View Full Version : Foolish Mobile ban
All they will succeed in doing in banning mobiles
is to make people send text messages at lap level
which is more dangerous than using the phone at ear level
as you have to take your eyes of the road completely
nice one Blair
aliferste
02-12-2003, 11:30
Is anything that important ?
Florence
02-12-2003, 11:30
All they will succeed in doing in banning mobiles
is to make people send text messages at lap level
which is more dangerous than using the phone at ear level
as you have to take your eyes of the road completely
nice one Blair
Until I got my handsfree car kit fitted I used to pull over and call them back but I must admit that when you are on a coach and its turning a corner and the driver is on the phone its worrying especially when you have a class of lower junior children in the coach. If he crashes you have to explain to all those parents what happened and its difficult when the driver is talking on a phone.
I feel all phones should be in a hands free kit or switched off now when driving unless you have a passenger who can answer the phone for you......
Sad really that people need laws to tell them how not to behave irresponsibly whilst driving...
Use ya brains!
paulyoung666
02-12-2003, 11:33
All they will succeed in doing in banning mobiles
is to make people send text messages at lap level
which is more dangerous than using the phone at ear level
as you have to take your eyes of the road completely
nice one Blair
not sure about that one , i reckon it is a good thing , i have lost count of the number of times i have nearly been wiped out by some idiot using one , perhaps cars should have a shield around them that will make using a mobile impossible , if it was my option i would make using a mobile in a car a very big offence , big fine or prison or both , mind you im not sure what the max penalty is now :erm:
not sure about that one , i reckon it is a good thing , i have lost count of the number of times i have nearly been wiped out by some idiot using one , perhaps cars should have a shield around them that will make using a mobile impossible , if it was my option i would make using a mobile in a car a very big offence , big fine or prison or both , mind you im not sure what the max penalty is now :erm:
I think it should be done by the context in which it happened and not by the very letter of the law
eg - calling home in a traffic jam saying you are late is not exactly public enemy number one
paulyoung666
02-12-2003, 11:59
I think it should be done by the context in which it happened and not by the very letter of the law
eg - calling home in a traffic jam saying you are late is not exactly public enemy number one
fair point :)
Scarlett
02-12-2003, 12:05
I think it should be done by the context in which it happened and not by the very letter of the law
eg - calling home in a traffic jam saying you are late is not exactly public enemy number one
Provided your in Neutral and have the handbreak on!
It doesn't take 5 secs to dial and say, HELLO, IM IN THE JAM (ala Dom Jolly)
The problem is that the odd occasion that I've answered the phone while driving (which I don't do anymore and not due to the ban that just came in) I've found it very hard to concentrait on the road.
As long as you not taking the Pi** then there should be no problem i.e. sitting a layby with the engine going is fine but when the car is in gear, you are behind 1 Ton of metal that can and will kill. If you lose concentration for a second and let the clutch up then you will have to live the consequences for the rest of your life. If your lucky then it's just a dent and a call to the insurance company butif your not ...
I thought you had to have the engine switched off?
Anyway, this new law doesn't affect us over here in Norn Iron.
TigaSefi
02-12-2003, 12:40
u weren't supposed to use the mobile phones in car whilst driving anyways for whatever reason so therefore this law is only enforcing it. Makes sense and I agree with it.
u weren't supposed to use the mobile phones in car whilst driving anyways for whatever reason so therefore this law is only enforcing it. Makes sense and I agree with it.
labour have brough in 600 laws since they 'got in'
they should sort out proper things instead of, once again, harrassing the motorist on his way to work and charging him mobile poll tax to bolster the taxes he will be paying when he gets to work which, as we keep getting told, have not gone up
TigaSefi
02-12-2003, 13:14
Not the point, mobiles and driving kills = Fact = Sensible law.
I think there are people out there senible enough to use a mobile while driving but there's far to many that are not. I dont agree with the law but because of these's people who put there phone first instead of there driving it has to stay
scrotnig
02-12-2003, 13:23
I have no problem with the ban on using a handheld whbile driving.
