road is ridiculous. Its also ridiculous to suggest its comparable with drunk driving. As this is obviously a commonly held view and since the advent of cameras you are unlikely to meet the bib on a road people are using phone as much as ever.
Statistics should be used only to fill in the blanks in our knowledge why we devise better ways to extend the knowledge into those areas, not to replace common sense by trying to apply statistics to the blatently obvious.
So why not ban smoking in cars, mobile phones, talking to your passengers and even picking your nose while driving. Legislate for each one in turn because I guarantee you can find statistical proof that all of those interfer with driving.
Why not, becuase its bloody stupid to do so and eight out of ten cats prefer not to.
Julian64 said:
There doesn't need to be a law to say whats dangerous because if you demonstrate your lack of control to a passing bib he will pull you regardless.
Exactly, the same goes for speeding. But the reason the government likes laws such as these is because it's black and white - you're either going faster than x mph or you're not, or you're using a mobile or you're not. Much easier than going to court and arguing out whether or not what you did was dangerous in those particular circumstances. And that's extra important when you want to be collecting those fines.
Julian64 said:
So why not ban smoking in cars, mobile phones, talking to your passengers and even picking your nose while driving. Legislate for each one in turn because I guarantee you can find statistical proof that all of those interfer with driving.
I'll bet smoking whilst driving will be the next to be banned. Just give it another couple of years.
Julian64 said:
I suppose my gripe is that the police have ample powers to judge anyone as unsafe and fine them or stop them accordingly. Its called careless or dangerous driving.
There doesn't need to be a law to say whats dangerous because if you demonstrate your lack of control to a passing bib he will pull you regardless.
I completely, 100% agree, and this is why I don't think we need more laws when what is REALLY required is thorough, considered application of existing law by experienced trafpol who have the ability and the authority to exercise discretion.
This means, for example, tugging the idiot going round a roundabout on full lock whilst on the phone in the wet at lunchtime, and maybe not tugging the chap doing a sedate 90 on the M11 in the dry at 3AM in a perfectly straight line.
However, this means spending more money on traffic police and less money on scameras, which are showing themselves to be a net loss in terms of overall safety.
Never going to happen, unfortunately.
markh508 said:
I'll bet smoking whilst driving will be the next to be banned. Just give it another couple of years.
Can't come too soon for me. Won't make a blind bit of difference - the police aren't out there catching them.
For example, I've only driven my car about thirty miles today, and I stopped counting other drivers on the hand held mobile phone when I got to seven.
For a worrying large percentage of folks, it doesn't matter what the law says, they do it anyway, precisely because the law isn't enforced.
Now just ask me about un-insured drivers. Hanging is too good for them, IMHO.
"and maybe not tugging the chap doing a sedate 90 on the M11 in the dry at 3AM in a perfectly straight line. "
He's breaking the law is not he.
Next you'll be telling me that MPs should not be prosecuted as they are servants of the people or racing drivers cos they are safe..
Get real. IF you let one idiot get away, thousands will follow. IF we followed the US system with helicopter systems above motorways, everyone - but everyone - would do 70mph.
Don't defend the indefensible: it just means the next cause will be diminished because of your support of the indefensible before.
My view of the mobile ban - before it was intruced - was it was unenforceable. It is clearly not being enforced. there are not enough traffic police. If there were your 90mph on a motorway guy would be nicked as well..
I have zero sympathy for anyone exceeding a speed limit by that margin. They deserve everything they get when caught.
He's breaking the law is not he.
Next you'll be telling me that MPs should not be prosecuted as they are servants of the people or racing drivers cos they are safe..
Get real. IF you let one idiot get away, thousands will follow. IF we followed the US system with helicopter systems above motorways, everyone - but everyone - would do 70mph.
Don't defend the indefensible: it just means the next cause will be diminished because of your support of the indefensible before.
My view of the mobile ban - before it was intruced - was it was unenforceable. It is clearly not being enforced. there are not enough traffic police. If there were your 90mph on a motorway guy would be nicked as well..
I have zero sympathy for anyone exceeding a speed limit by that margin. They deserve everything they get when caught.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff