• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Drivers on phones to escape fines

#1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4423926.stm

Motorists caught using handheld mobile phones while driving will escape a fine if caught during a safety campaign.

Instead of a £30, they will be urged to give thought to the potential consequences of their actions.

God give me strength. What kind of left-wing, tree-hugging, wishy-washy, namby-pampy nonsense is this?

Advice to plod: Take the phone out of their hand and crush the ****ing thing with your car, it's the only way to get through to these morons.

msr
 
#3
Instead of a £30, they will be urged to give thought to the potential consequences of their actions.

Maybe a practical demonstration of the consequences ie a quick shovel to the face might concentrate the drivers thoughts a bit?
 
#5
Advice to plod: Take the phone out of their hand and crush the * thing with your car, it's the only way to get through to these morons.
Maybe a practical demonstration of the consequences ie a quick shovel to the face might concentrate the drivers thoughts a bit?
How about some combination therapy?

Run over their phone then a shovel in the face? :twisted:
 
#6
Vegetius said:
This, BTW, is the same Thames Valley Police that has a quota/ points system for it's traffic police.

V!
I take it that this "initiative" will affect their quota. Do they get performance related pay?
 
#7
I can't really take this law seriously, since on a number of occasions (once in Nottingham, twice in London and once in Manchester) I've seen Old Bill at the wheel of their "follow-me" motors chatting merrily away on mobile ham bones themselves.
I also remember some time ago reading about a woman who was fined for drinking from a bottle of water as she stood at the traffic lights. Again, I've seen Old Bill in the UK do that very same thing.
It all seems a bit of a farce to me.

MsG
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#8
If you can afford a mobile phone, you can afford a hands free set. Too many people have died as a result of someone deciding that their mundane little conversations are more important than concentrating on the road. Crush their phones, hit them in the face with a shovel and then shoot them.
 
#9
People who use mobile phones whilst driving should be treated the same as drink drivers. A £1,000.00 fine and a years ban. Then smash them in the face with the shovel and thier phone, then run the car over them as a practical demo.
 
#10
Driving on the M60, I saw a woman behind the wheel of a moving car whilst putting on her make-up.

The shock made me spill my cornflakes over my newspaper.
 
#11
I was pootling down the M27 on the bike a couple of months ago when I passed a bloke in a BMW putting on hand and face moisturiser with his eyes shut, both hands rubbing away at his face.
I assume it was moisturiser......
 
#12
Someone must have asked this before.
What is the difference between a policeman in an area car responding to a call on his Clansman set (Yes - I know its not Clansman) and talking on your moby - or eating an apple - or changing a CD - or changing fcuking gear.
Modern life is not risk-free, any more than life ever was - just new risks.
 
#13
There is no specific legislation preventing the use of radio equipment in cars whilst they are moving etc just like truckers using CB sets or taxi drivers using their radios.

The police are no differenet than everyone else and they have to still maintatin a good standard of driving as they are no exempt from driving standard offences.

Talking on your mobile whether its hands free or not is more of a distraction than all the other things listed. It is not just a few seconds thinking about something else its potentially minutes at a time concentrating on something not even remotely connected with driving, during which time you are no paying full attention to what is happening ahead on the road and therefore taking greater risks and causing them for other drivers.

If you were changing cd's or eating an apple at the wheel you could still be fined for not being in prpoer control of your vehicle however the police would have to offer some evidence of this ie. if you were swerving all over lanes one and two of the motorway whilst eating an apple!

It will soon become an endorsable offence so that you get three points on your licence for doing it, might help might not just have to wait see.....
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#14
The police are no differenet than everyone else and they have to still maintatin a good standard of driving as they are no exempt from driving standard offences.

True but when they kill some poor fecker in a hot pursuit, (I'm not concerned about the scrotes its the proper innocents that hurt!) how often do they go inside, any figures available?
Dont tell me like firearms its justifiable!
 
#15
True but when they kill some poor fecker in a hot pursuit, (I'm not concerned about the scrotes its the proper innocents that hurt!) how often do they go inside?
Very few people get put inside for causing death by dangerous driving, you see tales of scrotes with a long track record of No Insurance, multiple disquals and so on getting suspended sentences. Coppers get summonsed for ludicrous things that The System ignores for non-coppers, to set an example. I actually think it's part of the CPS charging decision process in fact.

Bloke 'A' is a scrote with no insurance. The system cannot cope so he is NFA'd. You see this all the time.

Bloke 'B' drives through a red light. He is a copper. He gets prosecuted.

Now, I'm not talking about the Ch. Supt i/c of the Traffic Dept, I'm talking about herberts like me.

Who'd want to be a traffic cop anyhow?

V!
 
#16
Tried a google for it but came up with no results.

No its not justifiable in any way, they must however be convicted of a criminal offence, ie. causing death by dangerous driving or careless and inconsiderate driving etc and even thenh it is unlikely to result in a jail term.

How often do sh*ts go inside for killing some innocent that they run over with no licence whilst driving uninsured and disqualified, unfortunately not very often. There has been a number of cases recently where this has been the case highly publicised in the press. Soon there will be new legislation introduced including new offences 'causing death by careless driving' and 'causing death when driving while unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured;.

Some police drivers have over 12 weeks of training, their standard is going to be better than some idiot car theif but every incident must be taken on its merits. The new black box technology will assist in providing evidence for/against police when it is introduced soon as this will record all types of data from the vehicle before/after impacts and at times that it is activated.

