[Closed] Should hands free phones be banned from drivers

We already have a traffic law that over 90% of the population ignore on a regular basis - do we need another?

But answering a phone will turn even a good driver into an inattentive one, which is about as bad if not worse than a shit driver paying some attention.

Yep and like all the things mentioned is covered under existing laws.

Short of the incredibly impractical idea of jammers which would render the phone of the passengers useless and sat nav etc. There is no way to police or enforce this. However the police can look at bad driving.

The policing of the UK's roads has seen people replaced with cameras watching for red light jumpers or speeding drivers (speed kills remember that so we will blanket enforce 10m sections of roads). There are no police driving round looking after our roads I remember driving from Glasgow to Manchester and seeing no police anywhere a couple of years ago (well before any cuts were made) back in '99 I used to commute in the east midlands and saw loads. Every day on the roads in the UK I saw far worse than answering a phone call tailgaiting, kids on knees, dangerous loads, un roadworthy cars, manic driving, people putting on make up on the motorway.... but if that can't be sorted out then what can?

CharlieMungus, nice idea but does anyone take the sign out of the car when the kids aren't in there? I'm guessing it's like having an ICE number in your phone. It might make you feel better but actually, the emergency services know what they're doing and do things their own way.

My most scarey driving experience: being driven through Lahore in ****stan (scarey at the best of times) while the driver was watching Maggie Thatcher resigning on a small 12v TV mounted on the dashboard.

mentioned earlier, but my biggest gripe is people driving around on their parking lights. What the hell do they think those two dim little nightlights are going to achieve!?!

Manufacturers should make the sidelights only function when the engine is off - i.e. when they should be used when parking in an exposed position on an unlit street.

Turns out that my VW T4 has such a system, but that it is disabled in the OEM wiring loom. When the ignition is on, if you have the lights switched to Sidelights, the dipped beam comes on instead. When ignition is off, then the sidelights operate. But when you replace the loom with an aftermarket one, this system is in effect. Odd.

my biggest gripe

Really? Of all the things you see people doing on the roads this is your biggest gripe? You need to get out more.

we have generally good drivers round these parts. They just think that sidelights are effective in pea-sooper fog 😉

The idea for kids under 5 having to be accompanied by another, non driving adult is possibly one if the least practical, stupid ideas I've seen in here for a long time. Side lights are fine, they've been used for years. The thing is with LEDs they've become MORE visable than before, however I fully accept that neither should be used as in low vis. Interesting that daylight running lights were first seen on all volvos and swabs from those mental, all crazy swedes.
Talking on my mobile? Yes thanks, I tend to (always via hands free, built into the car kit) and the world continues to turn.

The idea for kids under 5 having to be accompanied by another, non driving adult is possibly one if the least practical, stupid ideas I've seen in here for a long time

Talking on my mobile? Yes thanks, I tend to (always via hands free, built into the car kit) and the world continues to turn.

First one doesn't justify an explanation, it's in the daily mail all cyclist should be off the the road because they don't pay road tax type comment.
Second one absolutely.

Through experience I know that talking on a hands free kit is dangerous. Its enough to distract you from concentrating and taking in all the things that are going on around you.
I managed to say, just before I hit the other car, "best go I'm just about to crash"

I managed to say, just before I hit the other car, "best go I'm just about to crash"

That shows you knew exactly what was going on 🙂

Interesting that daylight running lights were first seen on all volvos and swabs from those mental, all crazy swedes.

That's because
"By 2006 drivers in 12 countries had to drive with their headlights on all year round including Sweden since 1977, Iceland, Latvia, Macedonia and Norway since around 1980....."

First one doesn't justify an explanation, it's in the daily mail all cyclist should be off the the road because they don't pay road tax type comment.

I think you misunderstood the point I was making. If (as some do here) you think that banning of handsfree is a sensible thing as you can't trust motorists to use them safely it simply stands to reason that a driver can't be trusted to be responsible for a child whilst driving too. I would say a child can be orders of magnitude more distracting than a phone call - you can hang up a phone call or tell the person at the other end to give you a minute but screaming babies or tantrumming toddlers won't stop; a child being sick will keep on being sick and are too young to understand the logic of "Mummy/Daddy is busy at the minute - can you just be quiet please or we might have a crash".

is possibly one if the least practical, stupid ideas I've seen in here for a long time

I admit I'm playing devil's advocate - I just find that often people's idea of what is an acceptable risk is tempered by how much it might personally inconvenience them.

convert - Member

I think you misunderstood the point I was making. If (as some do here) you think that banning of handsfree is a sensible thing as you can't trust motorists to use them safely it simply stands to reason that a driver can't be trusted to be responsible for a child whilst driving too.

