I agree, I've seen people drive while drunk and I've seen people use mobile phones when driving... and the two aren't comparable IMO.

I find that if the person is a competent enough driver, a short call on a dual carriageway isn't too bad... but I've been in cars with people texting and it is fucking dodgy, I don't normally interfere if someone else is driving but I've had to ask them to stop since I felt like it was just a matter of time until we did some damage to ourselves/others.

Fucking hell, do you not understand that scaring a woman driving at 55mph, who isn't in control of her car, could potentially cause a serious accident?!

I didn't know that, but I'd like to see the report because they do tend to massage the figures to justify certain regulations which have/are about to be implimented.

I completely agree with banning smoking in cars, having a stick of burning shite hanging out your gob or in your right hand is not safe. You're partially thinking about your ash falling off, how good the carcinogenic fumes taste, how pricey a 20-deck is these days etc..

Agree, fire out a few articles until enough mongos swallow the bait and it gathers enough momentum to give them the green light to continue.

The state of that poor girls Pug 206 (think that was car) was absolutely shocking, I can still remember it from watching that episode/news reports at the time... was reduced to about a metre long.


Cheers,
Grant

 

About time.
i had the scary experience of looking up and seeing a trucker drive past me with a sarnie in one hand and a phone in the other.
Its surprising how complacent people become with driving

 

Got one in july.. Round a roundabout and flagged down by a officer. Told id been seen on the phone on the way off the round about and radio'd through to stop me. 3Points & 60Quid... Insurance renewal came just when i got my license and cost me 300quid more!!

 

really? who says that and what facts do they have to back it up?

 

They cant even back up their speed kills claims, so how the hell could the back up other BS claims !!

 

just out of interest i ran my details through a comparison website with and without a CU80 motoring conviction. it added about 12% to the premium cost.
try getting that with a DR10

 

Mobiles 'worse than drink-driving'


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1885775.stm


some reading in here if you want, a bit much but a proper report!

http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/info...one_report.pdf

 

there is no excuse for driving whilst holding your phone to your ear, or texting whitlst driving, surely people can wait to answer there txts or pull over to answer the phone if you dont have hands free kits.

 

laws = fines = government revenue

 

yeah, but it also says according to their controlled tests hands free is more dangerous than drink driving. if hands free conversation is more dangerous then so must talking to a passenger be.
thats about as useful as telling me juggling with your eyes closed whilst driving is more dangerous as sitting facing backwards whilst driving
how many in real life have been killed and/or injured in comparison?
plus the tests seem to be carried out by a government agency which tends to mean as much as fuck all.

 

theres real life figures in the report?!?!?!

I cant remember exactly where i have heard it but i'm sure if you want to dig around you will find the info mate. Its pretty obvious if you are using a phoen while driving its pretty dangerous.

 

Agree with all above who say its a joke, how many accidents are directly attributed to the use of a mobile phone? And if you quote please give me where you got the figures and post a link..

They even do people who have used the phone around the time of an accident as in a few mins before as they say your mind wasnt on driving...? Eh....dont make sense.

Like the no phones in petrol stations, wtf is that all about MOBILE PHONES DONT CAUSE EXPLOSIONS....PROVEN FACT! but hey a few people believe it so lets ban it...joke..

Like said above what about drunk drivers, non insured, tired, no licence etc, nope its all about speed cameras and mobile phones..

Whats more dangerous, 70mph on a motorway, sunny sunday afternoon no traffic and 100% visability or 70mph on a motorway, packed, torrential rain and at night?

Both are perfectly legal.

 

its obviously a distraction, thats undenyable. but to compare talking on a phone to driving whilst wasted and hardly able to walk/talk whilst pissing yourself i think is nonsense.

 

As for speed kills, 20 is plenty, school zone etc etc...i know a 100% fool proof way of stopping kids being killed or injured on our roads......STOP THEM WALKING ON THEM WOTH NO REGARD TO THE CARS WHO USE THEM!!!! Use proper crossings, and make it illegal to jay walk like in the usa and Also where the fuck are the parents whos children are fucking about in the road!!!

 

...adjusting the radio was 10 times more distracting that using a phone......person outside the vehicle was 28 times more distracting. what do we ban there?

 

As is signs on motorways on the side of the road, as is rain snow, night, planes flying over as we all look out the window at them, or the fitty in the motor next to you, or your stereo when your fav song is on, or your kids or your mates shall i go on....yes a distraction, an evilas they say NO

 

Who? News of the world?


Bollocks.

