Safe Speed Forums

I have found that FireFox is usually smart enough to restore the typed text if the 'back' button is pressed. Mine seems to recall the previous page from a cache internal to my PC.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Oh well, not only had I copied and pasted the original reply, but then on re-reading decided that it needed could be better and so re-did it, but almost c/p but wanted to get to bed so didn't! Then when all that I had was (for some reason Yahoo) a yahoo response saying that the forum could not be found! No amount of 'back' would work, then I failed to find the website ... then I was up for another hr which took me to 4am and realise that I hadn't changed my clock preference either.
I resolved it by call the emergency hosting service line and a technician on emergency call out was already there working om the massive storm that had thrown many facilities and had sorted out many of the backups etc... sadly it was a Virginmedia routing problem caused by the storm... it cleared within the 'timed requests sessions'.
Then I was able to re-post, but I do agree (& so regret) I ought to have re-saved!

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

I got into that particular habit before FireFox appeared (I tend to use Chrome for day-to-day browsing now - much quicker - but that's another topic)

Besides which, unless things are guaranteed to save your data, a couple of mouse-clicks just gives extra assurance. I've had some nasty experiences of things which 'usually' work, but then don't on the one occasion when you really need them to.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Distractions distractions and yet more distractions while driving/riding....

What next will be an acceptable distraction, to add to the plethora of all the other distractions while driving - a blow job perhaps?

Hey, I think I could keep my eyes on the road and watch speed cameras and change gear etc. so why not? (Rhetorical I very much hope). So where do we draw the line?

Driving should absolutely be the very most important thing when you are driving IMO. Everything else should be secondary FFS! I am prepared to e-die on this matter! (While always supporting Safe Speed's stance against DUMB speed enforcement)

I use transport to get from A to B and when I reach my destination THAT is when I have fun, get pi$$ed and pick up the missed calls from my mobile phone about 'small stuff'. This is my least happy thread/post of all time.

I'm not siding with you weepej, because I know how you feel about how Speed always Kills and I have taken calls when stuck on the M6 south while going at 0.0mph in a queue while a known number from work is checking just to see if my leg isn't in the jaws of a Rottweiler at a client's house.

I am siding with just me here, or so it feels...

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Not at all Tone! I generally think it's a bad idea to let yourself be distracted whilst driving - be it by using a phone, eating, copping an eyefull of a pretty lass on the pavement, looking for speed limit signs and scameras...

HOWEVER, like speed limits, we don't live in a binary world with a convenient dividing line between "safe" and "dangerous". You don't spontaneously combust at 31MPH, for instance. Similarly, all but the most blinkered would acknowledge that there's a world of difference between the guy who grabs the odd wine gum out of a bag in his door pocket whilst driving on a clear motorway and the trucker who tries to eat a plate of microwaved chilli on his lap in a busy city centre! However, they are both "eating". And so it is (in my view) with mobile phones. The whole notion of being "dangerous" or "not dangerous" is a gross over-simplification. The authorities know all about this because the inconvenient "elephant in Weepy's room" is that by some strange magic, CBs, taxi and police 2-way radios are not deemed "dangerous" - or at least not dangerous enough to warrant banning their use!

I am not sure what you don't understand about what I have said, as I think you'd be in agreement so I guess it is my way of explaining things that are at fault.

Let me try and say it another way ...
Absolutely distraction can be very dangerous for good and safe travel whether we are walking, cycling, driving or riding ...
The real world informs us that we do many actions behind the wheel or handlebars.
(are you with me so far- and I am seriously not being patronising or anything)!
So we have a balance of actions against a perfection of total gaze at the road ahead, eg. to indicate, check the dashboard, check the (all around) environment, check the route any any hazards along it - adjusting our position and speed to reflect the hazard density and traffic volume (etc.).

We have added on top of this a host of car controls (many essentials and some less so), radios, and many other equipment.
Along the way there have been questions asked about if (eg introduction of radios) were 'right' and good or if they were bad for road safety. Evidence was gathered studied and questioned and as it happens decided that it was OK.

ALL that I am doing here is demanding that there be a proper balanced gathering of all data, so that the best possible results are achieved.

