WARNING! NEW Mobile Phone Laws

[DuxDeluxe]

I find doing anything with my Satnav requires my undivided attention. It's hard enough sitting on my drive setting the thing up.

You think you have problems….. walking and chewing a sweet is my limit. And those that know me will testify to the fact that I still fall over. A lot.

 

[MisterB]

" I would tell them to go and do one and not listen to them" That, I would suggest could well the start of a journey to a custody suite. If not you ay be having a vehicle safety check, anything and everything they can think of that takes as long as possible and then you might have an eyesight test to.

I think if you re read my post, you would see that I said 'if that would happen', meaning I would already be in the custody suite! - unfortunately you may think the individual police officers have every right to say and do what that want to do and if you disagree they MAY and do have the right, to decide to become awkward/over enthusiastic.
I have a different view, the individual police officers should not treat anyone differently just because they refuse to take part in an egoistical exercise by an individual officer. If I have committed an offence, fine me and move on, don't try pontificating to me, because I won't listen to you.
To suggest I should just accept a 'lecture' from the individual officer and if not they would then go on to subject me to further tests and checks because of my attitude feels corrupt (in terms of process) and threatening.
I want my police force to treat everyone the same irrespective of the reverence shown towards them. A police officer being 'awkward' because they don't like someone's attitude doesn't seem to be professional, subjecting someone to further 'examination' IS valid for a valid reason. To suggest I should not tell a police officer to do one if they start to try to lecture me on my actions instead of just issuing a penalty because they might be a little bit upset and decide to 'punish' me further, seems wrong to me, as though we should be scared of the police, when we should in fact respect the role they play in society.
I could go further and suggest that of course individual police are never wrong in either their application or knowledge of the law .... but even then I am not scared of them as individuals not liking my response ...

 

[DBK]

Here is a document from The House of Commons library explaining in plain language, not only what you can and can’t do, but in most cases the logic behind it. I found it very useful.

Broken Link Removed

Thanks for that. It makes a lot of sense explaining why the changes have been introduced.

 

[Justus3]

Highly unlikely to end up in a custody suite for using a mobile when driving.

If it did happen, I would tell them to go and do one and not listen to them. They are there (in those circumstances) ONLY to catch those who break the law and not lecture anyone on the merits.

Ps I have the utmost respect for the police as a public service body, but not all those employed within their ranks.

I take you've never had to deal with the mess when a over a tonne of killing machine is left to run out of control. Scoping up a fellow human of the road is no fun I can tell you.

On its own most likely not but you would if suspected of by doing it that lead to other offences being committed. Like the death of someone else due you not willing to stay safe behind the wheel. In regard to the rest I’d suggest you don’t try it. Unless you fancy seeing the custody Sergeant from the wrong side of the desk. A simple test given your view of such matters try refusing to give a sample due to drink driving. You’d soon change your views unless you end up unconscious due to crash with drink thought to why.That is in which case a blood sample will be taken by the custody nurse at your hospital bed side. The law allows it no ifs or buts.

Then again attitudes like yours are why the county has such a gun-how view of traffic safety and law.

 

[ambulancekidd]

If the phone is in the cradle can you use it in speakerphone mode?

The thing to remember for everyone here is that even using your phone completely hands free can still land you in hot water.
If you are involved in a collision & someone dies or is seriously injured, the police will search to see if you were on your phone & if you caused the collision, you'll almost certainly be charged with causing death by dangerous or careless driving, so whilst it is still legal to use hands free, it comes with a warning.

I've been to quite a few collisions caused when someone was using a phone whilst driving, some fatal, some not, but the scenes of devastation showed me that its simply not worth the trouble, both myself & Mrsambulancekidd refuse to answer the phone whilst driving, even though both our car & motorhome are well set us to do so. We tend to stop & call the person who phoned back, or ring them when we get home.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Paulypaul]

So how am I supposed to take photos of people I spot using their phones, texting or scrolling through FB, while hogging the middle lane of the motorway, so that I can send the footage into the old bill?

 

[L' Hobo]

So how am I supposed to take photos of people I spot using their phones, texting or scrolling through FB, while hogging the middle lane of the motorway, so that I can send the footage into the old bill?

