Safe Speed Forums • View topic

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » Discussion Forums » Speed, Safety, Driving and The Law

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Phoner drivers

Moderators: Moderators, Moderators

Page 1 of 3

[ 41 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2, 3 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Author

Message

Squirrel

Post subject: Phoner drivers

Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 12:20

User

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 01:55
Posts: 235
Location: Bristol

An email I sent to a few people (SafeSpeed, ABD, IAM etc) a while back:

Quote:

I have a Bluetooth hands-free kit fitted in my car (Nokia CK-1W) which integrates with the in-car audio system for the best possible sound quality, and with this arrangement I can carry out a brief conversation fairly easily even at motorway speeds.

Even so, I intensely dislike talking on the phone whilst driving, especially non-motorway, and will often tell a caller to "hold on" while I negotiate a roundabout or junction - even with hands free.

Because of my job (I'm a self-employed IT consultant) I need to be contactable whilst on the move, but fortunately most clients that catch me whilst driving are fairly understanding. Especially when I open a conversation with "I'm fighting rush hour traffic right now".

However, I have a friend who will often call me on the mobile whilst driving, and doesn't seem to "get" the fact that I'm not going to have an inane chat whilst driving, regardless of speed or road conditions.

But the worst problem nowadays seems to be either "white van man" or "repmobile" - you see something being driven badly, often less than 3 feet off your rear bumper, and notice the driver is chattering away into a hand-held mobile phone.

This is one occasion where I'm all for a ban on hand-held mobiles. However it perhaps should have been backed up with legislation to encourage car manufacturers to fit Bluetooth hands free kits to vehicles as standard (as Audi and Mercedes are now doing on some models), backed up with a campaign towards mobile phone manufacturers to fit Bluetooth to the cheaper models of phone. The Bluetooth chipset isn't all that expensive, and hardly adds anything to the cost of a handset. The problem is that most manufacturers (eg Nokia) don't bother fitting Bluetooth to basic handsets, and only provide this functionality to the more expensive models.

What's needed is a basic "talk here, listen here" handset that has Bluetooth. Most people don't care about video cameras etc, they just want to be able to make and receive phone calls. So why should they have to pay extra for those features just to get a phone that can be used in the car with the Bluetooth hands free kit?

I've since changed the car and fitted a Sony MEX-BT5000 head unit with built-in Bluetooth. This lets me browse the phone book and make a call from its control panel, so I don't need to mess around with the phone if I need to make a quick call. Not that I generally do, I might call someone to say "stuck in traffic, gonna be late" if I'm crawling. But apart from the fact I now get the name and number on a dot matrix VFD on the dashboard my point still stands.

Nokia, Samsung etc - please give us a cheap basic phone with Bluetooth. Sony, Kenwood, Alpine - please give us more aftermarket head units with Bluetooth. Audi, Mercedes, BMW - please fit Bluetooth as standard on ALL models, not some expensive optional extra.

In fact... Ford, Vauxhall etc - please fit Bluetooth as standard.

And any driver caught with a mobile phone to their ear in anything other than stationary traffic should have their hand amputated!

Top

jamie_duff

Post subject: Re: Phoner drivers

Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 14:09

User

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 15:14
Posts: 420
Location: Aberdeenshire

Squirrel wrote:

An email I sent to a few people (SafeSpeed, ABD, IAM etc) a while back:

Quote:

I'm sure market research is quite prolific in the mobile phone business. Camera phones are also extremely handy in the case of road accidents, parking tickets or pretty much any other instance when having a few photos of the scene wouldn't go a miss.

I still challenge the idea that a hand held phone is dangerous. WVM whom you mention isn't dangerous because of the phone, he's dangerous because he's tailgating. That's a separate issue.

Most middle-market car manufacturers offer Bluetooth facilities in their audio equipment. Ford/Vauxhall etc need to start offering audio equipment (as opposed to the noise generators fitted at present) before getting too tied down with Bluetooth :lol:

_________________

Last edited by jamie_duff on Mon Dec 04, 2006 14:29, edited 1 time in total.

Top

Stephen

Post subject:

Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 14:20

Police Officer

Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 22:37
Posts: 279
Location: Warrington

As I have said before any prolonged conversation whether it be on phone to ear or hands free, you can always tell when you approach these drivers from the rear they are as said before.

1. In middle lane right up the backside of the car in front
2. In the middle lane with nothing in lane one but due lack
of concentration dont realise or dont care.
3. Travelling at 50 - 60 mph in lane three looking ahead and not for one
second looking in there rear view mirror.

