Boating regulation.........A thought?

[Col]

A few of you on here have been banging on about compulsery licensing of boats and skippers.

Have you seen what a dogs dinner the mobile phone laws have turned into.

1/ You can make a mob call from your car, if phone is a hands free in a cradle
(you are not allowed to use mob in you lap, even if you are using headset)

2/ You are allowed to send texts (??) providing mob is in cradle.

3/ You are not allowed to use handset while car is running even if stopped
( If you pull over to answer call, you must turn off engine)

So how can it be safer to send texts (mob in cradle) than to take a call on headset with mob in lap??

So what will it be if legislation comes in for boaters?

Everyone to sail with crash helmets on to prevent head-to-boom collisions??
Rear high intensity fog lights and hazard flashers fitted to all boats??
Mobo's limited to 5hp Briggs and Stratton mower engines?? (knew you'd like that one)

Tachograph fitted, with max sailing time limited to say, 8 hours like truck drivers??


You have been warned.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/colspics> Cols Picture Album</A>

 

[whisper]

Quite honestly if I had to make an MOB call whilst in the car I wouldn't hesitate to use the phone whether it was in a cradle or not.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: To be honest

If you can't make a simple phone call while your driving you ought to be a pedestrian.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[andy_wilson]

Re: To be honest

Statistically, a proportion of people using handheld phones can't also drive without having an accident.

It is from these we now have a measure of protection.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: Statistically

In all motoring accidents that are not as a result of mechanical failure someone is "driving without due care and attention". The mobile phone is just another manifestation of the lack of attention. It is neither as distracting as having the the car full of children or of driving with hay fever.

Having been hit up the arse twice by women with their kids in the back of the car, one of whom admited straight out that she'd turned around to speak to her daughter "just for a moment" . I'd have prefered her to have phoned her child and kept looking forwards.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Col]

Re: To be honest

Not really disagreeing with that one.
But what difference does a cradle make?? You can use moby in its cradle (with an ear phone arrangement, if you prefer) to make or receive texts or calls.
You can't make or receive calls with the same earphone arrangement If the phone isn't in a cradle (i.e.) In your lap, or on passenger seat?? Why not??

My point is- Are we going to have strange rulings like these if regulation ever comes to boating? Could even effect use of VHF.


<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/colspics> Cols Picture Album</A>

 

[Bergman]

Seems strange to me that it makes no mention of mobile radio equipment.

Presumably the policeman who gives you the ticket will have called his control on his hand held UHF transceiver whist following you.

Can't understand why you have to turn off engine whilst stopped to make a call.

Does this law also apply to HGV driver most of whom seem to spend all the time they are not on the CB on the mobile phone.

So I will have to stick to having a quick shave, reading the map, talking into the dictaphone, eating my sandwiches, filling and lighting my pipe and reading the Sun while on the move and park up to call home.

Presumably the people who draft these things all have chauffeurs - paid for by the taxpayer.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[FullCircle]

All tosh and nonsense my friends. Fundamentally this is another revenue grasper at 30 quid a pop, no points on license(They couldnt give 3 points a time to moby users as well as speeders, or there would be no one to man the buses by 2006).

Poor drivers will not magically get better by not having a phone, and good ones will not get worse. Statistically I would eat my underwear if it shows anything but the smallest downward blip in the accident stats. And just passing a law doesn't mean people wont do it anyway. After all we have had drink driving since 1968, and people still do that at considerably greater penalty.
Talking of stats, it will improve the crime clearup rates, by proving to be tough on crime, and tough on the causes of crime.

No doubt some clever dick will have a web subscription based on GPS info for the latest mobile phone camera hotspots!

Buy shares in hands free kit suppliers.

I have today commissioned a black painted block of wood to hold against my ear whenever I see a law enforcement source. This will suffice to confuse and frustrate them until I get my Jellyfish Transparent phone to market.

PS the law allows one to use 2 way radios without let or hindrance in the car......

Jim Dew

<hr width=100% size=1>Second Chance - First Love

 

[TonyD]

From the Dept of Transport web site FAQ:

"Q14. Will 2-way radios be included in the new offence?
The use of 2-way radio equipment (unless the device can also be used as a phone) when driving is not included in the new offence but remember there is still a risk of distraction and prosecution under other powers."

Now can someone explain to me why it is safe to use a 2-way radio handset, connected to the dash by a piece of coiled wire, but not safe to use a mobile phone? It couldn't be that it was too expensive to equip the police (and taxis) with a hands free equivalent could it?

Or perhaps all our police drivers and taxi drivers are just better than other mere mortals!

TonyD


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Col]

Didn't know that about the 2 way radios. It makes this law an even bigger mish mash than it already is [sigh]

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/colspics> Cols Picture Album</A>

 

[thewetone]

Personally I would prefer the plods to concentrate on cars with defective lighting than trying to catch people using phones. But then again I see so many police, ambulances, buses etc with defective lights etc that .........

