Judge rules on Mobile phones

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 3:52 pm

Good deal.

We need that here.

Attached files

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 4:04 pm

Yay! Next they can ban the driver from having conversations with passengers. Children in the car are a clear distraction & must never be allowed inside any vehicle. Drive-thru fast food joints had better close voluntarily before they're driven out of business, so to speak. Yank those radios out as well. I guess we can use the cupholders to hold loose coins, since drinking coffee can be deadly.

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 4:19 pm

Acc everything you said is somewhat true a bit over the top but true. :wah:

Sorry but I would like to see all driving distractions removed from the hand of drivers period. It is deadly enough on the roads with out some ass kid behind me trying to text message someone with one hand barely on the steering wheel. It is insane it has to stop and the sooner the better.

There isn't a day that goes by that I don't see some intersection accident with some idiot slammed into the back of someone because they were talking on their phone. Most cases they slam so hard they total the front of their cars so you know they weren't paying attention or they would have at least slammed on the brakes no way full on BAM no brakes at all.

I have said it before and I will say it again. If someone who is talking, or now texting on their flippin phone and kills a member of my family I will beat them to death with the damn thing and I will do it.

[QUOTE]Yay! Next they can ban the driver from having conversations with passengers. Children in the car are a clear distraction & must never be allowed inside any vehicle. Drive-thru fast food joints had better close voluntarily before they're driven out of business, so to speak. Yank those radios outas well. I guess we can use the cupholders to hold loose coins, since drinking coffee can be deadly.[/QUOTE]

NotToday · Post by **NotToday** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 4:24 pm

It would be nice if they didn't ban it totally, but made it mandatory to use a headset..

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 4:28 pm

Good for them! I got rear ended once, while stopped at a red light, by a woman yakking on her cell phone!

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 4:32 pm

Wouldn't work it has to be against the law to stop it, just like drinking. Of course there well always be those that break the law.

Don't get me wrong I think cell phones are great when used properly. Pull the hell over and talk on it, it is that simple. Or let the call go to voicemail.

Since when have we become so danmed important that we have to network, or chat while driving down the road. It is totally insane. :-5 In emergencies they are excellent and thank God we have one.

Since when did the automobile become a command communications center. It is a rolling weapon on wheel when you pay strict attention. When you add phones to the mix it is certain there will be many death beacuse of it.

Driving take every bit of your concentration in my opinion. It is deadly out there on the roads and freeways. I want everyone paying attention to one thing when driving, DRIVING getting from point A to B in one piece.

[QUOTE]It would be nice if they didn't ban it totally, but made it mandatory to use a headset..[/QUOTE]

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 4:36 pm

I rear-ended a nice nurse once. I was chatting with my beloved. No hands, I swear!

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 4:48 pm

NotToday;628136 wrote: It would be nice if they didn't ban it totally, but made it mandatory to use a headset..

Research over here appears to suggest that it's the conversation rather that just holding the 'phone that causes the accidents - and the likelyhood of having an accident remains elevated for some minutes after the end of the call.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 5:24 pm

magenta flame;628162 wrote: Accountable citing other causes of accidents doesn't take away the incidents of accidents caused by talking on the phone whilst driving. (you obviously agree with the first comment under the original article.)

We've already had advertising campaigns for young drivers and the behaviour of their passengers distracting them when driving a vehicle. And an advertising campaign where a girl is trying to change the radio station and and runs up the back of another vehicle or a Ped (can't remember) because she is distracted.

A sure fire way (used on myself and siblings when we were kids ) is pulling over to the side of the road and telling your kids if they misbehave that they can walk the rest of the way home . Seems to shut them up pretty well. Or telling them they can walk in future because they can't behave.

the drinking and eating while driving a vehicle doesn't seem to be too much of a problem it's when there is a spillage of some kind and drivers attempt to clean it up, which distracts them. Smoking as well, if you drop it or in the process of butting it out in the ash tray is the distraction which seems to cause accidents.
Advertising campaigns are fine. Great even! Why do cell phones deserve to be outlawed while the others don't?