Then when conversation finished you look in your mirror and wham they pass you by at warp factor one to make up for lost time or the fact that they cant do two things at once. We will never eradicate this type of driving but perhaps when the points system comes out, and the ones on mobile phones to ears may think twice, thats all I can say.
Stephen

Top

jamie_duff

Post subject:

Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 14:33

User

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 15:14
Posts: 420
Location: Aberdeenshire

Is a mobile phone conversation any different to talking to passengers in the car? Should talking to passengers also be illegal?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic but I really fail to see a) why some people blame phones for general bad driving and b) why some people need to shut their brains down to use one. These are probably the same people who stop and stand still to answer their phone when out walking :roll:

_________________

Top

botach

Post subject:

Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 14:36

Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK

Quote:

These are probably the same people who stop and stand still to answer their phone when out walking

Or the same ones who walk straight out on a zebra crosing with phone glued to hand, and have only drivers to thank for judging that that was their intention.

Top

PaulB2005

Post subject:

Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 14:57

User

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 23:42
Posts: 48

Quote:

I really fail to see a) why some people blame phones for general bad driving

If they are driving around with one hand clambed to their head then i find these people tend to indicate less and take more chance at junctions becuase they can't steer, make a call and change gear at the same time. Sometimes quiet dangerous ones.

Nearly in a serious accident once because a young girl entered a roundabout as i was coming round but i presume couldn't change gear because she was on the phone so she shot out in front of me. Missed her car by inches.

Top

Stephen

Post subject:

Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 17:04

Police Officer

Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 22:37
Posts: 279
Location: Warrington

If I may be so bold and say that perhaps the ones who drive and use a mobile phone,whilst driving are the ones who continually try and defend the actions of others.

I would say stand back and analyse all the others drivers behaviour not just of one or two but a few of the more bad drivers like, changing gear with one hand approaching junction/ roundabout and looks but doesnt register what is approaching puling out in front of people, then having the cheek to try and pass the blame back to innocent driver.

These are the ones that need to be stopped and unfortuneately its this type of driver behaviour that gets everyone else tarred with the same brush.
Stephen

Top

Squirrel

Post subject:

Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 18:02

User

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 01:55
Posts: 235
Location: Bristol

I won't use a hand-held mobile whilst driving. End of story. If it rings then tough.

On hands-free... I'll keep it short and sweet. I won't have inane chatter even on a handsfree kit (unless I'm parked up and the handbrake is on).

I very rarely make a call whilst the car is in motion. If I do it's either "going to be late" or "I'm just pulling up, meet me outside". Anything that's likely to be longer and I'll pull in to the next services.

WVM may be dangerous because he's tailgating... but is he perhaps tailgating because he's more concerned with talking to some bit of totty on his corporate phone than paying attention to the fact that he's about to start mounting the car in front of him doggy-style?

And yes, talking to someone on a phone (even hands free) is more distracting than talking to a passenger. Several reasons. Firstly the passenger (even if they don't drive) will be aware of any hazards - they have a similar view to the driver.

Secondly, and more importantly, when talking on a phone you don't get all the non-verbal communication, eg gestures and facial expressions. Which means your brain is trying to "fill in the gaps" as it were.

The hand-held vs hands-free argument is fairly obvious though. If you're hand-held then you only have one hand on the wheel. If you're changing gear you have NO hands on the wheel. Clever...

Top

Ernest Marsh

Post subject:

Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 23:33

User

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere

Quote:

Is a mobile phone conversation any different to talking to passengers in the car?

Yes.
A passenger in the car experiences the same view of risk that the driver sees, and moderates the conversation accordingly.
When sat side by side, there is no impediment to pausing the conversation if the need arises.
When on the phone, people tend to try to cram everything in to keep the call brief - a message burst not a conversation, so more attention is diverted to the call.
Finally, not many drivers would just let go of a phone to regain control of the wheel if an incident occured suddenly in front of them - and valuable reaction time is lost while they decide where to put down the phone!

That said, there are times when SOME drivers could operate the phone and drive without risk. Unfortunately there are SOME people who are not fit to phone unless they are secured by a safety rope to a secure shielded location - as portrayed in the posts above! Those types are the real reason the rest of you are not allowed to operate the phone while behind the wheel. :oops:

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Top

Rewolf

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 09:55

User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands

Actually there is a crossover scenario - where the passenger is not aware of the risks, and has a quite different view of priorities: when the passenger is a small child, and has worked their way into a frenzy or tantrum. I never use a mobile unless stationary and the call is absolutely necessary, but with the small child the only option is to mentally block your ears and ignore the kicking of the seat. When are they going to ban having children as passengers?

