Get off your bloody phone

[tigertim20]

1973 was our worst ever road toll. 843. No phones back then.

and no airbags
and no abs brakes
and shitty tyres
and around the time when seat belts werent compulsory
etc
etc

You're right, but not all of us. My entire mobile phone bill last year was $2.73, though of course that left me with $17.27 unused and needing a top-up.

Amazes me at work though during smoko when everyone has their face buried in a screen for 20 minutes. Once upon a time we actually used to talk.

I dunno if things have really changed much at all. When I was younger it was a race to the smoko room to get the most desirable section of the newspaper to bury your nose in on your break.

No different in my experience

[Owl]

When I was younger it was a race to the smoko room to get the most desirable section of the newspaper to bury your nose in on your break.

No different in my experience

Fair enough, but I come from a background of panel beaters and painters. We never got beyond tool brochures.

[YellowDog]

If any of you saddos have a FARCEBOOK account, check out this very recent 'Not paying attention' Auckland video:

https://www.facebook.com/avishes/vid...1820707978425/

[jasonu]

Amen.

Not that I agree with phone use while driving.

1973 was our worst ever road toll. 843. No phones back then.

Prolly more to do with being asphyxiated by those leaky old pommy shit boxes.

[Voltaire]

Prolly more to do with being asphyxiated by those leaky old pommy shit boxes.

and a skin full of the weasel piss DB or Lion Red

[Voltaire]

If any of you saddos have a FARCEBOOK account, check out this very recent 'Not paying attention' Auckland video:

https://www.facebook.com/avishes/vid...1820707978425/

I'm shocked, an Indian who can't spell Khyber Pass properly.

[Viking01]

Why just Auckland?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/105...-mobile-phones

But, first things first.

The first question has to be "Is this an actual problem, and one worthy
of our attention (plus time and resources) to address ?".

My feeling is "Yes", but in absence of published data (on road death or
injury crashes at least) to substantiate this position, I'm probably on
soft ground.

I'm not aware that Police officers attending a crash scene are required
to determine (and record) whether the use of a mobile phone was a
contributing factor to a crash.

Suspect that this may not even be physically possible, due to either
driver injury or to lack of driver willingness to admit the circumstances.

Data collated for / by MOT does not appear to break out "mobile phone"
as a separate factor. Choose any month from the following link, and look
at the data break-down.

https://www.transport.govt.nz/resour...ashstatistics/

And if you can't measure it, you can't then easily estimate a social cost.


But for argument sake, let's just assume mobile phone usage contributes
to "poor driving behaviour" as well as to "near-miss and actual crashes"
(to a sufficient level warranting some attention).

When out on my limited travels, I see at least one instance a week of
"poor driving behaviour" due to mobile phone usage.

It's always puzzled me why seemingly sensible people feel this need to
risk their own life (and those of their passengers) to answer a call or to
text while driving. Not to mention others travelling in their immediate
vicinity.

I can understand that picking up and answering a phone call is probably
some type of unconscious reaction (like responding to a crying baby).
Takes some conscious willpower not to respond immediately. [Ignore
hands-free for the moment]

But reading or writing a text on a mobile phone while driving in traffic ?

If you asked offenders "would you be prepared to close your eyes, and to
continue driving eyes-closed in busy traffic for (say) 5 seconds", suspect
the answer would probably be 'No".

But given that such drivers probably drop their phone down onto their lap
and look down when texting, I struggle to see any appreciable difference
between the two scenarios.

I could criticise younger generations, as being more "wedded" to the use
of mobile phones. You only have to watch people walking around the city,
head down and mobile phone in hand, and not looking where they're going.
But suspect the "using a mobile phone while driving" issue is probably non-
generational.

I can understand that:

- Crackdowns by Police for short periods may not be a good use of their
resources, nor drive any long term improvement in driver behaviour.
- The offender has to be caught in the act in order to be prosecuted in
some way.
- Introduction of fixed surveillance cameras around a city for monitoring
may not be a necessarily desirable outcome, either for its citizens (for
reasons of civil liberty), or for government administrators (simply too
expensive to implement and manage).

But surely, we have not lost our creativity and our ability to address this
situation in some combination of ways. I am sure there are other options.

Example:

1. Initial driver education (at the time of up-front learning or training) ?

Maybe car driving instructors and testers should insist that students should
take their mobile phones with them and leave their mobile phones on while
receiving instruction, and any attempted phone pick-up is an "instant fail".

2. Ongoing driver education (via periodic media programmes) ?

If we can do it with advertisements like "Ghost Chips" for drink driving.

Maybe mobile phone usage while driving does not rank anywhere near as
highly (in terms of perceived social cost)?

3. Increased penalties for offenders (whether poor driving or crash related) ?

Is an $80 fine plus a few demerit points really a serious deterrent, and going
to promote a change (improvement) in driver behaviour ? I seriously doubt it.

