Let's hope the new law is enforced a bit better than the seat belt law, the fog light law, etc etc...
|
Apparently, a lady in Dundee got done today anyway.
HJ
|
They pulled her over because of the phone use and then found her to be drunk.
Now thats what it *should* be all about.
Pull 'em for speeding, pull 'em for using a phone, pull 'em for whatever and then have a good look at what else they're up to.
|
There is no confusion just that some people don\'t want to be banned from using it. Fine them on the spot, no warning, stopn pussying about. Regards
Peter
|
|
Scottish Forces had always said they would prosecute from day one. I think it was the wrong message to send by ACPO in E&W to say they would only caution initially. By all means adopt the policy, I still feel that the ACPO are politicing. Look forward to defending a case in of the driver using his/hers in a jam.
|
Even in this thread a strange attitude seems to prevail whereby everyone who ever uses a mobile phone in a car is branded as the same sort of idiot as those who drive with one permanently clamped to their earhole in order to constantly whitter inanities to their mates and their nearest and dearest. Mobile phones have opened up the world for the purposes of communication (which has upsides and downsides), and they have become essential for business. If someone can find you on your mobile at any time it can make the difference between doing a deal and not doing a deal. That's why I think that a lot of the people who campaign against any use of mobile phones in cars are the sort of people who merely get paid and don't actually have to earn a living. I really look forward to pugugly's report of his first case of defending someone for using a hand held while stuck in a traffic jam.
HJ
|
> they have become essential for business. If someone can find you on your mobile at any time it can make the difference between doing a deal and not doing a deal.
No doubt about that HJ but surely then should have fixed in car set up rather than handheld equipment. Would presume also such installation offset against tax.
|
|
|
Like others, I understood that it was only in Scotland that offenders would be prosecuted from day one. However a driver in Norfolk was given an on-the-spot £30 fine yesterday. When interviewed he made it clear that he didn't understand how it could affect his driving, which is exactly why we have needed this new law instead of relying on common sense.
As for the comment from HJ that using a mobile to talk business is OK but using it for any other purpose is idiotic -- how on earth can the purpose of the call affect the level of the hazard?
|
I can see where HJ is coming from. Notice that he refers to people getting in touch with him ... to do a deal...
This suggests to me somebody who isn\'t making outbound calls but may answer the odd business call in the car. This as opposed to some moronic type driving everywhere whilst organising their social calender with the latest camera phone with games and mp3 pressed to their shell-like.
I too use my \'phone in the car for similar reasons to HJ. I can often be driving long distances that would otherwise leave me inaccessible and therefore unable to run my business for hours at a time. With a bluetooth headset on auto-answer I can take calls whilst driving and if it\'s a frivolous call will briefly state I will call back as I\'m driving and end the call.
If it is a call I need to take (this is usually on the motorway) I slow to 60 or so, drop in behind a convenient lorry and keeping my eyes glued to mirrors/screen etc will handle the call. If at any time the situation is less than safe, the call goes, which I explain at the outset to whomever I\'m talking to.
I agree there is a rabid \"NO PHONES\" approach from a number of people who, I suspect, have no concept of the need to generate their own income as they have the type of employment whereby they have no need to be contactable in this way in order to get paid. It\'s a straightforward polarisation of views brought about by a lack of understanding of a way of working that is foreign to you.
I\'m able to see both sides of the fence as I have worked in the latter sort of employment and yes, I thought all mobile use in cars was foolish. It\'s not, it just needs some common sense.
As an addendum (nice to have an edit button) I will NOT take calls in town/built-up areas whilst on the move. Too much happening that makes it a risk. It\'s a quick \"let me call you back\" then find somewhere to park.
|
|
Agree completely with No Dosh's views on this one
|
No Dosh,
"I suspect, have no concept of the need to generate their own income - It's a straightforward polarisation of views brought about by a lack of understanding of a way of working that is foreign to you."
IMO the above statements completely miss the point of the argument. It is not in dispute that some people have a greater dependence on their mobile phones than others for earning their daily crust. It is irrelevant whether they are "merely paid" or "create wealth" for themselves. That reliance on their mobile should not, and does not, give them dispensation to interpret the law differently.