<hr width=100% size=1>Randy

Once the avalanche has started, it's too late for the pebbles to vote

 

[BarryH]

Ah but,if said radio equip had a selcall unit fitted would it then become a phone. When I was a yorkie chomping trukker, we had selcall two way radios. I reckon they only had'em fitted so the transport manager could give us a bolloking without all and sundrie getting an earfull.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Get a Life and Maybe Save One

Divert the incoming mobile calls to voicemail, leave it on, it will ring briefly to say there is a message so you can pull off at the next opportunity or when you wish. That way a) there is no risk to life - yours or anyone else's b) you can give 100% concentration to the caller when you call them back, in business that could be in everyone's interest.

My customers are very important people, when they talk to me I want to give them 100%, that probably means I will need to take notes or refer to files so it is much better I call back when this is possible. You could even add this to the voicemail message 'I'm sorry I am unavailable at the moment, I may be in a meeting or in the car, please leave a message and I will call you back just as soon as I can'

I would bet everyone other than the most thick skinned will turn off their phone when in a meeting, so do the same in the car. For the posers this is actually a bonus, because now people will think they are always in important meetings so must be really high flyers.

Like I said, get a life, most of the conversations I overhear (or receive or make) via mobiles are not so important as to be minute critical let alone worth risking your life or someone else's for. Don't say it can't happen - IT HAS - IT DOES.

I will now stand back and duck the incoming.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[thewetone]

Re: Get a Life and Maybe Save One

I used to work in High Wycombe and I live on the South Coast, a distance travelled each day, each way was 87 miles. Only call I ever made was to tell my wife that I was 30 minutes from home. There were times when I would see somebody talking an the phone at the m25/m40 junction and they would still be talking when I turned off at the M23. Having said that I did notice that more men than women were talking on the phone, but more women than men were using text messaging. At least while talking the eyes were on the road even if the reaction time was slower. (And I won't go into the subject BMW drivers)

<hr width=100% size=1>Randy

Once the avalanche has started, it's too late for the pebbles to vote

 

[longjohnsilver]

Wrong end of the stick!

Don't think anyone would argue with you, I think the point of Cols post was about the confusion this new law has caused and the discreprancies within it. Also his point was how would they (the government) regulate boating when they confuse the hell out of most peeps with a simple matter of mobile phones.

That's wot I think the post was about, no doubt Col will respond with his thorts.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[thewetone]

Re: Wrong end of the stick!

I think the Regs in place are quite sufficient for boating ie you have to have a licence or be under the direct supervision of a licence holder to operate and you have to have a licence for a radio be it fitted or handheld. Biggest problem is the people that put to sea relying on mobile phones. I have sailed in many parts of the world and have yet to see a mobile phone mast come floating by.

<hr width=100% size=1>Randy

Once the avalanche has started, it's too late for the pebbles to vote

 

[thewetone]

Re: Wrong end of the stick!

Also wrt to legislation for boating, in this respect the RYA seems to be doing a good job in preventing legislation but unfortunately it is back to the few that spoils it for the many. It is that few that get all the publicity that prompts calls for legislation. And it is usually from their families or relations who, up to that point, were quite happy with the way things were.

<hr width=100% size=1>Randy

Once the avalanche has started, it's too late for the pebbles to vote

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Wrong end of the stick!

I do have a VHF licence and operators licence, and have had training. Agree that relying on mobiles for safety is stupid.


However, mobiles do have their place aboard boats. It's often much easier to call marinas/harbours before you get into VHF reception range to check berth availability. Same applies to meeting up with other boats where range is an issue, and you are running late, or making plans to meet up.

There are also places along the UK coast where mobiles are actually a more reliable means of calling the coastguard than VHF due to range and reception issues. I'd never go to sea without VHF, but the mobile can actually be quite handy on occasion

<hr width=100% size=1>Dad, why won't this magnet pick up this floppy disk?

 

[Robin]

Reply Was To The Repliers

Hi LJS, yes you are right, I wasn't actually replying to Col's post but to the drift from 5 or 6 others and also the tone from many interviews heard on TV/radio news yesterday.

Yes there are plenty of other possible distractions to drivers but covered (as was mobile use) by existing legislation. However mobiles have been proven to cause accidents in fact and proven 4 times more likely to cause an accident in controlled trials. I have had 'proper' hands free carphones in my cars from 1986 and a plain handset alone since last year, all were distracting to varying degrees in use but especially the handset. Inevitably in poor reception areas it became necessary to pick up the handset even on a proper carphone and the fiddly keyboard on tiny modern handhelds makes it even more so. Texting in the car has to be unbelievably stupid IMO. I need a mobile for business but 'saw the light' months back and have the phone diverted to voicemail when driving. Certainly it is much better for me and I believe it is better for the callers in the end - they get 100% of my attention when I call them back instead of a 25% instant response.

There were some really lame excuses around from drivers interviewed yesterday including ' I need one because I make 'n' visits per day and need to phone people for directions' or 'what about people who eat sandwiches in the car' or 'it's just another revenue raiser for the government'. Plus I believe 30% said they would ignore the law.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ianwright]

On \'phones in cars.

You don't need one.
No you don't.

They don't need to talk to you, and you don't need to talk to them.
If you were important enough for the above to be untrue then you would in the back seat and your driver would be steering..
You are much less important than you think,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

(this to the one eared pillock in front of me this morning, left hand holding phone to right ear, AND the rest of you.)

IanW

<hr width=100% size=1>Vertue 203, Patience