Safe Speed Forums

No Tone, that's not what I'm saying. There was already adequate legislation in place to deal with those whose driving fell below the required standard due to mobile phone use, or any other reason for that matter, the blanket ban was not required. More research is required into how much, when and how mobile phones degrade driving ability, in order to better inform everyone from policymakers down to drivers.

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

The problem with the careless driving offence is that it usually only comes into play once a crash has occurred. In the absence of a crash, it is difficult to say objectively whether someone is driving carelessly unless they are doing something blatantly daft.

If the government had decided not to go ahead with a specific prohibition then many would have seen it as giving a green light to handheld phone use.

It should also be pointed out that the legislation on drink-driving (the most nearly comparable offence) is based on epidemiology – the disproportionate crash involvement of drivers with high blood alcohol levels. It is not founded on studies of how alcohol actually affects the driving function.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

This is a policing issue, not a policy issue.



Is everyone missing the fact that mobile phone use is already mentioned in careless/dangerous driving statute?!



Nor should it be, but knowledge of the mechanisms can help inform. Furthermore, alcohol is not nearly a good analogy to mobile phone use; drunkenness cannot be started and stopped instantly and at will, nor does any knowledge of how alcohol impairs equip one in any way to mitigate that impairment.

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

If we go back in time to when people were getting killed on our roads someone saw, quite rightly, that the speed of vehicles should be looked at. And so the first speed limit signs were born.

I very much doubt that any intense or long research was done over years before their introduction but it was a good call based on common sense. Sadly, it has since become a political football and revenue earner for the government coffers with absurd lowering of limits and obsessive over-enforcement. But here’s a question...

Were they or were they not right to introduce and enforce those first speed limits?

Yes, of course they were right! Otherwise it would have turned to mayhem while years of research and empirical bloody, (and I’m not swearing here), carnage took place. I believe even we are not opposed to appropriate speeds and enforcement 'for the good'.

The same mayhem was happening with the use of mobile phones and so, just as with those first speed limit signs, they have taken action to curb the abuse and, hopefully, this will not be turned into a political football like the speed issue has and common sense will prevail.

From here, if it can be proven that mobile phone use can be done safely, (maybe include it in the driving test or something ), then okay! But at least we have a starting point from curbing abhorrent and dangerous behaviour.

Were they right to take action on mobile phone use as they did? Of course they were right and to say otherwise would be no different to saying no to the introduction of those first speed limits.

_________________
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.

It might be, but without a specific prohibition many people would assume it was OK to continue doing it provided they did it safely, which they would believe they were doing.

At the time the law was brought in I was working in an office with a high proportion of female members of staff and a number of them said openly that they would stop doing it because it had been made illegal.

There are many things that are mentioned in the Highway Code as potential distractions (with varying degrees of justification) but which are routinely done to some extent by very many drivers.

I would hope those questioning the mobile phone law don't believe that texting while driving should be permitted if done safely.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I have absolutely no idea whether this is happening but...

I reckon that one of the standard procedures now adopted by the police when investigating a KSI incident is to check the mobile phone records of the driver(s) involved to see if anyone was on a call or texting at the time.

This may provide some evidence as to the prevalence of phone use related to serious accidents. Any phone activity near to the time of the accident will mean the finger can be firmly pointed at the phone user as liable. A good reason to switch it off in the car?

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

Robin will no doubt answer himself, but in re-reading his long post above, I conclude that he would say that everything is permissible providing it is done safely. It is only when it becomes unsafe that a sanction should be applied via the existing laws.

Does this mean that we should let people do dumb things until they hurt themselves or others or is preventive action permissible?

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

I fully agree. The only issue is that there is no such data at all (that I have seen anyway); personally I find this quite telling.

While the issue of distraction does make sense, I had previously thought that speed cameras made sense (thanks to the illusion of RTTM). At least with this issue there is some data available. You would have thought it would have been easier to get phone logs compared to getting vehicle speed at the times of impact.

I am not condoning or defending use of mobiles whilst driving.

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

It has felt for me as though people have been trying to defend the indefensible and completely unnecessary though Steve, the key word there being “unnecessary”.

I could, if I take a quantum leap of faith, understand why it was so tempting before the introduction, availability and cheapness of hands-free options; but not anymore I can't.

