I personally think the offender's car should be impounded, but I can just see the public outcry when the offender is a BMW driving single mum with two kids being left at the road side by the police, the fact that she was using a mobile phone whilst driving would be forgotten.
Sat in a queue at the traffic lights at the crossroads in Blackfen last week. Some cnut behind me decided he didn't fancy that so he drove up onto the pavement, used that to avoid the crossroads completely and drove off down Blackfen Road, all whilst his mobile was glued to his ear.
When I use my phone for sat nav I don't even have it in sight. It's usually in the cup-holder, on charge with the verbal instructions coming over the car radio via blue-tooth. That's been good enough to get me everywhere I've needed to go so far without having to look at the screen for directions.
Sat in a queue at the traffic lights at the crossroads in Blackfen last week. Some cnut behind me decided he didn't fancy that so he drove up onto the pavement, used that to avoid the crossroads completely and drove off down Blackfewn Road, all whilst his mobile was glued to his ear.
for example i use my iphone in a holder as my sat nav, is that classed as using a mobile?, if i touch the screen to clear a text message?.
What possible reason could you have for needing to "clear a text message" while you are driving?
so i can carry on looking at the sat nav?? thought that was quite self explanatory
thought it was a pretty normal question would have read better if i would of said notification of any sort be it text message, racing post notification, tweet notification.
I would increase the punishment for a first-time offence to four, distinct things, all of which would be enforced, (but I think the fourth one would have the most effect).
1. 11-points on your licence (ie, if you do anything else wrong, you're over the 12-point limit).
2. An immediate, thirty-day driving ban.
3. A £10,000 fine (which can be suspended on request)
4. A seven-day ban on owning, operating or using a mobile phone.
Why a ban only for those who have passed the driving test in the past two years? Not consistent, is it? Anyone using a phone whilst driving - irrespective of when they passed the driving test - should be banned from driving. The length of ban should be large (e.g. six months) so that it acts as a deterrent. I'm a cyclist and I have been deeply affected by injury - physical and mental - caused by being hit by a car.
As the law currently stands, 6 points (for any offences) in your first two years is enough to lose your license. Consider it a probationary period after which it becomes 12 points before you risk losing your license.
Why a ban only for those who have passed the driving test in the past two years? Not consistent, is it? Anyone using a phone whilst driving - irrespective of when they passed the driving test - should be banned from driving. The length of ban should be large (e.g. six months) so that it acts as a deterrent. I'm a cyclist and I have been deeply affected by injury - physical and mental - caused by being hit by a car.
I was surprised to hear there will be a harsher punishment for certain drivers, just because they have been on the road for less time. Surely any decent brief could get this turned over at any first hurdle?
See randy andy's post. Regardless of offence, drivers in the first 2 years have a limit of 6 points.
So maybe it has been badly reported (no change), as they've been saying it in the context of an automatic straight ban for new (or young drivers as they have also been saying on Auntie), with no mention of the "6 points and you're out" rule for new drivers in the first place.
The problem isn't the scale of punishment, it's the enforcement. Increasing the severity of the punishment to counter enforcement issues is a worrying trend.
When you break it down it's just purely selfish behaviour and a totally unnecessary to do.
I've seen plenty of drivers on their phones clearly not paying proper attention and seemingly a high proportion of those have a passenger with them; so I'm usually thinking 'why ain't they using it on their behalf'!?
for example i use my iphone in a holder as my sat nav, is that classed as using a mobile?, if i touch the screen to clear a text message?.
What possible reason could you have for needing to "clear a text message" while you are driving?
so i can carry on looking at the sat nav?? thought that was quite self explanatory
thought it was a pretty normal question would have read better if i would of said notification of any sort be it text message, racing post notification, tweet notification.
If you're looking at a Sat Nav you are not concentrating on the road and that could be classed as driving without due care and attention.
for example i use my iphone in a holder as my sat nav, is that classed as using a mobile?, if i touch the screen to clear a text message?.
What possible reason could you have for needing to "clear a text message" while you are driving?
so i can carry on looking at the sat nav?? thought that was quite self explanatory
thought it was a pretty normal question would have read better if i would of said notification of any sort be it text message, racing post notification, tweet notification.
If you're looking at a Sat Nav you are not concentrating on the road and that could be classed as driving without due care and attention.
thats what im asking as im no expert, does looking at a sat nav and touching the screen count as using the mobile phone.
for example i use my iphone in a holder as my sat nav, is that classed as using a mobile?, if i touch the screen to clear a text message?.
What possible reason could you have for needing to "clear a text message" while you are driving?
so i can carry on looking at the sat nav?? thought that was quite self explanatory
thought it was a pretty normal question would have read better if i would of said notification of any sort be it text message, racing post notification, tweet notification.
