About time too!

Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:

> SteveH ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
> were saying :
>
> > Parrot car kits are cheap as chips and take literally minutes to
> > install. That's what's going in my 'classic' when I get it back.
>
> I find a bluetooth earpiece far easier to use and less distracting than a
> fitted car kit - and that's after having several professionally fitted
> genuine Nokia kits.

I had to resort to a bluetooth earpiece when my CK-7W threw a hissy fit
on me.

I hated it, ended up switching my phone off in the car until it was
fixed.
--
SteveH 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - Hongdou GY200 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 TSpark - B6 Passat 2.0TDI SE - COSOC KOTL
BOTAFOT #87 - BOTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

---

› See More: About time too!

"Tommy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:43:58 +0000, TFP wrote:
>> Absolutely right. Down here in London / Surrey it is incrdible how many
>> t0$$ers you see in 30k cars who can't afford 50 quid for a handsfree kit.
>
> With most new phones it's just a case of plugging a wire into the phone
> and clipping it onto your shirt.

Though unless the phone itself is in some sort of mount, it's still illegal.
You can only touch the phone if it's mounted somewhere.

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:53:41 +0000, James Luff
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Norcot wrote:
>> "Steve" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> Drivers face new phone penalties
>>>
>>> Motorists who are caught using a hand-held mobile phone while driving
>>> will have three penalty points added to their licence, the government
>>> says.
>>>
>>> Transport Secretary Douglas Alexander said the maximum fine would also
>>> double to £60 from 27 February.
>>>
>>
>> The sooner the better. We see motorists and van drivers every day trying to
>> negotiate busy High Streets or roundabouts with their mobile phones held to
>> their ears. It's a culture that will take some changing.
>>
>
>I'm all for it, but let's also ban smoking while driving. How is that
>any different to having a phone in your hand!

Not at all. Usually because the bimbo (usually) waving the fag around
(on the basis of observation) is talking about everything under the
sun and not concentrating on the road in front. Nor anything else.
The ability to multi-task is merely an opportunity to carry out two
(or more) tasks badly at the same time.



Regards
JonH

In message <[email protected]>, James Luff
<[email protected]> writes
>
>The point is, that talking on a mobile phone removes one hand from the
>wheel.

So does changing gear in a manual car. Should we ban them all and make
everyone drive an automatic then?

Or alternatively, should drivers of automatics be exempted from this
law?


--
Roadhog

SteveH wrote:
> Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> SteveH ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
>> were saying :
>>
>>> Parrot car kits are cheap as chips and take literally minutes to
>>> install. That's what's going in my 'classic' when I get it back.
>> I find a bluetooth earpiece far easier to use and less distracting than a
>> fitted car kit - and that's after having several professionally fitted
>> genuine Nokia kits.
>
> I had to resort to a bluetooth earpiece when my CK-7W threw a hissy fit
> on me.
>
> I hated it, ended up switching my phone off in the car until it was
> fixed.

Exactly!! What is so wrong with doing that? I'm sure in some
countries you HAVE to have the bloody thing switched off in
the car by law anyway. But no, paranoid women will then
instantly think that if their boyfriend isn't contactable 24/7
365 then he's cheating.

What did we do without mobiles? Had a quieter life that's for
sure.

JAF wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:53:41 +0000, James Luff
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I'm all for it, but let's also ban smoking while driving. How is that
>> any different to having a phone in your hand!
>
> It doesn't require such a large amount of your brain to be relinquishing its
> driving duties.
> All the same, you might have a point.

But to me that isn't the issue, the difference between talking on the
phone whilst driving requires no more or less concentration that talking
to a passenger. What is a problem is that the phone requires you to
remove a hand from the driving process, hence hands free. If the actual
process of talking on the phone was the dangerous aspect then why would
hands free make that any safer?

--
regards, James Luff Gamertag: Lufferov
remove 'nospam' to e-mail
"There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those that understand binary, and those that don't."

Charlie Mitchell <[email protected]> wrote:

> > I had to resort to a bluetooth earpiece when my CK-7W threw a hissy fit
> > on me.
> >
> > I hated it, ended up switching my phone off in the car until it was
> > fixed.
>
> Exactly!! What is so wrong with doing that? I'm sure in some
> countries you HAVE to have the bloody thing switched off in
> the car by law anyway. But no, paranoid women will then
> instantly think that if their boyfriend isn't contactable 24/7
> 365 then he's cheating.
>
> What did we do without mobiles? Had a quieter life that's for
> sure.

At a guess, never got any real work done because you'd end up spending
most of your day in lay-bys picking up messages and replying to them.

