Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Dave-C on 20 December 2007, 19:42:05
-
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/itn/20071220/tuk-crackdown-on-drivers-who-use-mobiles-dba1618_1.html
What do we all think about the latest change to the law??
Personally I think:
There is a time and a place to use a mobile phone, firstly, HAND HELD is a NO NO!
However, I've had the debate with several friends, that, it could actually be acceptable in an automatic gearbox'd vehicle!!!! I see both sides to this argument.. But, NO, NO still stands....
I'm sure you'll have opinions on that! ;)
Our Meega has the CRT700 fitted it's most useful when we're on a long journey, we'll divert the mobile to it for safety...
My works van has a cradle on the dash, I have a plug-in earpiece/mic... If I need to make a call, I'll pull over, then carry on with my journey.. to me that's the same as receiving a call on auto answer.... if the road is clear / straight then I'll chat away, ditching the call if the road gets busy or winding... Would you consider this to be sensible useage?
I look forward to the debate on this post.... I also respect that any comments made are NOT the views of the OOF... and that OOF will NOT be responsible for any such comments...
As I see it, that's all lawful! ;)
DC
-
I personally think any kind of wired (or gay bluetooth) earpiece is not right, nor is handheld.
Not sure I believe the research either.
For me, proper HF kits...
-
there are critical calls what you need to answer,
specially on a stuck traffic for 1 hour if the boss is on the phone you need open ;D
-
I personally think any kind of wired (or gay bluetooth) earpiece is not right, nor is handheld.
Not sure I believe the research either.
For me, proper HF kits...
My mates got a blue tooth, he doeasn't LOOK gay :-/
-
I personally think any kind of wired (or gay bluetooth) earpiece is not right, nor is handheld.
Not sure I believe the research either.
For me, proper HF kits...
Are they the ones with the Pink flashing light???? ;D ;D ;D
-
I personally think any kind of wired (or gay bluetooth) earpiece is not right, nor is handheld.
Not sure I believe the research either.
For me, proper HF kits...
My mates got a blue tooth, he doeasn't LOOK gay :-/
he does with his flashing blue earring....
-
I have nokia hands free through the speakers etc, i think these are safe, not like changing the channel on the radio etc.
:y
-
reality is not every driver is same..Some even cant drive with two hands on it..
and another scene weeks ago in job park one driver talking with mobile , looking at girls and going
bacwards :o :-X I sshout stop but hit the car at the backside.. I tell in the security for the owner and ,
after a while he denied what he did..
-
I have a factory fit GSM phone.
-
this is headline bullshit .dangerous driving is well nigh impossible to prove unless you have a confession.
-
this is headline bullshit .dangerous driving is well nigh impossible to prove unless you have a confession.
Valid point!
However, I was privy to the local councils CCTV control room yesterday.. 45 clear definition screens / cameras covering many streets in our locality... there is some of the evidence if they wished to use it :o
DC
-
the existing laws if used to there full extent can f**k you over pretty hard, so who is going to enforce this? the cops? there to busy filling out forms.
-
plus of course the only thing there interested in is speeding!!
-
this is headline bullshit .dangerous driving is well nigh impossible to prove unless you have a confession.
Surely it's possible to tie in the time of the crash with phone company records of the times of your phone coversation. :-?
I'm with Cem though. There are loads on the road that can't drive with 2 hands that need sorting first.
As for the 'experts' that say that driving even using hands free is akin to drink driving! Pah! :-X
-
who times the crash?
-
who times the crash?
I can't think it'd be too difficult to put a time to it, especially like in the example they used on the main news, where the HGV tok out a car on the motorway. There's enough CCTV watching over us all with a time/date mark on it.
-
who times the crash?
Tacograph! If it's a HGV... call's to 999 logged.... get your point though!
Anyway what about bl00dy smoking and driving..... that's equally as dangerous, smoke in the eyes, risk of dropping it and burning your b0ll0x, acting as a relaxant etc....
All needs addressing first.....
Sorry smokers, but, it's true...
DC
-
can be estimated I think
-
I've only NEARLY lost control of a car once..........a wasp :o
-
thats fine under cctv but anywhere else the incident time is determined by when the ambulance call is logged.
-
......
Anyway what about bl00dy smoking and driving..... that's equally as dangerous, smoke in the eyes, risk of dropping it and burning your b0ll0x, acting as a relaxant etc....
All needs addressing first.....
Sorry smokers, but, it's true...
DC
I manage[size=12]d[/size] very well, along with many many others, for more than 20 years, & never had a crash or came close - saw loads in my mirrors .... !! ;D
There's a load of distractions when you're driving .... kids being one of the biggest.
-
I've only NEARLY lost control of a car once..........a wasp :o
nightmare ..happened me also ;D
cause I dont like to use climate , make me sick..I always open the windows even in cold
-
kids being one of the biggest.
Have to agree - I followed a woman the other day in a clapped out fiesta with a baby in chair on front seat, and she was spending too much time on the child, not enough on the road
-
kids being one of the biggest.
Have to agree - I followed a woman the other day in a clapped out fiesta with a baby in chair on front seat, and she was spending too much time on the child, not enough on the road
:o :o
-
kids being one of the biggest.
Have to agree - I followed a woman the other day in a clapped out fiesta with a baby in chair on front seat, and she was spending too much time on the child, not enough on the road
:o :o
It is legal in the UK as long as the kid sits in a proper child seat either forward or rear facing. At least the child was in a seat, I've seen kids roaming loose in both the front & rear of cars and sat on Mum's knee in the front!
-
kids being one of the biggest.
Absolutely. Got my bonnet stoved in once by a mother with a car full of kids having a tantrum. >:(
Cow was uninsured too. Police didn't want to know and my insurance company gave up chasing her. >:(
If there's anything distracting you from driving your car safely, you have the option to pull over and sort it out.
Failing that, do what pilots do and prioritise things in order of importance: Aviate, Navigate, Communicate.
Kevin
-
kids being one of the biggest.
Have to agree - I followed a woman the other day in a clapped out fiesta with a baby in chair on front seat, and she was spending too much time on the child, not enough on the road
:o :o
It is legal in the UK as long as the kid sits in a proper child seat either forward or rear facing. At least the child was in a seat, I've seen kids roaming loose in both the front & rear of cars and sat on Mum's knee in the front!
here also I 've seen many times childs sitting on mothers knee but really thats big ignorance and can not be excused..
-
In my opinion driving using handsfree is no different from having a conversation with another person in the car which I think is good on a motorway as it relieves the hypnotising effect and keeps you alert.
What they going to do next ban conversation altogether in a car. >:(
But I suppose you have to cater for idiots. ;D
-
here they ban smoking for drivers >:(
-
here they ban smoking for drivers >:(
That's going too far. Jesus Christ! I can feel a rant coming on. When are people going to realise that you just cant take all the risk out of day-to-day living? Driving is one of lifes pleasures and, God knows, we certainly pay enough for the priviledge. I, for one, will flout the no smoking law if it's ever introduced over here.
-
reason is gov political -religious ideas..Actually not the safety..But they dont say the truth as you guess..
However smoking here is very common..If the police really try to apply the rule they will go in trouble with many drivers..
-
here they ban smoking for drivers >:(
That's going too far. Jesus Christ! I can feel a rant coming on. When are people going to realise that you just cant take all the risk out of day-to-day living? Driving is one of lifes pleasures and, God knows, we certainly pay enough for the priviledge. I, for one, will flout the no smoking law if it's ever introduced over here.
Me too :y
-
here they ban smoking for drivers >:(
That's going too far. Jesus Christ! I can feel a rant coming on. When are people going to realise that you just cant take all the risk out of day-to-day living? Driving is one of lifes pleasures and, God knows, we certainly pay enough for the priviledge. I, for one, will flout the no smoking law if it's ever introduced over here.
Me too :y
..... and me! >:( & I gave up nearly 6 years ago! :y
-
Dangerous Nonsense
The press is full of reports such as this, declaring that mobile phone use will in future attract a prison sentence. This is largely nonsense, and the CPS (who have issued the press releases that started this story) know that it is.
The law has not changed. All that has changed is the CPS' guidance to its own staff as to the correct offence to charge when someone causes mayhem on the roads while distracted by using a telephone. In the worst cases (and they will be few) the CPS will charge Dangerous Driving (as they are free to do already) or its most serious version, Causing Death by Dangerous Driving, which for some years has carried up to (I think) 14 years inside. But it isn't up to the CPS to decide what's dangerous, as opposed to careless, it's up to a jury. And juries are notoriously ready to convict of the lower charge, perhaps because any jury will include people who have used a phone while driving. This applies even more so to Manslaughter - in fact it was the acquittal rate that led to the introduction of the offfence of causing Death by Dangerous Driving.
This is a spin exercise, part of the CPS strategy to raise its profile.
Mobile phone use is a problem but so is enforcement - if someone is driving in the dark on a motorway, who or what is going to detect his use of the phone? Technology may provide an answer one day, but it won't be soon and it won't be cheap.
posted by Bystander | 11:27 AM Comments (5) | Trackback (0)
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Think Yourself Well Served
Charon QC blogs about a controversial payment of a few thousand pounds.
Why don't we Brits appreciate how lucky we are?
In almost any country an allegation of impropriety involving less than ten, or a hundred, grand of our Earth pounds would be greeted with a shrug.
I do not seek to excuse anyone, but we Brits almost certainly have the world's least corrupt politicians, judiciary, and public servants. And being Brits, we assume the opposite.
posted by Bystander | 8:39 PM Comments (16) | Trackback (0)
Talking of Fishing
It's difficult to disapprove of the fishing licence system, since the cash raised goes directly into maintaining fishing waters, and the licence costs less than 50p per week. When we see cases of unlicensed fishing we impose fines and costs that rub in the message that it's cheaper to get a licence.
I was surprised to learn recently that we now have the power to ban someone from holding or applying for a rod licence for up to five years. I simply had to ask the lawyers the penalty for Fishing While Disqualified, but none of them knew, and we had too much work on to take time to look it up.
I know that defiance of a court order is a terribly serious business, and that we should visit the wrath of the law on perpetrators, but I don't think that I could keep a straight face while dealing with one of these. Do we give him an endorsement? Make him take a new test? Is there a test?
While the Police and CPS continue to usurp the judicial functions of the courts in ever more serious cases, with conditional cautions and penalty notices, why is my list cluttered up with this kind of stuff that cries out to be dealt with by fixed penalty?
posted by Bystander | 5:09 PM Comments (6) | Trackback (0)
Spams and Scams
As I wearily click through my Inbox deleting the daily influx of spam that has slipped past my electronic sentinels I sometimes wonder if anyone out there can really be gullible enough to fall for the tired old Nigerian 419 scams, the magic penis pills and all the other come-ons. I blogged about a phisher who nearly got away with it here. Then last week we saw before us a man accused of operating the well-known 'you-have-won-the-lottery' scam, which is a variation on the advanced fee fraud theme. Someone had fallen for it and had been relieved of over £25,000 in upfront fees to get their huge winnings released. That's the last I shall see of it as the case is off to the Crown Court to be dealt with, but it does explain the persistence of the scammers - you can send a lot of emails for twenty five grand.
posted by Bystander | 4:56 PM Comments (10) | Trackback (0)
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Secondary ID
Is one way to put it.
This is what is available now.
In five years' time?
posted by Bystander | 3:29 PM Comments (21) | Trackback (0)
Friday, December 14, 2007
Solid Principles
Stan Still, in a comment on another thread, refers to the Victorian Nine Principles of Policing.
They bear repetition, and seem as valid today as they were in 1829.
1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasi
-
whoops quoted too much!!!
-
wait for it next will be banning of all music being played in teh car incase people sing along and loose concentration. ::)
-
this is headline bullshit .dangerous driving is well nigh impossible to prove unless you have a confession.
Valid point!
However, I was privy to the local councils CCTV control room yesterday.. 45 clear definition screens / cameras covering many streets in our locality... there is some of the evidence if they wished to use it :o
DC
I have been in the one in Cardiff and it was amazing what could be seen :)
-
In my opinion driving using handsfree is no different from having a conversation with another person in the car which I think is good on a motorway as it relieves the hypnotising effect and keeps you alert.
What they going to do next ban conversation altogether in a car. >:(
But I suppose you have to cater for idiots. ;D
Absolutely agree there :y
Tho some 'experts' say passengers in cars are aware of whats going on around you......and stay quiet if for example you are trying to pull outa a difficult junction........tell that 'expert' if ive got someone in the back of my cab and they wanna chat.....they carry on regardless.......
In fact its easier to tell someone your chatting to on the phone.......either hang on a min.......or i'll call you back in two mins......which i do quite a bit.
-
All of this fails to take into account what kind of driver you are in the first place. Some divs would cause havoc on an empty motorway in the middle of the night without any distractions.