You can ignore a child for long enough to stop safely, just as you can ignore a phone call long enough to stop safely. And not all kids will do that anyway so treating them all the same is daft. If you have a kid that's constantly ill or out of control while driving then you might have to act accordingly but that's a matter of parenting not legality (my neighbours won't drive without an adult to look after their kid, frinstance, because he has ADHD and is genuinely dangerous) Acting against all parents to deal with those situations makes no sense.

But the main difference is, parents have to travel with kids, but you never have to make a phone call while driving. Banning the unnecessary is different from banning the essential.

You can ignore a child for long enough to stop safely, just as you can ignore a phone call long enough to stop safely. And not all kids will do that anyway so treating them all the same is daft. If you have a kid that's constantly ill or out of control while driving then you might have to act accordingly but that's a matter of parenting not legality (my neighbours won't drive without an adult to look after their kid, frinstance, because he has ADHD and is genuinely dangerous) Acting against all parents to deal with those situations makes no sense.

This is exactly my point -

as you can't trust motorists to use them safely

- Those wanting to ban phone use want to do so because they don't feel they can trust other road users to make sensible judgements. The child thing is exactly the same. I'm not in the ban camp - but if I was I'd like to take out all other similar distractions at the same time.

parents have to travel with kids, but you never have to make a phone call while driving. Banning the unnecessary is different from banning the essential.

I'm not so sure. Would you feel differently about your child being knocked off their bike by someone not concentrating because they were on a (handsfree) phone than someone not concentrating because they were dealing with their child in the back? Those of us in our middle years were brought up by parents who did not have the choice to transport kids around by car and lifestyles were set up accordingly. There are lots of low income families who don't have to make this choice now. I admit it's definately a hell of a lot easier (as a work colleague who is currrently banned as he insists on driving like a cock is fining out) - but truely essential?

convert - Member

- Those wanting to ban phone use want to do so because they don't feel they can trust other road users to make sensible judgements

The evidence shows using a handsfree while driving is consistently distracting. So driving while using one isn't a sensible judgement. It's all about "Oh, it doesn't distract me, I'm too good".

convert - Member

I'm not so sure. Those of us in our middle years were brought up by parents who did not have the choice to transport kids around by car and lifestyles were set up accordingly.

My mum could walk us to the local shops or the local school or the local health centre. Lots of people don't have that luxury. And sure, you can say "Well live somewhere you can" but affordability and the decline in local services and growth of big supermarkets etc makes that pretty hard. Wait til dad gets home? Not always an option either.

The evidence shows using a handsfree while driving is consistently distracting

My mum could walk us to the local shops or the local school or the local health centre. Lots of people don't have that luxury. And sure, you can say "Well live somewhere you can" but affordability and the decline in local services and growth of big supermarkets etc makes that pretty hard. Wait til dad gets home? Not always an option either.

Totally agree, but as much as anything that's because we have allowed ourselves to become a car centric culture with facilities to match. That would change with time if our car habits were forced to change you would hope. In many ways its easier now than back in the day - online supermarket shopping and deliveries and supermarkets open until late at night makes it a lot easier to not have to take the sprocket everywhere with you.

The evidence shows using a handsfree while driving is consistently distracting. So driving while using one isn't a sensible judgement. It's all about "Oh, it doesn't distract me, I'm too good".

I have to add a +1 to this. Whether you, I or the man round the corner "feels" he can trust another driver while on the phone is neither here nor there. There is a tome of research out there that shows that another driver cannot be trusted if he is either texting or on a phone conversation while in the car. There may be the odd exceptional driving god (of which a high proportion will be STWers 🙂 of course) who will be affected less, but everybody is to some degree and it's not essential that phone calls are taken or made.

The studies I've seen about the distractions of using a hands free kit have never shown the same tests with a passenger talking or kids in the car.
I have a factory fitted car kit and use it regular. I am still able to observe and take avoiding action against mothers wandering into another lane in their 4x4 whilst tending to little Billy in the back seat. Parents dangling their babies in pushchairs over the kerb a whole 5 metres from a zebra crossing. People that just walk into the road, cyclists that jump red lights. The only accidents I've had, have been none fault, with an old driver reversing in my car whilst I was in stationery traffic and a mother ran into a car behind me pushing that car into me.
Make the driving standards better to remove the bad drivers rather than legislate for the idiots out there. This should apply to all road users.

convert - Member

As does the evidence about children in the car - twas on the beeb a year or two ago, I'll try and find it.

I don't doubt it- but still comes back to the same thing, transporting kids by car is a neccesity for many parents, making phone calls in the car is a necessity for nobody.

To me, it's as credible as the other counterargument people use... "Oh, police and ambulances use radios and computers as they drive, if that's OK then phones must be OK too". You don't just look at risk, you look at risk vs benefit.

I have a factory fitted car kit and use it regular.

I guess you're just one of the exceptional drivers then? Either that or you're going to have to admit that you are regularly driving in a significantly distracted state.

