Reporting mobile use while driving

[Arjimlad]

Some of that may be true for a few people who do not want to involve the police through a lack of trust but it's not the case here, judging by the language used. In this instance, the only concern expressed is about the loss of livelihood for the offender.

In my view, that attitude is inexcusable.

It ignores the wider community aspect. Like it or not we live in a society and Peelian principles suggest that members of a society should do their bit for law & order.

We both agree that reporting dangerous driving makes the roads safer for everybody, not just the person reporting. If I fail to report someone who could be encouraged to give up their mobile phone when driving, by the fear of consequences or whatever, and they go on to maim or kill someone... especially when Avon & Somerset have made it so easy to file the report.

I know it's worse in Scotland.

 

[simongt]

Although the 'using a handheld phone whilst driving' nuts can always plead 'extreme circumstances' if they get banned like the jerk who was caught eight times and did just that - until he killed a cyclist on the ninth occasion. Does the blame has to go onto the weak magistratial system - ?

 

[Alex321]

Although the 'using a handheld phone whilst driving' nuts can always plead 'extreme circumstances' if they get banned like the jerk who was caught eight times and did just that - until he killed a cyclist on the ninth occasion. Does the blame has to go onto the weak magistratial system - ?

Yes.

You should only be able to make that plea once, at most. And it really should need to be much more extreme even then - risk to life level, not just risk to income.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Yes.

You should only be able to make that plea once, at most. And it really should need to be much more extreme even then - risk to life level, not just risk to income.

There is at least one court which sees it the right way.

Losing your job because you’ve been caught speeding is not exceptional hardship, York magistrates told a motorist as they banned him from driving for six months.​

​

They were sentencing Adam Martyn Wilson, 39, for doing 55 mph in a 30 mph zone – his third speeding conviction within three years.​

​

He told the court “I am trying to watch my speed”.​

​

The convictions meant he would be disqualified under the totting up procedure as it gave him at least 12 points on his licence.​

​

Self-employed Wilson, who lives in Byram Park Road, Knottingley near Selby, appealed to his local court to let him keep his licence on the grounds he would suffer “exceptional” hardship if he couldn’t drive.​

​

He claimed that if he couldn’t drive, he would lose his work and his home as he would be unable to pay his mortgage.​

​

“I am very dependent on my driving licence,” he told them.​

​

Magistrates told him: “It is normal hardship for someone who loses their licence to lose their job if their job requires them to drive.” 😍😍😍​

 

[simongt]

York & Selby, tougher magistrates oop North - !

 

[KnittyNorah]

There is at least one court which sees it the right way.

When
'Magistrates asked him why he hadn’t taken the warning of the previous two speeding convictions to change his driving style.'
he didn't know what to say.

He is a criminal fool and a dangerous one at that. The magistrates displayed common sense and a respect for the safety of others in the community.

 

[DRM]

York & Selby, tougher magistrates oop North - !

Since when was Knottingley near to Selby, has there been some kind of seismic land slip event I’m unaware of

 

[neil_merseyside]

Since when was Knottingley near to Selby, has there been some kind of seismic land slip event I’m unaware of

11 miles is hardly seismic?

 

[DRM]

11 miles is hardly seismic?

It’s near to Pontefract, it’s not even in the same postcode area as Selby, or the same county, it’s part of Wakefield and the five towns

 

[BoldonLad]

I understand it's a criminal offence but would you be happy dobbing someone in and they then lose their livelihood thanks to you?

They lose their livelihood due the their own selfish and dangerous actions, not due to the person who "dobs them in". The technology to make hands free calls is readily and inexpensively available, if you must use the phone whilst driving. There is no excuse.

 

[cougie uk]

They lose their livelihood due the their own selfish and dangerous actions, not due to the person who "dobs them in". The technology to make hands free calls is readily and inexpensively available, if you must use the phone whilst driving. There is no excuse.

My company went as far as to stop hands free calls too. You're just as distracted. People are a valuable resource - we weren't even to talk to suppliers if we could tell they were driving. We would ask them to call back once they were parked.

 

[BoldonLad]

Although the 'using a handheld phone whilst driving' nuts can always plead 'extreme circumstances' if they get banned like the jerk who was caught eight times and did just that - until he killed a cyclist on the ninth occasion. Does the blame has to go onto the weak magistratial system - ?

The technology to use the phone "hands free is readily, and, inexpensively available" I can see no possible excuse for using a hand-held phone, whilst driving.

My company went as far as to stop hands free calls too. You're just as distracted. People are a valuable resource - we weren't even to talk to suppliers if we could tell they were driving. We would ask them to call back once they were parked.

I would agree 100%. Personally, I do not use phone when driving (although my car does have built-in hands free). But, at present, using hands free is not illegal, and, hence, not reportable (the subject of the thread). Still possible to report resultant bad driving however (ie without due care etc).

 

[RoadRider400]

I understand it's a criminal offence but would you be happy dobbing someone in and they then lose their livelihood thanks to you?

How far do you take this logic? If somebody gets 20 years for murder and consequently loses their job, is that also the fault of the person that dobbed them in?

 

[sasquath]

My company went as far as to stop hands free calls too. You're just as distracted. People are a valuable resource - we weren't even to talk to suppliers if we could tell they were driving. We would ask them to call back once they were parked.

yep, mythbusters did a test. They drove in reverse around obstacle course while talking over hands free, then tried to match result under influence of alcohol. 3 to 5 pints of american beer to be as bad behind the wheel as while talking hands free over the phone. If i remember correctly it was over California and UK limit, which are one of the highest in the world btw... I'm having trouble walking straight with that much alcohol in me

 

[cougie uk]

My wife always used to use hands free. It was only when we were waiting at a red light and a woman in a Landover screeched to a halt half way past us into the junction. She had been on a hands free call too - you could hear it.

My wife no longer uses hands free.