Next year though, the plan is to escalate this to ban hands free kits as well.
Not one politician can explain to me why a hands free kit (a proper one not one of those dodgy things you clip on your shirt!) is any more dangerous than talking to a passenger. It's exactly the same. Are we going to ban talking to passengers next?
The sooner this obscene government is shown the exit the better.
My one worry about the law is that it's just to make more money, like speed cameras are now. I hate seeing people on the mobile while driving, but I'm not sure about the punishment in this case, like I said it will just be a revinue genarator in the end.
I dont really see a problem with the use of mobiles by people driving being banned as a problem. Even with handsfree. The bandwidth available on a mobile is quite small, so the quality of what you hear isnt very good compared to normal speech, due to loosing the High frequencys on the voice, it takes much more concentration to hear what the person on the other end is saying. IMHO they should have banned minibus/coach/bus driver from using mobiles ages ago, due to the amount of responsibility they have to take.
Jeremy
I have no problem with the ban on using a handheld whbile driving.
Next year though, the plan is to escalate this to ban hands free kits as well.
Not one politician can explain to me why a hands free kit (a proper one not one of those dodgy things you clip on your shirt!) is any more dangerous than talking to a passenger. It's exactly the same. Are we going to ban talking to passengers next?
The sooner this obscene government is shown the exit the better.
you're right there!
maybe they should ban you from changing cds/tapes and tuning the radio in
and what about the increasing amount of roadsigns they keep putting up everywhere - they are distracting in themselves - like those stupid "Drive Carefully" type signs - or "Make sure you brush your teeth today" etc
TigaSefi
02-12-2003, 14:00
erm, don't use mobile = don't pay, no revenue generator... what could be more simpler?
If u crashed into someone and kill someone whilst on the mobile, i am sorry, but u deserve every guilt feelin' going through your body.
EDIT: same as speeding, don't speed = don't get a fine. 40mph means 40mph. It up to u to disobey the signs but don't whinge when u get a fine.
SMHarman
02-12-2003, 14:24
I thought you had to have the engine switched off?
Anyway, this new law doesn't affect us over here in Norn Iron.
You do.
Phone rings, pull over - turn engine off, answer phone!!!
I think there are people out there senible enough to use a mobile while driving but there's far to many that are not. I dont agree with the law but because of these's people who put there phone first instead of there driving it has to stay
I agree. Sadly, the law has to account for all the people who will happily use a mobile phone while driving because they think they can handle it.
[QUOTE=TigaSefi]erm, don't use mobile = don't pay, no revenue generator... what could be more simpler?
QUOTE]
As I said I hate seeing people drive while on the phone, just and hour ago I watched one guy (on a mobile) go to pull out without looking and almost end up with the car infornt of me in the back of him ,and then he done the same thing to me.
But all I am saying is it will become a money maker for police forces, just like speed cameras. Maybe points on your licence would act as more of a deterant is all I am trying to say :)
This problem has arisen for lots of reasons, but one of the main causes is a lack of standardisation amongst mobile phones and car kit and the excessive costs of having one installed.
If all phones worked with all carphone kits (maybe with an adaptor) then everyone would use them. Costs would need to tumble though.
Just to clarify, I'm not talking about the earpiece devices but the installed carphone kits.
Guys, come on. Standardise and maximise....
SMHarman
02-12-2003, 14:46
erm, don't use mobile = don't pay, no revenue generator... what could be more simpler?
As I said I hate seeing people drive while on the phone, just and hour ago I watched one guy (on a mobile) go to pull out without looking and almost end up with the car infornt of me in the back of him ,and then he done the same thing to me.
But all I am saying is it will become a money maker for police forces, just like speed cameras. Maybe points on your licence would act as more of a deterant is all I am trying to say :)
http://www.met.police.uk/crimeprevention/mobile_driving.htm
The offence is currently subject to a £30 non-endorsable fixed penalty notice but is likely to become endorsable next year.
