OK, flame suit on.

I propose that phone usage should be legal when stopped (at lights or stop signs). The idea is simply to get drivers to look up - holding their phone at eye level, thus increasing situation awareness. Rather than looking between their knees where there is no peripheral vision at all.

Yes and they should be able to at least finish to the next sentence of their text/email/tweet and so forth after the light goes green. And in addition to that, if you get annoyed and use your horn after sitting and waiting until the light turns amber and the phone user then takes off leaving you with a red light, the cop should be able to book you.

not significantly worse than eating, playing with fire (smoking), drinking, changing radio station, chatting, or all of the above at the same time...

Oddly enough I've just been going through the new WA laws.

Even if your phone is in a cradle - you may not touch it unless parked.
Even if using its as nav (drivers aid).. but you can use a drivers aid (nav) if its not a phone. WTF?
If listening to music: You can use the buttons on the stereo to change tracks but not your phone. WTF?

I can answer my bluetooth connected phone by pushing a button on my stereo, but not my cradled phone? WTF?


Just WTF??

Select to expand quote

kiteboy dave said..
not significantly worse than eating, playing with fire (smoking), drinking, changing radio station, chatting, or all of the above at the same time...

Nahh, yeah it is

It's simply you don't touch your phone.

Those rules are written in so you can't be writing a txt get pulled over and say "oh I was just tuning in to the Kyle and jackie o show..." Loophole

Select to expand quote

kiteboy dave said..
not significantly worse than eating, playing with fire (smoking), drinking, changing radio station, chatting, or all of the above at the same time...

Some people can smoke, drink, eat, change radio station, and even chat without losing focus on the road. I don't think there's too many that can text on a smartphone without at least looking at the keyboard to see what they are typing. Even making a phone call is difficult without looking at the screen unless you have voice recognition.

So, yes, I think it is significantly worse.

Be careful Breezers this topic is a trap it has the ability to make people look really really dumb.

Select to expand quote

youngbull said..
Be careful Breezers this topic is a trap it has the ability to make people look really really dumb.

That's okay, I'll take the risk. My opinion:

Commercial drivers (truck class licence holders etc), should have licensing mechanism to allow them to use mobile phones when driving.

People like myself can not multitask when driving and are a danger when driving and operating a mobile phone. Anti phone legislation is good for people in my catagory as it keeps the roads safe.

However, certain people are able to multitask and do not pose a danger when driving and operating a mobile phone.

If airline pilots are able to safely operate comms equipment while flying planes, then that proves it is possible to safely drive a vehicle and operate a mobile phone. Given this argument, a similar arrangement should be put in place for commercial drivers that can pass a test to allow them to be licenced to operate a mobile when driving.

Select to expand quote

Chris_M said..

kiteboy dave said..
not significantly worse than eating, playing with fire (smoking), drinking, changing radio station, chatting, or all of the above at the same time...

Nahh, yeah it is

We are talking about when stationary - you for real?!!!
Texting when stationary is more dangerous than changing radio stations?

Grumps has a good point.
You are allowed to talk on handsfree anytime ..... but NOT touch the phone, even when stopped at lights. Surely it would make sense to be allowed to use the phone when stationary. Push green button twice to redial when at lights is illegal, but be distracted by conversation when driving is legal. Dumb.

Trouble is the average knob can't be trusted cos a FB update like "10min late due to traffic lol" is so farken important apparently

Select to expand quote

jn1 said..

youngbull said..
Be careful Breezers this topic is a trap it has the ability to make people look really really dumb.

That's okay, I'll take the risk. My opinion:

Commercial drivers (truck class licence holders etc), should have licensing mechanism to allow them to use mobile phones when driving.

People like myself can not multitask when driving and are a danger when driving and operating a mobile phone. Anti phone legislation is good for people in my catagory as it keeps the roads safe.

However, certain people are able to multitask and do not pose a danger when driving and operating a mobile phone.

If airline pilots are able to safely operate comms equipment while flying planes, then that proves it is possible to safely drive a vehicle and operate a mobile phone. Given this argument, a similar arrangement should be put in place for commercial drivers that can pass a test to allow them to be licenced to operate a mobile when driving.