Exceptional circumstances aside, I haven’t heard anyone give me one good reason why someone should need to use the phone with their hand, or mess about with it while driving, when there is a perfectly safe, (and legal), alternative. It's just laziness or stupidity, or both.

My friend recently bought a smashing replacement radio for his car from Maplin with built-in Bluetooth. It works incredibly well with the single push of a button to answer, or automatic ‘pick-up’ I believe, as does the earpiece I got from Halfords for £4.99 about a year ago.

As for whether using them is hurting people and their abuse is not a problem? It does happen and I know it does because I see patient’s files every day which gives the reason for their unfortunate situation. But I can’t give names and places and I’m sure some will think “oh he’s using that card again”. Oh well..

_________________
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 yet, but I'm willing to keep an open mind, pending the outcome of better research. I don't pretend to have seen and understood all the research out there but I am reminded of one much-publicised result that equated mobile phone use to serious drink-driving, in terms of accident likelihood, but I'm not convinced at all by the bits and pieces I've seen reported in the press. (I'm thinking in particular of the "mental arithmetic" challenge. Now it should be pretty obvious to ANYONE that all such a test could prove is that if the subject matter was demanding enough, it's pretty obvious that concentration will suffer and NOT that all tasks are likely to result in a similar loss of concentration).

Anyway, I hope that answers your question - perhaps you' care to answer the following:

Do you think that all the other (currently legal) forms of mobile communication use should be banned whilst driving?

While weepej cogitates on that one Mole, I have a quick question which involves simple logic.

How can adding an event or extra in-car task ever improve concentration on driving, especially an unnecessary event or task?

I’ll understand if a logical answer or support isn't forthcoming...

_________________
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.

I don't know Tone.

(There! That's an honest answer)!

HOWEVER, I think THAT'S the kind of research that needs to be done. Let's face it, concentration is a pretty elastic concept. Everyone can give something between 0 and 100% concentration, but not everyone's 100% would be the same (I imagine!) in absolute terms. The important thing (I feel) when driving, is to give the job as much concentration as it requires, and no more. Any more and you just induce fatigue very rapidly. An F1 driver can probably manage prodigious concentration for an hour or so. I don't imagine any human being would be able to concentrate at that level for (say) a 6 hour journey.

Also, what is it you're concentrating on when you're concentrating at 100%? The things you are watching may not (I imagine) not always be the things that could cause an accident. Inf fact, I'd even go so far as to say that extreme concentration in your field of consciousnes is probably even detrimental to safe driving! I've no idea if this is making any sense (and I'm not in the least bit qualified, so this is all "gut feeling!) but it seems to me that if you're concentrating 100% on what you can see, it will be (by definition) impossible to take in anything else (like the football rolling out between the parked cars up ahead).

I find, especially on long motorway journeys, that my mind wanders. Listening to the radio helps. It seems to absorb that bit of concentration that would lead the rest of my mind astray and leaves just enough for the rest of my brain to get its teeth into. What's more, there will be different sorts of radio too. There's the background "wallpaper" music and there's the Radio 4 serious debate. Both require different amounts of concentration devoting to them. If anything, something else to occupy part of my mind actually HELPS - especially on long journeys. I also wonder whether "concentration" is a bit like other aspects of the brain. People of my grandparents' generation used to say "don't fill the lad's mind up with all that rubbish" (in response to something or other, but our understanding of the human mind has deepened since then. We now know that the more you know, the more capacity for learning you seem to have! Quite the opposite of what was commonly supposed only a few generations ago. I think anyone who says they're devoting 100% concentration to their driving but still listens to the radio is probably lying!

So that's the sort of research I'd like to see. I'd like to see how much attention different sorts of scenario take up. I'd like to see what difference the content of the call makes. I'd like to see if there's an optimum level of concentration and whether or not anything less than that benefits from extra distractions (phone calls, listening to the radio etc.

Not only that, I'd like to see research into why using walkie-talkies or CBs doesn't have the same effect (if, indeed, it doesn't!) I'd like to see figures for KSIs per 100,000 vehicle-miles for taxis, CBers and emergency services compared to the general motoring population and to mobile phone users...

...and so on.