An analogy would be the self employed taxi/delivery driver. They have a financial incentive to finish their tasks quickly and get another job. Using your(and HJ's) argument that would justify them ignoring speed limits, traffic lights etc - yes I know many do anyway
The precautions you outline when using your mobile are an admission that its use carries an element of risk. Clearly you are less of a danger than the salesman in his repmobile at 90mph in the outside lane with mobile in one hand and consulting the paperwork on his passenger seat. Obviously the level of risk for yourself and other road users is acceptable to you; but presumably the salesman in his repmobile feels the same.
C
|
|
|
HJ,
That's why I think that a lot of the people who campaign against any use of mobile phones in cars are the sort of people who merely get paid and don't actually have to earn a living.
I really don't know what you are trying to say in the above statement. The vast majority of people in this country are salaried/wage earning. They are "merely" paid and earn a living. That includes the medical profession, police, Armed Forces etc.
You appear to be implying that motoring journalists and entrepreneurs are more worthy than these people and should enjoy some special category when it comes to observance of the law because it means doing a deal or not.
Or have I got it wrong?
I am with Dizzy on this "how on earth can the purpose of the call affect the level of the hazard?"
C
|
I have to agree with the anti mobile brigade.
People who are constantly using their mobile for business in the car IMO cannot give driving their 100% attention and are hazardous on the road.
The premise that any phone call is more important because you might miss out on a deal doesn't wash with me.Which is more important , your deal or my safety.
Why not turn your answerphone on , say I might be driving and ring back when safe to do so.
|
|
Spotting a mobile phone user on the move: wobbles about, can't keep to a set speed, and is obviously about to do something daft. Then the phone is spotted. Actions rather like that of a drunk: I keep them where I can see them if I can't get away!
|
|
If the nature of your business is the need to be always in touch then the Law, at present, allows for hands free. Be reponsible and get a good auto answer, voice recognition, totally hands free phone and be safer. Peter
|
|
Hi HJ, On the news this morning they announced that the Dundee Lady has also been done for drink driving, they breath tested her when she was stopped for using the phone. I find that a little strange as I am sure I heard the phone fine thing before midday on Moday so how come she was caught for drink driving. Maybe a night before binge drinker. So now the mobile phone LAw catch drink drivers. Well it allows to Police to have a reson to stop you. Regards Peter
|
I think HJ might consider you as 'part' of the anti-mobile brigade Helicopter ;)
I understand what you're saying about all phone calls being equal and agree with you to a point. There is however another issue where if everyone obeyed the rules there wouldn't be a problem however if HJ and others like him refuse to use the phone whilst driving then how do they compete with those that do? (similar to the recent complaint from textile manufacturers that they can't compete with those breaking minimum wage rules).
As for the importance of my phone calls, I currently keep my phone off whilst driving however I will turn it on in March to answer any (very quick) calls from my wife who's expecting our first child then. (Our house is both a long way from the hospital and my workplace)
|
By the way, the premise that people who are paid a wage are unable to understand those who have to 'earn a living' is IMO facetious codswallop.
I am paid a wage ( quite a large sum ) to run the UK end of a very large company and I have been self employed.
I have to be constantly in touch with the Middle east who are 3 hours ahead and the States who are 5 to 7 hours behind. I do deals worth millions of pounds every year without the need to use a mobile in the car, in the air or anywhere else.
|
People who are constantly using their mobile for business in the car IMO cannot give driving their 100% attention and are hazardous on the road.
I found in the past that I felt that my concentration was on the road when taking business calls (fully handsfree), but if it was a personal call my concentration was much less.
These days if I take a call while in ASDA , then when the call ends I find that I am 10 aisles away from where I was, and I haven't actually put anything in my trolley, such is the effect on concentration.
|
I totally fail to see why using a mobile phone in the car is quite safe if its a business call to try and close an important deal but its dangerous and stupid if you\'re nattering to your Mother about nothing in particular.
If there is no risk, then why ban either.
