UK and Europe · Public discussion

OT: Moble phone drivers to get points.

Started by Simon Mason · · Last activity · 23 posts · 1,983 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
19 November 2004
Last activity
27 November 2004
Original author
Simon Mason
Posts
23
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,983
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 23
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. From Daily Telegraph:

    The penalty for using mobile telephones while driving will be raised
    to £60 with a three-point licence endorsement after Government
    research found that current sanctions were inadequate.

    A study carried out for the Department for Transport found that
    motorists' use of hand-held mobiles had fallen only 25 per cent since
    the practice was made illegal last December.

    Drivers are still using mobile phones while on the move
    At present offenders face a £30 fine without penalty points. Ministers
    believe that the tougher punishment, expected to be included in a road
    safety bill in the new session of Parliament, will be more of a
    deterrent for the millions of drivers ignoring the existing law.

    If the bill completes its passage before an expected spring general
    election, the measure is likely to come into effect about 12 months
    from now.

    However, there remain doubts about the level of enforcement which -
    unlike speeding or bus lane infringements - is dependent on police
    patrols rather than cameras or number-plate recognition technology.

    Independent surveys suggest that even in highly populated areas, such
    as Greater London and the Thames Valley, the number of prosecutions
    averages between six and nine each day, indicating a nationwide total
    of below 400. The number of automatic fines issued for speeding is
    about 8,000.

    The research, carried out by the Transport Research Laboratory, was
    based on observation of traffic at 30 different locations during
    September.

    Lord Davies of Oldham, the Government transport spokesman in the House
    of Lords, said the change in motorists' behaviour "has not been as
    good as we would have hoped".

    According to the Government, making or taking calls or texts makes a
    driver four times more likely to be involved in an accident.

  2. Response to Simon Mason:

    Quoted message said:

    According to the Government, making or taking calls or texts makes a
    driver four times more likely to be involved in an accident.

    According to the AA (according to the Daily Mail) up to six times.

    --
    Mark, UK.
    We hope to hear him swear, we love to hear him squeak,
    We like to see him biting fingers in his horny beak.

  3. <snippity snip>

    What HMG don't get is that increasing the penalties won't work if there is
    no-one to enforce the ban.

  4. Nathaniel Porter said:

    <snippity snip>

    What HMG don't get is that increasing the penalties won't work if
    there is no-one to enforce the ban.

    Or the fact that research says it's the conversation that's distracting, not
    the act of holding a phone to your ear. So a hands free kit is just as bad.

  5. Quoted message said:

    Or the fact that research says it's the conversation that's distracting, not
    the act of holding a phone to your ear. So a hands free kit is just as bad.

    or presumably chatting to a passenger? Or administering a bollocking to
    your kids in the back? Or fighting with an errant dog that has knocked
    over the guard and is frantically trying to jump into the front seats?
    Or wondering what to do for tea? etc. etc. etc.

    Tony B

  6. Tony B said:
    Quoted message said:

    Or the fact that research says it's the conversation that's distracting, not
    the act of holding a phone to your ear. So a hands free kit is just as bad.

    or presumably chatting to a passenger? Or administering a bollocking to
    your kids in the back? Or fighting with an errant dog that has knocked
    over the guard and is frantically trying to jump into the front seats?
    Or wondering what to do for tea? etc. etc. etc.

    Or listening to the Radio / CD player .........

  7. "Tony B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Or the fact that research says it's the conversation that's distracting,


    not

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    the act of holding a phone to your ear. So a hands free kit is just as


    bad.

    Quoted message said:


    or presumably chatting to a passenger? Or administering a bollocking to
    your kids in the back? Or fighting with an errant dog that has knocked
    over the guard and is frantically trying to jump into the front seats?
    Or wondering what to do for tea? etc. etc. etc.

    Chatting to a passenger can be distracting but at least a perceptive
    passenger should sense when to keep quiet and also sense that you're not
    replying immediately because of the workload at that moment, dealing with an
    *important* customer or a crisis at the office on a mobile may prove more
    engaging.
    All the other instances you've cited would be better to deal with by pulling
    over.
    Wondering what's for tea should be done at red lights, but this option is
    denied to some as they don't actually stop for them ;-)

    Pete

  8. Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tony B
    <[email hidden]> gently breathed:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Or the fact that research says it's the conversation that's distracting, not
    the act of holding a phone to your ear. So a hands free kit is just as bad.

    or presumably chatting to a passenger?

