Safe Speed Forums

If it was a big cause of crashes I imagine it would be necessary to legislate. Like if us humans sneezed quite a lot and hundreds of people were being KSIed through drivers reaching for hard to reach handkerchiefs I could imagine it being illegal not to have a handkerchief in an accessable place, and that'd be a good law.

There was never any need to legislate for mobile phone use, there were already laws in place to deal with any action that negatively impacted on driving to a dangerous degree. Of course there is no need to legislate for handkerchief retrieval specifically, any more than there was ever a need to legislate for mobile phone use specifically!

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

Presumably without this silly mobile phone law they wouldn't have to hide the phone and could have it nearer the view of the road, so is the law actually causing more danger?

_________________
Andrew.

Well, no, because without the mobile phone law it's still illegal to drive whilst using a mobile phone.

So what's the mobile phone law for?

Making an explicit statement. Also making a different set of tariffs available to judges for use of mobile phone when driving as compared to eating an apple for instance.

Driving while holding a mobile phone is obviously so distracting and so dangerous that it should be a special case IMO.

I kind of agree and don't. Sort of.

If there's a law that already covers using a mobile while driving, there's either no need for another law, or else the old law should be scrapped when the new one comes in (don't someone like the Dutch have a one in, one out rule on new laws - good idea). Two laws is just silly.

But on the other hand, it's not more dangerous than driving while, say, holding a live lobster to your ear, so why make out it is? It strikes me as playing to the newspapers to be honest.

Why would you hold a live lobster to your ear?

Again, if people routinely chose to do this, and it was obvious that it affected driving in a way that say eating an apple didn't, then I'd welcome specific legislation to help stamp it out.

Because, as Nerval said, they are "peaceful, serious creatures, who know the secrets of the sea, and don't bark".

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Hardy har har har.

This thread has completed.

Hold a lobster to your ear!

For the record, I'm not sure where lobster came from.

Part Dali, and part trying to think what the most distracting thing you could hold to your ear would be. Alternatively, small irritable cat?

Ouch! Stop it! My sides.

Sainsburys?

I hope it's not got a roe on it, that could get messy, what with all those legs rubbing it into your ears.

I was more worried about the pincers if I'm honest.

That's not true, before the stupid law it was only illegal to use a mobile phone while driving if doing so was dangerous. The stupid law only made it illegal to do so safely.
There is a big difference in using a phone while driving round a small shite town in a manual car compared to driving on an open motorway.
And it allows the police to make some easy money. Also they will happily steal your £60 for using a phone while sitting in a stationary car which happens to have the engine running - because they can. That's fair.
Kerching - crime solved.


I think it was going to tell you, hence holding it to your ear?

_________________
Andrew.

You can't do it safely.

Brigining in a law that made it a specific offence to operate a vehicle whilst using one was an answer to the ridiculous assertion that you can.

Maybe you can't, I don't know. I'm sure I could if I practised.
I remember when I first got a mobile phone I found it very difficult to walk down the road while using it, but now I can.

If it is always dangerous the police would have no trouble proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it is every time?
Also if it's so dangerous they would have included their own TETRA handsets in the stupid law.

_________________
Andrew.

What's your definition of safely?

I see hundreds of people using a handheld phone while driving on any day, I've only ever seen a few crashes happen. Surely this suggests it can be done safely?

Hmmm, I think luck is more of a factor there.

Saftey is ensuring that risk is mitigated, driving with one hand on the wheel whilst holding a convesation is not doing that.

You don't need a 'phone to do that (oh and add looking at the pasenger rather than at the road)

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

One would be luck.

Ten would be luck.

A hundred would probably be luck.

A thousand might even be luck.

But we are looking at much more than that.

I think a majority of people only using the phone when they are not in a dangerous situation and/or compensating for their reduced attention is more of a factor.

There was only one reason for the mobile phone law. Politicians wanting to be seen to be doing something.