If you're looking at a Sat Nav you are not concentrating on the road and that could be classed as driving without due care and attention.
thats what im asking as im no expert, does looking at a sat nav and touching the screen count as using the mobile phone.
From what was said on breakfast TV this morning, just touching the phone is illegal.
If I could be so bold for one minute - In relation to the majority of minorish traffic offence, most fines are generally affordable to be paid in one lump by most drivers. If they really wanted to stamp these things out, they'd hand out on the spot bans (from 1 month for speeding etc. to life for drink driving etc.), with stiffer sentences for chavs who break their bans.
Could be described as another stealth tax, that does very well to get most people behind it. imo
Good move - got overtaken recently on the M11 by some c**t using two mobiles - anyone slows down in front and there's a pile up.
Becoming common now to be sat in traffic waiting for the twat in front to start moving as they're too busy looking at the phone.
Roundabouts are getting more dangerous as drivers invariably can't navigate them properly while on the phone.
I would love to know the % of accidents caused by twats on their mobiles.
Well, we covered that to an extent in the thread on speed cameras.
I gave you a clue in my answer to your post. That is that the factor of "failing to look properly" had gone up from 42% to 46% in the last few years. But the thing is that the actual factor "driver using a mobile phone" has such a small number (under 500 accidents) that it figures as zero percent in the tables. The reason being, of course, that unless the driver dies or is seriously injured they quickly turn off and put their phone away, so you'll never get an accurate figure.
I'm more interested though in why the Govt. haven't at the same time made more of an effort to educate pedestrians. The five factors "pedestrian failed to look properly", "pedestrian impaired by alcohol", "pedestrian failed to use crossing facility properly", "pedestrian careless, reckless or in a hurry" and "pedestrian wearing dark clothing at night" aggregate to being a factor in road accidents in 18% of the total.
How many of those peds were on their phone at the time, I wonder? Is it not fair that they should be held equally culpable?
If I could be so bold for one minute - In relation to the majority of minorish traffic offence, most fines are generally affordable to be paid in one lump by most drivers. If they really wanted to stamp these things out, they'd hand out on the spot bans (from 1 month for speeding etc. to life for drink driving etc.), with stiffer sentences for chavs who break their bans.
Could be described as another stealth tax, that does very well to get most people behind it. imo
On the spot bans? How would that ever work? It's asking for massive problems, giving individual coppers the ability to in a moment ruins somebody's life, potentially permanently (if you need to drive for work then a 1 month ban could end your employment and ruin chances of future employment as well). So an overzealous copper does you for 32 in a 30 and you lose your job and potentially your home. It would almost certainly be illegal in this country to levy and on the spot ban without any due process involved, as well as breaking various laws on punishment needing to be proportionate to the crime.
Comments
One guess what make of car he was driving...
thought it was a pretty normal question would have read better if i would of said notification of any sort be it text message, racing post notification, tweet notification.
(Slightly annoyed I can only LIKE this once).
Becoming common now to be sat in traffic waiting for the twat in front to start moving as they're too busy looking at the phone.
Roundabouts are getting more dangerous as drivers invariably can't navigate them properly while on the phone.
I would love to know the % of accidents caused by twats on their mobiles.
1. 11-points on your licence (ie, if you do anything else wrong, you're over the 12-point limit).
2. An immediate, thirty-day driving ban.
3. A £10,000 fine (which can be suspended on request)
4. A seven-day ban on owning, operating or using a mobile phone.
They should ban shit reporters an all....
I've seen plenty of drivers on their phones clearly not paying proper attention and seemingly a high proportion of those have a passenger with them; so I'm usually thinking 'why ain't they using it on their behalf'!?
Could be described as another stealth tax, that does very well to get most people behind it. imo
I gave you a clue in my answer to your post. That is that the factor of "failing to look properly" had gone up from 42% to 46% in the last few years. But the thing is that the actual factor "driver using a mobile phone" has such a small number (under 500 accidents) that it figures as zero percent in the tables. The reason being, of course, that unless the driver dies or is seriously injured they quickly turn off and put their phone away, so you'll never get an accurate figure.
I'm more interested though in why the Govt. haven't at the same time made more of an effort to educate pedestrians. The five factors "pedestrian failed to look properly", "pedestrian impaired by alcohol", "pedestrian failed to use crossing facility properly", "pedestrian careless, reckless or in a hurry" and "pedestrian wearing dark clothing at night" aggregate to being a factor in road accidents in 18% of the total.
How many of those peds were on their phone at the time, I wonder? Is it not fair that they should be held equally culpable?