Texting and driving

[TripleS]

This inevitably led to an increase in serious accidents at a time when the government was actively trying to reduce casualties.

I'm not sure if either of those two assertions are necessarily true ... was there really an increase in serious accidents caused by mobile phone use, or was it that there was just a perception that that was the case? ... was the government actively trying to reduce casualties or did it just want to be 'seen' to be trying to reduce casualties?

I must say I have my doubts about this too. It was easy for the government to impose this law, but was it really justified and the right thing to do. I still doubt it.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[MGF]

This inevitably led to an increase in serious accidents at a time when the government was actively trying to reduce casualties.

I'm not sure if either of those two assertions are necessarily true ... was there really an increase in serious accidents caused by mobile phone use, or was it that there was just a perception that that was the case? ...

People have been convicted of death by dangerous driving on the basis of their use of a mobile phone whilst driving. That is strong evidence of a causal link between using a phone whilst driving and causing a serious accident.

It seems to me that if it is the case that drivers are inevitably distracted only to the point that the distraction has no adverse affect on safety then accidents caused by drivers not paying attention to the task of driving would not happen. According to the Police not paying attention appears to be a significant cause of accidents.

Of course there is a worthy argument that the deaths and serious injuries caused by such distractions are an acceptable cost of driving and should be dealt with retrospectively by way of prosecution and prospectively by education. Politically there appears to be no such thing as an acceptable level of casualties on our roads.

...was the government actively trying to reduce casualties or did it just want to be 'seen' to be trying to reduce casualties?

Can't know for sure but whatever the reason Parliament would still be motivated to curtail or significantly limit the distraction of using a mobile phone whist driving.

[GJD]

People have been convicted of death by dangerous driving on the basis of their use of a mobile phone whilst driving. That is strong evidence of a causal link between using a phone whilst driving and causing a serious accident.

Do you mean that the prosecution only had to prove that a mobile phone was being used at the time, and was allowed to take it as a given that use of a mobile phone was a causal factor, rather than having to argue that it was a causal factor on a case by case basis? If the latter, then it's only strong evidence of a causal link in those individual cases.

[Standard Dave]

95 % of road traffic collisions are caused by driver error.

The use of handheld mobile phones, excessive speed and drink driving are identified as three causes that can be resolved by education and enforcement.
The failure to wear seatbelts correctly is also targeted as there is more than a casual link between use of safety restraints and seriousness of injury after the collision has occured.

One question I'd ask is if you had to drive really quickly on a demanding road would you down a couple of pints pick up your phone and take off your seatbelt? if not why not they aren't dangerous or distract you do they

[Gareth]

One question I'd ask is if you had to drive really quickly on a demanding road would you down a couple of pints pick up your phone and take off your seatbelt? if not why not they aren't dangerous or distract you do they

I have a range of thoughts in response to this comment. I'm not sure how they should be ordered but, anyway, here they are:

• I don't see how not wearing a seat-belt increases the chance of an accident, so that part of the comment seems out of place in this discussion.
• I think that on many roads you'd have to break the speed limit to make it especially challenging.
• risk can be managed - when I talk to a passenger I often drive slower, and I don't see how that aspect is different to talking to someone who is not in the car.
• I might also slow down to fiddle with the radio or adjust other minor controls such as those for heating or ventilation.

[MGF]

People have been convicted of death by dangerous driving on the basis of their use of a mobile phone whilst driving. That is strong evidence of a causal link between using a phone whilst driving and causing a serious accident.

Do you mean that the prosecution only had to prove that a mobile phone was being used at the time, and was allowed to take it as a given that use of a mobile phone was a causal factor, rather than having to argue that it was a causal factor on a case by case basis? If the latter, then it's only strong evidence of a causal link in those individual cases.

There is no given for dangerous driving. The use of the phone has to be dangerous and the danger must have caused the death.

[Standard Dave]

One question I'd ask is if you had to drive really quickly on a demanding road would you down a couple of pints pick up your phone and take off your seatbelt? if not why not they aren't dangerous or distract you do they

I have a range of thoughts in response to this comment. I'm not sure how they should be ordered but, anyway, here they are:

• I don't see how not wearing a seat-belt increases the chance of an accident, so that part of the comment seems out of place in this discussion.
• I think that on many roads you'd have to break the speed limit to make it especially challenging.
• risk can be managed - when I talk to a passenger I often drive slower, and I don't see how that aspect is different to talking to someone who is not in the car.
• I might also slow down to fiddle with the radio or adjust other minor controls such as those for heating or ventilation.

If you choose to take something out of context then the seat belt section of the limited quote may not make sense. If you increase the risk would you remove safety equipment.

If you live in an area that is mainly rural and hasn't had more than it's far share of government cash to build roads and other infrustructure like some areas of the south of England then you can't even safely reach the national speed limit. I'm sure some of the other members from the North, Wales and Scotland would agree that there are roads in their area where you can drive to the system and reach the maximum safe speed without breaking the national speed limit.

While talking to a passenger in the same vehicle they can see hazards or other road factors, you also don't need to hold the passenger in your hand or alter your grip on the controls to speak to them.

How long does it take you to adjust the radio or heater controls? no where near as long as people converse on the phone I would hope.

