https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49320473 I am not sure about how big the problem is. There are stats to show mobile phone use is driving is dangerous with significant casualties, but a quick search doesn't reveal the danger caused by hands-free use in isolation. But I think that our concentration can be distracted from many things in a car, chatting with passengers, kids, the radio/music, smoking, etc. It isn't something I do much of these days anyway, but I do know that a quick phone call can alleviate a few minor stresses that can tend to build up (that may unconsciously affect my driving), if late for a meeting or getting home late, for example. Personally, I don't think we should go down the banning route, but I think a publicity campaign about the dangers, may be more sensible.
People have to be honest with themselves. If they get too immersed in phone conversations then it is not safe to have one while driving. As you say a quick phone call to say I am running late etc, should not be a problem.
I'm not sure I have strong feelings either way, although my instinct is a ban isn't really necessary. People are so attached to their phones, and car manufacturers have invested so much in integrating their functionality in recent years, I would say this ship has sailed.
BRAKE border on PETA levels of overkill. They've won the argument with putting speed bumps and 20mph limits across London which in some cases has increased accidents, emergency response times, pollution, damage to cars and roads now they need to focus on something else. If they advocate the banning of hands free calls then they also need to advocate the banning of passengers talking to the driver which is possibly more distracting. How about kids arguing on the back seat, do we ban them from cars. The radio? some talk shows can be distracting. Touch screens, which by their nature pull your focus away from the road ahead, do we rip them out of all cars? Personally I find average speed cameras dangerous as I'm paranoid looking at the speedo all the time and not looking at the road. Just for a bit of Perspective only 2 countries in the world have safer roads than us, Micronesia and Sweden.
Not adaptive cruise control. Cruise is useful in free flowing traffic but when you've got people braking and speeding up ahead of you, it's hopeless. Would probably spec it next time.
Ditto! It is totally OTT and unnecessary; if 'ealth & safety have their way we would all be wrapped in cotton wool and gagged so we can't even speak to anyone whilst driving
I'm all for not holding you phone though and also not smoking whilst driving which I think is potentially more problematic.
As long as it doesn't interfere with me trying to post on WFC forums on an iphone on the motorway in rush hour without any glasses I don't mind.
I saw the BBC this morning and all the videos they showed were of people using hand held mobiles. Where is there evidence of accidents from the use of hands free? The number of convictions for mobile phone usage has gone down according to the BBC while accidents/deaths have increased. So why not enforce existing rules before seeing whether extending them is needed? How do you know if a person is using a hands free phone anyway? Talking is no evidence as the person could be talking to a passenger - or just singing along with the radio. I suspect satnav is more distracting than hands free so does that need to be banned?
I suspect that banning any use of a mobile when driving will just make prosecutions easier as the phone memory will show a conversation was taking place. However, I agree with the OP. Banning hands free goes too far unless there is more conclusive proof that it significantly increases the likelihood of an accident occurring. The data is not there yet imo.
If there are passengers in the car would they be banned from using a mobile? If not, on hands free they would just claim it was their call. If a solo driver is operating a hands free device how would anyone see if they were on the phone anyway - I am not sure how a prosecution could be brought. There might be a few instances where a car was pulled over for another reason and then use of a hands free was discovered but we are then in a situation which is not that common. I think the whole idea is ill thought out. Tackle the offenders who are being ignored before you increase the net surely?
If you are distracted by talking either to passengers or on hands free or talk radio then you shouldnt be driving to be honest.
I don't disagree. But if there is an accident and there's only the driver in one of the vehicles it will be easy to prove if they were using their phone at the time and "hands free" would no longer be a defence. At the very least it would nullify their insurance. As I've said, banning hands free is OTT imo but it will make prosecutions for mobile related accidents slightly easier.
Im much more in favour of banning children from talking in cars. A couple of nights in the cells for them will soon send a message to their community that this wont be tolerated any longer and is a small price to pay for increased road safety.
Agree with most of that although I am not sure how it makes prosecution for hand held mobiles any different - it just adds to the category of offence. The log already will show if someone was on the phone and if their phone is not paired with the car it could not be hands free. Would not like to see insurance nullified completely as that would leave innocent victims exposed.
Then wouldn't you ban conversations with passengers in cars as well? My suggestion, put the driving position in the centre of the car and a separation screen to the rear seats. Speakers only in the rear, so all the driver does is drive in silence with no distractions.
Don't have any crotch dumplings, problem solved. As regards hands free, I simply don't take calls while driving, hands free or otherwise. It can almost always wait until I arrive at my destination, and if it absolutely can't then I'll pull over and make a quick call. I've noticed that many (most?) people really struggle to tell the difference between urgent issues and things that can wait. It's creating generations that are attached to their smart phones at the hip. I've seen so many people display the attitude of "someone emailed me, I must respond inside 30 seconds!" Email is intended to be a non-emergent form of communication. So many people have got themselves into terrible habits with tech that undoubtedly cause no end of stress and (in some cases) encourage dangerous behavior.
It's not something I want but it should act as a deterrent to anyone considering doing something illegal when driving.
This is similar to how when campaigning to lower the blood alcohol limit for drink driving, the figures were all quoting the deaths from drink driving of people who were already over the limit.
It’s already the case that someone who commits certain crimes (drink/drug driving and dangerous driving typically) loses the benefit of their own insurance but the coverage for third parties remains intact. I guess that’s the solution here.
Sounds fair. Although if they suffer serious injury themselves why should the taxpayer pick up the tab when the insurer has been enjoying the premiums?
I suppose from a very legalistic viewpoint, the insurer would argue it specifically excludes coverage for that eventuality so has never accepted a premium for it.
Problem is that people still use hand gestures when talking on the phone to someone who cannot see said hand gestures. Bizarre phenomenon.
