Safe Speed Forums

I will post some of this person's letter to CW for discussion. More somewhat woolly minded thinking for the most part.

Because lives are saved by driving properly .. to COAST values. If these COAST values are applied properly and consistently - then a safe speed and thus an overall better compliance to safe and mostly legal choices is achieved by mostout there



Probably because they do not consider these drivers to such a risk. You do not argue with a big truck after all! Cyclists try to by riding up the inside of them and not realising that they are in the outer lane with a left indicator for a pretty good reason



Well smooth driving does prove cost effective. Jerky driving and and constant brake/accelerate/ does tend to cost more.

Air miles and an insatiable desire to have all seasonal goods in each season creates the food waste by the way.. along with eyes bigger than stomachs. I tend to eat as smoothly as I drive See me "recipe book!"

He continues ...



True.. so does cycling through a red light into the path of another car or fellow cyclist Not to mention accidents which cyclists have whilst texting and riding

I would say the failure of too many to use COAST properly .. on the part of all road users . wastes for more lives



Only in real terms .. it is not speed and the mobile which are causing these accidents. It is driver error .. caused by one or more of the principles under the COAST system being completely ignored. My force gets a lot of nonsense sent to us by this chap and his pals. Apparently we are fining enough folk for "speeding"

Oh sure . we issue less fixed penalties.. but our bulk of fines are collected via the magistrates' courts.. for CARELESS/UNDUE/DANGEROUS prosecutions. Some of these do not get fined: they go to where the likes of Mr Ramsay wants them to be. In PRISON!

Still like to say Durham is soft here? I can assure all out there that we are not. We are, however, fair and demand something called justice and not revenge. We also do something about dodgy roads in recommends to the local Highways Angencies too. We just have one "gimmick". A high profile police presence!

OK .. Allan. I can rant on the right issues -: . which, whilst they do not deliver ZERO casualities, they still keep us on a level peg of lower rate of incident overall. (I know he and his pals lurk )

Now we have seen less drivers at high speeds on our patch of the A1(M) and other similar dual carriageways because of the increased cost of fuel at the pumps. We have seen overall LESS drivers and MORE cyclists.. and mobility scooters which are causing their unique sets of problems. Given speed kills and mobility scooters are causing KSI at just 4 to 8 mph.. - something not quite right here.



I somehow do not think this crosses the mind of the driver who drives at 40 mph everywhere - including the middle lane of a motorway . Lane discipline does matter though and we usually do have words with the 90 mph plus brigade. We may use some - cough -discretion on odd occasions. There have been a couple of occasions when the driver was faced with a real emergncy and we gave an ecort and no further action other than a word to suggest picking up the phone.. getting an ambulance etc.

Now he comes out with a gem..



We do not condone "elephant racing"

Nor Middle Lane Morons


Many of the trucks which appear to be "tailgating each other" are actually basking and saving fuel by the created slip stream the way

lanes 2 and 3 are for overtaking purposes for the most part.


At least he admits that motorways are safe. Blimey




Well.. I call pavement cycling and ignoring red lights "breaking the rules" .. and perhaps they are likewise not quite as scrupulous as they should be in work

But this argument is not necessarily so. We have teams reporting back that they have been behind drivers who are rigid to the urban limits .. yet push it on the A1 .. which results in their pulling the guy for words.



Millions more cyclists will lead to accidents occurring between and amongst cyclists and I have already seen what happens in a crowd surge during my career to date Accident likelihood increases in density and where any human activity is at its busiest. In any case, busy roads are usually slower in speed - because of the sheer volume of traffic. So the accidents are not then due to speed. We are back to my accusation that too few use and apply COAST properly

By the way .. I do grow some food as do those Swiss hooligans



Oh dear.. so the price per barrel of oil, The Gulf war and a foolish folly of following the White House back room boys like pampered poodles has nowt to do with it? Nor the over-borrowings and an insistence on driving and powering the economy based on the over-inflated price of a small semi-detached with a postage stamp garden and a mortgage which our kids great-great grandchildren will probably still be paying off if inflation really goes belly up in Old Labour style?