Some people I know refuse to even have a phone on - others receive calls and so on. I see many handle their vehicles safely and others that are unsafe. I think we have to ask the question "is there a safe way to use a mobile phone" and if so what is that, and when is it (precisely) 'dangerous' and 'unsafe'.
Yes I know that most here will know exactly, what will be considered unsafe and what safe, but that doesn't solve the legal argument, we need proper research to fully understand what does make it dangerous and what does make it safe. Do you think that that is a 'reasonable and sensible' step or do you think we should just ban absolutely all of it, without study and without even asking to learn from it?
Once we have clear research and science more can be achieved with real knowledge.
While the study is being achieved, it never prevents any authority lavishing upon the public a mass of public info films about safe road use and behaviours, and to always act reasonably and show many examples! Nor does it prevent police from prosecuting those who act irresponsibly and dangerously.
Let's never forget that Safe Speed totally supports more police patrols to encourage all road users to behave well and responsibly, provide guidance and advice as well as proportionate enforcement.

Let's take mobile phone use a bit further as we know that under some circumstances some can 'manage' it safely, does this mean that others can others be taught ? Are there those that cannot ever be considered safe at all and if so how to ID them? (What tells us that they are unsafe) and I am not talking about in use, but through human personality traits, road sense,skills and ability - before they use a phone not after ?
Another point for example is does it / should it, become a separate test or perhaps even part of, a driving /riding test?

And finally do you think it is 'wrong' for me to 'bother' to ask these questions ? If you do then I have to as then, what (and why) do you think I should do that is different ?

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

But I do understand.

I guess it comes down to what might be termed ‘an acceptable amount of distraction’. I’d say that would be zero in an ideal world but I understand there are times when it is going to happen. In fact I am often distracted, in effect, doing what may seem like a very dangerous thing every time I use my motorbike i.e. looking in completely the wrong direction to where I am travelling, otherwise known as a Life Saver.

But, and here's my point, I am making a very clear distinction between those which are avoidable or unnecessary and those which are not!

Answering the phone and holding it to your ear for ‘however long’ simply isn’t necessary and I have yet to hear any justification for this other than it can be done safely by some most of the time. Yes, I’m sure some can, but I see many, (far too many), doing it dangerously.

Sure, it’s convenient to answer it and deal with and find whatever it is about there-and-then, but I don’t think convenience should be put above safety, especially when there is no reason or possible justification with the availability of many cheap hands-free options.

If someone really feels so very passionately about the need to always be contactable, like some do in their work while on-the-go, then they should buy a cheap hands-free set and get it working and set-up before the start of their journey. There is absolutely no excuse for not having a hands free these days, they are cheap, simple to use and safer. If someone says they can’t afford £5 or less for a Bluetooth earpiece connection their car is probably illegal too.

I don’t think we are going to see eye-to-eye on this sorry, but the bottom line for me is why on earth would anyone find it acceptable to stick a mobile phone to your ear when there is a far safer, better and cheap alternative? That, for me, sums up my complete argument against the practice.

With the greatest of respect to all members, that is what I don’t understand about this thread.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

There is a solution already.

A hands free.


I’m sure you don’t mean using the public as guinea pigs when the solution is already there...

Sorry to bang on about it but why teach when the better alternative already exists.

Not at all, but why question something where there is a perfectly reasonable win-win ‘have your cake and eat it’ solution? The question should be what, if anything, is wrong with using a hands free. I can't see any drawback.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Ahha, OK and totally fair enough and I can agree with you on many points.
In some ways much driving / riding is about distraction compromise, swapping one benefit of information, at the cost of lost data gathering from a former source.
I can see now that you think I am agreeing with 'hand held' use, I am not and not sure that I had agreed with that anywhere. I do NOT 'believe' that hand held phone use in a vehicle is good practice at all, and I am surprised that so much if it still goes on. I would like to see more data on this, especially from good UK sources.

I agree too, that hands free devices are cheap. I have asked a few local people to me, and the one's that admit to it, say that they do not believe that they perform well, so don't 'bother'! So, there is clearly a great need for better advertising, promotion & trials to show people how good they have become.
I do not applaud the use of a hand held phone as it requires removal of a hand away from the steering wheel - or handle bars (bikes and motorbikes etc) (horse riding is an exception as horses can be controlled with one hand, legs and body movements.
I hope that puts your mind to rest on that issue.

I agree that there are hands free options, and it is this that I am referring to, and the ability/ psychology to hold conversations vs distraction/s etc.

We must have proper intelligent research to enable a full understanding of all aspects of all the many and varied communications systems whilst travelling.
The laws then (and only after this research), need to be based on scientific research and data but not from emotional arguments or what we think might be true, even if that seems like common sense and potentially 'obvious'.