Oh, and FWIW, I suggest you look up some independent research about the differences between phone conversations and passenger conversations. Some research suggests that a driver with a passenger in the car is paying [i]even more[/i] attention to road conditions than if he was alone.

I'll leave you to have a look around for it.

Despite what you all think and especially

craigxxl - Member I am still able to observe and take avoiding action

I am the best driver on the forum

I guess you're just one of the exceptional drivers then? Either that or you're going to have to admit that you are regularly driving in a significantly distracted state.

My name is convert and I admit to on a number of occasions [s]using a handsfree phone[/s] changing a CD, eating an apple, drinking a coffee from the cup holder the manufacturer irresponsibly put there to tempt me. I now realise that non of these things were essential to my journey and I am the exception as no one ever does this and I have been regularly driving in a significantly distracted state. I am a bad man.

*fwiw I only realised my stereo had a handfree blueetooth mode the other week and never had the need to use it. I might just use it now(just the once mind, I'm not that mad) to experience some wild living.

My name is convert and I admit to on a number of occasions using a handsfree phone changing a CD, eating an apple, drinking a coffee from the cup holder the manufacturer irresponsibly put there. I now realise that non of these things were essential to my journey and I am the exception as no one ever does this and I have been regularly driving in a significantly distracted state. I am a bad man.

I have no objections to you doing any of those things, as again, research shows that of all the frequent non-essential activities in which we engage in a car, taking or making a telephone call, or texting are two of the most distracting. You can keep thinking up other activities until we get into the realms of absurdity. Using a hand held phone has been banned in dozens of countries around the world on the back of extensive research and meta-studies. Why has there never been such extensive research into the menace of driving with children in the car?

Why has there never been such extensive research into the menace of driving with children in the car?

Well, there has been. A simple academic paper google search brings up reams of them (along with phones, and eating and all other manner of distractions). But....

I'll leave you to have a look around for it.

Drinking coffee on the move's always struck me as daft tbh. But it's certainly not as daft as comparing it with using a hands-free.

Ok, fair enough I'll have another look. I just found lots more on mobile phone use and comparing its distraction with other types. Possibly the only other one which compares (besides absurd examples) is, to use a broad term, rubbernecking.

So, why hasn't it [carrying a child under five] been banned or regulated (was it you that suggested having another responsible adult in the car...I can't remember)? And what would single parents do?

So, why hasn't it [carrying a child under five] been banned or regulated (was it you that suggested having another responsible adult in the car...I can't remember)? And what would single parents do?

Well quite obviously it's not going to be banned because it would be draconian and very inconvenient and there is no appetite for it. I'm not that stupid. If you read back I was using it as a vehicle (no pun intended) to compare phone use against nd also to comment on how accepting we can be of a risk if changing our practise would adversly effect our way of life. Northwind (very sensibly imo) claims that banning the unnecessary is different to the necessary. I'm just looking at it from the counter perspective (mainly to be annoying!) of the cause and the outcome being more important than the perceived necessity and maybe questioning the use of the word “necessity" when "very desirable" may be a better term. I'm just challenging the perception that one person's (or a group of people's) necessity should override common sense - if indeed reducing risk is deemed common sense. It's a nonsense argument as never in a million year could I see a government than needs votes even considering it but sometimes it's good to look at an argument from an alternative perspective; particularly as a group of cyclists who defend our right to non essential leisure use of our busy highways irrespective of any percieved risk that may come with it.

But it's certainly not as daft as comparing it with using a hands-free.

Well, one report I found (admittedly written in 2002, so a bit out of date with the phone bit) found the preparation and consumption of food and drink to be the largest interal (i.e. from inside the car) distraction when observed with cameras in participants cars.

But why use it as a vehicle against which to compare phone use? (Other than to be annoying) You haven't demonstrated that any of the distractions of the activities you've brought into it compare to that of phone use. The reasons that carrying children under five in cars hasn't been banned isn't because of any political or sociological reasons. It's because it doesn't present the level of risk that phone use does.

I'm not keen on banning anything, it's not the most intelligent way to deal with problems. I didn't and don't agree with the mobile ban.

Surely each case should be dealt with on it's own merits. If you are driving safely you can knit a blanket for all I care. However, plenty of drivers are a danger even whilst doing nothing else but driving.

It's because it doesn't present the level of risk that phone use does.

Proove it! I admit I can't proove the other way (or tbh, can't be bothered to trawl around to see if such a research document exists) either but plenty of anacdotal evidence (I live directly opposite a primary school so get more than my fair share of observational opportunities) that driving standards with a child onboard are significantly hampered for a significant enough proportion of road users.

I guess you're just one of the exceptional drivers then? Either that or you're going to have to admit that you are regularly driving in a significantly distracted state.