Tis all the fault of them in their cars



Swiss and Finland do this. They include jay-walkers and cyclists. It gets applied to all equally.
Including the 10 year old who caused an accident in Switzerland by ignoring the little red man.

So careful about you are wishing here. You might find you may have to sell the bicycle for going through a light on red .. and we do include pelican crossings in this area of the UK. At the moment it's just £30 for cyclists. We think it should be more given the cyclist hit a chiid the other day doing this.






The opinion is really beggaring belief. Day in and day out.. we arrest folk on low incomes .. speeding in unroadworthy, unregistered and uninsured cars. We find plenty of these are unlicenced.
We find most of them in STOLEN cars. These are the types who end up killing. They do not stop for us. We have to rein them in. This puts OUR lives at risk! Any idea just what goes into the training here? Formation driving which boxes a felon in. It's precision driving and requires skills which would gain us entry to the Red Arrows .. such is the precision and team work required amongst the entire RPU here.

Those who own nice cars.. look after them .. are very likely to get upset at the slightest mark on their cars. They are more than likely to stop. Most of them do pass the "attitude test".. and many accept any penalty we give as we do so the correct. polite and educational way. Fining folk half their annual salary will not make our lives easier. We already have "far too much power and do not catch criminals either!" per the Waily.

They are on low income and unemplyed . and even unemployable in stark terms.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

I do like your answers to lots of these questions




I am surprised that you have words with people going more than 90. What's wrong with more than 90 if it is alright for the conditions? Or is it a case of the cops can't be seen to be doing nothing

_________________
Currently undergoing training with the I.A.M.

The government really have done agood job on him haven't they?! He's absolutely lapped it up without (seemingly) having stopped once to question any of it! Plenty of ill-informed invective with not a single number anywhere! I wonder, maybe he should start by looking through the figures and trying to find out how many people from different income brackets get caught speeding? Then again, why let facts get in the way of a good rant?!

(I think we need one of these emoticons:



But with the hand a bit lower...and animated)!

But would be showing a thumb ? or something other digits which would have the wild purring "most rudey!" ...

But he's a cracking advert for Roadpeace. (not! Not all think as he does - fortunately - nor hi-jack road safety matters to promote a self-interested and what does come across to normal folk out there as self-obsessed hatred of any one who owns a motor car I go off the reader letters pages and comments.)


) The Manchester based "colony" say they have not seen his letters to the local press recently though. And it's a waste of his time really writing to Cycling rags .. but then again perhaps he does so because he thinks it will whip up the lycra louts to more extremist views ..

Wrong again .. cos most cyclists out there also . er drive. Chris Hoy owns a top of the range BMW .. a 4x4 He has even enjoyed track days at Oulton Park I look forward to Clarkson inviting these guys to Top Gear for wacky challenge or a lap in the "reasonably priced car!"

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

There are some real lunatics out there.

Does this guy have a vote?

He write in the MEN the other day

But part of it .. there some logic as he bash the Handy users


I wish he would stop putting off folk from cycling though. It ist not dangerous. People think it "dangerous" because these farty lentilist cycling people keep saying it ist.

They are the ones who are making folk perceive as dangerous when all ist said und done



Only if you are stupid .. we are in possession of a photo taken by a local in that area showing this person cycling through a red light There no excuse for that



Riding through red lights ist actually illegal



But they still have to be on patrol to catch them.. I would also like to see this ban applied to cyclists as I loathe those who wobble around whilst on the phones. I think the Handy phone has made folk bad-mannered slaves to the devices. I really dislike those I am talking to face/face who take the call in the middle of their chat with me. You can always phone back when convenient. That ist what the phone with the voice mail designed for


I actually agree with this person on his next comment



I wonder if some confuse question with handy free use

I also agree with this one.. so we are RIGHT to campaign for NO cams und MORE POLICE .. as in REAL ONES!



