Mobile Phones

[DeeGee]

Noticed in a thread earlier, a ref to 'forthcoming' fines for using mobile phones.

My colleague in the office picked up a £30 fixed penalty fine (no points) for using his mobile whilst driving. He was told that around Christmas (date unsure?) the new fine of up to £1000 and 3 points on your licence comes in.

Forthcoming... 'tis here right now, and getting worse.

All part of the new policy of revenue-raising through 'crime-bashing'. Motorists will soon be reducing our income tax.


<hr width=100% size=1>Black Sugar - the sweetest of all

 

[Twister_Ken]

Question

I hate receiving a mobile phone call when driving. My car doesn't have a one of those cup holders so I have to steer with my knees, phone in one hand, Starbucks in the other. How am I supposed to turn the CD player down?

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[Mudplugger]

Re: Question

You realy don't want an answer to that, Do you?

<hr width=100% size=1>Tony W.

 

[wishbone]

Yep! my son got a thirty quid fine 2 months ago, very hot in the west yorkshire area. wev'e just got upgrades to sony/erecson blue tooth, problem is can't stop givin the spock! hand sign.

wishbone

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Why don't people just switch the damn things to voicemail whilst driving? They are quite happy to do that to their office phone it seems since 8 out of 10 calls I make gets the voicemail.

Be honest, using a phone whilst driving is dangerous, even with proper hands free sets. It surely cannot be too much hardship to note the message received tone and pull over to return the call if necessary, a) it is safer b) you can listen properly and even jot down notes if needed (it usually is), c) you will have a more stable signal so both sides can actually hear and understand the conversation.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Rob_Webb]

What, MORE rules & regs?

Why is using a hands-free phone dangerous? Surely no different to listenly attentively to the radio or immersed in a conversation with passengers? And of course the police are allowed to use their radios whilst driving.

When I first learned to fly, I was staggered by the difference from driving - after about 4-5 hrs I was expected to be able to keep the aircraft flying straight and level, whilst monitoring a far larger display of controls than a car dashboard, with a chart spread across my lap a pencil in one hand, a calculator in the other plus a flight computer and a ruler to plot a new course/speed/altitude/ETA etc, AND still listen to (and if necessary respond to) radio traffic in my headset.

Now I wasn't subjected to any kind of 'superhuman' pre-flight test to make sure I could do this - you just had to learn to deal with it and some took longer than others. So why not build a phone conversation into the driving test too - they are a fact of life, like it or not. Otherwise, are you going to ban all conversation from cars? What about noisy kids and dogs - ever seen a prosecution for those? Bet they have caused a few accidents too though?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BrendanS]

Re: What, MORE rules & regs?

Flying instructors deal with a different breed of people. It's assumed that anyone taking flying lessons can cope with the demands, and they will fail if they cannot. Black and white. Driving instructors are those saints who can keep their temper under duress.

<hr width=100% size=1>Err, let me know if Depsol enters the forum, I'll go and hide

 

[Stingo]

Re: What, MORE rules & regs?

Agreed. But what can we do about these over zealous beaurocrats in Downing St?

Last night in the local, I heard a rumour that the performers in the Moscow State Circus must wear hard hats when performing in the UK. Eh? Let's hope it was actually a rumour.

The other day I saw a school teacher that had all the kids on a leash marching along in the same way that you may take Rover for a walk and all were wearing cycling crash helmits and those awful flourescent green jackets. How the f*** are kids meant to cut and graze themselves and learn?

The proposed new Housing Act will force landlords to put self closing fireproof internal doors into their properties if the tenants in the same dwelling are not related or are not bonking each other. Or in other words, if the tenats start bonking each other, the landlord no longer needs to fit the above mentioned doors because the property would no longer be deemed to be an HMO (House of Multiple Occupancy). Unbelievably, it is the landlords responsibility to find out if his tenants are having a relationship or not. Is that not a gross intrusion of a tenants right to privacy which is protected by the Housing Act in the first place?

Think it was my learned friend TCM or Parahandy (was one of the two anyway) that reminded me of some Roman history. The downfall of the Roman empire was not due to lost battles, but due the empire grinding to a beaurocratic halt. And the only lesson history has taught us is that history will repeat itself.

