Permabanned
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 1,222
- Location
- Frodsham
Yes but he is more likely to with
Busted . .
- Thread starter Concrete
- Start date
He didn't lose. He's just getting frustrated with sheep who wear blinkers.
Says who? Do you know the individuals ability?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 1,222
- Location
- Frodsham
Blinkered to what Mobile phnes reduce your concentrate when driving? It is against the law?
I suppose we should all never drive in case we randomly sneeze?
I don't know anyone who has had an accident caused by a mobile phone.
I DO know someone who had an accident due to a sneeze.
FACT.
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 1,418
No I don't. I know OF, I don't "know".
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 1,418
does it really matter?
Yes. I'm sure there's lots of people who have choked on a sock and died, but the fact that neither of us know anyone who has means that, in all likeliness, it isn't that common
I don't see the point in arguing about the circumstances of which a ban/points/fine are given.
That is why laws are made, and don't tend to have technicalities that over complicate them.
Concentration should be with you all the time, I remember I was in Gloucester behind some chaps in a Corsa and the lights turned orange, some middle aged bloke started zipping over the crossing.
It was just really bad timing, I think the the biker shouldn't have attempted to cross and at the same time the young lad in the Corsa should have looked both sides on the crossing before pulling away.
He clipped the back of the blokes wheel and weirdly he seemed to keep balance then suddenly lose it.
No damage done to the bloke though, just a few select words shouted to the kid as he got out of his car but then got onto his bike and on his way. Don't think he was using a mobile, but there are a lot of drivers out there that just don't concentrate enough as it is.
Then again the law is weird, people like Jenson Button get pulled for speeding stupidly, then that officer doing some stupid speed got let off as the judge thought "no one has taken into consideration your high driving skills" as he was some top trained high speed pursuit driver.
That is why laws are made, and don't tend to have technicalities that over complicate them.
Concentration should be with you all the time, I remember I was in Gloucester behind some chaps in a Corsa and the lights turned orange, some middle aged bloke started zipping over the crossing.
It was just really bad timing, I think the the biker shouldn't have attempted to cross and at the same time the young lad in the Corsa should have looked both sides on the crossing before pulling away.
He clipped the back of the blokes wheel and weirdly he seemed to keep balance then suddenly lose it.
No damage done to the bloke though, just a few select words shouted to the kid as he got out of his car but then got onto his bike and on his way. Don't think he was using a mobile, but there are a lot of drivers out there that just don't concentrate enough as it is.
Then again the law is weird, people like Jenson Button get pulled for speeding stupidly, then that officer doing some stupid speed got let off as the judge thought "no one has taken into consideration your high driving skills" as he was some top trained high speed pursuit driver.
Using a non-hands free phone while you are supposed to be in control of a vehicle is illegal, that's all there is to it. If you feel it should be otherwise I suggest you petition your local MP and get something done about it, until then live with it or the consequences, your choice.
The key here is to come up with a valid reason as to why it is "ok" for you to be doing what you are doing. In the case of the highly trained police officer, he was able to come up with a believable reason that convinced the judge that the safety of the people on the road was not compromised by his actions, as he was highly trained. Also, during the process, the police officer would certainly have had to bring in people to corroborate his story, ie. that he is a highly skilled driver. He would also have had a proven history of not having ever crashed a car at normal speed AND during high speed pursuits. He would've got his police colleagues to testify on his behalf that they have witnessed his ability and in their opinion he would not be putting compromising anybody's safety, even if he was speeding.
If you can gather enough pieces of different evidence/witnesses to defend a charge for breaking the law, then a precedent can be set and people can get off a charge, even though they have been caught red-handed breaking the law. Remember, OJ Simpson got off a murder charge. Once that happened, everyone knew that anything would be possible in a court of law.
Bingo.
It's the same reason doctors have been known to get off a speeding charge if there is a real reason for them breaking the limit (IE they are needed at an emergency and an ambulance would make things worse, or could not arrive in time).
You may also get let off if you are taking an animal to the Vet's in an emergency, and time is of the essence (if it's eaten poison etc).
Anyone can get off things like speeding and even drink driving charges in the right circumstances, if there is a real emergency and there is no viable alternative*, and your actions are "reasonable" under the circumstances, or there is a specific need/exemption in place (police breaking the speed limit for example).
You will normally need to provide pretty good proof though, as the courts won't take your word for it (too many people have tried it on over the years).
It's the same reason the mobile phone law has a "loophole" that allows the use of it in an emergency situation.
A racing driver has zero special exemptions from the normal speed limits on the public roads, regardless of how good they are (however in some very rare circumstances they could make use of the same ones available to anyone).
A police driver on the otherh and, when on duty has a whole host of statutory exemptions, although they may be overridden by force policies (or require authorisation to use).
The police driver couldn't be prosecuted for "breaking the speed limit", which is an absolute offence (committed the moment you go over the limit), and so was left with the "dangerous driving", which it was decided was not proven.
Dangerous driving is not an absolute offence as it is largely based on the opinions of experts, and thus much harder to prove - especially when the person accused of it is highly trained and may even be expected to drive in such a manner officially at times.
*Say you're out camping in the middle of nowhere, have had a few pints and the only other person with you has a medical emergency, and you need to drive him to get to a phone/area with mobile reception.
I was speeding 12 months ago, got pulled over and booked. Didn't kill anyone, didn't mow anyone down, didn't cause an accident, in fact the road was empty. Should I of been booked? Of course I should. I learned my lesson, and now I am a far better driver. Whether or not you agree with a law or its application doesn't affect whether or not you should abide by it.
The law states that it is illegal to use a mobile phone while in charge of a motor vehicle - so in this case the law was applied perfectly. If you don't like it, get a hands free kit, or don't use your phone. Don't see why this needs 6 pages of morons shouting to figure it out.
The law also states that Welshmen are not allowed in the city of Chester after dark.
Shall we all bow down like good little sheep or should we perhaps apply some common sense?
Common sense suggests to me that if I don't want to be charged with using a mobile whilst in charge of a motor vehicle, then I shouldn't do so at any time, whether going 70mpg or parked at the lights.