All drivers should watch this....

[Big Err]

I think this video is excellent and it did the rounds when it first came out sometime ago...apparently it has been picked up by drivers, safety organisations and police all over the world. It made the BBC TV and radio due to it's 'popularity'.

I agree it is an excellent production and as I sit here watching it with colleauges it does create a reaction. However, like the Safe Drive Stay Alive production it hits hard infront of a dedicated audience but does the message make its way to the driving seat?

[michael769]

As a driving instructor I'm on the road more than most people. I see at least a dozen drivers every single day either talking on hand held mobiles or texting. If I see it why don't the police see it. I have never heard of someone being pulled over by the police for breaking the law re mobile phones. I'm not saying they don't stop people but I have never heard of it.

Take a look at a web-site like pepipoo or safespeed and you will find lots of people complaining about having been caught and done for using a mobile phone (they never done it honest guv!)

The problem is not that the police do nothing, it is that we taxpayers are not willing to provide our police with the manpower and resources necessary to enable them to do an adequate job of dealing with the problem.

[TripleS]

As a driving instructor I'm on the road more than most people. I see at least a dozen drivers every single day either talking on hand held mobiles or texting. If I see it why don't the police see it. I have never heard of someone being pulled over by the police for breaking the law re mobile phones. I'm not saying they don't stop people but I have never heard of it.

Take a look at a web-site like pepipoo or safespeed and you will find lots of people complaining about having been caught and done for using a mobile phone (they never done it honest guv!)

The problem is not that the police do nothing, it is that we taxpayers are not willing to provide our police with the manpower and resources necessary to enable them to do an adequate job of dealing with the problem.

....or have them use a sledgehammer to crack a nut, some might say.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[JConnors]

Evidence that the police do do something about drivers on mobile phones....

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23892727-watch-out-katie-met-has-no-truck-with-lorry-drivers-on-their-mobiles.do

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23882608-katie-price-to-face-driving-charge-trial.do

[TripleS]

Evidence that the police do do something about drivers on mobile phones....

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23892727-watch-out-katie-met-has-no-truck-with-lorry-drivers-on-their-mobiles.do

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23882608-katie-price-to-face-driving-charge-trial.do

Hmm, Katie Price, eh. Well at least the phone wouldn't need to be hand held.

It'll probably need the other JC to interpret that one.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[ExadiNigel]

If the Police has evidence of her veering across a lane in such a way as to cause others to have to take avoiding action why the hell are they pratting about with a mobile phone charge? Wouldn't dangerous or due care & attention be more appropriate? Her phone records should prove she was on the phone at the time!

[fungus]

If the Police has evidence of her veering across a lane in such a way as to cause others to have to take avoiding action why the hell are they pratting about with a mobile phone charge? Wouldn't dangerous or due care & attention be more appropriate? Her phone records should prove she was on the phone at the time!

I couln't agree more Nigel. If DWDCA or DD is evident, the appropriate offence should be prosecuted, not the lesser offence of driving whilst using a mobile phone, which after all only makes it easier to prosecute. That's not to say that most on this forum would agree that any form of distraction can be dangerous.

[ExadiNigel]

....That's not to say that most on this forum would agree that any form of distraction can be dangerous.

Which just shows there was no need to introduce the phone law in the first place!

[fungus]

....That's not to say that most on this forum would agree that any form of distraction can be dangerous.

Which just shows there was no need to introduce the phone law in the first place!

Indeed.

A few years back I had a pupil in his early/mid twenties who maintained that girls/young women should be barred from wearing revealing clothing as it was distracting.

[MGF]

....That's not to say that most on this forum would agree that any form of distraction can be dangerous.

Which just shows there was no need to introduce the phone law in the first place!

Unfortunately/fortunately the test for DWDCA or DD is not 'most on this forum agreeing/not agreeing a distraction can be dangerous.'

It appears from the report that she is being prosecuted for DWDCA......

[ExadiNigel]

It appears from the report that she is being prosecuted for DWDCA......

Perhaps, I suppose the clue may be this part "She denies not being in proper control of a vehicle" which I missed due to the article's preoccupation with the use of a phone.

Nigel

[TripleS]

....That's not to say that most on this forum would agree that any form of distraction can be dangerous.

Which just shows there was no need to introduce the phone law in the first place!

Indeed.

A few years back I had a pupil in his early/mid twenties who maintained that girls/young women should be barred from wearing revealing clothing as it was distracting.

Obviously a grumpy old man at a very early age.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[TripleS]

It appears from the report that she is being prosecuted for DWDCA......

Perhaps, I suppose the clue may be this part "She denies not being in proper control of a vehicle" which I missed due to the article's preoccupation with the use of a phone.

Nigel

I expect some of us might also have distracted ourselves with mental pictures of the accused, plus a bit of imagination, rather than just reading the report properly.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[ExadiNigel]

It appears from the report that she is being prosecuted for DWDCA......

Perhaps, I suppose the clue may be this part "She denies not being in proper control of a vehicle" which I missed due to the article's preoccupation with the use of a phone.

Nigel

I expect some of us might also have distracted ourselves with mental pictures of the accused, plus a bit of imagination, rather than just reading the report properly.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Nah, not me! Never been a fan of her - mind nor body! I prefer things au naturel! The natural imperfections increase the attraction.

[heeloth]

IIRC the production of this involved a group of school students who had lost a contempory in this sort of incident.

The physics are wrong, but that wasn't the point, which was to shock teenage drivers into not using their phones while driving

It sure worked! I saw a compilation of some staged and real (traffic camera shots) accidents on Facebook a while back. That sends a pretty strong message to ALL drivers about how to drive prudently.