You get a dashcam!

 

[LesW]

Thank goodness for voice activated satnavs..

 

[Paulypaul]

You get a dashcam!

Yeah, but it faces forward not out the side window

 

[Odd-no-more]

The only safe way to use mobile at any point is when not at the wheel

I have used a mobile phone whilst driving since the late 80's, am I just lucky that I have not had an accident? Or could you be that your hypothesis is wrong?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Odd-no-more]

Probably because you are still in control of the vehicle in a 'live' lane of traffic when you should be paying attention to the road etc.

I have spent many hours looking at red traffic lights, it gets a bit boring after a while

 

[Northernraider]

…..and smoking……

And breathing



In fact lets just ban everything.

 

[Northernraider]

" I would tell them to go and do one and not listen to them" That, I would suggest could well the start of a journey to a custody suite. If not you ay be having a vehicle safety check, anything and everything they can think of that takes as long as possible and then you might have an eyesight test to.

Which describes most of the police action these days perfectly.

Time wasting.

 

[MisterB]

I take you've never had to deal with the mess when a over a tonne of killing machine is left to run out of control. Scoping up a fellow human of the road is no fun I can tell you.

On its own most likely not but you would if suspected of by doing it that lead to other offences being committed. Like the death of someone else due you not willing to stay safe behind the wheel. In regard to the rest I’d suggest you don’t try it. Unless you fancy seeing the custody Sergeant from the wrong side of the desk. A simple test given your view of such matters try refusing to give a sample due to drink driving. You’d soon change your views unless you end up unconscious due to crash with drink thought to why.That is in which case a blood sample will be taken by the custody nurse at your hospital bed side. The law allows it no ifs or buts.

Then again attitudes like yours are why the county has such a gun-how view of traffic safety and law.

You seem to have missed my point completely, I don't break the law and don't use my phone when driving and I don't support or condone the practice, but if I ever did something wrong that involved an interaction with the police, for a traffic offence I was guilty of, then I would accept my punishment, but not a lecture on the morals of my actions and if that led to further interactions then I would submit a strong complaint on the behaviour of the individual police officer, who is there to enforce the law. I don't drink at all when driving or likely to be driving (not even a small sherry!!) and don't take drugs, so there would not be any valid justification to delay my journey further.
Your point about me never seeing major trauma following an RTA (old school RTC) is, I might add the type of holier than thou comment I would object to.
But since your post seems to suggest you want a contest to see who can piss the furthest, and who has witnessed the most, I served over 30 years in the Fire Service, starting before seat belts were compulsory and mobile phones needed a sack truck to carry them. I've seen, from very close up, more than my fair share of lives ruined and lost, some as I was at their side trying to comfort them and have acted as a witness in coroner's court for multiple deaths.
But back to my original point, I don't support, condone or encourage breaking any laws and if I ever did, I wouldn't need someone telling me how very naughty I have been and I don't support implied threats that individual police officers may sulk and be awkward. I prefer to think that they would always act professionally and deal with any offence committed by any person in exactly the same way and only take further action should they genuinely and legitimately feel further offences have been committed. The Police and their are not there to scare us and we shouldn't be scared of them.

Ps as an aside, I am almost certain that one day a legal claim will be lodged claiming trauma caused by attendance at a 'driver awareness' course or a driver, having attended one and kept their licence, will be involved in a serious accident. Which is again why the law should be enforced vigorously, but only the law and not the personal thoughts and ramblings of an individual police officer.

 

[DuxDeluxe]

And breathing



In fact lets just ban everything.

Ban cars!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Justus3]

I have used a mobile phone whilst driving since the late 80's, am I just lucky that I have not had an accident? Or could you be that your hypothesis is wrong?

What hypothesis ? It's fact look at both court and corner cases which show that using one. Has directly lead to other being hit or killed by drivers who see it as acceptable. Both me and Mrs JU3 have working knowledge of being involved in such cases. Or look at research that show driving is affected by using one.
I and other have pointed out the only truly way to be safe is not to use it.
Yet again an example of the total "who cares" view to traffic law and safely of others. All because taking that "important" call is worth more than the life of a human.

