Busted . .

West said:
Rediculus statement.

The simple fact is that he is in control of a vehicle in a traffic situation, thats how police see it and he got punished for not waiting, pulling over and answering safely whilst the vehicle is under a controlled stop, being sat at lights doesnt count as such.
Click to expand...

Ridiculous spelling of 'ridiculous'.

Back on track, please, get over it. Dude was stationary, you can't assume he wouldn't kill the call as soon as the lights changed, the copper was being an unmentionable, as is their prerogative, and that's all there is to it.
 
One last think im goign to say..

3 points for using a mobile while in traffic

Nothing for a old person who pulled out on a mate who was a bike and nearly broke his spine!

It all needs sorting
 
Shimmy said:
Did mythbusters do this comparison whilst sitting still in traffric? NO.

What did they do? An obstacle course, with hazards and parking.

Hardly the same is it?

Don't come in saying OMG mythbusters proved so and so when in this actual incident it was irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Has it has been sad he was hardly gonna suddenly hang up because the traffic started moving again. the whole point is talking on your phone does harm your ability to drive and you never know what will happen when you set off, in 10 yards some retarded child could run out in front of you, a motor cyclists may cut back in inches from your front bumper, some could randomly perform an emgerncy stop to talk to some else, etc. TALKING ON THE PHONE STOPS YOU CONCENTRATING! you can not deny that and you can't say one of a million situations that would need concentration won't happen
 
That's really harsh, he must have been low on his figures to bother to give a ticket.

Wrong place at the wrong time i'm afraid :(
 
chesterstu said:
Has it has been sad he was hardly gonna suddenly hang up because the traffic started moving again. the whole point is talking on your phone does harm your ability to drive and you never know what will happen when you set off, in 10 yards some retarded child could run out in front of you, a motor cyclists may cut back in inches from your front bumper, some could randomly perform an emgerncy stop to talk to some else, etc. TALKING ON THE PHONE STOPS YOU CONCENTRATING! you can not deny that and you can't say one of a million situations that would need concentration won't happen
Click to expand...

You're going on about what IF's.

When in fact he was stationary with the handbrake on, that's when he was given 3 points.

If traffic starts moving he plenty of time to say goodbye whilst disengaging the handbrake and moving off again. Or do what I do and put it on speaker.
 
West said:
Not always, they're more interested in not victimising people, I dont see this as victimisation... just law enforcement which they are paid and trained to do.
Click to expand...

I see this as the Gestapo without the leather trench coats.

Coppers nowadays are the guys who did geography/psychology at Uni and wonder why they cant get a job, so they land up making peoples lives hell in order to fulfil their months quotas. This is a prime example of a warning being good for the offence but no "i want to fulfil my quota" instead of busting some real criminals because thats hard work!!!
 
Shimmy said:
You're going on about what IF's.

When in fact he was stationary with the handbrake on, that's when he was given 3 points.

If traffic starts moving he plenty of time to say goodbye whilst disengaging the handbrake and moving off again. Or do what I do and put it on speaker.
Click to expand...

Lets compare this to the seat belt law. When sat in the traffic with your hand brake on and the car behind you stopped, the chances are the seat belt isn't really going to be that much use but it is the law you wear it. Seat belts save lives in the if situations just like not talking on your mobile does. I'm not taking the high ground because i have drove with no seat belt on and i have talked on my phone, I've sped and over took on bits of the road i shouldn't but i am under no delusion it is not dangerous or that if caught I should get sympathy for the 'police persecution' of drivers
 
what a load of tosh anyway that law is. talking on your mobile is dangerous.....

aye so it is, maybe a bit. so is looking at beautiful women as you drive past, lighting a cigarette while driving, sneezing, looking at all these massive billboards of semi-naked birds advertising stuff. maybe you just fell out with the wife and are really angry and have to drive to work, and your concentration is not really on driving. maybe you have sat-nav and it keeps distracting you (how it is illegal to talk on a mobile but still use sat nav is way beyond me!!!!!!!)

how many times you driven along behind a van / lorry with a load that doesn't look safely attached. nobody rants about that. what about the fact that passing other cars with 2 feet distance between you at 60 miles an hour gives a collision speed of 120 miles per hour, and this is accepted in this safety society?

this country has become safety obsessed, to the point of complete madness. LIFE IS DANGEROUS. people get hurt - stuff happens. you can't legislate for everything, and if people attempt it, as is happening just now, we all end up living in an open prison.