If there is a risk, is it supposed to make me feel better that when you hit me because you were on your phone, its alright because you were making a business call ?
I couldn\'t give a stuff what the call was or how important it was or whether you receive a salary, a wage, or merely create wealth.
You might as well say that its ok to exceed the speed limit by 100mph if you\'re going to a business meeting, but if you\'re only going to home you can\'t.
So instead of arguing about why its ok for some and not ok for others, understandable for some uses and ridiculous for others, surely the point is only the following - is there more of a risk ? Is it sufficiently more to justify a ban ?
From my own perspective (how distracted I feel and how often I see people on phones driving stupid) then I would say that there is an increased risk, it is sufficient for a ban, and if you\'re not hands free then you shouldn\'t use the thing however important is your call (life and death issues to one side).
However that\'s just my impression, I don\'t actually know.
But please - \"its lower risk or more socially acceptable to take the risk because of a business deal\" ?? Silly, very silly.
|
Not quite what I said, but this is a very difficult area.
Today I had to nip up to Reading on business and witnessed the "drunk driving" that is mentioned above. Yes, the driver was on a 'call. What galled me was the fact that the driver was in a blinkin' expensive Merc, yet clearly hadn't been bothered to sort out a relatively inexpensive hands-free.
My argument above was based around my use of hands free and my refusal to make a call whilst driving, even with voice dial. I mentioned the polarity of opinion based on my own experiences. The difference in viewpoint is relevant in as much as those that have never been in a position where their mortgage payment may rely on a call being received, (even if the response is "sorry, call you back in 5") are more likely to see all 'phone use as frivolous and therefore dangerous. There seems to be an intrinsic link in many peoples minds that suggests that casual use implies a lack of concentration.
I do feel the law is correct in that the physical act of holding a 'phone is wholly incompatible with driving, regardless of the nature of the call. That said, I've been in peoples cars when a "heavy" subject has come up on Radio 4 and their attention to the road has vanished for the entire 28 minutes of the prog!
|
No Dosh,
1. "There seems to be an intrinsic link in many peoples minds that suggests that casual use implies a lack of concentration."
2."I've been in peoples cars when a "heavy" subject has come up on Radio 4 and their attention to the road has vanished for the entire 28 minutes of the prog!"
Does not your second statement somewhat contradict the first?
I would have thought that an important business call on which "their mortgage may rely" would require considerable concentration(and thus divert it from driving) - far more so than a frivolous call.
C
|
It's more a case of acknowleging the call and agreeing a call back. The line of work I'm in is somewhat cut-throat. If someone gets my voicemail they just ring the next guy. If they get hold of me and I say, "Hi, glad you rang. Give me two/ten/whatever minutes as I'm driving right now" and you get the chance to gather the business.
Often the calls are less than 60 secs regardless, just checking availability for a project, for example.
|
Regarding the name of this thread... yes, ACPO have said that it will be a verbal warning for the first two months but many forces (West Mids being one of them) have taken the unusual step of not taking the ACPO line and have been merrily issuing fixed penalties over the last 24 hours. And in case you're wondering, I've been good today and put the phone in the boot so I can't be tempted! :-)
Was pondering though (I couldn't talk on the phone so I had some spare brain space!) on the drive home...
To me, the idea of drinking alcohol and then driving is totally wrong, and I think the same opinion is held by most people my age. I can't understand why if they can ban mobile phones, they can't ban drinking and driving. But anyway.... A lot of older people seem to be of the opinion that it's not that bad to have one or two and still drive. Because I've been brought up with the 'don't drink and drive' message and have taken it totally on board, do you think using a mobile while driving will be viewed in the same way by people in their 20s in 10 years time?
|
Hi Pologirl
Why not try a hands-free kit? The version with a wire which plugs into the bottom/side of the phone and the other end is a tiny loudspeaker, which goes in ones ear, works well. Set your phone to automatic answer after two rings and you are away.
Even though I have voice dialling, I avoid making calls on the move. Tesco have own brand hands-free and in-car charger kits for - I think - £4.99.
Regards Don drbe
|
|
|
|
|