No way is this the same as DD. As above - easy targets. And now also a good excuse for ins co's to increase revenue it seems.

 

a government backed agency says so.. so it must be true.

 

Do you notice its always "they"

Who are "they"?

 

And have you read those real life figures ?

Some do indicate that using a phone MAY have been a factor. Some mention phones, when clearly they had fuck all to do with it. And most are down to plain and simple retards driving.
And some were the fault of the other person !


But there is no doubt using a phone is a distraction. But they need to have a reality check on things that are a priority with road safety. They already have legislation in place for phones. They sure as hell dont need more. And even the current legislation is abused by officers to get their monthly ticket tallies up. It's an easy one for them.
Just like speeding.

 

they already have legislation under careless or dangerous driving convictions.
the problem is they shouldnt have made an offence of driving on your phone, but driving while distracted by anything.

That way one simple fixed penalty offence could be used to cover phones, smoking, drinking, bints doing makeup, arguing in car, too loud music etc etc etc.

all they then have to do is make a list of possible distractions that the police can use on the form, then update the list every couple of years as and when new things come out etc. No lengthy changes in legislation needed, just update what you already have.

Its much much easier to give out an FPN than it is to prosecute for careless or dangerous driving, so at present, phone users may feel picked on.

 

Propaganda spin doctors who manipulate statistics to say whatever the government want idiots to believe so they can dream up new legislation to fine people.

Effectively people who create a problem, so they can create fines to "fix" the problem. And it keeps these same idiots in a job, dreaming up such schemes

 

Hmm, I think that should have said "What new legislation do they need ?"

 

thing is, most things that piss us motorists off and are dangerous are illegal. eg tailgaiting, middle lane morons, using no indicators, swerving between lanes, driving gayly slow et.

All are covered under careless or dangerous driving depending on the situation.

the problem is prosecuting dangerous driving especially is not a simple ticket. its a court case, has a higher burden of proof than many other motoring offences meaning you need the coppers off the road for the morning to appear in court, CPS have to get involved, courts get involved etc etc etc.

so to achieve a dangerous drive conviction can be both expensive and no sure thing either. Plus people are more likely to contest it, or behave when they see a following cop car.

hence why FPNs are preferred. Lazy policing yes, revenue earning yes. Its just a shame they havent introduced FPNs for the more common bugbears listed above. Hurt financially the cunts who deserve to get punnished.

however until they have the motivation to change the legislation, anyone doing a few MPH over the limit will remain an easy target.

 

The solution is simple dont own a mobile phone works for me. You can then have 100% concentration looking out for speed cameras to maintain your 120+ average on the motorway .

 

LEGEND as per rod

 

Would love to know where these people get their facts from?

I have to work with accident data for my job and I can't see anywhere it records mobile phones as a cause or contributory factor???

Like speeding it's easy to single out and gain lots of support from useless cretins that are more worried about what everybody else is doing than actually looking after their own children and keeping them out of the roads in the first place.

I don't condone the use of a handheld phone whilst driving, although I've done it and sure if most people are honest they have too. It certainly does effect your driving, but to claim handsfree is as dangerous as drink driving is total horse crap. If that were true they should ban talking to your passengers as it's no different.

 

Shoot me down if you like, i haven't read the full thread, but that comment makes me sick!



Im currently waiting to go to court because some 2 dollar tramp cow of a copper stopped me for being on my phone, and i was 100% not on it


I had very small ear ear bud in, you get them on site for ear protection, i had an ear infection that gave me a strange echo, the ear bud helped stop it, i removed this while driving, changing fucken gear was more dangerous than taking it out.

I removed it, hence why my hand was at my ear.

They thought i was on the phone, basically told me i was getting done with CARELESS if i didnt admit to the phone.

I told them to ram it, they searched my van, even checked my phone, and STILL told me to admit it.

They told me they could take my phone to a lab and get it checked to see if was on it.

TAKE IT! GO ON! and that they did.


Scummy money grabbing rat bags is all i can say, the dirty wee tramp knew i wasnt on it and couldnt give in due to her "IM A COPPER" attitude.


SO what about me?? should i get banned??

The system is a crooked pile of vile shite, and they will bleed the country dry of hard working tax payers whether they are Innocent or not, they only see ŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁ

 

And you can be sure that you are not alone being treated like this !!

Giving idiots power when they require no evidence whatsoever for such an easy and serious conviction, is a dangerous thing.
And trying to prove your innocence is a costly and very distressing thing !!