Look Allan .. forget cyclists being the one und only person on the f:censored: road.. what about the other CAR drivers und the most vulnerable of all .. the pedestrian who at the mercy of Handy phone using pavement cyclists who jump red lights as well as the daft muppets in cars doing likewise

I wish he would climb off the holier than thou perch which sees cyclists as "never breaking laws" when we know to our costs that this ist NOT SO!

Und how about this for logic.. how does he know they are on Handy in this comment? For all he know they may be glancing down at speedo because of the scamera in Radcliffe which erected after a 15 year old ran in front of a car after consuming two bottles of neat vodka just before midnight



You cannot know .. if you are not "looking". A glance down at a dash whilst approaching does not mean they all texting



You should be in primary position und in high-viz ..

If the road narrow .. then you move to secondary und allow the overtake.

Und you always apply C O A S T. und stop at RED lights




Ah.. you agree as to what really cause it then Perhaps you would do best to support MART who are questioning the run around dodging of the yellow School bus services .. which appear to be being cut in this area?



1. There are umpteen other exercises which also fight flab.. diet.. walking.. running.. horseriding.. swimming.. football.. rugby... ice skating.. fencing.. all of which has toppest of athletes for Team GB 2012 und next Commwealths.. Worlds etc ..

2. You would also do them more favours if you would stop harping on how "dangerous" cycling ist. The fact you keep saying so .. put off parents from allowing the children to walk und cycle to school

It only dangerous if you ride badly und expect others to co-operate with you und not co-operate with any other road user .. which ist what the biggoted zealot in lycra ist more than guilty of und thus the greatest of dangers to everyone else .. including others on bicycles.



I have no doubt it will come about.. at the moment they are trying to educate with penalty point leading to tot-up. By the way, insurers may be OK about Gatso fines.. but will load for Handy phone points




Possibly because it not film much as you in "hunched down" .. all they get ist a shaky view of the tarmac

You would do better with helmet with cams sticking out all over it in every direction Ach.. I forget .. you do not like helmets



But you are saying they do not see you in first place



Are you now saying cyclists are POOR? Bicycles are not exactly cheap... und they have a carbon footprint in manufacture und road to retail outlets



Again .. he need to dismount his razor thin racing saddle.

Road safety ist about utmost respect und protection for ALL road users so how they choose to travel. We achieve this by having real policemen out there.. not gimmicks.. con-tricks.. short term .. or some green soapbox on which to lob phlegm filled bogeys from.. or some bizarre hatred of anyone who drives a nice looking car..

We achieve this by drumming road safety.. Green Cross .. responsibility und a duty of care .. along with a dollop of general courteous manners.

We do not achieve this by claiming cyclists own the roads und are some special case which preclude everyone else.. including the most vulnerable of all.. the person on two legs!

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

[quote="In Gear
(I think we need one of these emoticons:



But with the hand a bit lower...and animated)![/quote]




But would be showing a thumb ? or something other digits which would have the wild purring "most rudey!" ...

[/quote]

Perhaps thumb (in bum -if thats not too rude , and pistol to head ) --but then I can say these things (as I'm not constrained in what I say )

Sorry -IG - give us the ideas - you can only hint at them -been a Gov't employee and know what is deemed to be PC ( AND THAT'S NOT 99 or Dixon)

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

The thought of psychology, propaganda and 'control', spring to mind immediately.
He appears to be very dogmatic. I would first agree basic human rights and values to establish a negotiating basis. He appears to fail to grasp the basic facts, makes it very difficult to discuss advanced techniques.
I also wonder what 'drives' him ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

His premise is fundamentally flawed.