The legislation and bye-laws on where and when you can use your mobile, smoke your cigarette or ride your bicycle are all just more nails in the coffin.

So Mr Blair, with your kind permisson, may I take a shit and a shower and retire to bed?

Rant over.... G'nite.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.stingo.co.uk>http://www.stingo.co.uk</A> <font color=blue>- still showing at a computer near you</font color=blue>

 

[Sybarite]

Re: What, MORE rules & regs?

My reaction too.

A few days ago I was driving behind a car in which the occupants were obviously deaf and dumb yet having an animated conversation. Not only did they have to look at each other to communicate but the driver had to take his hands off the wheel to reply !


John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ccscott49]

Re: What, MORE rules & regs?

......and don't forget to wash behind yer' ears!!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

Re: What, MORE rules & regs?

The hard hats may be a rumour - but the Daily Telegraph reported as fact ..

To paraphrase (to avoid a copyright issue!) :-

Performers with Moscow state Circus have been told to start wearing hard hats to comply with new EU dictat.

Jugglers, tightrope walkers and other aerial acrobats with the circus currently touring Britain, have been told to wear safety head wear because of European regulations covering workers at heights greater than the average stepladder.




<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Re: What, MORE rules & regs?

This regulation I think is here already isn't it?

The aircraft analogy doesn't run, unless of course you flydrive it at 70mph on the ground round the M25. You could also be fined for reading the chart & navigating on your lap too. The point is you do none of the aircrafty things in close proximity to others be they pedestrians or other vehicles, if you swerve around a bit who cares?

As well as my normal mobile I have a proper (old style) dash mounted carphone, it was never a handheld and I think this kind may still be legal. The last call I received in the car, the caller asked was it OK to talk, I said yes as long as I don't need to take notes. He proceeded to rattle off a list of Order Numbers, quantities, dates,none of which I was ever going to remember, I had to stop him and promise to call back after I found somewhere to pull over. Had the phone been on voicemail I would have heard the ring to know I had a message and could call this back when safe, probably there would be several calls to answer, some of which I could probably even ignore completely. I do not believe it is necessary to answer every call instantly, I don't do it if I'm in a meeting so why do it driving and if on a long trip I would normally stop for a coffee or pee every 2hrs or so. My phone now goes on voicemail when I get in the car, just the same as when I go into a meeting.

There are already people dead from accidents where drivers were using mobiles, many of the drivers are in prison and for years not months. Other countries in the EU are going the same route too I believe.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

Re: What, MORE rules & regs?

We've had legislation like this in Jersey for years - it doesnt seem to make much difference, and enforcement seems patchy at best. Even worse - you get people stopping irrationally so that they comply with the law (they might often be comitting a parking offence).

Properly installed handsfree mobiles are legal - more to the point theyd be almost impossible to enforce if made illegal, as it could be mighty difficult to distinguish between a phone call, talking to a passenger, singing or the mad rantings of the disturbed...

I suspect you'd also have difficulties with police motorcyclists who use integrated hands free kit as a matter of routine, and taxi drivers, fast response paramedics and any others who require communications, but who dont have a passenger to operate a radio.

IAE, none of my phone calls are ever as distracting as the 'manageent' of two young sprogs in the back..

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[whisper]

Re: What, MORE rules & regs?

Congratulations on your responsible attitude. If only there were a lot more like you about on our roads. I can guarantee that on any 20ml drive I meet up with atleast half a dozen w*****s wandering about the carriageways oblivious to what's going on around them. Like you, I just pull in somewhere and check my voicemails whenever I wish. Haven't lost an order or had any other problems with this method in 5 years.
OK I'm also a self-righteous git /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

2 self righteous gits then!

What I find difficult to understand is the need for an INSTANT answer because it is on a mobile. People seem to accept that calling on a landline you may (well almost certainly will) get the voicemail 'cos your callee is on the loo, in a meeting, pretending he's in a meeting, down the pub or even at a meeting down the pub. When it comes to the mobile though, the callee feels guilty if he doesn't answer straight away, yet surely since you are out and about you would be EXPECTED to be incomunicado from time to time, even if it is only to pretend that you are in a meeting and not down the pub.

