Mobile Phone while driving

sassy_one

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

Police are not required to use lights or siren when making use of their speed exemption.

In other terms, don't have to warn other drivers and people of someone exceeding the speed limit causing a possible dangerous situation?

Sounds about right for the Police.

sassy_one

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

It's simply a case of can they get a prosecution?, and can they pay a fine? etc, which is why pondlife get away with it:mad:

My advice is don't use your 'Freedom of speech' around them :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

sassy-one wrote: »

In other terms, don't have to warn other drivers and people of someone exceeding the speed limit causing a possible dangerous situation?

Sounds about right for the Police.

They also don't have to warn the criminals who they're rushing to apprehend, do they?

rev_henry

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

Police are not required to use lights or siren when making use of their speed exemption.

Yes I know I am well read in the speed exemption for the purchase of chocalate bars clause of the RTA.

neilmcl

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

So what you're saying is that if a driver using a mobile phone cannot be proven to be driving carelessly, then we should just punish him anyway?

"Yes your Honour, he was driving safely and observantly, however he was having a conversation into a small black piece of plastic and therefore in my opinion wasn't driving safely".

No, what I'm saying is that it is a stone wall fact that using a mobile phone whilst driving causes a distraction and therefore that in itself is enough to proof driving without due care or attention. Therefore it's better to deal with it via a FPN rather than wasting public monies taking someone to court.

Yorkie1

neilmcl wrote: »

No, what I'm saying is that it is a stone wall fact that using a mobile phone whilst driving causes a distraction and therefore that in itself is enough to proof driving without due care or attention.

Actually, no it's not. For careless driving you require the standard of driving to have fallen below that of the competent and careful driver. That's the objective, observable driving. If the car isn't e.g. swerving, erratic, speeding, etc then the standard of driving hasn't fallen below the requisite standard and thus the offence is not committed.

The mobile phone offence is, as previously stated, strict liability without proof of impaired driving required.

Lum

Meanwhile if you're on handsfree and concentrating so much on the conversation and not where you're going that your driving becomes eratic, the mobile phone law doesn't apply and they have to fall back on the much harder to prove offence of careless driving so chances are you'll get off scott free.

sassy_one

Saw someone who cut me up today on a junction while he was using his phone, if that was you, you know what I said to you regards it!

It won't be long before someone is sadly killed through drivers using there phones whist driving

Dave101t

if its in a hands free cradle, you can try to press the buttons but its very hard.

sassy_one

Lum wrote: »

Meanwhile if you're on handsfree and concentrating so much on the conversation and not where you're going that your driving becomes eratic, the mobile phone law doesn't apply and they have to fall back on the much harder to prove offence of careless driving so chances are you'll get off scott free.

I've heard so many cases of people, being killed as a a result and the driver walking free, justice eh!