He want to see speeds controlled and enforced and is arguing that this would save fuel and help the poor and the needy and blah blah

However most cars achieve optimum fuel efficiency at 55-60mph, so surely if it's all about fuel prices we should be raising speed limits to 60 everywhere and removing slow obstructions like traffic lights, cyclists, 40mph idiots and pedestrians.



Actually wait, did I just straw man a more in-depth argument? I'm afraid my head went funny part way through reading it. I didn't notice any sensible points in there though.

I agree - reducing urban congestion would probably make more difference to the national fuel bill than anything else. It's not going to happen though, is it! People like cars because they're bloody good at what they do! The sooner the government realises that and tries to make public transport more attractive rather than private transport less so, the better off we'll all be!

If any government was truly serious about this, they'd mandate that the speed limiters on all cars sold in a given region be limited to 65MpH. (Except for emergency service vehicles, of course, because the government has to keep some sort of power over you, right?)
But no, it isn't good enough that the government take away your ability to drive over 65MpH outright ... they leave you with the ability, but want to punish you for getting caught doing it.
If speeding is so wasteful/dangerous/whatever, just change the speed limiter in my car's PCM, or stop with the BS already.
Or is it more important to them to be able to collect fines and revel in the joy of punishing people for something they actually have the power to prevent in the first place?
I'll forgive you, if you'll forgive me. EIther way, the point is that government is trying to feed us all rancid brownies from a cow pasture, to get us to 'willingly' give them more of our money.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Plans also afoot to put speed limiters in cars. Problem?

Umm,,, they'd limit to no more than 70 mph which might be a problem for trips to the continent and the continentals would be limited to 80 mph - and probably then "speed"

Most would get pinged in the 30 mph etc zones as they would have got used to the limiter and think it works everywhere


(The cruise control seems to get confused with "limiter" and even in some cases the b-b-bbrakes )

Dumbing down .. experience tells me that it just won't work. Making folk take responsibility for themselves .. oh Train them all properly

You see - if you have limiters - driving styles will change. Folk will need training to understand how they work and that they still have to apply pedals and turn the wheel. I am not necessarily being sarcastic either. We had a crunch up here and the bloke apparently thought his cruise controller slowed down "automatically" he was almost 60 years old too.


Now everyone will shout that he should know better. Maybe - but he just had not read the instructions in his new car and had never had a car with this feature before

Now .. do ya see what I mean about "you gotta learn!" as a constant.


So all very cosy to have the gadgets but first you have to sell the idea and re-train to understand it and use it properly.


Personally - I'd rather see folks taught properly in the first place. and be encouraged to update skills properly. Lots of carrots could be dangled.

As for emergency vehicles Rush, .. but of course no limiters required! But with everyone at the same speeds - guess we'd be limited somewhat anyway

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

If this guy is so concerned about fuel being wasted (and I agree it's a fair point that we might all bear in mind) he ought to address his complaint to the management of the Patient Transport Service of the NHS. This, you may be aware, essentially amounts to a fleet of minibuses with special provision for wheelchair users, and these vehicles are used to transport patients between hospitals, or between their homes and hospitals for treatment.

On one of my recent trips to the James Cook Hospital at Middlesbrough I had to wait a considerable time for my passenger to be dealt with before taking her home again - which is not unusual, and it's part of the job for which I volunteered - so no problem with that. However, while I was waiting for her a PTS vehicle parked nearby and the driver (obviously with spare time on his hands) sat in that vehicle with the engine running for no less than 45 minutes.

It was not a cold day, so this wasn't needed for the purpose of maintaining warmth. As far as I could tell it was pure thoughtless waste.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Like I said before, if Fuel Economy is of real concern, the speed limiters will be set to 105KpH / 65MpH.
(Um, wait ... IFF there exists an alternate valve opening scheme / gearing combo that would provide equal Fuel Economy performance at 130KpH / 80MpH, as at 105KpH / 65MpH presently, then great. I highly doubt it, so, for Fuel Economy, 105KpH / 65MpH it probably is.)

