Persistent offender killed cyclist while driving & texting

[glasgowcyclist]

There is evidence that even hands free use is as distracting as holding the phone.

And it has an even greater effect on reaction times than drunk driving.



GC

 

[EnPassant]

And it has an even greater effect on reaction times than drunk driving.

View attachment 142895

GC

The only surprising thing to me is that texting is somehow less distracting than "hand held phone". Not really surprised by the rest of that table though.
Well past time this was enshrined in law and peoples conscience.

 

[raleighnut]

There is evidence that even hands free use is as distracting as holding the phone.

Is there any distinction in law between speaking on a phone and texting?* If not, why not? From personal experience (not whilst driving...:P) texting requires prolonged periods staring at tiny screen and attempting to "type" on titchy parts of it, this takes your eyes off the road as well as your attention. It must be more dangerous that talking surely?

*Some years ago I was a passenger in a car of 4 being driven back from Norfolk to London from of all things a pool competition, the driver was using his mobile to text, I actually asked him to please stop doing it, to which he replied "I'm not texting, I'm sending an email". Which is funny, until it's not.
To my eternal chagrin I should have demanded that he stop and let me out if he was going to continue, but I didn't. So despite becoming more considerate as I age (lord I was a twit at 20), I still allow social pressure to influence decisions I take that afterwards I'm not necessarily proud of.
Apocryphal tale stated here only to reinforce the point that as a society we simply still do not take it seriously enough.

Similar here regarding the (lord I was a twit at 20), we regularly used to pile into cars to get to an out of the way pub that served late (very late actually as I've come out of it when the sun has risen) then someone would drive home. Utter stupidity.

 

[Tin Pot]

The only surprising thing to me is that texting is somehow less distracting than "hand held phone". Not really surprised by the rest of that table though.
Well past time this was enshrined in law and peoples conscience.

Only because the graph is worthless.

The graph should be showing reaction time, not this guff and spin. And as a range, not an average.

Plus, reaction is only part of the story.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I've posted this in another thread but the comment at the end of the article is worth noting in relation to this thread. Perhaps our courts could follow this example:

"I do not have to wait for him to kill or injure someone before I can exercise my powers to disqualify indefinitely."

Traffic Commissioner for Scotland, Joan Aitken​

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/...er_handed_20_year_ban_over_dangerous_driving/

GC

 

[EnPassant]

It isn't a driving ban, it is an HGV driving ban.

I believe Reg is referring to the original not the immediately preceding post.

 

[mjr]

There is evidence that even hands free use is as distracting as holding the phone.

Is there any distinction in law between speaking on a phone and texting?* If not, why not? From personal experience (not whilst driving...:P) texting requires prolonged periods staring at tiny screen and attempting to "type" on titchy parts of it, this takes your eyes off the road as well as your attention. It must be more dangerous that talking surely?

Not as far as I'm aware. RTA 1988 section 41D and searching the Road Safety Bill 2006 (which added that section) proceedings on www.TheyWorkForYou.com didn't find any consideration of distinguishing them.

I did find that Lord Hanningfield attempted to add pedal cycles to the ban, the bike-bashing nobber, along with Lords Simon, Berekeley (a cyclist himself) and especially Baroness Gibson of Market Rasen and RoSPA. Whip Lord Davies of Oldham opposed it because existing offences already cover it sufficiently well, rather than being friendly to cyclists or recognising the role of the smartphone as a cycling navigation and data collection aid.

 

[ufkacbln]

Should make it an obligatory disqualification.

I believe that at the moment there is a driver still driving with 51 points, is still a learner and escaped adriving ban in January this year

There are 2 others with over 49

25plus points and still driving counts another 30 or so and over 7,500 others driving with more than 12 points

The points system is a laughing stock

 

[glasgowcyclist]

That's a fairly crap graphic (something the TRL seems to specialise in).,,

Aesthetically or otherwise?

GC

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Both.

It's a bit of a nonsense graphic as the 'measures' are so vague as to be worthless.

Do you know of a better representation I could use?

GC

 

[EnPassant]

Nope - because it's actually something that's too complex to encapsulate in such a basic graphic.

Complex or not, surely if the data is there and can be suitably interpreted by those with the skills it cannot be beyond the wit of them make it available to the powers that be in a comprehensible format and for them in turn to increase the penalties commensurate with the level of danger presented by the offence? If it is indeed more dangerous to third parties than drink driving it's frankly criminal (both figuratively and literally) that I could probably stand on any street in the country and count half a dozen phone users in an hour.
Either that, or that graphic is not only simple but completely wrong?

 

[summerdays]

Complex or not, surely if the data is there and can be suitably interpreted by those with the skills it cannot be beyond the wit of them make it available to the powers that be in a comprehensible format and for them in turn to increase the penalties commensurate with the level of danger presented by the offence? If it is indeed more dangerous to 3rd parties than drink driving it's frankly criminal (pun intentional) that I could probably stand on any street in the country and count half a dozen phone users in an hour.
Either that, or that graphic is not only simple but completely wrong?

Half a dozen in an hour?.... I passed a queue of drivers and counted how many between each car with a driver looking at a mobile today.... I never got above 7 before having to restart counting and would have passed 8 or 10 in that one queue for a junction!

 

[EnPassant]

Half a dozen in an hour?.... I passed a queue of drivers and counted how many between each car with a driver looking at a mobile today.... I never got above 7 before having to restart counting and would have passed 8 or 10 in that one queue for a junction!

Well, I was considering moving cars as opposed to stationary ones and in any location, but yes indeed I was also erring on the side of a cautious (under)estimate.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Radio 4 Today did a fairly long discussion of this case this morning with Lee Martin's brother along with the father of a boy racer death. It started at about 8:10 and covered why there's a separate group of driving offences and not simple criminal cases, such as manslaughter or murder.

Actually, it's continuing now (from about 8:35)

EDIT: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07syyrf 02:10:00 and returned to around 20 minutes later

 

[Deleted member 26715]

[QUOTE 4454173, member: 259"]Yes, me too, the pubs in Derbyshire opened half an hour later than the pubs in Notts, necessitating last hour dashed through country lanes and over the brook.[/QUOTE]
Back in the 70's we used to do the same from South Yorks back to Notts, on Friday & Saturday nights