Busted . .

Werewolf · 1 Oct 2007 at 13:05

Ex-RoNiN said:
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.
:

The law doesn't care, if you are in traffic you are classed as driving, for all the police know someone waiting at traffic lights could have been on the phone for the past 5 minutes, and planning on being on it when the lights change.

It's harsh, but the chances are most people who are seen using mobile phones at the lights are likely to continue using the phone when the lights change.

Amps · 1 Oct 2007 at 13:22

A guy in my work got done while talking on a phone in a lay-by as his engine was running.

His engine was running to keep thje car cool (aircon).

3 points his way.

Mr Joshua · 1 Oct 2007 at 13:33

[TW]Fox;10186793 said:
Could you please explain the risk of using a handheld phone whilst stationary in a traffic queue with the handbrake applied?

I would have thought it was obvious, the risk of being caught and fined.

Confused · 1 Oct 2007 at 13:54

Werewolf said:
The law doesn't care, if you are in traffic you are classed as driving, for all the police know someone waiting at traffic lights could have been on the phone for the past 5 minutes, and planning on being on it when the lights change.

It's harsh, but the chances are most people who are seen using mobile phones at the lights are likely to continue using the phone when the lights change.

^^ What he said.

stoofa · 1 Oct 2007 at 14:48

Amps said:
A guy in my work got done while talking on a phone in a lay-by as his engine was running.

His engine was running to keep thje car cool (aircon).

3 points his way.

Errr...no he didn't.
It might be what he told you - but if he was actually in a lay-by he would not have been "done".

james.miller · 1 Oct 2007 at 14:58

laws are there to take judgement out of the equation. your 'fine' might not be somebody else's. that somebody else's 'fine' might be driving at 30 on the phone...untill they mow a child down. you can not let these msitakes happen so the only obvious answer is to make it law - do not use your phone whilst driving, and that does includ in traffic, however slow its moving.

its harsh, but you got caught. no point in calling the officer names, he's doing his job. take one on the chin and dont get caught next time.

Tetsujin · 1 Oct 2007 at 18:01

Trojan said:
So you think it's perfectly safe driving with only the one hand, and occasionally no hands on the wheel?

No, i always drive at '10 to 2' and 'quarter to three' as then it's physically impossible for anything to ever go wrong or an accident to occur. also with my hands in this position they are perfectly poised to react in any way to any incident. also i feel good because i'm doing what The Man tells me to do blindly, and The Man knows what's best for us all.

pitchfork · 1 Oct 2007 at 18:27

I wouldn't have taken that, handbrakes on, car is stationary.

Dogbreath · 1 Oct 2007 at 18:33

james.miller said:
laws are there to take judgement out of the equation. your 'fine' might not be somebody else's. that somebody else's 'fine' might be driving at 30 on the phone...untill they mow a child down.

I find it amazing that police officers aren't continuously mowing children down, having to use a handhed radio or phones in their cars. Or could it be that using a phone isn't automaticly dangerous, and should a driver be incapable of driving and using the phone then perfectly good laws have existed for many years to deal with this? Still, labour need to keep pushing out as many useless new laws as they possibly can, all in the name of our safety :rolleyes:

Werewolf · 1 Oct 2007 at 19:00

IIRC the difference in the eyes of the law is that the units the police use are normally fairly simple "push to talk" type things, usually these days with hands free as standard - or the second officer in the car does it (CB radios are also exempt).
They can still be done for dangerous driving or drivng without due care and attention if they have an accident whilst using their radios (basically the offence that mobiles used to fall under).

A large part of the problems with mobiles is that they have a display, and menus etc that people tend to pay attention to, and a number of small buttons that tend to require a fair degree of attention to use (and that's before you get to the prats txting whilst driving).

The mobile phone ban is basically a specific offence based on what used to be covered depending on the circumstances as driving without due care and attention/dangerous driving, one that is geared up to the modern day and a newish, but very common problem.

