Safe Speed Forums

Realistically there is no going back on the hand-held ban, although I do accept the point that it had the effect of making handsfree use seem "OK".

If hand-helds had not been banned, then it would have sent the same signal to people in the habit of using them, and every chav in the country would now be permanently on his mobile while driving.

If there was no drink-drive limit, then people would tend to drink more before driving, even if they knew the book would be thrown at them if they caused a crash while under the influence of drink, because people never think it will happen to them.

Banning handsfree phones too might be more beneficial than people think. OK, in a sense it may be unenforceable, but it would stop at the drop of a hat companies expecting their employees using the phone when driving, and overall would greatly reduce the amount of phone use at the wheel.

But my instinct is against adding another thing to the long list of bans.

_________________
"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

Agreed, if a total ban was introduced we could get some very draconican black and white enforcement which I don't think is desirable or helpful. I don't see a huge problem in someone phoning home while in crawling traffic to tell their partner they will be late for tea. However I do have a problem with those who try to hold in-depth sales call at 90mph while wandering all over the motorway.

I agree with Peter that it's too late to go back now, but TPTB could still learn a useful lesson for the next time an analagous issue arises.

In hindsight, what would have worked better - and sent the right message to the chavs with the mobiles clamped to their ear - would have been to have issued more stringent guidelines to Police Officers as to what constituted careless driving.

In other words, if it had become routine that every time a driver was seen blatantly using a mobile in an inappropriate way, eg whilst driving in traffic or for a prolonged call etc, then they got pulled over for an acide lecture, then the problem would have been seen to be being addressed. It didn't need a new law, it simply needed the existing one moving higher up the priority list for the TrafPols to get the message across.

As it is they have simply introduced yet another "drive by numbers" formula of "hands-free ok, handheld not" without actually getting any real message across about what the real problem was, ie distraction, loss of concentration etc.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

I've driven safely home several times after a pint or two. However I nearly ran into the back of somebody once when I was fiddling with a mobile wondering why it kept switching itself off.

The difference is that after a pint or two, you are 100% concentrated on the road, because you are aware that your reactions may be impaired. When fiddling with a mobile while sober, you don't have that extra concentration, because "you are sober so it must be OK".

I learnt a lot from that incident. Now I never do anything with a mobile whilst driving. Far too distracting.

Brian

JT wrote=.Surely it would make sense for officers investigating fatacs to check all the vehicle occupants for possession of mobile phones as a matter of course, and then to check via the service providers records to see whether the line was active at the time of the accident.

If only it was as simple as " can i keep your phone to send off for checking" along with the cost. Yes cost it sadly comes down to money in order to carry your job out efficiently. Perhaps the cost should be past onto either insurance company or service provider in circumstances like this, I bet they would have somethingto say.
Stephen

I'd rather we didn't get too focussed on this business of reaction times. If you're going to rely too heavily on fast reaction times, I tend to feel you're never going to be a particularly safe driver. Most of the safe driving ability we have comes from recognising the constantly changing situations, evaluating them with reasonable accuracy, and taking the correct action.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

that's exactly what's meant by 'reaction times' in this situation - not whether they can hit a buzzer in 1s or .5s. The focussed driver sees a danger and reacts to it appropriately. The mobile or drunk driver generally doesn't until it's too late.

I don't think there's a discrepancy here, it’s just the words in use. I prefer to think of the actions that occur prior to an “action” as anticipation, a very useful skill that, IME, tends to come with experience although I think some are naturally better than others.

The after “action” stuff I would say was reaction, as this occurs as a result of the “action”, again something that is important, especially where times are concerned, but I think it is fair to say that someone who is capable of anticipating an action will also have better reaction to it.

Cheers

Paul