If keeping everyone on the same sheet of music is of paramount importance, set it to 130KpH / 80 MpH, and raise the educational / training standards.
(What the hell ... raise 'em anyway.)
In the areas where 'driving too fast for conditions' would be most likely to lead to the K/SI-ing of pedestrains / bicyclists, real, roving police presence would be the optimal - ideally only? - solution ... and not just for the prevention of driver infractions, but of most crimes and misdemeanors generally.

If I must fuel the 'devil's advocates' here, I consider it most dangerous to drive ... unreasonably and imprudently ...
near schools and hospitals - where it might actually be fair not to expect the pedestrains to be able to take the burden of responsibility for their own safety
residential areas
commerce districts
metropolitan areas
etc

since 'driving too fast for conditions' would only continue to be an issue in those areas where
the speed limiter is moot
pedestrians are unavoidable.
I am of the opinion that if the feature can be shown to compensate for a driver's lack of attention REGULARLY - I.E. Lane Departure Prevention - it should be abolished / prevented from existence.

My personal favorites are ABS, Traction Control, Stability Control, Braking Force Redistributions which compensate and optimize brake performance for changing driving conditions and driver demand, and that's about it.

Excepting that the word ' encouraged' should perhaps be replaced with 'required', pretty much yeah.
With everyone else limited to between 65 and 80 MpH, you'd be 'limited' to
speeding, where pedestrians are much more likely to be in danger ...
and genuinely inconsiderate, negligent, reckless, and/or predatory driving generally.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

According to CW this week - Allan



and thus a speedy sort of guy really


Well Allan is followiing up the letter Wildy commented by reporting that Allan is campaigning for ALL cyclists EVERYWHERE to help the police nail those who continue to flout the law by using hand held mobiles.

It IS a pet hate of ours (mine .. and the Swiss family at large .. and those who know the well on one well known piston-headed forum will know that she really draws blood on this issue

OK .. apart from Allan's apparent dislike of four wheeled "cages" as he once called them - we do actually support his current campaign to some extent. He suggests

1. writing to MPS.

(OK .. done that on many issues. They are not exactly what one could call "bright" though. I'd write to the Chief Constables down to Inspector levels to get police to make various "scourges" into the publicised "campaign of the month" (

2. Circulating information to the universities.

and also schools/sixth form/Year 12/13 colleges and colleges of higher education.

3. Writing to local press. Also


Recent research suggests that about half (16 million out there ) ignore the hand held phone law. They may be right. We seem to prosecute a surprising number here.

CW goes on to complain that we have not banned any usage of these phones - including using them as "hands free". Unfortunately - our lad and lasses can SEE a phone in a hand or glued to an ear

If mouth is moving and no phone .. we do not know if they are just cheweing gum, talking to a passenger.. singing to the child in the car seat .. or singing to the radio or CD

The magazine quotes th example of the lorry driver jailed for killing another when he collided with someone. He was talking into a Bluetooth phone at the time. He was not jailed perhaps because of his talking into the phone. He was jailed because the degree of carelessness fell way below the standard we would expect of a decently competent person

I will agree that anything which distracts a person so much that he or she causes an serious accident needs to be called to account... and not one person should be exempt - including police officers.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

And that is why so many people take issue with this law. From those who want to see mobile phone use banned completely to those (like me) who think handsfree mobile is even more dangerous than handheld.
Out of interest, given the current law would you do anything about someone using this sort of handsfree?

When you prosecute, how many of 'that surprising number ignoring the handheld law' could've been prosecuted for Driving WithOut Due Care and Attention?

How many people whose mouths are moving without a phone in hand seem to be DWODC&A?
What about food and drink?
How many people DWODC&A, with on hand on the wheel, and the other on the shifter?

I guess I'm asking why DWODC&A doesn't cover it?

I'm convinced handheld laws exist because the driver's licensing standards are insufficient; if those standards were sufficient, then DWODC&A could simply be updated to keep up with the times.