Excellent and very interesting post Mole and I completely agree with you. As I have said, I am not opposed to research I am in favour of it, but I don’t think we could have waited for ‘however much longer’ before acting on this matter.

Unless I am missing something, the message I have been getting is that the law should not have been introduced, (or should now be repealed), because some people can allegedly drive safely holding the phone. That is simply not a good argument for not introducing a law prohibiting the practice and more importantly:

‘It does not make sense to me that someone who has just past their test, and at the beginning of a long driving career based on safe measures and sound advice, should then start thinking it's okay to occupy their hand with a mobile phone’.

Someone tell me I’m wrong and why? (I sincerely hope no-one will).

The law has been introduced and from here if it can be proven that mobile phone use can be done safely by the masses then okay!? I don’t think it can, but at least we have a starting point from curbing abhorrent and dangerous behaviour and I honestly don’t think that’s an illogical argument or standpoint.

As I have also said “I am making a very clear distinction between those which are avoidable or unnecessary and those which are not!” and “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”.

I the mean time do as much research as anyone likes. I am not opposed to it and await proof that the masses can be taught to use mobile phones with their hands; taught to do something for which there is no need or reason in actual fact and truth.

_________________
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.

Speaking from personal experience, the "cheap" hands-free kits can be an utter liability! The sound quality can be so poor that you end up concentrating MUCH harder trying to hear what the other person is saying than you would have had to by simply holding the phone to your ear!

I tried the "just-turn-it-off-in-the-car" thing once. When I stopped for a break, I turned it on and got all the various messages - one of which was from a client asking if I could drop in on my way past...

...about 100 miles back the way I'd just come! If I'd had the phone on, I'd have been able to drop in on my way past - the message was left about exactly the time I would have been passing his place!

Dude! What that tells me is you need to get a better one, or the right one, especially if your livelihood depends on it. As I was saying, if it’s important in your job to be contactable at all times isn’t it worth that expense? With respect Mole, one shouldn’t blame that there isn’t a hands-free option which works well. The one I got works very well indeed. As for if it isn’t a problem, I know this won’t constitute overwhelming proof but if only a fraction of it is true they were right to bring in the law; added to what I have seen for myself of course..

"Each year, about 21% of fatal car crashes involving teenagers between 16 and 19 involve use of cell phones while driving". (Edit, I'll have to find the link to that again )
(Edit2 I think it was here

The telephonic survey conducted in June on 1,004 adults affirms that many Americans get distracted by using their smartphones to call or text while driving. A previous DWD (driving while distracted) survey stated that from millions of Americans more than one out of the four had admitted the use of the app while hitting the road. The survey was also conducted by Harris Interactive for Nationwide in April, 2010".

"With the increase of the demand for smartphones and feature phones carrying the latest technology and apps, there has also been a rise in the number of car accidents. The latest public opinion poll surveyed by Harris Interactive for Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company has recently revealed that almost four out of ten American drivers, accounting to 38 percentage, have asserted that they have been hit or just missed drivers operating their handsets.

"Research from the Transport Research Laboratory, shows drivers reactions and responses are dramatically impaired when using mobile phones when driving, comparable with a driver who has consumed twice the legal alcohol limit. There is also growing evidence to suggest the use of mobile phones is becoming a more common contributory factor in many serious collisions. Legislation introduced in December 2003 prohibits the use of hand held mobile phones while driving and there is increasing anecdotal evidence that misuse, particularly by people driving for work purposes, is continuing.. However, they are also distracting and if used whilst driving it considerably increases the risk of a collision...

“To drive safely you have to concentrate and talking on the telephone distracts your attention from the road. What’s more, if you are using your mobile phone when you’re driving you cannot be in full control of your vehicle.”

And here's an eye-opener or two

Obviously if your eyes are focused on your cell phone, then you are not looking where you are driving

_________________
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.

Well Tone, your links suggest that there might be some danger in the practice but much more research is needed before a ban could be justified. After all a lion tamer could cope with a rabid lion on the back seat so why can't the rest of us. [/deep irony]

_________________
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

That doesn't suprise me to be honest , Tone and we also know that a very large proportion of that age group are involved in fatal accidents compared to other age groups and no doubt there are probably more speeding fatalities in that age group, than other age groups BUT at the same time we are typically introducing laws to the whole spectrum of motoring public (the majority of which may be sensible) on the basis of a minority (just as with speed limits being dropped to cater for the incompetent).