 

[Paulypaul]

You seem to have missed my point completely, I don't break the law and don't use my phone when driving and I don't support or condone the practice, but if I ever did something wrong that involved an interaction with the police, for a traffic offence I was guilty of, then I would accept my punishment, but not a lecture on the morals of my actions and if that led to further interactions then I would submit a strong complaint on the behaviour of the individual police officer, who is there to enforce the law. I don't drink at all when driving or likely to be driving (not even a small sherry!!) and don't take drugs, so there would not be any valid justification to delay my journey further.
Your point about me never seeing major trauma following an RTA (old school RTC) is, I might add the type of holier than thou comment I would object to.
But since your post seems to suggest you want a contest to see who can piss the furthest, and who has witnessed the most, I served over 30 years in the Fire Service, starting before seat belts were compulsory and mobile phones needed a sack truck to carry them. I've seen, from very close up, more than my fair share of lives ruined and lost, some as I was at their side trying to comfort them and have acted as a witness in coroner's court for multiple deaths.
But back to my original point, I don't support, condone or encourage breaking any laws and if I ever did, I wouldn't need someone telling me how very naughty I have been and I don't support implied threats that individual police officers may sulk and be awkward. I prefer to think that they would always act professionally and deal with any offence committed by any person in exactly the same way and only take further action should they genuinely and legitimately feel further offences have been committed. The Police and their are not there to scare us and we shouldn't be scared of them.

Ps as an aside, I am almost certain that one day a legal claim will be lodged claiming trauma caused by attendance at a 'driver awareness' course or a driver, having attended one and kept their licence, will be involved in a serious accident. Which is again why the law should be enforced vigorously, but only the law and not the personal thoughts and ramblings of an individual police officer.

Agree 100%....how could anyone accept being patronised by a a member of an organisation that is basically morally corrupt?

The days of respecting the old bill are long gone, and unfortunately fo them, they are a victim of their own actions. They reep what they sow in terms of commanding the respect of the public.

 

[TOT]

Hey People - just to let you know that there are IDIOT SCUM on the road WHO PERSIST IN TEXTING while driving............

 

[Paulypaul]

What gets me is the mums on the school runs texting or holding the phone like it's a cb mike, totally oblivios to everything around them.

 

[Northernraider]

Probably on the phone

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[L' Hobo]

Yeah, but it faces forward not out the side window

Get two (or three OR a 360 degree reversing camera)?

 

[Odd-no-more]

What hypothesis ? It's fact look at both court and corner cases which show that using one. Has directly lead to other being hit or killed by drivers who see it as acceptable. Both me and Mrs JU3 have working knowledge of being involved in such cases. Or look at research that show driving is affected by using one.
I and other have pointed out the only truly way to be safe is not to use it.
Yet again an example of the total "who cares" view to traffic law and safely of others. All because taking that "important" call is worth more than the life of a human.

All I am saying is I have been using a mobile for over 30 years, safely, the headlines about accidents involving mobile phones totally ignorers the fact that thousands of drivers use mobile phones every day without having accidents. In most cases the use of a phone is a contributing factor, not the cause. Now I agree there is an additional slight risk with a phone but everything in life has a risk, it is safer never to get into a car at all

 

[Paulypaul]

View attachment 604898

Probably on the phone

Copper driving that probably claimed loads of money for mental trauma after the parallel parking manoeuvre went wrong.....and more than likely got 6 months off on full pay as well

 

[Justus3]

MisterB you'd not be singled out by law an officer but have grounds to stop your vehicle. Once they are met they are free to carry out other checks of both you and the vehicle. Free to deal with what else they may find. Which maybe a nice friendly bit of advice to fix that brake light. The police are not all about dealing with crime but have a part to play in reducing crime and preventing reoffending. Giving out "friendly advice" is a key part of the job. The level of that advice mostly depends on the level of how much you choose to rub them up the wrong way.

I accept that you have real life knowledge of damage accidents bring and that you don't barke such laws. But the clear view of just deal with the crime and get over it. Show me all I really need to know.