However, I am not on the front lines. You are. That's why I'm asking; that and most of us hold your experiences and nuanced opinions in high esteem.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

I have not seen any reports of anyone copped here for that one.. but I am sure he would have been lectured over the dangers of an elastic band stopping the circulation to his brain.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

I have to admit about 75% would have been done under the "Driving Without Reasonable Consideration Charge" under S3 of the RTA 1988 with the rest perhaps covered by plain "Careless". This charge differs from "Careless" in that we are showing the degree of carelessness in the disregard to road safety and road conditions (and not actual outcome )* - whereas in the "lack of consideration" charge - we have to prove how another person on the road was inconvenienced. Usually - we can - and usually we can show "careless driving on the part of the driver"


* I am aware that there have been amendments - but as we discussed in the MacIntyre tragedy - the amendments to the offences involving dangerous/careless in the event of a death resultant - still do not change much. We still have to show how far the accused's standards fell below the average required standard of competence.




If our teams see any driver behaving "sub standardly" on the road - they will pull them up for a chat about COAST - best outcome. and issue FPN or worse - along with the same lecture - worser to worst outcome.




Our neighbours to the North of us prosecuted a woman for eating an apple. Lone officer and his video doo-dah recording the event had run out of tape at the time. So they took aerial photos to show to the court to prove how tight the corner was to negotiate with an apple in one hand. It was discussed on this board at the time with even them Mad Cats defending the woman. At this point - I read the comments. Grabbed a huge Granny Smith from the fruit bowl and tried driving my own car around my own driveway - which runs in a crescent shape as I have the end house in a cul-de-sac and fell in love cos it had a huge garage and a crescent shaped drive which meant my wiffe need not bother reversing out

Anyway - I found I could not negotiate the corner properly with this apple in one hand. The Mad Doc stormed back to me that I am a ruddy nit picking "pefectionist" at the time.

Then we had the "affair of the cheese ploughman" whereby Cheshire cops based in the Warrington area prosecuted a bloke for eating one of these.

So .. we do .. um.. prosecute folk for eating at the wheel of the car.

Naturally - we will not be prosecuting for the occasional sucky sweet or the crisp from the bag we opened before we set off And we do understand the need for "doughnuts"

But we still say eat before or stop somewhere nice and safe for a picnic.





Umm.. the UK police have been known to address this "one hand style of driving" - and get bashed in the press


I've always found myself more relaxed with my hands resting with that relaxed hold at the "quarter to three" point


But if the person had an accident and in the unlikely event they admitted to "caressing the gear stick as constant" - then it would rest with CPS after our reports of the incident have been referred.




I think our laws evolve as wrongs which need righting come to light. Unfortunately, the wording of some of these make a nonsense most of the time We already had mobile phone and eating huge buttles and swigging out of huge litre bottles of pop as absolute under exisiting law - and we still cover - loosely - the gabbling on hands free if that gabbling can be proven beyond reasoned doubt to have been a significant factor in a serious incident.

But the instances of holding the hand-held phone were getting wide spread and showing up to be a serious danger. I think the govermnent and police felt that the only way to get out the message was via a specific law... which does not seem to be working out too well as yet

Oh .. it is one of the few things Allan can be supported on. If he toned down the "car hating" nonsense - then perhaps the replies to the letters he writes to the local press would be less hostile and h may even find support for this particular campaign of his.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

What's wrong with drinking from a huge bottle of pop? Sure there's a certain technique needed to drink from a 2 litre bottle with one hand if it's full, but once mastered it's pretty easy and takes no longer than drinking from a 500ml bottle (which usually costs about the same as a 2 litre!)

The trick is to hold it with the palm of your hand part way down the bottle to support the weight more evenly. Oh and if you intend on driving while doing this, have a passenger present to give it back to when you're done.

I'd draw the line at 3 litres. I've never found a technique for drinking from those one handed. Maybe someone with huge hands could do it?