I have no problem with the police not being aloud to persue/follow cars that wont stop, no skin off my nose and yes it would make the roads safer but imagine what would happend when all the sh*ts know that the police wont follow them or try and stop them after they have just robbed someone?
 
#17
Longinthegums wrote

What is the difference between a policeman in an area car responding to a call on his Clansman set (Yes - I know its not Clansman) and talking on your moby - or eating an apple - or changing a CD - or changing fcuking gear.
Modern life is not risk-free, any more than life ever was - just new risks.
Hope this is a wah!!!!

The difference is that the policeman in the area car responding to a call on his clansman set has proven to be a very capable driver, on a test a lot more rigourous than the driving test. also the call on the radio is likely to be important in a emergency sort of way.

Not some mong on a phone talking to his mrs or to a colleage who will be sat at a desk oppisiate in 5 mins. ditto eating etc.

Modern life is indeed not risk-free but adding new ones is just silly.

Just do what I do, turn the bloody thing off. You are not as important as you imagine.
 
#18
Chocolate frog said -

Hope this is a wah!!!!

The differenceresponding to a call on his clansman set has proven to be a very capable driver, on a test a lot more rigourous than the driving test. also the call on the radio is likely to be important in a emergency sort of way. is that the policeman in the area car

Not some mong on a phone talking to his mrs or to a colleage who will be sat at a desk oppisiate in 5 mins. ditto eating etc.

Modern life is indeed not risk-free but adding new ones is just silly.

Just do what I do, turn the bloody thing off. You are not as important as you imagine.

What the Fcuk is a wah?

It wasn't.

I am sick of being patronised by my (?) goverment, my (?) police force, my (?) local council and by safety fascists.

So,

"The differenceresponding to a call on his clansman set has proven to be a very capable driver, on a test a lot more rigourous than the driving test. also the call on the radio is likely to be important in a emergency sort of way. is that the policeman in the area car"

Bullstih. The area (Panda) car driver has the same licence you and I have. Except mine is 35 years old, clean and enhanced by Advanced Motorist and HGV instructor training. The guys who drive traffic cars may be a little better owing to the 14 weeks course.
The 19 year old policeman is not likely to respond to an emergency call with an adrenalin rush - fcuk off!

"Not some mong on a phone talking to his mrs or to a colleage who will be sat at a desk oppisiate in 5 mins. ditto eating etc"

Not a mong, - incidentally, if this is really short for mongol - or Downes Syndrome - get a vocabulary!

"Just do what I do, turn the bloody thing off. You are not as important as you imagine."

So, I am a doctor. I am in a borrowed car. The car does not have handsfree. Not being important, I switch my phone off and the patient dies. There are many possible scenarios if you think.

My general point is that we are being robbed of civil liberties in the UK. Much of the robbery is justified by "the powers that be" in terms of risk removal or risk mitigation. Hence our firearms laws, our near-miss with 90-day internment, the deaths of 6 million cows, the list is endless.

I am a responsible adult. Yes, I know that my attention can be diverted by a phone call - but for liberty's sake, let me make a adult decision whether or not to answer the thing!
 
#19
Longinthegums said:
Not a mong, - incidentally, if this is really short for mongol - or Downes Syndrome - get a vocabulary!
If you feel you need to be correct others, at least spell properly: it's Down's syndrome, or trisomy. Perhaps you should get a dictionary.

It's named for John Langdon Down, the Medical Superintendent of the Royal Earlswood Asylum for Idiots, who first described the syndrome. He used the term Mongol to refer to the facial appearance of people with the syndrome, as part of his 'ethnic classification of idiots'. Individuals with severe intellectual disability were referred to medically as 'idiots' and 'cretins', though both terms have since passed into common usage, just as 'mong' seems to have, though more recently.


So, I am a doctor. I am in a borrowed car. The car does not have handsfree. Not being important, I switch my phone off and the patient dies.
Sounds dramatic, but unlikely in real life. More likely scenarios:

I am a doctor. I am in a borrowed car. The car does not have handsfree. I have forgotten my Bluetooth headset. I switch my phone off so that I can drive safely, knowing that the ambulance service responds to medical emergencies, and that they can call a BASICS doctor in a radio-equipped vehicle if they need one.
 
#20
Longinthegums said:
Bullstih. The area (Panda) car driver has the same licence you and I have. Except mine is 35 years old, clean and enhanced by Advanced Motorist and HGV instructor training. The guys who drive traffic cars may be a little better owing to the 14 weeks course.
The 19 year old policeman is not likely to respond to an emergency call with an adrenalin rush - fcuk off!

I am a responsible adult. Yes, I know that my attention can be diverted by a phone call - but for liberty's sake, let me make a adult decision whether or not to answer the thing!
Unfortunately I have seen plenty of people who have held driving licences for a long time make massive errors when driving nearly/casuing serious accidents.
Unfortunately I have also seen people who hold a IAM certificate drive extremely badly.
Again unfortunate that it is I have also seen HGV drivers showing a standard of driving that is less than acceptable on a regular basis.

Police drivers are not heros however I am sure you will remember this when your house gets broken into and you want to see the police immediately. But in reality using a phone is completely different than a radio.

You are a responsible adult, yes I have no doubt that you are and in no way disagree, however unfortunately not everyone is and they have to have rules made because they do silly things like use their mobile phone when driving and then end up killing someone.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Ho2331 The Intelligence Cell 102
CrabfatBILL Cars, Bikes 'n AFVs 100
Simon - Quest Magazine Jobs Offered 0

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top