So while I agree with you that mobile phone handling while driving CAN be dangerous, it is obviously more dangerous if you mistreat it (as can be gas, electricity, guns, knives, speed etc) and the trick is to know what is and isn't dangerous and clamp down on the dangerous use of mobile phones in cars, as opposed to total usage of mobile phones in cars. To be honest if you are in an area where you are likely to be spotted by a patrol car, whilst holding a mobile phone, you are probably in an area where the traffic density is too high to be holding a mobile phone anyway.

As for Mole, if you are in the market for a Sat Nav, I can recommend the Garmin 215 which has bluetooth reception and is a very good sat nav (hands free quality is good but not brilliant)

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

I think it is fair to say that 21% of young drivers are not on the phone at any time.
So if that statistic in your article is correct Tone, then that data would go a long way to showing that the use of phones has a considerable detrimental impact.

RCGB2008:


This largely confirms that 21% of young drivers indeed aren't on the phone at any time - indicating the use of HH really is over-represented.

HOWEVER:

"Road Casualties Great Britain 2008" states that 16 of 2170 fatals had being on the phone as a contributory factor, less than 1%.
Of course that is for drivers of all ages, and I don't know if either document differentiates between hand-held and hands-free.

The figure of 21% really doesn't work (even for specific ages within the group)

RCGB2009:

"Road Casualties Great Britain 2008" states that 15 of 1935 fatals had being on the phone as a contributory factor, again less than 1%.



There has been a 20% increase in HH mobile use over that year, so we would expect the rate of that contributory to increase by the same amount if HH mobiles really were such an issue. However, over the same time period the fatality tally involving HH mobiles had actually reduced. Of course we have to be careful of temporal noise and other variables (improved occupant protection).




The RCGB2009 performed the same kind of survey, reporting over 30% for HH mobile use. Clearly the perception of the public is somewhat distanced from reality.



RCGB2008: Mobile phone contributory factor, for SI accidents = 60
RCGB2009: Mobile phone contributory factor, for SI accidents = 55
RCGB2010: Not yet released

Now that I've dug a little bit, I can see there is a lot of misrepresentation regarding the impact of mobiles whilst driving.

Let's have real data!

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

Yes Grabs but I keep coming back to the same point time and time again. There is a safe and legal alternative

We need to use knives, we need to use gas and electricity. We do not need to operate a HH mobile phone while driving.


I repeat

1) Is having a mobile phone in your hand going to make your driving safer?
2) Is it imperetive is it that you absolutely must take or make that call right there-and-then?
3) Do the benefits of this practice outweigh any and all other concerns over and above using a hands-free?
4) Is it impossible just to pull over and stop instead, either straight away or at the next service station?

NO! NO! NO! NO!

Again: The law was put in place for a good reason and it's an excellent starting place to make a case for looking into whether it’s helpful or not. I think it is and if evidence shows that you can teach the masses how to use one safely in your hand while driving then okay – I’m on board.

But you are going to have your work cut out because it certainly isn’t looking good so far...

_________________
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.

Agreed Steve. But as I said, even if it is only a tiny fraction we still have the evidence of our eyes and common sense, (plus what I see through work). Can someone here, anyone, hold their hand up and say they have never seen a car meandering or some numpty holding it up to their ear in a fashion which, BTW, also acts like a blinker as they move their head? Iv'e witnessed drivers trying to negotiate islands with one hand through the steering wheel. Maybe it's just rife here in Birmingham but I see it on a regular basis.

That is why I believe it was right to make it law, re: my earlier argument on the introduction of speed limits. If it is found that it is indeed not a problem at all and it has all just been made up or blown out of all proportion – great! I will accept the evidence.

I'll go to the extreme.. Let's say it's only a handful of people getting killed each year and the claims have been incredibly, grossly exaggerated beyond belief! Why do it when you simply don’t have to?

Let's have the research and investigation by all means while the, (sensible), law is in place and who knows, maybe one day I'll eat my words. And if I'm wrong I will eat my words! But I have to say, I'm pretty comfortable on that score because we already know from investigations after accidents, where the mobile phone was in use, that this does in fact happen.

_________________
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.