InvaderGIR · 1 Oct 2007 at 19:04

West said:
Simple answer is, get a hands free kit, no call is important enough for you to take such a risk.

I have better than that...a passenger.

If it rings when it's only me in the car, then whoever it is can wait, or have loudspeaker, if I have a passenger then they get to answer it.

I've always used a hands free kit, or a passenger whilst I've been driving, but I find hands free kits with wires get in the way, and the bluetooth ones are pants.

InvG

TheVoice · 1 Oct 2007 at 19:07

carlazai said:
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!!!

Interesting outlook, but you're wrong. As for quotas, blame the organisation for those, not the officers.

Ex-RoNiN said:
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"

Being STATIONARY doesn't matter, there IS a fine because he wasn't pulled over/parked. The OP said the police officer was friendly; I don't see what that makes him a "right ***". While I do think a warning would have sufficed, mobile phones divert people's attention constantly. The police officer wouldn't have known it was a short call, so try to see it from his perspective before talking nonsense.

jdderbys · 1 Oct 2007 at 19:10

You deserve the points. Are your calls that important it couldnt have waited 20 mins?

Concrete · 1 Oct 2007 at 19:29

Just reading through the responses I often wonder if people ever read peoples posts other than the original one.

Anyway, might be getting out of it, apparently judges don't look to favourably on the police putting down a DOB that states the offendant is 2 years old

Tetsujin · 1 Oct 2007 at 19:56

Concrete said:
Just reading through the responses I often wonder if people ever read peoples posts other than the original one.

Anyway, might be getting out of it, apparently judges don't look to favourably on the police putting down a DOB that states the offendant is 2 years old

haha good luck to you, this is a rare instance where i'd not be enraged by hearing someone got off on a technicality!

Trojan · 1 Oct 2007 at 20:38

Tetsujin said:
No, i always drive at '10 to 2' and 'quarter to three' as then it's physically impossible for anything to ever go wrong or an accident to occur. also with my hands in this position they are perfectly poised to react in any way to any incident. also i feel good because i'm doing what The Man tells me to do blindly, and The Man knows what's best for us all.

Come on, drop the immature sarcasm for a second. Do you really think that it's totally safe to drive with just the one hand on the wheel for an extended period of time? That's what you seem to be implying.

Tetsujin · 1 Oct 2007 at 20:44

Trojan said:
Come on, drop the immature sarcasm for a second. Do you really think that it's totally safe to drive with just the one hand on the wheel for an extended period of time? That's what you seem to be implying.

it's not immature it's highly amusing, and we could indeed turn this into a Holy War thread about the virtue of being relaxed and in control and perfectly safe versus the virtue of being a good little boy and doing what The Man tells you to all the time but there's no point. that's a cryptic 'yes', by the way. and i'm not a terrorist.

Puzzled · 1 Oct 2007 at 20:54

Damn that's harsh

Makes me feel lucky as I was stuck in traffic today for nearly 2 hours (did 4.5 miles in 1hr 30 mins

) and I called my bro to try to find a way out of it. Didn't realise I could still be done if I wasn't even moving. :eek:

Police car went past a few minutes later as well to deal with all the idiots racing down the hard shoulder.

Trojan · 1 Oct 2007 at 21:00

Tetsujin said:
it's not immature it's highly amusing, and we could indeed turn this into a Holy War thread about the virtue of being relaxed and in control and perfectly safe versus the virtue of being a good little boy and doing what The Man tells you to all the time but there's no point. that's a cryptic 'yes', by the way. and i'm not a terrorist.

It's nothing to do with "The Man" and all to do with basic safety and control of the car. How are things going to end up if you hit a pot hole whilst driving with just the one hand on the wheel for example? Or aquaplaning?

Also, if one of your hands is in use on a mobile then how do you change gear without taking both hands of the wheel? Do you think that's safe as well?

silversurfer · 1 Oct 2007 at 21:24

Booking someone while they arent even moving is ott, dont be silly now