i've read posts on this thread that amaze me. some people here are free thinkers and i applaude you, but some others are just sheep. so easily brainwashed. to the sheep i ask you - now that you will not use your mobile while driving, do you also refuse to change the channel on your radio or press the buttons to move to the next cd track because your eyes have to leave the road, do you never eat a bar of chocolate or drink some water while driving. do you never look at anything as you drive by, but focus exclusively on the road? have you really thought it all through, or do you just accept whatever the authorities tell you to do????

jeez

and to the original poster - i can't believe you got done for that. i feel sorry for you. you were committing no crime in real terms and were causing no danger to a soul.

oh and by the way i use a bluetooth headset always, and have done since before the ban came in, but was i more dangerous when i held the phone to my ear - i think not.

getting drunk and driving is a bad thing, but talking on the phone..........

lets get real.
 
Last edited:
chesterstu said:
Lets compare this to the seat belt law. When sat in the traffic with your hand brake on and the car behind you stopped, the chances are the seat belt isn't really going to be that much use but it is the law you wear it.
Click to expand...
Rubbish example. Anything could hit the car behind and actively cause you to require that seatbelt. NOTHING short of a scence from an American action movie is going to cause you to do any harm while talking on the phone in stationary traffic.
 
Interesting to see some people's points of view in here. This one's aimed at west:

The other day, the traffic in my town came to a halt, and I could see what was holding things up, and we weren't going to move very far, very quick. When I was stationary, my phone rang, and I answered it, but simply said "I'm driving, I'll call you back later". I was on the phone no longer than 2 seconds whilst not moving at all. If a police officer happened to see me doing that, do I deserve 3 points?
 
el_dazza said:
Interesting to see some people's points of view in here. This one's aimed at west:

The other day, the traffic in my town came to a halt, and I could see what was holding things up, and we weren't going to move very far, very quick. When I was stationary, my phone rang, and I answered it, but simply said "I'm driving, I'll call you back later". I was on the phone no longer than 2 seconds whilst not moving at all. If a police officer happened to see me doing that, do I deserve 3 points?
Click to expand...

nope. no way.
 
Shimmy said:
You're going on about what IF's.

When in fact he was stationary with the handbrake on, that's when he was given 3 points.

If traffic starts moving he plenty of time to say goodbye whilst disengaging the handbrake and moving off again. Or do what I do and put it on speaker.
Click to expand...

The problem was, he was still in traffic, not "parked" in the eyes of the law.
The law requires you to be parked or pulled over (technically with the engine off*).
As far as the law is concerned you are not parked whilst at traffic lights, and hence the the offence is complete.

Was it a bit unfair in context? Possibly, but the police aren't mind readers and can only act on what they see, what they saw was someone on the phone whilst in traffic.
I just wish we had more police on the roads to catch those using their phones more often.

The legal system tried the fine only route, but it didn't work and a number of people were totally ignoring it (or even writing it off as a business expense in some cases), hence the increase to fine + points :(




*IIRC the wording is something along the lines of "whilst in control of a motor vehicle" which normally means sitting in it with the engine running - most cops would take it in the spirit of the law though, and not do you for using the phone whilst obviously parked/pulled over with the engine running.
 
buachille said:
oh and by the way i use a bluetooth headset always, and have done since before the ban came in, but was i more dangerous when i held the phone to my ear - i think not.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is more dangerous holding the phone to your ear. For a start you only have 1 hand on the wheel for a prolonged length of time. Then how do you go about changing gears with only one hand available? Yep, NO hands on the wheel for a few seconds.

Also, I found that talking with the phone to my ear I ended up concentrating more on the phone call than the road ahead. Whilst using a hands free kit however I seem to concentrate on the road ahead as per normal, and it's just like talking to a passenger.
 
Which as proven by this here graph from the Internets Research Association is pretty terrible.

ohthehumanity.jpg
 
If the car is stationary, then there's no driving involved, hence no fine. The copper sounds like a right ***, as do the others that agree with him. HE WAS NOT DRIVING HE WAS STATIONARY.

Common sense and the UK are two words you just can't combine these days, unless you include "lack of" :rolleyes:
 
Mobiles have voicemail for a reason, no need to pick up and say 'I'm driving, will call you back later' all you're doing is putting yourself in a position to get done. As for the stationary argument, sure he was but he was still supposed to be in control of the vehicle as it's not like he was actually parked was he.

We all managed just fine without mobile phones for years before they were invented, how some people cannot manage without them for the length of a car trip is beyond me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom