Using mobiles when driving.

[AM9]

At last the penalties are being tightened up for driving whilst using a handheld mobile phone. Unfortunately they have decided to increase the fine by 50% but only add one extra point to licences for car drivers. The other problem is that the offence is normally only dealt with when there is an incident involving somebody doing it.
The police (through a court?) have access to mobile phone usage figures, so proving that the phone was in use would not be that difficult. If the law was enforced better and the points per prosecution were increased to 6 points for everybody, these selfish drivers would be removed from the (driving) food chain a lot quicker before they did too much damage. Why does it take an incident that threatens the wellbeing of innocent people for action to be taken?

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

At last the penalties are being tightened up for driving whilst using a handheld mobile phone. Unfortunately they have decided to increase the fine by 50% but only add one extra point to licences for car drivers. The other problem is that the offence is normally only dealt with when there is an incident involving somebody doing it.
The police (through a court?) have access to mobile phone usage figures, so proving that the phone was in use would not be that difficult. If the law was enforced better and the points per prosecution were increased to 6 points for everybody, these selfish drivers would be removed from the (driving) food chain a lot quicker before they did too much damage. Why does it take an incident that threatens the wellbeing of innocent people for action to be taken?

I'm sure that I read recently that the number of drivers fined for this offence has actually gone down in the last year or so.

 

[AM9]

I'm sure that I read recently that the number of drivers fined for this offence has actually gone down in the last year or so.

Wasn't the use of a mobile phone whilst driving a factor in the Great Heck crash?

 

[DaleCooper]

I'm sure that I read recently that the number of drivers fined for this offence has actually gone down in the last year or so.

Good, all the more reason to hammer the remaining recalcitrant drivers who I see almost every day.

 

[ainsworth74]

Wasn't the use of a mobile phone whilst driving a factor in the Great Heck crash?

No he fell asleep at the wheel after being up late the night before. He did use a mobile to call the emergency services after he realised he could't get his vehicle clear of the railway but by that point it was too late.

 

[tony_mac]

The other problem is that the offence is normally only dealt with when there is an incident involving somebody doing it.

That's just not true, many people are routinely prosecuted. However, reducing police resources is bound to lead to a reduction in detection.

The police (through a court?) have access to mobile phone usage figures, so proving that the phone was in use would not be that difficult.

You mean after an accident? I assume you can't mean that police should routinely be asking courts to provide everybody's records, just in case?

Not that I am condoning it, but there are all sorts of other hazards that are equally dangerous. Having children in the car is arguably more distracting than talking on the phone. Having under-inflated tyres is more likely to lead to somebody's death.

 

[jon0844]

I'm sure that I read recently that the number of drivers fined for this offence has actually gone down in the last year or so.

Not surprising. Less police enforcement and it being harder to spot people with a phone in their lap that they're using to text/IM as against talk on, and the usual complacency that comes with not feeling there's any serious chance of being done.

 

[TheEdge]

...and the usual complacency that comes with not feeling there's any serious chance of being done.

Take all the money spent on pointless speed traps* and spend it on catching people who are using phones while driving. And the other generally dangerous and distracting driving acts.

*I don't mean all of them, ones outside schools and the like are fine. The ones sat at the bottom of hills or on open stretches of dual carriageway however...

 

[AM9]

... You mean after an accident? I assume you can't mean that police should routinely be asking courts to provide everybody's records, just in case?

No, not routinely, but when there are circumstances where the driver's behaviour may be indicative of such activity. Access to a call record would only be to establish use over a very few minutes before an event. The numbers wouldn't even need to be released unless the driver disputed the calls.

Not that I am condoning it, but there are all sorts of other hazards that are equally dangerous. Having children in the car is arguably more distracting than talking on the phone. Having under-inflated tyres is more likely to lead to somebody's death.

So what! If those are such a risk then fix those as well but they are taking steps to fix this selfish activity now and so they should. That sounds like the 'why don't you go and catch all the real criminals' comment that motorists come out with when they are pulled over for a misdemeanour.