--
SteveH 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - Hongdou GY200 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 TSpark - B6 Passat 2.0TDI SE - COSOC KOTL
BOTAFOT #87 - BOTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

JAF <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 21:17:24 +0000, [email protected] (SteveH) wrote:
>
> >
> >I hated it, ended up switching my phone off in the car until it was
> >fixed.
>
> And did the world end?

It was a PITA and effectively extended my working day by an hour or two.

> No.
>
> It's a course of action I heartily recommend.
> Saves on batteries too.

How does it save on batteries when my car kit and phone are both powered
from the car battery?


--
SteveH 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - Hongdou GY200 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 TSpark - B6 Passat 2.0TDI SE - COSOC KOTL
BOTAFOT #87 - BOTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

JAF ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

>>I hated it, ended up switching my phone off in the car until it was
>>fixed.

> And did the world end?
>
> No.

But a ****load of time and effort could easily have been wasted because of
a missed call.

> It's a course of action I heartily recommend.
> Saves on batteries too.

Ummm, you DO know that mobiles don't just use a couple of Duracell AAs,
don't you...?

Roadhog wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>, James Luff
> <[email protected]> writes
>>
>> The point is, that talking on a mobile phone removes one hand from the
>> wheel.
>
> So does changing gear in a manual car. Should we ban them all and make
> everyone drive an automatic then?
>
> Or alternatively, should drivers of automatics be exempted from this law?

Okay, I should have said the driving process and not just wheel.

--
regards, James Luff Gamertag: Lufferov
remove 'nospam' to e-mail
"There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those that understand binary, and those that don't."

James Luff ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

> The point is, that talking on a mobile phone removes one hand from the
> wheel. Talking hands free doesn't.

You can easily drop a phone if need be. You can't easily do that with a can
of coke or a lit ciggy.

Tackle the problem, not the symptom, and charge 'em with DWDC&A if they
are.

SteveH wrote:
> Charlie Mitchell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> I had to resort to a bluetooth earpiece when my CK-7W threw a hissy
>>> fit on me.
>>>
>>> I hated it, ended up switching my phone off in the car until it was
>>> fixed.
>>
>> Exactly!! What is so wrong with doing that? I'm sure in some
>> countries you HAVE to have the bloody thing switched off in
>> the car by law anyway. But no, paranoid women will then
>> instantly think that if their boyfriend isn't contactable 24/7
>> 365 then he's cheating.
>>
>> What did we do without mobiles? Had a quieter life that's for
>> sure.
>
> At a guess, never got any real work done because you'd end up spending
> most of your day in lay-bys picking up messages and replying to them.

Even in the supposed halcyon days when there was a layby every couple of
miles or so, few of them had phone boxes.

Adrian wrote:
> James Luff ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding
> much like they were saying :
>
>> The point is, that talking on a mobile phone removes one hand from the
>> wheel. Talking hands free doesn't.
>
> You can easily drop a phone if need be. You can't easily do that with a can
> of coke or a lit ciggy.
>
> Tackle the problem, not the symptom, and charge 'em with DWDC&A if they
> are.

I think there's something to be said for that, mobile phone use is
already covered by that offence. If the Police could actually be arsed
to enforce the laws we already have there wouldn't be the need to invent
new ones to act as a deterrent.

A couple of successful convictions for DWDC&A while using a mobile would
soon make people think twice before using a one. The problem is, I see
mobile phone use while driving two or three times a day. I don't know
anybody who has been fined for doing it.

--
regards, James Luff Gamertag: Lufferov
remove 'nospam' to e-mail
"There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those that understand binary, and those that don't."

JAF ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

>>I'd rather look like a star trek cast-off with a naff lump of
>>plastic in my ear for that incredibly important phone call
>>that simply wont wait, than than lose my livelihood by losing
>>my licence.

> What did you do before mobile phones?

Wasted a lot of time.

> And if it's that important, won't they ring you back?

Or leave a message, yes.

Of course, you won't actually GET the message until you get to your
destination and turn your phone back on.

Bit of a bugger if the message left five minutes after you leave the office
tells you that the meeting you're heading to (three hours away) is
cancelled ...

> And if you're any good at your job, won't you get other work?

Interviewer - Why did you leave your last job?
Interviewee - I lost my company a major client, because I refused to use a
perfectly safe and legal tool-of-the-trade.
Interviewer - Don't call us, we'll call you...

Brimstone ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :

>> At a guess, never got any real work done because you'd end up spending
>> most of your day in lay-bys picking up messages and replying to them.

> Even in the supposed halcyon days when there was a layby every couple of
> miles or so, few of them had phone boxes.

Even less have phone boxes now.