Just wait a few months.
So when they see you driving through a speed camera with a phone in your hand you will get 6 points / £60.
SMHarman
02-12-2003, 14:53
This problem has arisen for lots of reasons, but one of the main causes is a lack of standardisation amongst mobile phones and car kit and the excessive costs of having one installed.
If all phones worked with all carphone kits (maybe with an adaptor) then everyone would use them. Costs would need to tumble though.
Just to clarify, I'm not talking about the earpiece devices but the installed carphone kits.
Guys, come on. Standardise and maximise....
I think it will happen quickly on the next generation of cars. For Example, the new Saab 9-3 Sport Saloon is bluetooth enabled.
http://carsguide.news.com.au/theadvertiser/printpage/0,8297,5391901%255E24309,00.html
(the neatest article I could find on it - search bluetooth and saab on google for more)
So your bluetooth enabled car can interface with your bluetooth phone (any manufacturer) and a wireless hands free kit is operational.
EDIT
Here's a BBC news link...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2362085.stm
Just wait a few months.
So when they see you driving through a speed camera with a phone in your hand you will get 6 points / £60.
But this is my argument, if this is considerd dangerous driving (which I think it is) then the people caught are a risk to others on the road, so instead of fining them and putting points on their licence, give them a free warning first time (obviously noting their details) and if they get caught aagin, 3 points no fine.
SMHarman
02-12-2003, 16:05
But this is my argument, if this is considerd dangerous driving (which I think it is) then the people caught are a risk to others on the road, so instead of fining them and putting points on their licence, give them a free warning first time (obviously noting their details) and if they get caught aagin, 3 points no fine.
Why no fine. Small fines cover the processing costs. Perhaps we could have a 2 tier system fines or points!
zoombini
02-12-2003, 16:07
Fining the wallet hurts more than fining the license.
Modern technology can make phones that allow us to talk to someone on the other side of the world while driving. So it can easily also make it safer. People just need a push like this to make them get the proper equipment to help make it so.
The more that are sold, the lower the prices will fall on it.
I'm not too bothered myself, I dont use mine while driveing. I'm just glad that they have not banned "picking your nose" while driving - I'd get stopped straight away!
I'm not too bothered myself, I dont use mine while driveing. I'm just glad that they have not banned "picking your nose" while driving - I'd get stopped straight away!
maybe in the future
they will insist on you
purchasing a 'hands free'
nosepicking kit
I think there are people out there senible enough to use a mobile while driving but there's far to many that are not. I dont agree with the law but because of these's people who put there phone first instead of there driving it has to stay
No way - and the people who think they are safe with a mobile in one hand and the steering wheel in the other are the most dangerous of all. Anybody with a phone glued to their ear not only has their concentration divided, but will also suffer a potentially fatal delay (only one or two seconds could make the difference) if they suddenly need to execute an emergency manoeuvre that requires both hands on the wheel. And concentrating on grasping the phone between the head and shoulder while trying to keep two hands on the wheel is even worse.
Here's the daft thing - using a CB radio is not illegal while driving but a mobile phone is - how daft is that?
This problem has arisen for lots of reasons, but one of the main causes is a lack of standardisation amongst mobile phones and car kit and the excessive costs of having one installed.
If all phones worked with all carphone kits (maybe with an adaptor) then everyone would use them. Costs would need to tumble though.
Just to clarify, I'm not talking about the earpiece devices but the installed carphone kits.
Guys, come on. Standardise and maximise....
For those with Bluetooth phones, there are already Bluetooth Handsfree kits. Take a look at http://www.sonyericsson.com/uk/spg.jsp?template=PS1&B=IE&PID=9943&LM=PSM_V&gal=104. Go to http://www.sonyericsson.com and search for HBC 30 if that doesn't work.