    Less so, because generally the passenger will be aware to some extent of
    what's going on around the vehicle.

    Quoted message said:

    Or administering a bollocking to your kids in the back?

    Worse than using a phone!

    Quoted message said:

    Or fighting with an errant dog that has knocked over the guard and is
    frantically trying to jump into the front seats?

    Yes, well...

    Quoted message said:

    Or wondering what to do for tea? etc. etc. etc.

    Only if you shut your eyes to visualise it. :-)

    --
    - Pyromancer Stormshadow.
    http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk <-- Pagan Gothic Rock!
    http://www.littlematchgirl.co.uk <-- Electronic Metal!
    http://www.revival.stormshadow.com <-- The Gothic Revival.

  9. Peter B said:


    Chatting to a passenger can be distracting but at least a perceptive
    passenger should sense when to keep quiet

    Often the passenger suddenly going silent is the first sign you ought
    really to have been concentrating on the road ;-)

    Tony

  10. Pyromancer said:


    Quoted message said:

    Or administering a bollocking to your kids in the back?

    Worse than using a phone!

    How is administering a phone to your kids in the back worse?

    Tony ;-)

  11. In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]
    says...

    Quoted message said:
    Pyromancer said:


    Quoted message said:

    Or administering a bollocking to your kids in the back?

    Worse than using a phone!

    How is administering a phone to your kids in the back worse?

    Tony ;-)

    Mark

  12. Nathaniel Porter said:

    <snippity snip>

    What HMG don't get is that increasing the penalties won't work if there is
    no-one to enforce the ban.

    I did one recently, it got dismissed at court because the mobile phone
    record showed there was a minutes gap between my watch and his mobile
    phone receipt!!!
    Bloody magistrates! Some of them need taking out and shooting...wait, I
    could do that... 🙂

    Sniper8052

  13. Sniper8052(L96A1) said:

    I did one recently, it got dismissed at court because the mobile phone
    record showed there was a minutes gap between my watch and his mobile
    phone receipt!!!

    Perhaps, because of their past performance, some Magistrates are
    becoming wary of accepting the word of police officers?

    --

    Email address is spam trapped, to reply directly remove the beverage.

  14. Call me Bob said:
    Sniper8052(L96A1) said:

    I did one recently, it got dismissed at court because the mobile phone
    record showed there was a minutes gap between my watch and his mobile
    phone receipt!!!

    Perhaps, because of their past performance, some Magistrates are
    becoming wary of accepting the word of police officers?

    Nah, it's because they are mostly useless old farts with half a brain
    cell who couldn't tell the right thing to do if it got up and smacked
    them in the face.

    Some chap got off killing a pedestrian because there was a three second
    gap between the mobile phone record and the atomic clock at Greenwich, I
    kid you not. I have the magazine around somewhere.
    Alternatively, ask two people next to you the time, I would be surprised
    if they both said the same.

    "A man with one watch knows the time, a man with two is never sure"

    I cant remember who said that but it's very apt.

    Oooooh so bitter. 🙂

    Sniper8052

  15. JRKRideau wrote:
    [snip]

    Quoted message said:


    It is not clear why,at least from what I have read, but for some
    reason the cognitive loading seems much higher for cell phones. My
    personal bet is that we need to expend more effort on phone calls
    since we lack any other sensory cues, and in fact, probably lack even
    many auditory cues we may rely on when in the presence of a person
    even if we are not looking at them.

    John Kane
    Kingston, ON Canada

    ISTR that 'phone users create a little piece of cyberspace in which they
    hold their conversation with the other 'phone user. In effect, part
    of their mind is "outside the car". This is one reason why a
    conversation with a passenger is different.

    Another problem, in my opinion, is that the remote caller expects the
    complete attention of the car driver, so if the conversation pauses
    because the driver is subliminally aware of some impending crisis they
    are likely to chip in with "are you still there" noises, thus
    distracting at the most critical moment. This is quite different from
    professional radio contacts with say, air traffic control, where it is
    understood that control of the aircraft takes precedence over answering.