Justice costs money when you own a car. And those who abuse the system ( ie dodgy cops ) never get prosecuted for false statements, perjury etc when they make these false allegations against people.

 

i agree that its another way of making extra Ł out of motorists which fucking annoys me,if its not this it will be something else though.

on the flip side though,i do 30-40k miles a year and spend a lot of that on the phone (handsfree) BUT even on handsfree if i get into a conversation for a bit then come off the phone and think back over say the last 20 miles i cant remember fuck all of what ive passed or the junctions etc,lost count of the amount of times ive missed my junction on the mway coz im too busy blethering. i think you definately lose concentration. people without handsfree are defo a hazard tho,you see them all over the road and crawling along at 20mph!
next time you're on the phone,when you come off it think back over your journey,you'll get a shock at how much you cant remember!!

 

Im lost as to what they atually want? whats the dangerous bit talking to someone or not using two hands for the wheel?

Use blue tooth or a parrot and you're ok? so its not the talking to someone, so it can only be using two hands on the wheel at all times? in which case i should imagine theres alot of drivers on here that should be " banned and rightly so " if it was up to the PF jury for only having one hand on the wheel

 

Sort of agree that there should be an on the spot fine for being on a phone but as of CU80 sounds a fookin joke. If htey do this they should put smoking whilst driving on the same level as I think its just as dangerous to be puffing away at the same time......

As a few said above Parrots / Bluetooth kits are great but what happens when your phone rings, you still need to actively press a button to answer it, be it on the phone or parrot/stereo etc.... Is that classed as being on the phone, very grey area!! Easy fix - tint ya windows!!!!!!! No CU80 then just Ł30 fine!!!!!!

 

My parrot kit came with a remote that fits to the bottom of the steering wheel, so when I get call I don't have to actually take my hand of the wheel to accept the call. Voice activation makes it simple for out-going calls as well.

 

can't remember who it was, but some fella here got done for being on the phone because some old pensioner pulled out in front of him and nearly had an accident, then reported it to the police for the guy nearly hitting him "because he was on the phone"

absolute horseshit

 

Quite a vague summary there dojj, are you referring him having the phone pressed to his ear or is this on handsfree?

Regardless of whether the pensioner pulled out when he shouldn't have, the other guy is still in the wrong for being on his phone. If they were to have crashed it's more than likely he could have reacted quicker if he wasn't on the phone?

 

he wasn't on his phone though, he proved he wasn't, but plod took no notice and the courts dismissed the evidence from his phone company that he hadn't made a call within hours of the incident

i'm not sure who it was though but someone will have a better memory than me and point you to the thread in question

i'm sure there was quite some concerns raised by it as loads of peole then claimed that, as it had been agreed by a judge that joe public could report anyone for being ont he phone and be believed this had set a preccedent that oculd then be followed, in law

 

Maybe she couldn't "give in" because she was on probation and as such unable to show any discretion, as opposed to having an "I'm a copper" attitude? Don't let one incident tarnish your opinion of a very overworked, and underappreciated profession.

I'm applying to join the special contabulary with a view to becoming a traffic copper one day, and after talking to several regular coppers about various aspects of the job, it's those kinds of attitude that MAKES an officer want to find something to arrest you for. If you get the arse with a copper, they'll assume it's probably because you have something to hide, hence the questioning! If you've done nothing wrong, you literally have NOTHING to get excited about!

I appreciate your reason for having your hand near your ear, but with 99 out of 100 people they encounter are actually on the phone, is it any wonder they wanted to see what you were doing?

 

But the law at present doesnt require you to be on the phone.

If you even touch your phone whilst driving, that is treated as the same offence as a full blown conversation oblivious to the world around you.
The only time you can touch the handset when the keys are in the ignition, is if the phone itself is fixed into a cradle.
It is then deemed part of the car.

Although it would be funny to drive around in a camera equipped car ( for your own evidence ) with a small black block of wood to your ear, and absolutely NO handset in the car at all.
Lets see how many arsehole cops try and pursue a prosecution.

Or have the handset fixed into the car, and hold one of those handsfree visor thingies to your ear.
The law is for phones, and a handsfree visorcom thing isnt a phone. Although it might take a good solicitor for that one

 

my mercedes has a button on the steering wheel to press to answer, the caller id comes up on the radios digital display in the centre console. it also connects automatically to my phone as soon as i get in the motor.

 

it does that in my van too once you hook it up to the bluetooth

but not all motors do that, our fords don't, they just have a button to press to answer, turn the volume up and disconnect