I turn my mobile to voicemail when:-

In the car
In a meeting
In a restaurant, even Little Chef or the likes
Skiving on the boat if it's moving (people keep asking what's wrong with the engine or have you got the car window open)
I just want some peace.

That still leaves at least 30 minutes a day I can be reached, more than enough in my opinion.....



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Metabarca]

Re: 2 self righteous gits then!

Quite right, too. I find calls on landlines or mobiles at what might reasonably be assumed to be mealtimes extremely annoying. I mean, would you go and ring on someone's doorbell at 8 in the evening and say "Where are you?"! Well, ok you knows wot I means.
I once saw four youngsters arrive in a restaurant (in Italy) - hi!! kissee kissee! long-time-no-see - sit down and immediately start bashing away at their phones. Clearly, those present became boring after approx. 30 seconds.
The funniest episode was when mobiles first came out - you can imagine the pose value in Italy. Well, I saw one guy in a bar ostentatiously blabbing into his phone, making sure all could see him when suddenly it rang...

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.comoy.com/saillinks.html>http://www.comoy.com/saillinks.html</A>

 

[DeeGee]

Non sequiter

A lady friend was walking home alone rather later than she liked, in a well-lit but empty area - empty that is, except two rather threatening-looking guys who were following her, from the other side of the street. Eventually, they crossed the street and started to close the gap. My friend stopped, turned and looked at the guys as she got her spectacle case out of her handbag and ostentatiously made a 'mobile phone call'. The two guys recrossed the road and walked quite quickly back to whence they had come. Fact.

<hr width=100% size=1>Black Sugar - the sweetest of all

 

[Robin]

Re: 2 self righteous gits then!

I was on the transfer bus from plane to terminal at Heathrow. The lady next to me rang her office..... to say she couldn't talk now she was on the bus, she would call in again tomorrow. Probably the other 80% of passengers on the phone were doing something similarly important.

Then there was the lady calling hubby in the supermarket, she at the cash desk, he sent for some forgotten item in the freezer isle.

Then there's the ring tones, mind you I do have Rod Stewart 'We are sailing' for use at the boatshow, why I don't know since I turn the phone OFF at the show!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Captain_Chaos]

I am suprised your'e suprised.
Given that now it is estimated that 1 in 5 of the working population is employed by the government or a local authority ( and all on final salary pension schemes), the government has got to find ways of increasing funding.

The reason the government reviewed the policy on light dues recently was, imho, because the relevant department has a big unfunded pensions liability. Licensing of yachts is inevitable. It is a soft target for the government that can be "taxed" without upsetting the majority of the population. the fact that any revenues raised will be swallowed by costs of administering the system is a matter of no concern to gordon brown. Efficiency only matters if you are accountable for your actions and this government is accountable to no one.

Motorists are even softer targets and can be guaranteed to be squeezed for a few quid and justified by some liberal kaftan wearing pinko who thinks that everyone should cycle into work.
I have just been done for speeding by a mobile camera unit. (36 in a 30 limit, four lane road, downhill stretch, no pedestrians in sight). I asked the Bill for a copy of the photograph because at the time of the incident I was not sure whether it was me or the voice from the galley that was driving. I was told in no uncertain terms that as owner of the car it was my responsibility to sort out who was driving and if i didnt i would a £2,000 fine and a court appearance. Interesting human rights act implications on this one.

This attitude contrasted markedly with the views of the same police force earlier in the year when two drunken yobbos smashed beer bottles on the wings of my car causing extensive damage. Each yobbo blamed the other and as a consequence, the police thought this impoosible to resolve and they both got away with it.

So two "crimes" committed and the police have a 50% conviction rate and have increased the funds in the government coffers. They must be very pleased with themselves.

Sorry, shipmates, rant over.

<hr width=100% size=1>I'd rather be sailing

 

[duncan]

Re:mobiles and the boat show

surely correct mobile ettiquette at the boat show is on when walking round, so that you can receive calls from thirsty mates, and off when at the guiness stand because anyone calling and getting a message will assume you are already at the bar

<hr width=100% size=1>