 

[90019]

Not surprising. Less police enforcement and it being harder to spot people with a phone in their lap that they're using to text/IM as against talk on, and the usual complacency that comes with not feeling there's any serious chance of being done.

If you know what to look for, it's generally pretty easy to spot people who are texting when they stop.

 

[GB]

Access to a call record would only be to establish use over a very few minutes before an event.

Needs to be at the time of the incident or the few seconds before. I could have pulled over to take a call, put it away and then less than a minute later be involved in an accident.

What someone has done a few minutes ago may have nothing to do with the accident.

 

[jon0844]

If you know what to look for, it's generally pretty easy to spot people who are texting when they stop.

Indeed, as I often do. But it's not AS easy for the police.

It's possibly also harder to obtain evidence after the fact, such as phone logs that prove the phone was being used.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I'm sure that I read recently that the number of drivers fined for this offence has actually gone down in the last year or so.

That's probably a result of there not being enough police around to see the drivers using their phones? Certainly round here in Epsom drivers are very heavy users of mobiles while driving, but there's never any officers around to witness it.

 

[ExRes]

I applaud any increase in the penalties but what they're talking about is nowhere near enough, if you seriously want to stop dangerous habits such as telephone calls and texting while driving then the penalties need to be severe enough to make people stop doing it, a minimum fine of £1000 would wake a few up along with at least 6 points, while the Police being able to take the phone and SIM until the case reaches court might make people realise their entire life, which the mobile phone appears to be nowadays, would be disrupted to say the least

Personally I fail to see why anyone would condone or excuse the use of mobiles while in charge of a motor vehicle, if they do then they should discuss the habit with someone who has been on the metallic end of a car being used by such a person

 

[Antman]

There has been a marked drop in such offences since harsher punishments were introduced and make them even harsher (I would suggest an automatic ban) and such offences will drop even more.

The worst offenders seem to be van drivers and vehicles connected with the construction industry.

 

[ExRes]

There has been a marked drop in such offences since harsher punishments were introduced and make them even harsher (I would suggest an automatic ban) and such offences will drop even more.

The worst offenders seem to be van drivers and vehicles connected with the construction industry.

I wish you were right, there may have been a drop in offenders who have actually been caught but I see no decrease whatsoever in the amount of phone using drivers in this neck of the woods

Agree totally with the van driving builders brigade but would add supermarket delivery drivers and women with 'child on board' notices, some of whom manage a cup of coffee alongside their mobile while taking such loving care of their issue

 

[jon0844]

I think the problem has got way worse and way more dangerous.

Let's consider that people in commercial vehicles are more likely still needing to make calls, calling customers for directions or to say they're coming, or take calls from people giving then work or changes of schedules etc.

Reps may also need to make calls, but any half decent company car will have a Bluetooth system and it will be set up because the car is probably used by just one person. Vans may be shared, so even if they have BT it may be seen as too much hassle to set up.

For other people, who makes calls much these days? Compare that to using Facebook Messenger, SMS, WhatsApp or merely wanting to read that new comment on Facebook.

All of which mean taking your eyes off the road, which is arguably far far more dangerous. And certainly harder to both detect and prove in court.

 

[AM9]

I think the problem has got way worse and way more dangerous.

Let's consider that people in commercial vehicles are more likely still needing to make calls, calling customers for directions or to say they're coming, or take calls from people giving then work or changes of schedules etc.

Reps may also need to make calls, but any half decent company car will have a Bluetooth system and it will be set up because the car is probably used by just one person. Vans may be shared, so even if they have BT it may be seen as too much hassle to set up.

For other people, who makes calls much these days? Compare that to using Facebook Messenger, SMS, WhatsApp or merely wanting to read that new comment on Facebook.

All of which mean taking your eyes off the road, which is arguably far far more dangerous. And certainly harder to both detect and prove in court.

If the persistent offending can't be curbed by tougher penalties, then maybe a signal spoiler will be mandated in cars that run on public roads. If the other seats are occupied, i.e. weight sensing and seatbelt locked, the signal will be freed. Ultimately, there are those who think that the law shouldn't/doesn't apply to them who will do anything to get their 'mobile fix'.

 

[jon0844]

Such devices are illegal for many good reasons and would also stop passengers using their devices.

However phones can and do detect when you're walking, cycling or driving so you could possibly have company issued devices with software to restrict usage in motion but it wouldn't be perfect, or work with anyone that has their own personal phone (or run their own business and wouldn't install the software).

It will just come down to enforcement, which won't be easy or cheap.

 

[Antman]

I wish you were right, there may have been a drop in offenders who have actually been caught but I see no decrease whatsoever in the amount of phone using drivers in this neck of the woods

Agree totally with the van driving builders brigade but would add supermarket delivery drivers and women with 'child on board' notices, some of whom manage a cup of coffee alongside their mobile while taking such loving care of their issue

May be different in your area but in London and the south east there has been a considerable drop in drivers using phones since harsher penalties for offenders came in although there are inevitably a hard core of offenders but generally it's becoming as socially unacceptable as drink driving.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If the persistent offending can't be curbed by tougher penalties, then maybe a signal spoiler will be mandated in cars that run on public roads. If the other seats are occupied, i.e. weight sensing and seatbelt locked, the signal will be freed. Ultimately, there are those who think that the law shouldn't/doesn't apply to them who will do anything to get their 'mobile fix'.

Surely if persistent offenders can't be kerbed they should lose their licence?

I wouldn't agree with any sort of signal blocking, it could delay things in an emergency.

 

[jon0844]

I don't think it has become socially unacceptable like drink driving though. I think everyone thinks they'll be fine for just a few seconds or minutes. Reading a text is probably seen as even less risk, even though it's clearly more dangerous.

I also think drink driving is beginning to come back as a problem as a new generation hadn't perhaps had the same level of hard hitting campaigns, and the police seem to be doing fewer stings that make it easier to get away with it.

A cut in traffic police numbers (or making them do other police duties that takes them away from the roads) can't help.

 

[Antman]

I don't think it has become socially unacceptable like drink driving though. I think everyone thinks they'll be fine for just a few seconds or minutes. Reading a text is probably seen as even less risk, even though it's clearly more dangerous.

I also think drink driving is beginning to come back as a problem as a new generation hadn't perhaps had the same level of hard hitting campaigns, and the police seem to be doing fewer stings that make it easier to get away with it.

A cut in traffic police numbers (or making them do other police duties that takes them away from the roads) can't help.

I think it is moving that way though and of course it is far easier to report such people to the police nowadays. Cuts in the police will obviously reduce the chances of getting caught but the prospect of losing their licence should convince most people that it's just not worth the risk.

 

[jon0844]

People need to be done or hear about a friend that got done, or such talk is pointless. People will increasingly do what they like these days, because they can and don't simply abide by laws because it's morally right. It's mad that we seek tougher sentences but don't put the resources behind suitable enforcement.

Enforcement that would of course spot other crimes too, not just using a phone.

I still think it's harder to prove in court if someone denies they were reading a text at the wheel. This means everything would need to be captured on film, as checking phone records wouldn't work as it would for seeing if someone was making or receiving a call.

 

[Amberley54]

Earlier this afternoon witnessed in the car park of a large grocery chain, a driver reverse out of a parking space whilst chatting on their phone straight into side of a stationary car that was letting a vehicle out of another space.

The driver, still intermittently chatting on her mobile, was extremely abusive to the elderly driver of the car that she had hit until I and another independent witness stepped-in to inform both drivers that we had seen the incident and furthermore that we had also seen the driver on her mobile st the time.

'So f******g what, we're on private land so you can't f****g get me for that.'

At that point a security guard removed the car key from ignition and advised that police had been called.

Small crowd responded with a gentle round of applause.

And who said working in retail was boring?

 

[tony_mac]

That's kind of right - using a mobile phone is only an offence on a 'road'. A car park may count, but it is a grey area.
It sounds like a straightforward driving without due care and attention anyway, which is more serious and applies in any 'public place'

Taking somebody's car keys probably isn't lawful either!

 

[Antman]

That's kind of right - using a mobile phone is only an offence on a 'road'. A car park may count, but it is a grey area.
It sounds like a straightforward driving without due care and attention anyway, which is more serious and applies in any 'public place'

Taking somebody's car keys probably isn't lawful either!

Taking the keys until the police arrive would be ok to prevent her driving off, assuming that's why he took them?

 

[Amberley54]

That's kind of right - using a mobile phone is only an offence on a 'road'. A car park may count, but it is a grey area.
It sounds like a straightforward driving without due care and attention anyway, which is more serious and applies in any 'public place'

Taking somebody's car keys probably isn't lawful either!

Strange that offenders are usually very quick to assert their knowledge of their rights?

Anyway, if you're going to get all Rumpole about it, the security guard was merely preserving crime scene and stopping suspect leaving the scene, action they often take when apprehending shoplifters as they get to their 'getaway car' with the unpaid for goods.

 

[AM9]

Strange that offenders are usually very quick to assert their knowledge of their rights?

Anyway, if you're going to get all Rumpole about it, the security guard was merely preserving crime scene and stopping suspect leaving the scene, action they often take when apprehending shoplifters as they get to their 'getaway car' with the unpaid for goods.

Anybody could do it as a type of citizen's arrest, a non-violent type that still (effectively) prevents the person leaving the scene of a witnessed event and of a potential crime.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Such devices are illegal for many good reasons and would also stop passengers using their devices.

However phones can and do detect when you're walking, cycling or driving so you could possibly have company issued devices with software to restrict usage in motion but it wouldn't be perfect, or work with anyone that has their own personal phone (or run their own business and wouldn't install the software).

It will just come down to enforcement, which won't be easy or cheap.

Note that I said a 'mandated in cars that run on public roads' as would be defined in the Road Vehicles Construction and Use Regulations.
I also said 'If the other seats are occupied, i.e. weight sensing and seatbelt locked, the signal will be freed' (as in inhibited). Passengers could then use their phones legitimately. The device would need to be Ofcom approved and would probably work by acting as a (very) local base station and turning phones that were very close, (e.g. just within the shell of a steel/aluminium bodied vehicle), maybe acting something like a blackmarket 'man-in-the-middle' device.
I'm not saying that it would be particularly practical at the moment, but such devices would cost very little to embody within the vehicle (if mandated). No doubt there would be a small army of those who try to circumvent such an arrangement, but they would be relatively small and the more crude attempts could even be detected.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Taking the keys until the police arrive would be ok to prevent her driving off, assuming that's why he took them?

The device would be disabled once the engine was switched off.

 

[jon0844]

It will never be lawful to have a device that blocks or scrambles signal in any location, so I'd drop that idea altogether. Ofcom is not going to start approving localised signal blockers that could never be assured to work only for a confined area.

The punishment for possessing such a device probably needs to be even more severe than someone using a mobile when driving.

 

[AM9]

It will never be lawful to have a device that blocks or scrambles signal in any location, so I'd drop that idea altogether. Ofcom is not going to start approving localised signal blockers that could never be assured to work only for a confined area.

The punishment for possessing such a device probably needs to be even more severe than someone using a mobile when driving.

'Such a device' would be a mandatory part of the vehicle so they wouldn't be floating around on the shelves in Halfords. Anybody who wants to get an illegal 'man-in-the-middle' device can anyway so there's not much chance of preventing their illegal use.
It wasn't really a serious idea anyway, - more a better method of dealing with persistent offenders than picking up the bodies after the annual cull of a few people by those who simply can't be out of touch whilst they should be concentrating on controlling a potentially lethal piece of machinery.