[TripleS]

One question I'd ask is if you had to drive really quickly on a demanding road would you down a couple of pints pick up your phone and take off your seatbelt? if not why not they aren't dangerous or distract you do they

I have a range of thoughts in response to this comment. I'm not sure how they should be ordered but, anyway, here they are:

• I don't see how not wearing a seat-belt increases the chance of an accident, so that part of the comment seems out of place in this discussion.
• I think that on many roads you'd have to break the speed limit to make it especially challenging.
• risk can be managed - when I talk to a passenger I often drive slower, and I don't see how that aspect is different to talking to someone who is not in the car.
• I might also slow down to fiddle with the radio or adjust other minor controls such as those for heating or ventilation.

If you choose to take something out of context then the seat belt section of the limited quote may not make sense. If you increase the risk would you remove safety equipment.

If you live in an area that is mainly rural and hasn't had more than it's far share of government cash to build roads and other infrustructure like some areas of the south of England then you can't even safely reach the national speed limit. I'm sure some of the other members from the North, Wales and Scotland would agree that there are roads in their area where you can drive to the system and reach the maximum safe speed without breaking the national speed limit.

While talking to a passenger in the same vehicle they can see hazards or other road factors, you also don't need to hold the passenger in your hand or alter your grip on the controls to speak to them.

How long does it take you to adjust the radio or heater controls? no where near as long as people converse on the phone I would hope.

Dave - are you saying that rural roads in the North present vitually no opportunties for the safe use of speeds in excess of the NSL? If you are, I'm surprised at that. This member from the North finds lots of situations on rural roads where the NSL can be exceeded by quite large margins, without safety being reduced to any degree worth bothering about.

As for passengers seeing hazards and desisting from distracting a driver with chit-chat at such times, in my experience they hardly ever do that. Members of this forum are very likely to do it, but normal passengers don't.

....and occasionally I might hold certain parts of a certain passenger anyhow. We've only been married 47 years and the novelty hasn't worn off yet. You are right though, this involves an adjustment to my handling of the controls of the car, but it's not detrimental on the occasions when it is done.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Gareth]

I'm sure some of the other members from the North, Wales and Scotland would agree that there are roads in their area where you can drive to the system and reach the maximum safe speed without breaking the national speed limit.

Like TripleS, I'm not convinced. I accept there are sections where you'd be under the speed limit a fair proportion of the time, but that's down to short distances between successive hazards. Thinking about roads around Peterborough, for an example that's not where I live, there are large number of minor A-roads, B-roads and other unnumbered roads that would only get interesting between the bends or corners if you are going above the speed limit.

While talking to a passenger in the same vehicle they can see hazards or other road factors, you also don't need to hold the passenger in your hand or alter your grip on the controls to speak to them.

I also agree with TripleS - 'normal' passengers pay very little attention to whether or not the driver has a high workload. From the second part of your comment I presume you're completely OK with handsfree mobiles and voice activated dialing?

How long does it take you to adjust the radio or heater controls? no where near as long as people converse on the phone I would hope.

Seconds for changing the climate control on our car to increase the heat output to maximum and increase the fan speed to direct air to the screen. Since I have to reach beyond the gearstick and then select and press the correct sequence of buttons, some buttons repeatedly until a visual feedback indicator is reached, it means to effectively operate the controls I need to take my eyes off the road, and therefore I need to pick a good time to do this.

Similarly if I could be bothered to play a CD - a button push to select the CD player, another to select the desired CD, repeated pushes of another button to select the track I want to hear. Actually it's easier to ignore all that and just be content to listen to the dulcet tones of a TDi

[TripleS]

How long does it take you to adjust the radio or heater controls? no where near as long as people converse on the phone I would hope.

Seconds for changing the climate control on our car to increase the heat output to maximum and increase the fan speed to direct air to the screen. Since I have to reach beyond the gearstick and then select and press the correct sequence of buttons, some buttons repeatedly until a visual feedback indicator is reached, it means to effectively operate the controls I need to take my eyes off the road, and therefore I need to pick a good time to do this.

Similarly if I could be bothered to play a CD - a button push to select the CD player, another to select the desired CD, repeated pushes of another button to select the track I want to hear. Actually it's easier to ignore all that and just be content to listen to the dulcet tones of a TDi

....or better still, an HDi....but I won't make a big issue of that.

The key thing about all these non-essential activities that might distract a driver is knowing when you can safely take a little time off from the driving task, and when you can't. It's the same principle when people complain about the difficulty of keeping a watch on the speedometer in order to stay within the limit in a built-up area. You need to assess the scene sufficiently far ahead to satisfy yourself that there is no risk of a problem suddenly arising within the next few seconds, and that's the opportunity to do a speed check or adjust the heating or play with some other ancillary equipment. When you're fully occupied with the driving, these other things have to be left alone for the time being.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[IVORTHE DRIVER]

See, yet again Dave has the right idea, there is a time and a place to play with the ancillary equipment, though Im not sure my wife would like being refered to as such!!

[TripleS]

......there is a time and a place to play with the ancillary equipment, though Im not sure my wife would like being refered to as such!!

Indeed, a most timely note of caution there. I am well accustomed to being in receipt of a clipped earhole.

Best wishes all,
Dave.