Maybe the question is then: If you won't change your behaviour for reasons
of personal safety, what type of penalty (and how high) needs to be applied ?

4. Temporary confiscation of the mobile phone for a limited period as well ?

Administration and security could be a challenge. Certain industries might
be affected more heavily (e.g. couriers).

Would you go out and replace a phone in the interim, and risk re-offending ?

5. Development of a portable pouch containing materials resisting transmission
of mobile phone frequencies (e.g. tin foil or metal mesh, as per a Faraday
cage) into which the mobile phone could be placed while driving ?

For those who are simply resistant to turning their phones off while driving.


Maybe we have already tried, failed, and relegated this situation to the
"too hard basket" ?

Or don't we care sufficiently ? And we are willing to just leave it up to the
individual (personal responsibility) ? It's just that I'd just prefer not to get
cleaned up by a driver who "doesn't care". Selfish, I know.

Disclaimer: Do I turn off my mobile phone when driving ?

No. But I don't pick up either. No call pickup is worth my life. Any calls
go through to the mailbox.

[pritch]

"Suspect that this may not even be physically possible, due to either
driver injury or to lack of driver willingness to admit the circumstances."

If they have the time of the accident and the phone number they can tell if the driver was on a call at the time. This has been used in the past although it may not be routine.

[rastuscat]

I have bluetooth pairing fitted to mine. If the phone rings, I can press a button on my steering wheel and then talk to someone while driving normally.

On the motorbike I go with "fuck 'em, I'll worry about it when I stop (or not)".

At work - mostly my phone stays in my pocket, I don't need to spend several hours every day looking at it.

I think that people reading and replying to texts while driving are the worst, why can't those cunts just check their texts later?

Cogntitive distraction is not solely the preserve of texting drivers.

Hands free bluetooth is no safer than hands-on phone use.

https://www.nsc.org/Portals/0/Docume...hite-Paper.pdf

Out handset law totally misses the point.

Don't get me started on the touch screen in cars, and even the TFT screens on new motorcycles.

[Scuba_Steve]

Hands free bluetooth is no safer than hands-on phone use.

In some cases worse some studies have shown, as alot of cars have things like road noise going on so the brain has to spend more CPU power deciphering the wanted sounds from the ambient noise.
Kinda like how it's easier to read the central word in this


Rather than this

[Daffyd]

People using their phones while crossing roads are Darwin award candidates and should be encouraged.

Just yesterday when I was delivering Miss 13 to school a stupid woman steeped out in front of us. She was walking at about a 45° angle so basically had her back to us. Never even glanced up from her 'phone. Would have been an easy target had I not taken evasive action.

Trouble is there's a stupid law here that states the bigger vehicle is always at fault, unless you can prove differently. Eg, truck at fault in a car vs truck, car at fault in a car vs motorcycle, motorcycle at fault in a m/c vs pedestrian. This is why dash cams are selling like hot cakes atm.

[Daffyd]

I'm sure there is very cheap simple devices that could be fitted to vehicles to create a car dead spot while you drive.

IMHO a high pitched, feedback type squeal would be more effective.

[Daffyd]

Amen.

Not that I agree with phone use while driving.

1973 was our worst ever road toll. 843. No phones back then.

We did have RT's though. Back in the 'day', 70's-80's, most tradies had RT's in their vans, and used them all the time. I guess it wasn't as dangerous then as speeds were lower and there was considerably less traffic on the roads.

[Viking01]

Cogntitive distraction is not solely the preserve of texting drivers.
.....
Don't get me started on the touch screen in cars, and even the TFT screens on new motorcycles.

OK, I won't get you started ......

I know that there are plenty of other driving behaviours that rank higher
in terms of potential risk (e.g. drink driving ; running orange or red lights ;
tail-gating ; not staying in lane ; risky overtaking).

But for some reason, "using a mobile phone while driving" has been one that
has always niggled me. Maybe because we're often enclosed by other traffic
when this happens, and are compelled to have to follow the person for some
distance while they weave their merry way. Thus compounding the situation.

The only reason for mentioning it is that barely an hour after having read
the article, I had a gentleman whizz through a round-about across in front
of me from my left while busily chatting on his mobile phone. Seemingly
oblivious to the world in general.

The first point he looked to his right was when he was actually entering
the intersection itself. No risk of collision on this occasion, as I'd already
seen what was likely to (and did) happen, and had already delayed my
entry into the round-about.

It just seems such a totally unnecessary risk to take while driving. And
one that is quite easily avoidable.

And I was curious whether TPTB had already judged it to be "too hard to
enforce". Even so, why the seemingly low penalty ?

[Honest Andy]

We did have RT's though. Back in the 'day', 70's-80's, most tradies had RT's in their vans, and used them all the time

Mine never seemed to work very well after lunch on Fridays for some reason