fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by Bonefishblues »

Are you saying at least1 in 10 motorists are on the phone at any given time?
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by reohn2 »

Bonefishblues wrote:Are you saying at least1 in 10 motorists are on the phone at any given time?


I'm saying stand on any busy junction and judge for yourself!
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by Bonefishblues »

reohn2 wrote:
Bonefishblues wrote:Are you saying at least1 in 10 motorists are on the phone at any given time?


I'm saying stand on any busy junction and judge for yourself!

I'm assuming that you have, it just seems a very high proportion to me.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by reohn2 »

Bonefishblues wrote:
reohn2 wrote:
Bonefishblues wrote:Are you saying at least1 in 10 motorists are on the phone at any given time?


I'm saying stand on any busy junction and judge for yourself!

I'm assuming that you have, it just seems a very high proportion to me.


I've looked around when on the bike(a little higher so can see more and I'm a nosey old phart anyway) and am surprised at just how many people are using mobiles whilst waiting for TL's to change.Obviously mine is a guestimate and not a scientific study.
But what worries me more than anything is when in heavy traffic on M/ways(I use M6 J23 Haydock park race course to J19 Knutsford quite a lot, which is constantly chocker)the number of people using mobiles in what I'd term as probably the worst case scenario for causing an RTI,as bumper to bumper traffic speed fluctuates so much in those situations and with a few major junctions(three M/ways and two major roads)
Roughly about every fourth time I use that section of M/way there's either ''debris in the carriageway'' signs on the o/head gantry(usually bits of car)or two or three vehicles on the hard shoulder with various bits crumpled as a result of RTI fender benders or worse.
I've got so I can spot those using mobiles almost instantly,they wander in the carriageway,tailgating in lane 1(usually trucks for some reason,perhaps because they're slower and bigger so they think they'll spot them slowing sooner :? ),make sudden braking manoeuvres,etc.
Occasionally I'm wrong and it's someone applying make up,reading with the newspaper on the steering wheel,having a shave or squeezing zits :? ,etc,etc.

As I posted previously I'm sure most RTI's are caused by mobile use whilst driving.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Postboxer
Posts: 1929
Joined: 24 Jul 2013, 5:19pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by Postboxer »

Just hit the phone a few times with the hammer of justice, then their car. That would sort it.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by reohn2 »

Postboxer wrote:Just hit the phone a few times with the hammer of justice, then their car. That would sort it.

My thoughts exactly.
The problem is policing is increasingly politicised and the politrickians fear doing what is the correct thing due to a backlash come election time.
Not to mention police numbers being reduced almost monthly.
If the current bunch of clowns get in again we're set for even more reductions in services,whilst we employ police comissioners at high rates of pay whose jobs are totally superfluous.You couldn't make it up.
Then we are told crime is reducing year on year,what they don't mention is that it's reducing because people don't report small crimes any more,because they know nothing will be done if they do report it!
I think it's termed as ''cooking the books'' :?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by Flinders »

On my currently totally unscientific impressions, I think hand-held mobile phone use when driving declined a bit after the law came in, but is now at a higher level than it was before the law came in. More people have phones, and what's worse, more of them are texting and not just talking, which is even more dangerous.
I think that if you have been using a mobile phone whilst driving within 5 minutes of an accident you should be automatically assumed to be guilty of dangerous driving and given the maximum penalty for that, without the need for a jury.
Juries should only be able to decide on whether, additionally, the dangerous driving was the direct cause of death or injury, or whether there were other contributory factors.

Drivers know they are highly unlikely to be caught, and even if caught having killed someone, are unlikley to be punished, so the law is now being pretty much completely ignored.
Speeding is nearly as bad. I'm now seeing speeding even in 'average speed' sections, where once you never did. As this seems only to be in some specific locations, I assume that the locals know the police in the area aren't interested, or that the devices concerned aren't actually switched on there.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by Flinders »

What kind of moron feels the need to text people every few minutes anyway? I've never understood why they do it. They need to get a life. Surely nobody really wants tombstone says 'their sumtotal contribution to the world was sending thousands of texts a month about nothing of any importance'.
iviehoff
Posts: 2411
Joined: 20 Jan 2009, 4:38pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by iviehoff »

Flinders wrote:I think that if you have been using a mobile phone whilst driving within 5 minutes of an accident you should be automatically assumed to be guilty of dangerous driving and given the maximum penalty for that, without the need for a jury.
Juries should only be able to decide on whether, additionally, the dangerous driving was the direct cause of death or injury, or whether there were other contributory factors.