These kits will work with any phone that supports Bluetooth headsets.
Having read all the posts let me put my 2 pence worth in. In June of this year I was knocked of my motorcycle by a guy driving his car while on a mobile phone. He didn't look, didn't indicate and later came out with the line I've heared many times before "sorry mate I didn't see you". After the impact I was sitting in the road with £5000 worth of twisted metal (formerly known as a motorcycle), I looked at the guy in the car and he's still on the phone. As you can imagine the temptation to ram the phone down his throat was very strong, I resisted but only just.
Sorry to ramble but my point is this, you will always get idiots like this who endager lives with reckless behaviour, IMHO this legislation doesn't go far enough, the fine should be greater and points should be added. At the end of the day this action is bordering on driving without due care and should be treated as such i.e 3-9 points and a fine.
The main problem is that since the Police has been able to keep a portion of fines from Speed Camera's there are fewer Traffic Units patroling the roads to spot these and other offences. Speed camera's DO NOT catch dangerous drivers and as such have a limited use........But don't start me on that one.
Stay safe
Sorry to ramble but my point is this, you will always get idiots like this who endager lives with reckless behaviour, IMHO this legislation doesn't go far enough, the fine should be greater and points should be added. At the end of the day this action is bordering on driving without due care and should be treated as such i.e 3-9 points and a fine.
SMHarman posted this:
The offence is currently subject to a £30 non-endorsable fixed penalty notice but is likely to become endorsable next year.
from http://www.met.police.uk/crimeprevention/mobile_driving.htm
So, it is entirely possible (if not likely) that hey will be giving people points.
SMHarman
02-12-2003, 17:39
Here's the daft thing - using a CB radio is not illegal while driving but a mobile phone is - how daft is that?
Indeed - and they are generally driving 40tonne articulated vehicles that need more concentration skill space and thought than a motor car.
Wasn't this bounced around during the 80s when the last big CB craze broke out. I guess they are no bigger risk than they have been for the last 30+ years.
i think a full ban on mobile phones is good bluetooth is the way around it but i would be more then happy for a complete ban on phones you would still have the right to carry one in the car for emergencies you should not be distracted by using a phone while driving
and someone might say there is a car radio or cd player that can distract you true it can but you can treat that as passive listening
True - but scrabbeling on the floor to find a CD or tape or pack of cigarettes or lighted cigarette that you have dropped is a distraction.
:notopic: Why have we not banned smoking at the wheel that involves only one hand on the wheel and hot fire hazzards and potential loss of concentration.
EDIT like the top post!
i think a full ban on mobile phones is good bluetooth is the way around it but i would be more then happy for a complete ban on phones you would still have the right to carry one in the car for emergencies you should not be distracted by using a phone while driving
and someone might say there is a car radio or cd player that can distract you true it can but you can treat that as passive listening
fireman328
02-12-2003, 17:46
Not the point, mobiles and driving kills = Fact = Sensible law.
People killed as a result of alleged mobile use last year was 20, (Daily Telegraph 1/12/03)
People killed in workplace due to electricity last year was 18 (ROSPA, workplace only. + unknown domestic.)
We should ban the use of electricity ?
When Mr. Plod pulls you over ask how he drives a manual transmission car whilst operating his PR to inform his control he is about to do a stop check and asks for the registered keeper details which he will need when you get stopped.
Indeed you could include me in this as I am required to answer radio calls whilst on the move, sometimes at speed with the audible and visual warning devices operating.
More new laws are silly, there are already offences of careless driving, dangerous driving and causing a death by dangerous driving why is another one required ?
What about the drivers I see regularly on the M25 with a map/newspaper spread across the steering wheel, drinking a coffee or soft drink are these not offences ?
This is another example of knee jerk reaction by a nanny state being bullied by do gooders.
The difference between us lot using mobiles whilst driving and police using their radios is that they are highly skilled drivers, surely?
