ChatterBank1 min ago
Driver's phone penalties
There are now tougher penalties for drivers caught using hand-held mobile phones. The offending drivers will now not only pay a fixed penalty of �60, but they will also have three points added to their licence instantly. It is hoped that the changes to the penalties will make drivers stop using hand-held phones altogether and aid road safety. What do you think of the new law? Will it stop you from using your phone whilst driving? Do you think it will make the roads safer?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by AB Asks. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
People who believe that the law banning the use of mibile phones whilst driving will work are living in cloud cuckoo land. On motorways this law will be so flouted as to be unusable at the same time as increasing the number of road deaths.
What are the options then
1. Increase the penalties.
2. Wait for the next exit on the motorway (up to 20 mins)
3. Ban their use altogether in vehicles.
4. Pull onto the hard shoulder so that the call can be answered (allow 1 min max for this)
5. do nothing.
Of course it would be no 4.:
What are the options then
1. Increase the penalties.
2. Wait for the next exit on the motorway (up to 20 mins)
3. Ban their use altogether in vehicles.
4. Pull onto the hard shoulder so that the call can be answered (allow 1 min max for this)
5. do nothing.
Of course it would be no 4.:
As everyone has said their are far worse distractions than talking on the phone. I never thought about it before but the worst distraction has to be noisy kids. When they ban kids from the car then I may consider this law fair lol
Can I point out that loads of people crash and get killed on the road every year where mobile phones are not involved - As soon as 1 person is killed where a mobile phone is involved then you get all the do gooders claiming it was because of the movile phone - Has nobody considered that they would have been killed anyway had the mobile not been involved???
Can I point out that loads of people crash and get killed on the road every year where mobile phones are not involved - As soon as 1 person is killed where a mobile phone is involved then you get all the do gooders claiming it was because of the movile phone - Has nobody considered that they would have been killed anyway had the mobile not been involved???
If you have been nearly killed by a SKIP driver taking a roundabout one-handed, with a mobile clutched under his chin, or had a white van pass within an inch of your pedal foot - as I have - you will have very strong feelings. The penalties are nowhere stiff enough. I make a point on my cycle ride to work (4 miles) of counting the offenders. Never less than two, and often as many as eight. The offence will never be stopped, it's as futile as trying to prevent speeding, but the penalties if caught should be draconian, and if involved in an accident while on the phone, chuck in chokey for 5 years.
Quite easy ...
If someone does something dangerous, loses control and kills someone whether they are on the phone or not is immaterial. If they had not been on the phone they may have been driving the same way still lost control and killed someone.
The fact that someone is on the phone does not make the difference between killing someone or not.
It may be a contributing factor (distraction) but a far less distraction than having noisy kids in the car - Ban kids from cars I say lol
If following others logic that deaths in this way happen only because someone is on the phone then surely after the introduction of this law and everyone follows it, there should NEVER be any deaths again on the road EVER (not quite but I hope you see my point, although I somehow doubt it lol)
If someone does something dangerous, loses control and kills someone whether they are on the phone or not is immaterial. If they had not been on the phone they may have been driving the same way still lost control and killed someone.
The fact that someone is on the phone does not make the difference between killing someone or not.
It may be a contributing factor (distraction) but a far less distraction than having noisy kids in the car - Ban kids from cars I say lol
If following others logic that deaths in this way happen only because someone is on the phone then surely after the introduction of this law and everyone follows it, there should NEVER be any deaths again on the road EVER (not quite but I hope you see my point, although I somehow doubt it lol)
No, honest-joe, the correct answer would be No.2.
Hav you any idea how dangerous allowing people to stop whenever they feel like it on a hard shoulder is?
Do you not understand how dangerous the hard shoulder actually is?
It is more dangerous that driving while on the phone!!
Far more people have been injured stopped on the hard shoulder that have by using their phone - it is even in the highway code that you must get out the car and as far away as possible for safety!!
How would you propose to ensure people one have "1minute max" ??
you can't, can you...!
If people can't wait 20 minutes until the next exit, and are unable to ignore a ringing phone, and their call is so urgent, like i said - GET A HANDS FREE KIT!!
Hav you any idea how dangerous allowing people to stop whenever they feel like it on a hard shoulder is?
Do you not understand how dangerous the hard shoulder actually is?
It is more dangerous that driving while on the phone!!
Far more people have been injured stopped on the hard shoulder that have by using their phone - it is even in the highway code that you must get out the car and as far away as possible for safety!!
How would you propose to ensure people one have "1minute max" ??
you can't, can you...!
If people can't wait 20 minutes until the next exit, and are unable to ignore a ringing phone, and their call is so urgent, like i said - GET A HANDS FREE KIT!!
lawrence 2
hhmmmm, you are obviously yet another example of a keyboard tough guy-
you sound like a complete j@ckass pal.
oh by the way-
your -means your
youre- means you are
I suggest a dictionary sir ? or an evening course in english ?
www.learndirect.co.uk do home learning.
But tell them you need to start from primary school level.
a for apple, b for ball,
should be about right for you.
hhmmmm, you are obviously yet another example of a keyboard tough guy-
you sound like a complete j@ckass pal.
oh by the way-
your -means your
youre- means you are
I suggest a dictionary sir ? or an evening course in english ?
www.learndirect.co.uk do home learning.
But tell them you need to start from primary school level.
a for apple, b for ball,
should be about right for you.
Latest Posts
Uk Will Question: If A Will States A...
Law2 mins ago
ChatterBank2 mins ago
Funny How Our Country If Full Of People...
News11 mins ago
Is There A Pro England Rally Today
News17 mins ago
