Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 19 January 2004 12:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ken Lucas For those of you who are not already aware, here is a link to a news item which provides details on what is believed to be the first conviction since the new law on the use of hand held mobile phones whilst driving was introduced. http://www.fleetnewsnet....article/?articleid=32802 Regards Ken
Admin  
#2 Posted : 19 January 2004 14:06:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Eric Burt Ken Well done for raising this one Ken. Perhaps it will help to sway the opinions of a few of the doubting Thomases. However, call me old Mr Pedantic, but this chap wasn't actually sent to prison under the new law - he would have received the same penalty if the offence had happened any time after April last year. This is when Lord Woolfe ( yes THAT one) gave directions on sentencing for falling asleep at the wheel (see Selby tragedy) and causing death while driving and using ANY type of mobile phone. I see that there is another report out today that says that the new law is causing problems of drivers pulling over suddenly into the nearest layby / entrance to a field etc etc to take phone calls......... Regards, Eric
Admin  
#3 Posted : 19 January 2004 14:18:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Chris Abbott Sickening... thanks for posting. I have a question, and it may be stupid - but I'm gonna ask it anyway. Why ban him for 5 years, as well as the sentence (not that 5 years is a problem) - but if he's in prison for 5 years, then surely the ban is unnecessary, it's not as if he can drive... in prison ? Maybe someone will explain it... :) Chris
Admin  
#4 Posted : 19 January 2004 14:33:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jim Walker Chris, You must be one of the few people left in the country that doesn't realise that no one serves the whole of their sentence. Five years actually means about 18 months, so long as you behave inside. Maxine Carr was jailed for 3-4 years, about 2 months ago. She is due out any day. Build more prisons I say. Or flogg & hang 'em
Admin  
#5 Posted : 19 January 2004 14:52:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Chris Abbott I said it was a stupid question - sorry... but if you don't ask, you'll never know :) BUT... 18 months !!!! ? What's this point in that!! But I bet his ban is 5 years (that's not reduced fro good behaviour!) Glad I'm not a lawyer! Stupid rules! ;p Chris
Admin  
#6 Posted : 19 January 2004 15:04:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Martin Gray Let us get this incident into context. The offence the driver is likely to have been convicted of is 'Causing Death By Dangerous Driving' this offence would have taken place prior to the new legislation being introduced and the driver cannot be charged with the mobile phone offence retrospectively. There have been many cases where drivers have been on the phone whilst driving and it was an offence of 'driving whilst not in proper control of a vehicle' this still applies. If the vehicle were to be involved in a road traffic accident the greater offence will be sort i.e. (if a fatality) 'Causing Death By Dangerous Driving' or 'Driving without Due Care and Attention', both of which can carry prison sentences, where as the specific mobile phone legislation only carries a fine. Please do not get the differences in legislation confused.
Admin  
#7 Posted : 19 January 2004 15:52:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Sean Fraser Good point Martin - but it underlines my contention that what we need to improve road safety is not more legislation but more enforcement of what we already have. I always thought that DWDCA was the road equivalent of the Scottish "Breach of the Peace" - an excellent catch-all for all anti-social offences not separately legislated against! The point behind the mobile phone law, flawed as it is (I was shocked that the IAM advanced driving book suggested that use of hands free kits was safe!) is that it provides a specific hook for police to hang a "lesser" offence on, rather than go down the "Driving Without Due Care and Attention" route and all that entailed. My problem is that this is not going to be properly enforced or prosecuted either. Police already have problems dealing with major crimes - they don't have the time for these tiddly ones. I don't have a solution for this (other than more traffic police - now THERE'S a popular suggestion [irony filter almost deleted this statement]) but I feel that driving attitudes, like safe attitudes, are the only way to improve bahaviours. Not laws. The best phrase I've heard in relation to this issue was made on this very forum - driving is a privalidge, not a right! The license is already harder to obtain but it needs to be made more comprehensive to include night driving (rural areas in Scotland cannot include motorway or dual carriageway driving as there aren't any!). It's easier to lose now with a consequent need for re-testing but I would endorse a mandatory re-testing every ten years with a simplified testing regime would help. However, we have to be mindful that the UK has one of the lowest RTA deaths in Europe - perhaps we should be emphasising this point every time we mention the need to improve it. After all, the average driver is already (reportedly) under pressure with all the attention car driving seems to get. Starting every time "The UK has an enviable safety record on the roads but it can still be improved . . ." might sweeten the pill a bit! One thing I've pondered was a form of non-violent direct action, like honking at someone using a phone whenever I saw them (including cyclists without lights during dark, eejits turning without indicating etc.). If everyone did it, there would be such a noise they'd have to hang up! Unfortunately, there are all sorts of problems with that - not using the horn for the reason intended, confusing or annoying other innocent road users, not to mention the guy stopping, coming over and knocking my block off!. Just a thought though . . .
Admin  
#8 Posted : 19 January 2004 16:22:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Ken Lucas Thanks Eric My PERSONAL opinion is similar to Eric's comment, re: doubting Thomas'. In point, concentrating on the comment by Judge Henry Globe QC who said: 'A motorist has lost his life because your (the offender) attention was avoidably distracted by the use of a mobile phone. This month (December) a new mobile phone law came into force which prohibits using any hand-held telephone while driving. The whole purpose is to reinforce what has been known for some time – that the use of a mobile phone while driving is dangerous and can lead to accidents of the most serious or fatal kind.' Ken
Admin  
#9 Posted : 19 January 2004 16:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Eric Burt Sean Good point We would all like safer roads / drivers etc despite our (GB) good accident record and I am sure motorists would welcome a partnership approach to road safety with the Police. Unfortunately cases such as the man who was sent to prison last week for failing to pay his fine after being caught doing 38mph in a 30 mph zone don't help their cause. This morning at about 7.45 there was a crash on the A55 near Chester - drivers were tailgating each other in the heavy rain and in the dark!! After the crash I noticed how they were all giving each other just a bit more room. I also noticed that there wasn't a police car in sight. Nuff said...... Eric
Admin  
#10 Posted : 19 January 2004 16:31:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Eric Burt Ken Did the Judge deliberately leave out the words "hand-held" when referring to mobile phones...!! Eric
Admin  
#11 Posted : 19 January 2004 20:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Mike Miller See the bloke with the bike got a mention then! What is required is a compulsory driving re-test every five years to bring the standards back up. The police are already penalising drivers for motoring offences by making them take corrective driving lessons at the offenders expense. As an option to a fine that is. Mike
Admin  
#12 Posted : 20 January 2004 00:49:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By John Murgatroyd The research that the mobile phone law was based upon, actually found that TALKING on a phone dramatically lowered the drivers attention on driving. In fact, there is considerable research that shows that even talking to another person in the vehicle significantly affects driving ability. There is also medical research available that measures the activity within the brain, not surprisingly it showed that large areas within the brain are highly active when carrying on a conversation, obviously something has to suffer. If the quality of driving falls well below an acceptable standard and death results, the driver can be charged with manslaughter.
Admin  
#13 Posted : 20 January 2004 13:41:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Karen Todd Jim, You are so right about jail terms. In NI people seem to serve even less of their sentence again, e.g. I think some people have been released after serving about 2 years for murder. Also, is jail tough enough? We have seen people emerge from jail suntanned and musclebound, and start riots inside if their TV and microwave gets taken away. I read somewhere recently that only 20% of people who go to jail are successfully rehabilitated, i.e. do not offend again. Regards, Karen
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.