I have been digging up various bits of data :
Driven to Distraction hhere
New York Times article here
Wiki link Mobile Phone & driving here
Relative Risk (Wiki) explanation here and Regression Analysis[url]=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_analysishere[/url]
Driving Psychology - Uni of Hawaii here(USA but I can find nothing on mobile phone use!)
Distracted Driver Article here
Some of the above is quite interesting ... still not found the article that I wanted to re-find of distraction though - I have linked to it previously though ...
[Brain Downtime article here]
Emergency Vehicle gadgets here
and NY Blogs here

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

Ah, ok ta and phew. I was worried there for a while and feeling increasingly worse about being in the barrel I felt I was in

So the research and discussion I am interested in then is whether a hands-free is compromising safety, but maybe that’s for another day/thread as I’m not one to topic drift

If, as I believe I read on SS yonks ago from someone, it is a possibility that being in conversation with someone who is not in the vehicle is bad, then we certainly do need to research this. I wouldn’t want my *grandchildren being driven to Weston Super Mare on an day outing with 40 other kids while the driver chats away on the M6 to his mate about last night for an hour using hands free if that is proven to be a distraction as well.

My gut feeling is it would be a distraction because driving is about so many things, not least concentration, and if his mate is telling him an interesting story the driver may not notice an impeding danger IMHO, but I’ve got to retrieve the toys I’ve thrown out me pram just now..

*Always good to get the ‘children card’ out in an argument.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Ah you're all right ... I figured there was a foundation link missing somewhere ! Sorry it took me so long to realise where you were coming from ...
We do need proper and intelligent research on this and I am uncertain as to the total reliability of simulators, in one of the links I provided in my earlier post, as a 'serious' study.

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

OTOH, Tone. I would rather that, than them be in the back seat of a car whilst the driver has a "must maintain eye contact" chat with her front seat passenger.

_________________
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

Me too. I've just had a thought.

If someone phones you when your driving, you say "I'm driving at the mo so I can't.. OH S T!". You then smack the mob on the dashboard and rev the engine before switching the phone off. You could add a horn sound too, if it's somewhere appropriate, for extra effect.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

So then ... I can see here that they have a selection of (USA) rules : http://www.statehighwaysafety.org/html/ ... _tips.html
Which are basic and sensible and I like the 'refrain from' than an outright 'ban' as it shows an element of tolerable exceptional exception.

From the DfT we have these contributions :
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/da ... beltmobile
http://www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/162469/2 ... rivers.pdf
and that latest (issued Mar 10) ...
http://www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/162469/2 ... eusage.pdf

But of course and as they state observing 'hands free usage' is very difficult! How can you tell if someone is talking, to themselves, to 'the radio', pretend comms with another road user, to an animal, to themselves or to someone on the other end of the phone ?
I would have expected to see a 'survey' to obtain these figures.

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

One thing I would say (from personal experience!) about the cheaper hands-free kits is that the sound quality is pretty lousy. I have found myself WISHING I could just pick the bloody phone up rather than try to concentrate so hard on just trying to hear what is being said! That's part of the problem that needs more researching. What they want you to do is not to use up too much of your concentration on the phone AND not to occupy one of your hands with it. That said, driving with the window down "holding the roof on" on a nice day IS still legal. I feel that in some cases, the level of concentration required to decipher what's being said on a crappy hands-free is greater than what would have been required to hold a mobile.

I'd also like to see more research on the QUALITY of the conversation and its effects. Clearly saying "I'll be home about 8.00, love" is a darned site less distracting than answering a complex technical question about a job or having an emotional row with a partner! Both are still perfectly legal on a hands-free and both would be perfectly legal on a CB. (go figure...)

On that I agree 100% with you - except to say I will not be a passenger in a car with such a driver. I will get out and walk.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

I have honestly, seriously, rehearsed that scenario Pete; and that is exactly what I would do, for real!

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

So do you think there should be a specific law covering that? If so, should hand-held devices be exempt? Or should BJs only be illegal if you're alone in the car?

Sorry, BT, not trying to give you a hard time - it's just that I couldn't resist responding to your opening

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

No prob Pete &

It's way past my bedtime.. Zzzz...

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Is it not a matter of 'how and when' which effect the level of distraction caused ?
We know that sometimes various normal car controls can distract us but our ability to handle that efficiently, e.g. miss a gear (makes us pay immediate attention to this as it may become urgent to keep movement momentum up to keep us safe as stopping or slowing maybe very dangerous and unexpected !

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