About time too!

Matthew Haigh <?@?.?> wrote:

>James Luff wrote:

>Personally, I do use a phone handsfree in the car. I also use two way
>radio (amateur radio), also handsfree. I've done both for many years (it
>is 20 years since I started using two way radio in the car). I always
>make sure that the person on the other end of the call knows I am
>driving, and I will be ignoring them if the road needs my concentration.
>I will also only answer the phone if the road conditions appear
>reasonable or I know it will be a low-stress call (no business calls
>whilst driving through a town centre, but I'd take a call from a
>friend)- but from what I see on the roads this clearly isn't common
>practice.

In other words you are not a twat. As I said when the legislation was
about to be introduced a twat with a mobile phone will still be a twat when
you take away his phone.
--

---

› See More: About time too!

[email protected] (SteveH) wrote:

>JAF <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >But a ****load of time and effort could easily have been wasted because of
>> >a missed call.
>> >
>> Oh dear.
>> Time.
>> It has to be either wasted, or spent.
>>
>> Oh for the days when it could just be allowed to pass, and we could stand
>> and stare.
>
>The world has moved on.
>
>Even banana republics rely on mobile phones these days.
>
>Which leads me to the question of why can a Massai tribe get a mobile
>signal in the middle of Africa when T-Mobile can't get one to me 4 miles
>outside of Chepstow?

Because they don't have NIMBYs objecting to mast installations perhaps.

--

"JAF" <[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.
>>
> Even if they were given away free, who wants to look like a Star Trek
> cast-off, with a naff lump of plastic stuck in your ear?
>
Why stuck in the ear?

I use a Stingray Bluetooth car kit stuck on the dash
(Called stingray cos it looks like one)
http://www.asda-phones.co.uk/accesso...tooth-speaker/
(most were sold at Tescos, now sold out)

about half that price on ebay where i got mine

I can recommend it, nothing better at 30quid or less (ebay)

Steve Terry

"SteveH" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1hsd5ce.1vdbmi9ozwjiaN%[email protected]...
> JAF <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >But a ****load of time and effort could easily have been wasted because
>> >of
>> >a missed call.
>> >
>> Oh dear.
>> Time.
>> It has to be either wasted, or spent.
>>
>> Oh for the days when it could just be allowed to pass, and we could stand
>> and stare.
>
> The world has moved on.
>
> Even banana republics rely on mobile phones these days.
>
> Which leads me to the question of why can a Massai tribe get a mobile
> signal in the middle of Africa when T-Mobile can't get one to me 4 miles
> outside of Chepstow?

Because the Massai don't give TMobile (et al) a hard time when they want to
put a cell site 2 miles from their local school ? ;o)

SteveH [email protected] wrote in
<1hsd5m0.pooqpc1ptw63jN%[email protected]>:
> JAF <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > If the actual
> > >process of talking on the phone was the dangerous aspect then why would
> > >hands free make that any safer?
> >
> > Because the (totally ****ing incompetent) gubmint says so.
> > The *real* research shows that using a phone while driving is more dangerous
> > than talking to a passenger when driving. But it's because the phone
> > conversation is likely to be more important than the chit-chat with a real
> > live passenger, and does require more concentration. Hands-free or
> > hand-held doesn't make any difference - the importance of the topic of
> > conversation seems to in research.
>
> If talking on the phone takes so much of a persons concentration that
> they can no longer safely operate a vehicle, then, IMHO, they shouldn't
> take to the roads in the first place.
>

This is probably true. However the extensive research over the last few
years shows it's the case with the vast majority of people. Now I'm sure
that many will agree that a majority of road users are dangerously
incompetent. The problem is that the all think they are one of the
competent few, apart from the minority who are actually competent, most of
whom don't realise it.

I think there's only one real solution. Ban seat belts for drivers and
attach a short sharp spike to all steering wheels. Then see how many
people want to drive whilst using a mobile.

--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"

"The Traveller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Steve" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Drivers face new phone penalties
>>
> Newest traffic law today here is 2000 krones find if you don't scrape the
> snow and ice off all your car windows, Steve.
>
> Sensibly, Edith.
>


Grampian Police had this policy a few years back. They advertised that they
were determinely looking for cars which where the drivers vision was
impaired with snow/ice and stated categorically that they would prosecute.

McK.

"JAF" <[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.
>>
> Even if they were given away free, who wants to look like a Star Trek
> cast-off, with a naff lump of plastic stuck in your ear?
>
> --



....if it saves your job.....