It seems to be the trend today. Some people can't be responsible, and other people can't be arsed holding them responsible. It's too hard. It's just easier to ban the symptom that shows their irresponsibility.

The Rob · Post by **The Rob** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 5:34 pm

I commute to work via bicycle most days. I feel safer sharing the roadway with motorists who aren't eating, drinking, smoking, or talking on cell phones. I do realize that some people, even without the afore-mentioned distractions, will not give the requisite amount of attention to the operation of their vehicles, but those people are the ones that are secure enough in their own minds as to their driving skills that they would never admit to themselves or others that their preoccupation with those distractions makes a whit of difference, and so their driving habits further degrade.

It's a good effort on the part of legislators, but I fear we'll see that it merely smooths the road for punishment after the fact rather than deterrence before.

Post by **spot** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:14 pm

Accountable;628165 wrote:

It seems to be the trend today. Some people can't be responsible, and other people can't be arsed holding them responsible. It's too hard. It's just easier to ban the symptom that shows their irresponsibility.It isn't a symptom, it's a cause and prosecution is "holding them responsible". Talking on a phone while driving demonstrably elevates the risk of a collision. People get sentenced for it. I'm delighted. The danger isn't the accident, it's the people thinking they're immune from crashing into anyone. People used to drink under the influence of alcohol thinking they were good enough at driving in such a state, remember?

As for children, there's no reason why they should be distracting if they're properly brought up. Driving while holding a drive-through product is already illegal in the UK, thank goodness. Why do you think radios are a problem? They're not interactive.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Jun 03, 2007 11:31 pm

Accountable;628165 wrote: Advertising campaigns are fine. Great even! Why do cell phones deserve to be outlawed while the others don't?

It seems to be the trend today. Some people can't be responsible, and other people can't be arsed holding them responsible. It's too hard. It's just easier to ban the symptom that shows their irresponsibility.

Because the evidence shows that using a mobile 'phone whilst driving is the equivalent to drunk driving in it's effect on accident rates.

Sounds like a good enough reason to me - prime cause rather than symptom.

Such things as eating whilst driving are grouped under the offence of "Driving without due care and attention" but making driving whilst using a mobile 'phone a specific offence make it easier to get a procecution.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 1:24 am

Accountable;628165 wrote: Advertising campaigns are fine. Great even! Why do cell phones deserve to be outlawed while the others don't?

It seems to be the trend today. Some people can't be responsible, and other people can't be arsed holding them responsible. It's too hard. It's just easier to ban the symptom that shows their irresponsibility.

Don't know about the states but here we already have an offence of driving without due care and consideration, reckless driving etc etc that takes care of most things. If a passenger is talking to you most have the sense to shut up at times when distractions could be dangerous. (actually my wife doesn't but she takes a heavy hint)

It's the degree of distraction that is the problem with mobile phones. I've lost count of the number of near misses I've had because of people swaying across the road because they are on the phone or suddenly slowing down in overtaking lanes as they answer the phone causing near pile ups. If it was just themselves they put at risk it wouldn't be a problem would it? Some people need draconian penalties before they stop doing something irresponsible. It's a civil rights issue, I have a right not to have my life imperilled by stupid people.

Personally I would ban hands free as well. I would also advocate crushing the cars of people convicted of drunk driving or driving without insurance.

cars · Post by **cars** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 1:39 am

gmc;628237 wrote: Don't know about the states but here we already have an offence of driving without due care and consideration, reckless driving etc etc that takes care of most things. If a passenger is talking to you most have the sense to shut up at times when distractions could be dangerous. (actually my wife doesn't but she takes a heavy hint)

It's the degree of distraction that is the problem with mobile phones. I've lost count of the number of near misses I've had because of people swaying across the road because they are on the phone or suddenly slowing down in overtaking lanes as they answer the phone causing near pile ups. If it was just themselves they put at risk it wouldn't be a problem would it? Some people need draconian penalties before they stop doing something irresponsible. It's a civil rights issue, I have a right not to have my life imperilled by stupid people.

