Why mobile phones but not CB radio? [Was: hoons]

On Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:37:53 +0000, brian w edginton wrote:

> On Sun, 09 Nov 2008 14:44:24 GMT, [email protected] (Phred)
> wrote:
>
>>I've often wondered about the CB radio side of things. Presumably it
>>was excluded either because it's been around for decades and/or there
>>aren't enough people using it to constitute a significant risk to the
>>rest of us?
>
> Dunno about that.
> Lots of them in vehicles in rural areas. Not to mention every semi and
> B-double on the highway has a CB or two.

I live in NE Tassie, and UHF CB is a part of daily life here for many
(most?) people. Due to the mountainous terrain, most ppl keep monitoring
CH40 because of the steep and twisty roads frequented by logging trucks.
Makes life easier/safer for everyone.

Even a lot of the rural stores here display a sign stating what channel
they monitor. Cheaper than a phone call I suppose plus a lot of areas
here have no mobile phone coverage.

> That said...I have, always, been under the impression that it was
> illegal to use a microphone while driving. I guess it was one of those
> "common knowledge" things that I never queried.

Seems to be one of those things, an urban myth of sorts.

Of course, despite the (apparent) legality, trying to argue with a cop
about it may well see the bastard defect your vehicle, or similar... if
you get one of those emotionally immature types who cannot handle being
proven wrong.

> Come to think on it, I did ask a radio inspector back when I got my
> first CB licence in the early 90s. Thought he said it was illegal...but
> he may have said it wasn't a good idea. Had more brain cells then. And,
> maybe, he lied for my own good ....LOL.

IME, some RIs know a lot less than they should.

---

› See More: Why mobile phones but not CB radio? [Was: hoons]

Jeßus wrote:
>
> Of course, despite the (apparent) legality, trying to argue with a cop
> about it may well see the bastard defect your vehicle, or similar... if
> you get one of those emotionally immature types who cannot handle being
> proven wrong.

The answer to that is not to argue with the cop, but to accept the
penality notice, make sure he's written in his notebook the actual
facts, and dispute it later.

Sylvia.

On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:25:38 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:

> Jeßus wrote:
>>
>> Of course, despite the (apparent) legality, trying to argue with a cop
>> about it may well see the bastard defect your vehicle, or similar... if
>> you get one of those emotionally immature types who cannot handle being
>> proven wrong.
>
> The answer to that is not to argue with the cop, but to accept the
> penality notice, make sure he's written in his notebook the actual
> facts, and dispute it later.

That is the sensible response, for sure.

Not sure I am capable of staying calm every time though, depending on how
the interaction transpires. Some of them seem to be spineless and will
hide behind their badge if losing a verbal argument - these are the ones
most likely to provoke me.

If recorded audio/video of the exchange was usable, then I'd almost
certainly dispute the cop's claims.

Jeßus wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:25:38 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:
>
>> Jeßus wrote:
>>> Of course, despite the (apparent) legality, trying to argue with a cop
>>> about it may well see the bastard defect your vehicle, or similar... if
>>> you get one of those emotionally immature types who cannot handle being
>>> proven wrong.
>> The answer to that is not to argue with the cop, but to accept the
>> penality notice, make sure he's written in his notebook the actual
>> facts, and dispute it later.
>
> That is the sensible response, for sure.
>
> Not sure I am capable of staying calm every time though, depending on how
> the interaction transpires.

Sadly, the evidence shows that I have a similar problem. The advice I've
given is not necessarily the advice I'd follow. I tend to let my
annoyance get the better of me, much to my later disgust. All I can do
is vow to do better next time.

C'est la vie.

Sylvia.

On Nov 10, 4:36*pm, brian w edginton <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:58:09 +1100, Sylvia Else
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Here's the equivalent rule from Tasmania, which is much the same.
>
> >http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/t...9290/s300.html
>
> >As an aside, I note that unlike the NSW legislation, it doesn't seek to
> >widen the meaning of "use", which could presumably lead to argument in
> >court about what the word means in this context.
>
> >Sylvia.
>
> BTW
> I wouldn't be surprised if a cop decided driving with one hand on the
> wheel and a mic in the other was akin to inattentive driving.
> I believe they have foot switches for their radios....so they don't
> have to take a hand off the wheel. But, I guess, they don't use it all
> the time.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> If you want to stand out in the crowd...
> check the alleys for escape routes, first

No dear boy...they have their hands on their........