McK.

"JNugent" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dave C wrote:
>> JAF wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Even if they were given away free, who wants to look like a Star Trek
>>> cast-off, with a naff lump of plastic stuck in your ear?
>>>
>> I prefer that to some stupid idiot killing people.
>>
>> I saw one of those 30k plus cars this week with the driver having a phone
>> in one hand and a sandwich in the other.
>
> What's wrong with that - in a layby?
>
Depends what's in the sandwich.

"Gaz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Steve wrote:
>> Drivers face new phone penalties
>>
>
> We had two previous pieces of legislation which deal with driving using a
> mobile phone.
>
> This is typical nulabour nonesense, the idea that you continue to
> legislate, and all will be well has shown to be a fallacy.
>
> It isnt the law that need changed, its the lack of enforcement.
>
> We have the same thing with the Lords discussing laws on "arranged
> marraiges", now I'm sorry but it is a poor show when our criminal justice
> system is unable to find a law being broken when a young girl is forced
> against her will to partake in an arrangement such as marraige.
>
> These laws are about 'sending a signal'................
>


Exactly - Idont understand why the majority of the public cant see through
new labours mass law creation program. As always they think they can solve
problems by legislating against them - quite oblivious to the fact that the
law-breakers dont give a **** anyway...thats why they break the law.

McK.

"Badger Shame" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I think there's only one real solution. Ban seat belts for drivers and
> attach a short sharp spike to all steering wheels. Then see how many
> people want to drive whilst using a mobile.
>

Is it possible to externally restrict what kind of signal a phone gets? If
so, how about only allowing textual messages through while someone is
driving? It would have to be voluntary for cars I guess, but if it was
somehow automatic it might work.

Would help with cinemas, libraries and trains too.

Shak

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:56:09 +0000, Matthew Haigh <?@?.?> wrote:

>Dave C wrote:
>
>> I saw one of those 30k plus cars this week with the driver having a
>> phone in one hand and a sandwich in the other.
>
>Isn't that why these cars have automatic gearboxes and power steering
>(so you can steer with your knee or elbow and have both hands free for
>more interesting things)? :-)
>
>Matt

Why don't they have cars that are designed so that you don't need
hands, feet, eyes or even to pay attention? Oh they do, they're called
taxis.

I'm more interested to see what steps will be taken to stop people
driving when they've clocked up their ban. Can the police wheel clapm
drivers?, tag cars?
--
Free Christmas Cards
http://www.christmasfreebies.co.uk/christmas-cards.htm
What I want for Christmas
http://www.christmasfreebies.co.uk/dear-boyfriend.htm

This new law is bloody stupid and typical new labour

>>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.

Exactly

>>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.

Now this is a sensible idea - why have a specific law when not required?

More points when required too!

Aaron B wrote:
> "JNugent" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Dave C wrote:
>>> JAF wrote:
>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>> Even if they were given away free, who wants to look like a Star Trek
>>>> cast-off, with a naff lump of plastic stuck in your ear?
>>>>
>>> I prefer that to some stupid idiot killing people.
>>>
>>> I saw one of those 30k plus cars this week with the driver having a phone
>>> in one hand and a sandwich in the other.
>> What's wrong with that - in a layby?
>>
> Depends what's in the sandwich.
>
>
No she was turning right at a set of traffic lights - BTW forgot to
mention the 2 kinds in the back without seat belts!

--
Dave C

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:49:27 +0000, I waved a wand and this message
magically appears in front of mogga:

> I'm more interested to see what steps will be taken to stop people
> driving when they've clocked up their ban. Can the police wheel clapm
> drivers?, tag cars?

Set fire to their driving licence and crush their cars?
--
http://www.munted.org.uk

Fearsome grindings.

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 10:28:38 +0000, Alex Buell
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:49:27 +0000, I waved a wand and this message
>magically appears in front of mogga:
>
>> I'm more interested to see what steps will be taken to stop people
>> driving when they've clocked up their ban. Can the police wheel clapm
>> drivers?, tag cars?
>
>Set fire to their driving licence and crush their cars?

And chop their wallets off to stop them buying a new one?
--
Free Christmas Cards
http://www.christmasfreebies.co.uk/christmas-cards.htm
What I want for Christmas
http://www.christmasfreebies.co.uk/dear-boyfriend.htm