    Anecdotal data point: a work colleague recently called me using a
    hands-free car kit and within a few moments had taken a wrong turning
    and started having an angry conversation with himself, me *and* the
    car's satellite navigation system; goodness knows how much capacity was
    left for actually driving :-)

    Peter

    --
    ---------------
    www.amey.org.uk

  16. Tony B <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Or the fact that research says it's the conversation that's distracting, not
    the act of holding a phone to your ear. So a hands free kit is just as bad.

    or presumably chatting to a passenger? Or administering a bollocking to
    your kids in the back? Or fighting with an errant dog that has knocked
    over the guard and is frantically trying to jump into the front seats?
    Or wondering what to do for tea? etc. etc. etc.

    Tony B

    No, apparently. I just lost my backup disk with the references but
    the general trend of the data so far is that cell phones are much
    worse than in-car distractions. Among the studies was one the Traffic
    Research Laboratories did for an insurance company about 3-4 years
    ago and there was more recent one pulblished this year. IIRC the TRL
    study suggests you're better driving while over the legal alcohol
    limit than driving while talking on a cell phone.

    These studies are among several I have heard of but I have not read
    the others. N. Eng. J. Med. apparently has one from the 1990's
    showing similar results.

    It is not clear why,at least from what I have read, but for some
    reason the cognitive loading seems much higher for cell phones. My
    personal bet is that we need to expend more effort on phone calls
    since we lack any other sensory cues, and in fact, probably lack even
    many auditory cues we may rely on when in the presence of a person
    even if we are not looking at them.

    John Kane
    Kingston, ON Canada

  17. "Sniper8052(L96A1)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Nathaniel Porter said:

    <snippity snip>

    What HMG don't get is that increasing the penalties won't work if there
    is
    no-one to enforce the ban.

    I did one recently, it got dismissed at court because the mobile phone
    record showed there was a minutes gap between my watch and his mobile
    phone receipt!!!
    Bloody magistrates! Some of them need taking out and shooting...wait, I
    could do that... 🙂

    Sniper8052

    I had a similar experience several years ago when the accuracy of times
    noted in my pocketbook was questioned (I worked in an enforcement role in
    local government at the time). In order to prevent a repeat I bought one of
    those cheapo radio controlled clocks from Argos, but when I left the council
    the generous folk I worked with bought me a Junghans radio controlled watch
    which I can heartily recommend. Cheaper alternatives are marketed under the
    brand Eurochron and every police officer should have one just to avoid this
    problem.

    --
    Gordon
    Subtract 1 from 11 to reply

  18. On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:27:18 GMT, "Sniper8052(L96A1)"
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Some chap got off killing a pedestrian because there was a three second
    gap between the mobile phone record and the atomic clock at Greenwich, I
    kid you not. I have the magazine around somewhere.

    The fault here is not with the magistrate (unless they were
    stipendiary) but with the clerk. Lay magistrates are not legal
    experts and have limited legal training; lawyers are legal experts and
    expert in particular at playing games with the law. It's not
    surprising they wind the beaks round their little fingers sometimes.

    And of course beaks are quite often selected from the ranks of the
    local "reliable chaps" - i.e. masons and such, although there is a
    definite effort being made to make more female and black appointments
    to the bench. A lot of them (at least in rural areas) are high Tories
    and inherently sympathetic to the middle-class offender - I know one
    who expressed outrage at the prosecution of a driver doing "only"
    36mph in a 30 zone (i.e. 20% over the limit, almost certainly an
    indicated 40mph).

    Guy
    --
    May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

  19. Tony Raven said:

    Peter B wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Chatting to a passenger can be distracting but at least a perceptive
    passenger should sense when to keep quiet

    Quoted message said:

    Often the passenger suddenly going silent is the first sign you ought
    really to have been concentrating on the road ;-)

    Note to self: never accept a lift from Tony...

    --
    Mark.
    http://tranchant.plus.com/

  20. Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tony Raven
    <[email hidden]> gently breathed:

    Quoted message said:

    Pyromancer wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Or administering a bollocking to your kids in the back?

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Worse than using a phone!

    Quoted message said:

    How is administering a phone to your kids in the back worse?

    Depends on how hard you administer it!

    --
    - Pyromancer Stormshadow.
    http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk <-- Pagan Gothic Rock!
    http://www.littlematchgirl.co.uk <-- Electronic Metal!
    http://www.revival.stormshadow.com <-- The Gothic Revival.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.