Safe Speed Forums

http://express.lineone.net/news_detail.html?sku=1094

Points on your licence if you drive and phone

By Jo Macfarlane

DRIVERS caught using their mobile phones while driving will be hit with three points on their licence from next month.

Offenders will also be fined £60 as the Government cracks down on dangerous driving.

From February 27, drivers face losing their licence if they persistently flout the ban as motorists can be disqualified if they accumulate 12 points on their licence in three years.

But last night road safety campaigners said there were too few traffic police to enforce the law and called for all phones to be outlawed, including hands-free kits.

Research shows using a hand-held or hands-free phone while driving increases the risk of a crash four-fold.

Drivers are less aware of what is happening around them, miss road signs, are less likely to hold a stable speed and react more slowly when the car ahead brakes.

Since legislation came into force in 2003 which banned mobiles without hands-free kits, drivers have been fined £30. Ministers hope the tougher legislation will crack down on those still flouting the law.

At least 13 people were killed last year by motorists using a hand-held mobile, according to the Department for Transport.

But road safety campaigners claimed yesterday the new penalties “meant nothing” without extra funding for traffic policing.

Shadow transport secretary Chris Grayling said: “The trouble with changes like this is that ministers have left our roads to be policed by speed cameras rather than real traffic officers and so people will carry on getting away with offences like this.”

Liberal Democrat transport spokesman Alistair Carmichael said the penalty increase meant “nothing” without proper enforcement.

“Driving while on the phone can be extremely dangerous, and it is concerning that so few drivers are being caught. The recent decrease in traffic police may well have led to these lamentable figures.”

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed campaign, said: “What worries me is that the law appears to condone hands-free phoning while driving. It’s entirely the wrong message.

“Hands-free conversations are equally dangerous and the only advice we should be giving to drivers is ‘don’t phone and drive’.”

A spokeswoman for the road safety charity Brake said: “We would be happy with an even bigger fine. You get penalised more for allowing your dog to litter the streets than for driving while using a mobile. No-one has died from dog litter, but people are killed by thoughtless motorists chatting illegally.

“We are calling on the Government to look into banning hands-free mobiles as well. It’s the distraction of conversation that causes crashes. No conversation is that important.”

Research by the Liberal Democrats shows that only a small proportion of drivers using a mobile are punished.

They found that while 21 per cent of motorists admit to using a mobile phone while driving, most recent Home Office figures from 2004 show that only 74,000 are caught and fined.

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

Is the Brake spokeswoman in la-la land? Dogs 'littering' the streets? Does she mean we have pets dropping their crisp packets and coke cans, or that people are just leaving their animals in piles in the gutters?

Presumably she meant 'fouling', but are Brake spokeswomen really so sensitive that even this tame descriptor will illicit a blush?

sorry paul , I disagree


A hands free conversation is a skill that can be learned just like talking to your passenger without looking at them.

You cant do it when you first drive, but most people can manage it after a while.

I did however find that a mobile phone ear bud set took a very direct path to the brain and I did not recall much of the jeorney after using one.

_________________
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

Likewise I'd argue that a short (and I mean SHORT) conversation on hand-held is no more dangerous than fiddling with the stereo or heaters...

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Dam dogs and their crisp packets and sweety wrappers, SOME THING MUST BE DONE!!!

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor

Doesn't dog 'litter' (sic) send children blind?

FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY, WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!

I think I would agree with that. When I first got a mobile phone I seriously couldn't cross the road while talking on it. Now I might be able to.

It may be like listening to a sideband radio signal, or to aeroplane conversations. At first you can pick out a few words but can't make much sense of it all, then you learn how to do it. I think your mind has to learn which bits to ignore.

Edit: Should pilots be banned from using the radio while flying?

_________________
Andrew.

Just for the record, I hate the idea of legislating handsfree phones out of cars. Like with anything, if you don't take responsibility for your actions you can make a dog's dinner of it and cause an accident.

But this goes for:
- picking your nose
- looking at a passenger while conversing
- looking at an attractive pedestrian/motorist/passenger
- paying attention to kids in the backseat
- eating [Mars Bar / apple / McDonalds / Jamie-Oliver gourmet meal]
- smoking cigarette / cigar / pipe / joint
- doing make-up / shaving
- pondering the performance of the England cricketers down under
- changing radio station / CD / cassette
- singing along to U2 music
- glancing at map / A4 with directions / WiFi PDA showing speed camera sites
- etc.

...whilst driving.
Gimme a break, please, handsfree usage is not dangerous unless improperly undertaken. Just like driving itself. Or all that stuff I've listed (except for the jokey ones, of course, I would never put make-up on whilst driving

Could not agree more. Until I see a proper study conducted into this then I simply can't agree with the legislation here.

All we ever see is quotes similar to the above - "13 people died due to drivers using mobile phones last year". Before banning phones there should have been a study to see how many people died from people eating at the wheel, smoking at the wheel, fiddling with their radio at the wheel, etc. I strongly suspect people eating while driving causes far more accidents than phone calls do.

If all these activities are approximately the same I can see only three logical choices...

1) Make ALL of these activities illegal.
2) Make NONE of these activities illegal, including mobile phone use.
3) Go back to the previous state under which any stupid driving can be prosecuted as dangerous driving.

I saw a pretty redhead walking along by Corfe Castle once and forgot I was driving for a second.
So glad the car in front didn't stop.
Dangerous things, redheads.

_________________
Andrew.

I had something similar by email... This is how I replied:

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

And don't you forget it!

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

I'm also a little bit uncomfortable with some of the wording I've seen so far. At the outset, I'm totally in favour of banning hand-held phones while driving. Only yesterday I noticed someone dialling out while waiting at the give-way line of a major roundabout - looking straight down at his lap.

BUT... with the decline in Trafplod, enforcement is as big an issue as anything else. Try banning hands-free mobiles (I'm the first to admit I'm a heavy user of a fully-fitted carkit and my wife uses a Bluetooth headset), and you'fre going to open yourself right up...

"I was singing to the radio officer", "I was talking to myself officer" - and that's even if you do get stopped.

Lets enforce the law we have at the moment - whichi people know is toothless, and at least make hand-held-phone driving socially unacceptable. Get those people using some form of handsfree device (I'm not too fussed what - a reasonable headset is only 20 quid or so) and see how we get on from there. Otherwise we really are biting off more than we can chew.

Cheers

The only danger with that is, define short. With one hand clamped to your ear, you only have one hand to share between the steering wheel and gearstick. Say something happens that means you need to brake hard or steer hard... something has to give.

Sorry sixy-the-red, but I'm not with you at all here. Once we condone "a little" of something, the next thing is to extend how little we condone.

All the "science" I have seen has takem a driver in a stressfull driving task and given him a stress full phone call task and asked him to count backwards whilst driving a slalam driving course.

And I bet with enough practice most people could lean to do both, And eventually at the same time.

A driver must prioritise tasks just as he would stop talking to the passenger whilst negotiationg a new or tricky junction...

Maybe that is something that is not being taught? or tested?

_________________
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

Interesting. I do just this (i.e. stop talking) if a hazard presents itself. Do people stop talking on the phone in the same fashion? Does the phone conversation occupy a higher order of priority than the driving task?

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Yes, if I'm talking and need more concentration then I put the conversation 'on hold'. Doesn't matter if it's passengers of someone the other end of the phone (not that that happens very often anyway).

I'm sure we've had this discussion before, but what about someone who only has one arm? Can't they control the vehicle ok? (when they're not holding a phone at the same time, of course )


'course not.

_________________
Andrew.