 

[Nigel P]

You seem to have missed my point completely, I don't break the law and don't use my phone when driving and I don't support or condone the practice, but if I ever did something wrong that involved an interaction with the police, for a traffic offence I was guilty of, then I would accept my punishment, but not a lecture on the morals of my actions and if that led to further interactions then I would submit a strong complaint on the behaviour of the individual police officer, who is there to enforce the law. I don't drink at all when driving or likely to be driving (not even a small sherry!!) and don't take drugs, so there would not be any valid justification to delay my journey further.
Your point about me never seeing major trauma following an RTA (old school RTC) is, I might add the type of holier than thou comment I would object to.
But since your post seems to suggest you want a contest to see who can piss the furthest, and who has witnessed the most, I served over 30 years in the Fire Service, starting before seat belts were compulsory and mobile phones needed a sack truck to carry them. I've seen, from very close up, more than my fair share of lives ruined and lost, some as I was at their side trying to comfort them and have acted as a witness in coroner's court for multiple deaths.
But back to my original point, I don't support, condone or encourage breaking any laws and if I ever did, I wouldn't need someone telling me how very naughty I have been and I don't support implied threats that individual police officers may sulk and be awkward. I prefer to think that they would always act professionally and deal with any offence committed by any person in exactly the same way and only take further action should they genuinely and legitimately feel further offences have been committed. The Police and their are not there to scare us and we shouldn't be scared of them.

Ps as an aside, I am almost certain that one day a legal claim will be lodged claiming trauma caused by attendance at a 'driver awareness' course or a driver, having attended one and kept their licence, will be involved in a serious accident. Which is again why the law should be enforced vigorously, but only the law and not the personal thoughts and ramblings of an individual police officer.

In my experience of speed awareness courses it was apparent that a considerable number of drivers might have benefitted from some 'advice' at an earlier stage in their driving careers as some are completely clueless about many of the basics around driving, obviously driven for years without understanding where they were going wrong. Listening to an informal chat might have avoided the later appointment with the criminal justice system!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Northernraider]

MisterB you'd not be singled out by law an officer but have grounds to stop your vehicle. Once they are met they are free to carry out other checks of both you and the vehicle. Free to deal with what else they may find. Which maybe a nice friendly bit of advice to fix that brake light. The police are not all about dealing with crime but have a part to play in reducing crime and preventing reoffending. Giving out "friendly advice" is a key part of the job. The level of that advice mostly depends on the level of how much you choose to rub them up the wrong way.

I accept that you have real life knowledge of damage accidents bring and that you don't barke such laws. But the clear view of just deal with the crime and get over it. Show me all I really need to know.

I bet you are fun at parties officer.

 

[iandsm]

Which describes most of the police action these days perfectly.

Time wasting.

Yes, wasting the time of someone who was foolish enough to tell them. "go and do one"

 

[Realist]

It’s all down to todays woke society and things changing for the worst.

Can’t talk about past history.
Can’t use a device in a car for the fear of being not in control and concentration levels being effected.
Can’t pass any comment just in case the woke society gets upset.

The list goes on and on.

The bottom line is if everyone drove within the law, speeds, concentrate on the road, don’t park where your not supposed to etc etc we would not have the need for speed cameras, speed bumps, woke society monitoring brigade.

Me I just want to get on with life, don’t give a rats arse what anyone does and drives within the law simples.

Life’s bloody hard enough as it is without people pocking things to bits like the new laws that are in place to create a more safer driving environment and not their for the arm chair woke society to complain over.

F me, next they’ll be throwing statues in the sea and complain about the state of the oceans, what next…..

I know Russia now that’s worth complaining over.

Does my head in.

 

[Northernraider]

Yes, wasting the time of someone who was foolish enough to tell them. "go and do one"

Aye and unfortunately its once again double standards . You can be charged with wasting police time . But they are free to waste yours with no other reason other than to waste your time.

That's why very few have any respect for them.

 

[Coolcats]

All distractions in a vehicle should be switched off/banned and that includes the 'sexy' technology pushed by Car companies it really is not required. It is aimed at driving sales not making driving safer

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}