Personally I would ban hands free as well. I would also advocate crushing the cars of people convicted of drunk driving or driving without insurance.
If convicted, the drunks should be in the car at the time! :-5 No repeats!

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 1:44 am

cars;628243 wrote: If convicted, the drunks should be in the car at the time! :-5 No repeats!

Hey, I almost said that too...I'm glad you did, Cars. :-6

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:27 am

spot;628221 wrote: It isn't a symptom [of irresponsibility], it's a cause and prosecution is "holding them responsible". Using cell phones does not cause irresponsibility. It is irresponsible to use cell phones while driving.

spot wrote: Talking on a phone while driving demonstrably elevates the risk of a collision. People get sentenced for it. I'm delighted. The danger isn't the accident, it's the people thinking they're immune from crashing into anyone. People used to drink under the influence of alcohol thinking they were good enough at driving in such a state, remember?People's thoughts are never the danger, only their behavior; but that's a different thread.

spot wrote: As for children, there's no reason why they should be distracting if they're properly brought up. Driving while holding a drive-through product is already illegal in the UK, thank goodness. Why do you think radios are a problem? They're not interactive.
Except when listening to a call-in talk show or a really good song.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:33 am

spot;628221 wrote: Driving while holding a drive-through product is already illegal in the UK, thank goodness. Why do you think radios are a problem? They're not interactive.Bryn Mawr;628228 wrote: Such things as eating whilst driving are grouped under the offence of "Driving without due care and attention" but making driving whilst using a mobile 'phone a specific offence make it easier to get a procecution.gmc;628237 wrote: Don't know about the states but here we already have an offence of driving without due care and consideration, reckless driving etc etc that takes care of most things. You already have an umbrella law that sounds reasonable, so there's no need to have another specifically for cell phones ... except political, of course.

Bryn Mawr;628228 wrote: Because the evidence shows that using a mobile 'phone whilst driving is the equivalent to drunk driving in it's effect on accident rates.Have there even been studies on the other offenses mentioned? I think you'll find similar results.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 6:59 am

posted by accountable

You already have an umbrella law that sounds reasonable, so there's no need to have another specifically for cell phones ... except political, of course.

The difficulty is proving the offence. There was sufficient concern to require a specific offence. Political? Dead right it is, it's called public demand, same with banning smoking in public places it's politicians responding to public concern and doing something. Rare as it is in other instances but we tend to expect our govt to take action on things.

http://www.mobilesociety.net/uploadi/editor/strayer.pdf

Have you never done it yourself? If you have surely you appreciate the point about how distracting it is?

Like everybody else I have used a phone while driving as well, but one near miss cured me of doing it again. It wasn't my fault I was on the phone is really no excuse.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 11:38 am

gmc;628237 wrote:

Personally I would ban hands free as well. I would also advocate crushing the cars of people convicted of drunk driving or driving without insurance.

Agreed, but why crush the cars - grab them as part of the fine, sell them and use the money raised to compensate the victime of road crime.

It's always seemed a waste of a good car to just crush them.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:46 pm

Bryn Mawr;628228 wrote: Because the evidence shows that using a mobile 'phone whilst driving is the equivalent to drunk driving in it's effect on accident rates.

See:

http://info.directline.com/xxx/news.nsf ... Report.pdf

which addresses some of the issues raised in this thread. A nice concise read.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon Jun 04, 2007 4:04 pm

Bill Sikes;628818 wrote: See:

http://info.directline.com/xxx/news.nsf ... Report.pdf

which addresses some of the issues raised in this thread. A nice concise read.

Thank you - I couldn't easily lay my hands on the paper I remembered but this is a worthy substitute from them that knows.

Key findings? :-

• Driving performance under the influence of alcohol was significantly worse than normal driving, yet significantly better than driving while using a mobile phone. Furthermore, drivers reported that it was easier to drive drunk than to drive while using a phone.

• The results demonstrate that drivers’ reaction times were, on average, 30% slower when talking on a hand-held mobile phone compared to being drunk and nearly 50% slower than under normal driving conditions. According to the tests, drivers were less able to maintain a constant speed and found it more difficult to keep a safe distance from the car in front.