No, I just prioritise that I am driving a vehicle first and secondly having a conversation.

Some people are so cock sure of themselves

Surely each case should be dealt with on it's own merits. If you are driving safely you can knit a blanket for all I care. However, plenty of drivers are a danger even whilst doing nothing else but driving.

i know your taking it to an extreme, but, you are driving, therefore the only thing you should be doing is driving. There are too many outside events about to be trying to do more than one thing. If you are knitting you aren't paying attention to the road, to the kids between the parked cars, the driver emergency stopping in front etc etc.

I was knitting whilst driving the other day, copper came alongside and shouted
"PULLOVER"
No I replied
"CARDIGAN"

IGMC 😳

Some people are so cock sure of themselves

Not cock sure of myself just aware of what I am doing. If the traffic gets crowded I stop talking to observe what is going on around me. If the conditions dictate then I'll end the conversation just like I would if I had a passenger in the car.

Passed through Gunnison in Colorado a couple of years ago and they have an enlightened local statute that if you are caught by the police/sherriff with a mobile phone/electronic device in your hands when you are driving within the county boundries, the phone is taken off you and is destroyed there and then at the side of the road i.e. sim & memory card removed and cut up, battery taken out and then the phone is stamped on, the remains are sent for recycling.

The police HAVE to have photo/video evidence, but once they have this say ta ta to your toy. The second offence they impound your car for a month, the third... well lets just say nobody has been that dumb.

Local government had an understandable sense of humour failure after a three year old was reversed over by a driver on a phone.. the fact that it was the local mayor's granddaughter may have had something to do with it. Lovely place by the way... well worth a visit....

Apparently issue of driving whilst on the phone has just went away.....

craigxxl - Member

Some people are so cock sure of themselves

Not cock sure of myself just aware of what I am doing. If the traffic gets crowded I stop talking to observe what is going on around me. If the conditions dictate then I'll end the conversation just like I would if I had a passenger in the car.

Nope I was right the first time.

Passed through Gunnison in Colorado a couple of years ago and they have an enlightened local statute that if you are caught by the police/sherriff with a mobile phone/electronic device in your hands when you are driving within the county boundries, the phone is taken off you and is destroyed there and then at the side of the road i.e. sim & memory card removed and cut up, battery taken out and then the phone is stamped on, the remains are sent for recycling.

The police HAVE to have photo/video evidence, but once they have this say ta ta to your toy. The second offence they impound your car for a month, the third... well lets just say nobody has been that dumb.

Best. Idea. Ever.

Going back to the Sat Nav positioning, it amazes me how some people don't remove pay and display stickers and flyers left under the wipers.

They can be blocking or at least distracting vision.

[img] ?w=600#038;h=800[/img]

too many drivers don't give a f***

Well, I did have a little (I mean little) look around and found a couple of interesting thoughts.....

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety ]Wiki link to distracted driver[/url] - of course you should never use a wiki link in a discussion but there are some interesting links from it to papers and findings on the difference between phone calls and talking to passengers. It talks about the research being mixed. I've googled a few of the articles and studies mentioned and I'm going to assume that phone calls are defiantly more distracting but not by a huge, huge margin.

Then head over to the Canadian Automobile Association site - quite good with lots of stats and references made to the papers they came from.

There is this -

top distractions identified by the CAA/AAA

Outside object/person/event — 29.9%
Adjusting radio/CD — 11.4%
Other vehicle occupants — 10.9%
Something moving in the car — 4.3%
Using another object/device — 2.9%
Adjusting car's climate controls — 2.8%
Eating/drinking — 1.7%
Cellular phones — 1.5%

but also this

Cell phones are one of the most common distractions for drivers. Drivers engaged in text messaging on a cellular phone are 23 times more likely to be involved in a crash or near crash event compared with non-distracted drivers. (Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, 2010)

which doesn't exactly help my case

but more interesting was :-

Children are four times more distracting than adults as passengers, and infants are eight times more distracting than adults as passengers

Lies, damn lies and statistics I know but if you are a little selective about what you look at and squint a bit you can combine the wiki links controversy about the difference between talking to passengers and on the phone with the CAA's stance that infants are 8 times more distracting than adult passengers and I think there is a fair case that infants run handsfree phone conversations more than a little close in the risk to safe driving stakes.

As said earlier I'm not seriously advocating banning drivers taking sole care of infants but we ignore it as a risk because it's an inconvenient truth.

Quite frankly I think there are far more distracting things on the road and in a car and what we need to address is people's inability to follow rules, drive with care and attention or take driving seriously (rather than just driving on automatic). There is no logical difference between someone on a handsfree phone or someone in the back seat, unless of course you're a complete moron and for some reason change the way you deal with conversations when having one on the handsfree.

We need to stop focusing on what we can ban and start focusing on how we can educate people to drive better.