I think your first point needs to go a lot further. At the moment juries in effect get to decide what is careless or dangerous driving in a wide range of cases. I have often argued that there should be a policy framework for what it is, so that they just don't have the discretion in run-of-the-mill cases. If a policy statement says that you have a duty to see something legally present in the road, even in conditions of dense fog or light glare, then SMIDSY is no excuse, and the burden of duty is on the driver to see them, including travelling at a speed that allows them to stop in time for a stationary obstruction in the road in poor visibility. It ceases to be a matter of jury debate as to whether it is dangerous to run over a cyclist when blinded by glare. Doubtless any set of rules has its marginal and uncertain cases, but make certain a lot of run-of-the-mill cases, and set policy externally to what is sensible for society.

I disagree with the second issue you suggest. It's a rare case where someone is charged both with dangerous driving and with causing death by dangerous driving, in case the dangerous driving was not the cause of the death, but in principle it could arise. But I'd much rather we just had an offence of dangerous driving, with a penalty scale that took into account the consequences, and leave complex issues of causality to the judge in the rare cases where it arises. Juries are for assessing the reliability of evidence. They probably aren't much good at that either, but at least it is some kind of a back-stop against abuse of the legal process.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by Flinders »

(sorry, I was unclear, I didn't mean juries should divide blame, just decide on guilt or innocence of the actual charge of causing death by, etc.)
Though in some circumstances, it's little short of murder. I doubt they'd do me for being 'dangerous' if I went out with a gun and shot out at random and killed someone. Driving a car whilst texting seems to me to be no different.
danhopgood
Posts: 102
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 5:16pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by danhopgood »

Re. statistics on mobile 'phone use when driving:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31634425
Valbrona
Posts: 2694
Joined: 7 Feb 2011, 4:49pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by Valbrona »

Law enforcement in the UK is bonkers. You don't need highly trained, well paid, full-on Police Officers to deal with minor motoring offences, or any minor offence for that matter. Lets re-name PCSOs as 'Police Officers' and give them FIAT Panda's to patrol in.
I should coco.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by Flinders »

danhopgood wrote:Re. statistics on mobile 'phone use when driving:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31634425


Supports what I thought. Car drivers using a hand-held phone are more than twice as likely to be texting than speaking.
I think texting whilst driving should incur an automatic ban of at least a year. It's far more dangerous than speaking on a phone. And the fine/points even for speaking on a phone should be far higher.
£100 as it starts at now isn't enough for either offence. Even the max fine of £1000 isn't enough. Some people spend £100 on phone charges in just a few months, and as the chance of being caught and fined is close to zero, most people would regard a £100 fine as a just a minor charge for doing it.
I suspect that their stats are on the low side. I see more than one in a hundred drivers using a hand-held phone round here, I think they text etc. before joining the nearby motorway, or when they come off it. It's probably more dangerous to do it on the minor roads, but they may feel they're less likely to be caught. Incidentally, there are plenty of laybys, service roads, car parks etc. that they could stop in to phone. They just think their convenience is worth more than other people's lives. And I'm sure that attitude on the road isn't confined to their use of phones.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by thirdcrank »

danhopgood wrote:Re. statistics on mobile 'phone use when driving:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31634425


Very interesting. :D

One thing that's obvious but is still worth noting, is that those observations only show activity at a given time. By that I mean that if you observed the colours of passing cars, you would soon have a pretty good idea what %age of cars were white. A couple of % of drivers using a phone at any given time suggests to me that those drivers are only a small part of the %age of drivers who might use a phone while driving. There will be some drivers, I expect, who never put their phone down and others who only do this occasionally. However, they are all people who consider the activity more or less OK and who might, therefore, be reluctant to convict another driver of causing death if "all they had done" was to use a mobile at the wheel.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: fewer motorists fined for mobile use

Post by reohn2 »

Statistics can get very complicated but one thing's for sure,enforcing the law,in the case of mobile use,talking or texting,etc ain't at all complicated if you wish to stop it.
If the penalties are harsh enough and the policing good enough it'll stop within months of implementation and the same goes with any known dangerous driving activities.
It can be done,the problem is we as a society have deemed we can't afford it and are prepared to liveor die with the consequences something I find abhorrent,we are our own worst enemy.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Post Reply