SMHarman
02-12-2003, 17:59
The difference between us lot using mobiles whilst driving and police using their radios is that they are highly skilled drivers, surely?
Not those driving "panda" cars. The Rats and those in ARVs are, but most only need the police basic driver training, not advanced.
cjmillsnun
02-12-2003, 18:02
erm, don't use mobile = don't pay, no revenue generator... what could be more simpler?
If u crashed into someone and kill someone whilst on the mobile, i am sorry, but u deserve every guilt feelin' going through your body.
EDIT: same as speeding, don't speed = don't get a fine. 40mph means 40mph. It up to u to disobey the signs but don't whinge when u get a fine.
I've done this one before.
I agree with the mobile phone ban BUT speed cameras are just a revenue generator for the government, FACT.
What noremally happens with a speed camera is that the speed limit is reduced, and a speed camera brought in. (Normally in a dual carrigeway like the A45).
I'm sorry but the speed limit WAS 70MPH there and it WAS safe, now it is 40MPH and is dangerous, because even people who are not speeding slow down for the cameras..........
I have seen many people caught out by this as someone slows down to 30MPH for the camera as they cannot remember what the limit was. Someone doing 40MPH (the limit) and looking at their speedo (because they are approaching the camera) looks up 0.5 second later and cannot stop, (not because they were tailgating, they were obeying the 2 second rule) but because they had to check their speedo because of a camera.
classic example of a revenue generator is the infamous camera on the M11.
Also worth noting is that speeding causes 7% of accidents.
check your facts, www.abd.org.uk . Also think, since cameras became so popular, the number of traffic police has decrease by over 1/3.
Speeding IS breaking the law, but reducing a limit and placing cameras in safe areas is licenced THEFT!
Flubflow
02-12-2003, 18:03
Here's the daft thing - using a CB radio is not illegal while driving but a mobile phone is - how daft is that?
I mentioned exactly that in a similar thread on this subject (a thread which should perhaps be merged with this one).
fireman328
02-12-2003, 18:05
The difference between us lot using mobiles whilst driving and police using their radios is that they are highly skilled drivers, surely?
Being a highly skilled driver, which most police officers are not unless they have been on the pursuit drivers course, doesn't stop you from losing concentration whilst changing gear steering with one hand and talking on the radio.
I have an automatic but most police vehicles are manual so I am marginally better off.
cjmillsnun
02-12-2003, 18:06
Fining the wallet hurts more than fining the license.
that statement is complete cr@p. I get done for using my phone, it costs me some money - I pay. end of story. I go bananas and get done 4 times for speeding, it costs me my licence and my job!
Flubflow
02-12-2003, 18:12
The problem I have with the £30 fine (and this applies to other fixed penalties as well) is that if you decide go to court and then loose then you pay up to £1,000. This is not justice because it puts innocent people off from seeking justice if the case is difficult to prove (and the court will always err on the side of two traffic cop witnesses).
So, if you have a mobile phone lying around the car and you were just scratching your ear then it is going to be difficult to defend against two mistaken or blatanly lying corrupt coppers.
I suppose you could get detailed records from your phone provider to prove you were not engaged in a call at that time but doesn't that cost money and require a court order sent via your solictor or something (?) (costing more money).
The problem I have with the £30 fine (and this applies to other fixed penalties as well) is that if you decide go to court and then loose then you pay up to £1,000. This is not justice because it puts innocent people off from seeking justice if the case is difficult to prove (and the court will always err on the side of two traffic cop witnesses).
there are no innocent people in this case you use a phone while driving you are fined simple dont like it then prepare to go against the law and it will not look down on you lightheartdly you can getting away with no more hassle by giving £30 which would you prefer ?
People killed as a result of alleged mobile use last year was 20, (Daily Telegraph 1/12/03)
People killed in workplace due to electricity last year was 18 (ROSPA, workplace only. + unknown domestic.)
We should ban the use of electricity ?
