The difficulty is enforcement.

[onearmedbandit]

What rubbed me up the wrong way was that you tarred everyone with the same brush. I know plenty of people off here who have received a ticket, and not questioned the cops judgement.

[scumdog]

What rubbed me up the wrong way was that you tarred everyone with the same brush. I know plenty of people off here who have received a ticket, and not questioned the cops judgement.

C'mon OAB, THAT is not the KB way - well not 'judging' by the posts screaming about cop dishonesty, lack of integrity and a strive for 'quotas'.

[Fatjim]

When you're honast about something and someone treats you you as if your not then then it can be "quite upsetting".

For example, my insurance company wants to do a credit and conviction check on me and have an investigator interview me and my neighbours. This is a result of a claim I've made on a burglery the other week. Now they're treating me like the many people who fraudulently make claims each week, although they have absolutely no reason to suspect my claim is in anyway fraudulent.

On top of this the local manager has been nothing but rude and has shown no understanding of the situationwe are in as a result of having the following stolen during the school holidays with 3 children at home.

TV
Xbox
PS3
both Computers

This pisses me off, especially as I have been a customer for 15 years, and before, when the company was bought out.

I'm now going to play hardball with them as much as I can. This will not be a plesant experience for any of us.

[Pixie]

I heard that too. Accident rates etc go right up



I (can't find it now) but saw/read/heard an interesting dialogue on cell phone talking vs that by passengers.

The long and short of it is this (from memory)
1) Conversation is engaging - distrating... so someone talking and expecting your involvement in the conversation will distract you
2) Passengers in a car talk "situationally" i.e. if something happens that will affect the way you drive (topless woman crossing the street, car swerving in front of you, red light runner approaching) they most often share in that experience... and (crucially) stop talking... and allow you to focus/stop diverting your attention from the threat presenting itself.
3) People on the other end of a cell phone do not get involved in the situation presenting itself (how could they?) and keep blathering on. Human nature is such that attention is then divided between the two immediate demands for attention resulting in incomplete copnversations - and compromised driving.

Lo - chatting on the cell phone is more dangerous.

I've seen no numbers or stats to back that particular assertion but on the face of it - it makes sense to me.

This may be true in lab tests.
Ever noticed the drivers who have to turn and look at their passenger as they talk to them - for seconds at a time?
A great habit to indulge in at 100 km/h

[Pixie]

Wouldn't it be careless driving? Same as if you were carrying out any distracting activity, if a cop sees you - or better has you on an in car camera - (why don't they all have them? - technology is cheap as chips these days) weaving all over the road texting or on a phone isn't that enough? Same as "sustained loss of traction".

Cheap?
Were talking about enforcement authorities that are afraid that ticketing motorists for anything but speed,alcohol and seatbelts will blow their budget.

[Pixie]

It'd totally abolish *555. No bad thing.

Dials *555 - "Hello Police?I just saw someone talking on a cell phone while driving"
Police- "Where are you"
555er-"driving along the Newmarket viaduct"

[scumdog]

Cheap?
Were talking about enforcement authorities that are afraid that ticketing motorists for anything but speed,alcohol and seatbelts will blow their budget.

Another KB cheap-shot generalisation??

Or a troll?

I HAVE successfully charged people for using a video camera while driving and other 'distracting' driver behaviour.

But I've also ticketed for speed, alcohol (yeah, I'm sure THATS a money spinner with most fines 20% of what they could be) and seatbelts. (Like not wearing them ever has any consequence..."Shit man, what're you on about, I'm a good driver, I hardly ever crash.."

[Pixie]

In my post I did say hands free... and while I agree standard holding your phone to your ear while driving I should be band, but hands free is the same as talking to your passenger... but txting worse again.

Well in that case get rid of the speedo, and warning lights... get rid of rear veiw mirror as the all take youe eyes off the road... as for communication to driver... put the driver in a sealed compartment seperated from the passengers simple... just hope he don't nod of due to total boardem

My GPS is right where the speedo is and shows speed whats the difference, (thats what I use if for while riding) It doesn't allow search functions while in motion, I can only switch between screens... once I stop then it allows the normal function

Bullshit
The issues are brain involvement in conversation and operating complex equipement like phones ,GPS etc are totally different to checking idiot lights and the road behind you

[Pixie]

Another KB cheap-shot generalisation??

Or a troll?

I HAVE successfully charged people for using a video camera while driving and other 'distracting' driver behaviour.

But I've also ticketed for speed, alcohol (yeah, I'm sure THATS a money spinner with most fines 20% of what they could be) and seatbelts. (Like not wearing them ever has any consequence..."Shit man, what're you on about, I'm a good driver, I hardly ever crash.."

I was refering to the document Candor posted,which clearly shows the authorities,wether they are Treasury,Ministry of Transport,ACC or the Police Management, are basing enforcement on the cheapest offences to deal with.

You're way too oversensitive Scummy

[Big Dave]

I know plenty of people off here who have received a ticket, and not questioned the cops judgement.

I pleaded insanity. He just said I was mad.

[spudchucka]

I HAVE successfully charged people for using a video camera while driving and other 'distracting' driver behaviour.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtykNMs6l6E

You haven't been moon-lighting over in the US of A have ya?

[scumdog]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtykNMs6l6E

You haven't been moon-lighting over in the US of A have ya?

Welll....now you mentioned it....

[spudchucka]

What rubbed me up the wrong way was that you tarred everyone with the same brush. I know plenty of people off here who have received a ticket, and not questioned the cops judgement.

You may have missed a key word or perhaps not noticed the rhetorical aspect of the question asked. It was simply intended to make people think.

The only difficulty is most of you don't even trust cops to operate speed detection equipment honestly, (often accusing them of just making speeds up or issuing tickets to drivers based on speed readings obtained from other vehicles), so why would you trust them to police this when it would rely totally on the cops ability to spot offences and their integrity to police honestly?

[onearmedbandit]

Ooooo you're right, I did miss that word.

[EnzoYug]

Yep. Why I never have radio going. But if cell phones are to benaned then so should be radios, stereos, passengers (and bloody babies especially ).

Texting should be banned for the same reason a TV in the car is not allowed to be viewable by the driver whilst the car is running. Driver takes eyes off the road (as with txting) driver won't see what/who they are about to kill.

That simple. People look at their phones when they txt. Maybe once, maybe the whole time. It's fucking dangerous. Enforcement is not always the problem, simply "making it illegal" will be enough to reduce it somewhat. The cops can pick up the rest.