As a slight sideline I have a clear memory of a Car Wars episode where an unmarked high speed response team were following stolen vehicles. The radio was hand held, and the driver was the senior officer with two other officers and a camera operator in the car. So who was using the radio? The driver obviously - in a high speed pursuit, and what did he do with it when things got very busy? He stuck it between his legs. Now with examples like that on prime-time television is it any wonder that other drivers don't believe that mobile use is as dangerous as they are told?

I also remember the reports of the first driver who died as a result (possibly) of using their mobile while driving. It was reported because the police were arguing for a ban, but couldn't actually find many examples where the mobile had helped cause any problems at all. The driver wasn't talking, he was texting, and was overtaking at high speed at night in the wet, lost control and crashed killing himself. His fellow police officers must have been torn between publicising it and keeping very quiet.

Top

jamie_duff

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 10:41

User

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 15:14
Posts: 420
Location: Aberdeenshire

That's pretty much where I'm coming from Rewolf.

I'm not one to use the phone when driving, just for the record. That said I tend to ignore the thing half the time even when I'm not driving.

I guess I don't like being "summoned" :lol:

I still can't see how phones can be blamed for bad driving. The above points by Stephen are very valid, I've seen them. That said I've also follwed such drivers even after the phone calls and they still drive like tossers, just differently.

I think the phones are symptomatic of bad driving and bad mental capacity rather than the cause of it.

I think that targeting anything that has the potential to contribute to bad driving is possibly harmful to the overall road safety mentality.

Maybe we should make driving in the snow an offence too because some people can't quite get their heads round that, and try to overtake in an unploughed L2 of a dual carriageway or something else equally dumb.

Rather than saying "Mobile Phone use causes crashes" maybe we should be saying "Wake up, switch on, focus on the primary task in hand".

I can't see that mobile phone use is any worse than raking about in the glovebox for that CD, daydreaming about washing which is outside getting wet in the rain or trying to entertain restless children in the back. You can't ban every bad habit. As soon as you do another one appears in it's place. By targeting individual (and if I may say so, somewhat trivial) habits which may reduce some drivers' abilities to keep the attention on driving the vehicle, all you do is create a scapegoat.

So now we have a country full of "Extra Safe Drivers". They are safe because they don't speed, and they are extra safe because they don't use their mobile phone. They're still pouring attention into countless other needless tasks and activities whilst driving, but because they're not doing the two "named and shamed" causes of crashes, they are legal and thus, by implication, safe.

Bad show is all I can say.

_________________

Top

Rewolf

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 10:51

User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands

Don't forget eating a sweet, having a sip of a drink, or lighting a cigarette - all of which are perfectly safe in the correct conditions and very dangerous in others. Rather than overloading everybody with a tonne of specific and over-restrictive legislation, the basic "Driving Without Due Care and Attention" is all that has ever been needed - along with some commonsense enforcement.

Unfortunately some idiots think that they have to create legislation in order to be seen to be doing something.

Top

civil engineer

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 15:28

Member

Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:30
Posts: 2053
Location: South Wales (Roving all UK)

I don't really get the whole ban mobiles whilst driving thing.

We are trusted to use our judgement as to how to operate the vehicle and in my opinion there can be an appropriate and an inappropriate time to use a mobile.

Radios, passengers, eating, maps etc etc can all distract but we are expected to use our judgement.

Top

handy

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 17:07

User

Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 20:28
Posts: 1267
Location: not too far in front, not too far behind.

Rewolf wrote:

As a slight sideline I have a clear memory of a Car Wars episode where an unmarked high speed response team were following stolen vehicles. The radio was hand held, and the driver was the senior officer with two other officers and a camera operator in the car. So who was using the radio? The driver obviously - in a high speed pursuit, and what did he do with it when things got very busy? He stuck it between his legs. Now with examples like that on prime-time television is it any wonder that other drivers don't believe that mobile use is as dangerous as they are told?

PTT radios are specifically excluded from the legislation on using handheld mobile phones whilst driving. When SWMBO and I used to drive places in convoy (happened a few times a year when we lived dahn sarth) we would carry walkie talkies to say things like "kids need the loo - pull in at next services" or similar. Happily drove past police whilst using the PTT radio.

This distinction leads me to believe that the "danger" is not using the phone, it's the choosing the right number and dialling bit, and the fact that PTT radios usually only have one destination (with the exception of CB, perhaps) whereas on a mobile phone you could be talking to a friend one minute, your boss the next, a customer after that. All of which require mental effort to deal with, mental effort best spent on driving safely.

Actually holding the thing and speaking isn't in itself a problem?

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

Top

jamie_duff

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 17:22

User

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 15:14
Posts: 420
Location: Aberdeenshire

Almost every phone on the market nowadays has voice activated dialing though.