Jeßus wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:58:09 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:
>
>> Jeßus wrote:
>>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:20:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 09 Nov 2008 22:16:53 +0000, Jeßus wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:15:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Interesting. Only just found this thread. I was under the
>>>>>>>> impression that using mics whilst mobile would also be illegal.
>>>>>>>> Does anyone have a link to the revelent legislation (or info)
>>>>>>>> regarding this? TIA.
>>>>>>> http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/n...reg/rr2008104/
> s300.html
>>>>>>> See subsection (2)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "(2) In this rule:
>>>>>>> "mobile phone" does not include a CB radio or any other two-way
>>>>>>> radio."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>>> Thank you Sylvia. Quick too
>>>>> Ah: "New South Wales Consolidated Regulations" So this law may vary
>>>>> from state to state?
>>>> They're part of the Australian Road Rules. There can still be state
>>>> differences, but usually not. Which state are you interested in?
>>> I'm in Tassie myself, so thats where I'm particularly interested to
>>> know of course, cheers.
>>>
>>>
>> Here's the equivalent rule from Tasmania, which is much the same.
>>
>> http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/t...9290/s300.html
>>
>> As an aside, I note that unlike the NSW legislation, it doesn't seek to
>> widen the meaning of "use", which could presumably lead to argument in
>> court about what the word means in this context.
>
> Once again, many thanks Sylvia. Saved me a lot of time digging around for
> the right info. As you say, the wording is somewhat different and I note
> that in Tas the penalty is only 5 penalty units vs. 20 for NSW.
>
> It at least states: "(2) In this rule,"mobile phone" does not include a
> CB radio or any other two-way radio.
>
>


Make that three
QLD has the same

but you can be charged for undue care and attention(or similar charge)
if by using your CB/Two way you caused a crash or were driving in a
dangerous manner

Kev

On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 19:14:30 +1000, Kev wrote:

> Jeßus wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:58:09 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>
>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:20:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 09 Nov 2008 22:16:53 +0000, Jeßus wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:15:17 +1100, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeßus wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Interesting. Only just found this thread. I was under the
>>>>>>>>> impression that using mics whilst mobile would also be illegal.
>>>>>>>>> Does anyone have a link to the revelent legislation (or info)
>>>>>>>>> regarding this? TIA.
>>>>>>>> http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/n...reg/rr2008104/
>> s300.html
>>>>>>>> See subsection (2)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "(2) In this rule:
>>>>>>>> "mobile phone" does not include a CB radio or any other two-way
>>>>>>>> radio."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>>>> Thank you Sylvia. Quick too
>>>>>> Ah: "New South Wales Consolidated Regulations" So this law may vary
>>>>>> from state to state?
>>>>> They're part of the Australian Road Rules. There can still be state
>>>>> differences, but usually not. Which state are you interested in?
>>>> I'm in Tassie myself, so thats where I'm particularly interested to
>>>> know of course, cheers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Here's the equivalent rule from Tasmania, which is much the same.
>>>
>>> http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/t...9290/s300.html
>>>
>>> As an aside, I note that unlike the NSW legislation, it doesn't seek
>>> to widen the meaning of "use", which could presumably lead to argument
>>> in court about what the word means in this context.
>>
>> Once again, many thanks Sylvia. Saved me a lot of time digging around
>> for the right info. As you say, the wording is somewhat different and I
>> note that in Tas the penalty is only 5 penalty units vs. 20 for NSW.
>>
>> It at least states: "(2) In this rule,"mobile phone" does not include a
>> CB radio or any other two-way radio.
>>
>
> Make that three
> QLD has the same
>
> but you can be charged for undue care and attention(or similar charge)
> if by using your CB/Two way you caused a crash or were driving in a
> dangerous manner

Driving in a "dangerous manner" is something they could use to sidestep
the regs and get the result theyre after.

brian w edginton wrote:

> BTW
> I wouldn't be surprised if a cop decided driving with one hand on the
> wheel and a mic in the other was akin to inattentive driving.
> I believe they have foot switches for their radios....so they don't
> have to take a hand off the wheel. But, I guess, they don't use it all
> the time.
>
> Just a thought.

Nope. Mic in hand.

Addtionally, during a pursuit, they'll do a lot of talking on the radio.