When Mr. Plod pulls you over ask how he drives a manual transmission car whilst operating his PR to inform his control he is about to do a stop check and asks for the registered keeper details which he will need when you get stopped.
Indeed you could include me in this as I am required to answer radio calls whilst on the move, sometimes at speed with the audible and visual warning devices operating
you have given a rather poor comparison when it comes to 'electricity is dangerous' if electricity was not a source of energy produced there to use
the world would have a hard time living without it trains would not run there would be no lights tv's video's other important items that are in use daily
a mobile phone is not as important as electricity its not life threatening to not have one previously everyone coped without it so why not now you dont need to use your phone 24/7
the ban is on phones not radios as they are used by emergency services and taxi drivers
fireman328
02-12-2003, 19:27
there are no innocent people in this case you use a phone while driving you are fined simple dont like it then prepare to go against the law and it will not look down on you lightheartdly you can getting away with no more hassle by giving £30 which would you prefer ?
you have given a rather poor comparison when it comes to 'electricity is dangerous' if electricity was not a source of energy produced there to use
the world would have a hard time living without it trains would not run there would be no lights tv's video's other important items that are in use daily
a mobile phone is not as important as electricity its not life threatening to not have one previously everyone coped without it so why not now you dont need to use your phone 24/7
the ban is on phones not radios as they are used by emergency services and taxi drivers
.... and, as we all know, taxi drivers are so vital they think they should be given powers to ignore traffic signs, exceed the speed limit and generally drive like they own the road. Oh sorry they already do !
If you don't like the comparison with electricity then what about recreational swimming, 400 per year die as a result of recreational swimming, surely this must be a case for a law banning swimming as it's 20 times more dangerous than driving whilst using a mobile phone. (ROSPA July 17th. 2003)
.... and, as we all know, taxi drivers are so vital they think they should be given powers to ignore traffic signs, exceed the speed limit and generally drive like they own the road. Oh sorry they already do !
thats going a bit too far i have never had a taxi driver do such a thing then again i live in a good area where the drivers do take care on there driving habits
If you don't like the comparison with electricity then what about recreational swimming, 400 per year die as a result of recreational swimming, surely this must be a case for a law banning swimming as it's 20 times more dangerous than driving whilst using a mobile phone. (ROSPA July 17th. 2003)
i see a clutching of straws...........
swimming is a sport you dont have to take part in recreational swimming i think most of those died due to being inexperianced just because something like this has a higher death rate does not mean it should be banned its been proven that people (especially men) get distracted too easily while driving due to doing 2 things at once
I confess to driving on the M62 last week whilst nattering on my mobile and nearly totalled my car cos I wasn't concentrating :erm:
I have learnt my lesson but it's a shame it takes something like that to make you realise
Peachy (and anyone else who is moaning about this law), Why do you need to use your mobile phone when driving? Do you ever have any calls to make that are so important you cannot pull over and make them? If you do, why not get a hands free kit?
fireman328
02-12-2003, 20:05
thats going a bit too far i have never had a taxi driver do such a thing then again i live in a good area where the drivers do take care on there driving habits
i see a clutching of straws...........
swimming is a sport you dont have to take part in recreational swimming i think most of those died due to being inexperianced just because something like this has a higher death rate does not mean it should be banned its been proven that people (especially men) get distracted too easily while driving due to doing 2 things at once
Please tell me where these taxi drivers are they sound like paragons of virtue !
To get back on topic. It is an ill conceived piece of legislation brought in by a nanny state, which is not required as the Road Traffic Act covers everything in this legislation and much more beside. All that it means with the fixed penalty is that police services will be able to generate even more revenue at the roadside without recourse to actually convincing a magistrate that an offence was committed. One more nail in the coffin of the British system of justice which assumes innocence. By bringing in the fixed penalty they are inducing the accused to admit guilt, and pay £30 or take time off work, get a lawyer and go to court. Money for old rope. This legislation has very little to do with safety but a lot to do with revenue.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.