I still think this is just a finger pointing exercise. A token that the authorities know what's bad for us and is trying to protect us.

In reality DWDCA would suffice when justified but it's much more convenient to collect £30 or whatever the fee, sorry, fine is.

Edited for bad spelling :lol:

_________________

Last edited by jamie_duff on Tue Dec 05, 2006 17:27, edited 1 time in total.

Top

handy

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 17:26

User

Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 20:28
Posts: 1267
Location: not too far in front, not too far behind.

jamie_duff wrote:

In reality DWDCA would suffice when justifie

yup, that was what I was going to say but phone rang so I pressed "submit" before finishing my thought train.

Top

anton

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 17:27

Life Member

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266

handy wrote:

[Actually holding the thing and speaking isn't in itself a problem?

I watched a lady try to park in a meter bay whilst on the phone..... it took her about 5 attempts. Usual suspect £20k car no phone kit. She wasnt dangerous but did cause congestion.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Top

Ernest Marsh

Post subject:

Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 23:42

User

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere

civil engineer wrote:

I guess peoples judgement fails at different levels, and either mobiles lead to a very poor threshold in more individuals, OR are simply more obvious - you can see them clamped to the ear, where as ratching about in the glovebox, or changing a CD is more hidden from view.

Maybe it's because of the area I live in, but I see more women on the phone either going to or from school, than men - and the driving standard which goes with such behaviour is appalling - only last week, I saw a Range Rover following me clip the kerb on a straight stretch of road. Female driver was on the phone!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Top

SafeSpeed

Post subject:

Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 17:15

Site Admin

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed

I see that this thread has been linked from C+. The Safe Speed official position on mobile phones is as follows:

- We believe tha there are 'special risks' associated with mobile phones which do not apply to conversations with passengers nor listening to the radio.

- We do not believe that holding the phone is a significant part of the risk. All the science points to the 'mental' effects rather than holding the phone.

- We believe that the science falls far short of 'what we need to know'. We don't know that individuals are equally or similalry affected and we don't know that the effects are 'durable' (for example: can we learn to drive safely while also conducting a telephone conversation.

- We believe that the law on using a hand held mobile phone was pretty much useless, and in some cases made matters worse. In particular many business users decided that hands free phoning was OK, and there aren't sufficient traffic Police to enforce the law. There has been little or no change in hand held mobile phone driving since the law was introduced.

- While the science points to a large increase in danger, we do not seem to have statistics to bear this out. For example the recent contributory factor data lists crashes contributed to by mobile phone driving at 0%.

- Use of mobile telephones by drivers remains a serious road safety concern, but the science does not properly explain the problem or the solution.

More research is needed urgently. We need to know:

- What is special about mobile phone conversations that makes them distracting to drivers?

- Are mobile phone risks equal or similar across the population? Are some people very high risk, while others have no elevated risks at all. Can we identify such groups?

- Can we learn to drive safely while using a mobile phone? Do we learn to be safer naturally? Could we use some advice?

- Why are mobile phone crashes under-represented in the crash statistics?

- If we determine that there is a serious safety issue resulting from mobile phone use, what is the optimal solution / counter strategy?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Top

Safety Engineer

Post subject:

Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 03:50

Member

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 18:42
Posts: 1283
Location: Essex

Something I posted on another thread here about mobiles:

Safety Engineer wrote:

When the first laws about mobiles and driving were being discussed I was asked by a client to look into it. I spoke to Herts Police (the clients local force) and thier comment was along the lines of 'in reality it makes little difference as we already stop drivers using mobiles under driving without due care and attention'.

So did we actually need this law?...

...So in real terms just what will be gained by making it an endorsable offence ???

A few weeks ago I saw a car trying to navigate a roundabout (very poorly) the driver had a mobile in one hand and it looked like a mars bar in the other, so what's the biggest hazard? The mobile or the mars bar.

IMO neither, a sensible driver would realise that negotiating a roundabout is not the time to be eating or phoning.

I think that the mobile phone law is concentrating on the sypmtom rather than the problem. I sat up earlier writing out a crude root cause analysis in an accident investigation format that I use for work, keep asking 'Why?'. You'll still be asking 'Why?' at the mobile phone point of the RCA.

_________________
Gordon Brown saying I got the country into it's current economic mess so I'll get us out of it is the same as Bomber Harris nipping over to Dresden and offering to repair a few windows.

Chaos, panic and disorder - my work here is done.

http://www.wildcrafts.co.uk

Top

Page 1 of 3

[ 41 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2, 3 Next

Board index » Discussion Forums » Speed, Safety, Driving and The Law

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Jump to: