Bansturbators Again

That using a mobile phone while driving is a potential distraction is not a new discovery – even the use of hands free devices was highlighted about twenty years ago. Yet we have new research – probably paid for by us – to tell us exactly what we already knew; that using a phone while driving affects ones cognitive abilities. Indeed, it’s why I don’t answer the phone while driving. At the most, I’ll tell the caller I will call them back as I’m driving. This is because I am aware from my experience that my driving suffers if I have to deal with a long-winded conversation with a disembodied voice.

But, as is usual, having “discovered” what was already common knowledge, we get this:

Use of hands-free phones should be banned from vehicles as well as hand-held ones, road safety campaigners say.

No. No, we shouldn’t ban them. It is up to people to do as I have done, make an individual assessment and act accordingly. There is plenty of legislation on the statute book with which to prosecute drivers who do not apply sufficient care and attention. Another ban, yet more attempts to micromanage we do not need. For crying out loud, they cannot police the current crop of unnecessary fiddling little laws designed to micromanage the minutia of our lives. Not that this changes the principle though. A ban is illiberal and that should be an end to the matter.

12 Comments

  1. That would be hard to enforce. They would have to pull over anyone whose lips are moving while driving.

    I see smoking also gets a mention in that article

  2. “Using a mobile phone, eating, drinking and smoking were all shown to increase the risk of a crash, Brake claimed.”

    So when do they get around to the radio, cd or iPod use? All equally distracting I would have thought. I don’t want to give them ideas mind, or we’ll end up with a Priest in the back seat praying for our safe journey as standard. Imagine your car with an in-built praying priest. It’s enough to make you want to take both hands off the wheel, turn round and punch them out, whilst doing 70 in the fast lane. 😉

  3. You see I have a real problem with people who drive and talk on the phone, as a pedestrian I am tired of people on phones running red lights and nearly hitting people, I see it time and time again.
    You wait a the crossing for the green man as you are told to do from a very early age the green man comes you cross and some idiot with a mobile phone to their ear comes tearing through and nearly takes you off your feet.
    Yes there is legislation but it’s not properly enforced and when these not so responsible drivers do these things they sometimes kill people, other peoples people. usually they walk away unscathed and some poor family loses a loved one or has someone killed maimed or crippled.
    So until the current legislation is enforced or there is a sudden rush of unselfishness by many drivers I don’t see the point of more legislation. Drivers seem to have a special privilege, everyone assumes everyone else drives and people sound horrified if you ever say “well actually I can’t make the doctors in 10 minutes as I live 2 miles away and I don’t drive” there is usually a resounding silence and then an accusatory “WHAT, everyone drives, you don’t drive! Thats ridiculous!”
    I like walking, I never felt the need to drive I don’t want to drive. I don’t even use my mobile walking in the street because pedestrians are as bad for not paying attention and not looking where they are going, technology is all very well in it’s place and it’s place is NOT driving on the roads or walking in the street.
    If a train driver was using his mobile whilst driving and crashed he would be sacked and prosecuted for negligence.
    So why are drivers let off, just because so many of them are irresponsible selfish and thoughtless, unless the government introduced a compulsory consideration law it’s all a waste of time frankly. 🙂
    The police attitude (like with the bikes on pavements is) so many people are doing it and we can’t prosecute them all so they all get away with it. Well if they started making an example of some maybe the vast majority would follow the rules. I doubt it but who knows.

    • I see it too. I watched one woman texting while negotiating a mini-roundabout a few weeks back. The problem is twofold – firstly, it is almost impossible to enforce and secondly, the penalty for getting caught is minimal.

      So, sweep away the legislation and go back to basics. Sure, you can use a phone or text if you want, but cause an accident and you get prosecuted under the offences against the persons act – not a sixty quid fine and a few points, but ten years inside. Now, that might concentrate a few minds…

    • “Brake said a Freedom of Information request showed more than 500,000 people had points on their licence for using a phone or being otherwise distracted.”

      Half a million people hardly suggests the law is not being enforced.

      • Plod might be pulling them – but the courts aren’t or can’t issuing an appropriate penalty – so there’s insufficient deterrent.

        After all, if, for instance, bumping off those who severely (or even moderately) piss you off attracted mere points on your licence and a couple of hundred quid fine, I bet there’d be more than 500,000 so endorsed, the population would (thankfully) be far fewer – and the Palace of Westminster and the corridors of Whitehall would rival the Marie Celeste

  4. In my opinion, unless you are able to drive with distractions, such as music, kids, backseat drivers, even cigarettes, coffee, sandwiches, you should not be driving.
    Rather like touch typing, you do not need to concentrate on the keys, but on the words that you are typing, there can be other distractions in the room which will not make you need to double check your keyboard skills those skills are second-nature.
    If you are accustomed to driving with distractions you will be just as alert to hazards, pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers.

    • It depends upon the context. if the traffic situation is demanding, then distractions can become a problem. It is up to the driver to manage them – not parliament.

  5. Classic denormalisation tactic. Produce something controversial that you know the BBC will pick up and air throughout the day; get mainly roasted for it but the germ of the idea is now implanted in the minds of millions of people. Plus, there’s the added attraction that – as is usual in these scenarios – people will mostly go off at a tangent about using phones without handsfree, and end up confusing the message by equating both as dangerous as each other.

    That aside, I’m with you about simplifying the law as specific rules aren’t necessary. There is even quite a lot of research saying that laws on mobile use don’t do much good and could even be making things worse via compensatory behaviour. See [1] and [2].

Comments are closed.