Agree with the above totally . the problem is its not studied in the text book to use a phone like it is in other aircraft,shipping and transport Using comms. eyes for looking at instruments and then back to the horizon for focus.

We have that condition of the law here. So, people stop where ever they are and use their phones - no matter how congested or narrow the road.

... if talking hands-free is distracting, why should passengers be allowed to open their gobs at all? That's never made sense to me...

Re. Aircraft... They have comms button on the stick and a copilot checking and ready to take over....

Select to expand quote

rod_bunny said..
Oddly enough I've just been going through the new WA laws.

Even if your phone is in a cradle - you may not touch it unless parked.
Even if using its as nav (drivers aid).. but you can use a drivers aid (nav) if its not a phone. WTF?
If listening to music: You can use the buttons on the stereo to change tracks but not your phone. WTF?

I can answer my bluetooth connected phone by pushing a button on my stereo, but not my cradled phone? WTF?


Just WTF??

The way I read this you can touch your phone if its in a cradle Rod.
http://www.ors.wa.gov.au/Documents/Law-Changes/ors-mobile-phones-faq.aspx

I was at the lights the other day. .. There was a woman doing something on her phone the lights went green then red, neither her or the people behind her noticed... I think she should have lost her license.

^^ Probably full of that stuff you think should be legalised.

And therein lies the irony of this thread.

Select to expand quote

smicko said..

rod_bunny said..
Oddly enough I've just been going through the new WA laws.

Even if your phone is in a cradle - you may not touch it unless parked.
Even if using its as nav (drivers aid).. but you can use a drivers aid (nav) if its not a phone. WTF?
If listening to music: You can use the buttons on the stereo to change tracks but not your phone. WTF?

I can answer my bluetooth connected phone by pushing a button on my stereo, but not my cradled phone? WTF?


Just WTF??

The way I read this you can touch your phone if its in a cradle Rod.
http://www.ors.wa.gov.au/Documents/Law-Changes/ors-mobile-phones-faq.aspx

Read that earlier... its incongruent, which is why I did the wtfs.
You can touch it , in its cradle, to make or receive calls. But you can't touch it, in its cradle, if using as GPS.
if you are using it as a music player you cannot touch it or even be able to view the screen.
If your phone is cradled, you are not touching it, and it throws up a preview of the text/email someone sent.... your nicked!

It goes on to say that there are exemptions for drivers aids...(mostly related to professional driving) but gives no guidance on the use of these aids other than the penalty for using them.


I understand the intent of the laws, but you get booked under the letter of the law. These are just too messy as they are and bear no semblance to reality. New cars have touch screens with GPS, phones with browsing and other apps built in - how is that any different?

I suppose with the G sensor in the smart phones now, maybe they can prove that some dick was texting at the moment of impact

It's a tough one, as any conversation or radio is distracting to some degree.
Two way radios in vehicles as well

New larger vehicles now have head up displays onto the windscreen for phones and movies

I tried out the new auto steer on a 300hp tractor taking it out to the farm and I didn't have to override the steering wheel, for the whole 32kms of the trip. (except to pull over to let traffic past.)
GPS accurate to 8.5mm. Proximity sensors to 100mtrs in all directions. The severity of audible "chirp" increases as vehicles approach.
This will be slaved to another tractor so only one operator for the two tractors.

Corner approaching, says and the digitized lovely lady counting down the distance it meters to the turn. At 10mtrs she pauses the DVD till the intercept with the new line is confirmed and locked and then the movie resumes.

This is only for agriculture and mining. (for the time being)

I was chating to some friends the other night that work at a south west refinery, their site induction includes instructions that they can't walk and talk on a phone. Yup, if they are having a conversation they have to be standing still. maybe the Nanny State is actually being driven by the mining industry, not the government...?

Select to expand quote

Chris6791 said..
I was chating to some friends the other night that work at a south west refinery, their site induction includes instructions that they can't walk and talk on a phone. Yup, if they are having a conversation they have to be standing still. maybe the Nanny State is actually being driven by the mining industry, not the government...?

And thus it goes full circle... back to corded phones so you cant go anywhere





(And yes an induction I went through has that stipulated)

Select to expand quote

Chris6791 said..
I was chating to some friends the other night that work at a south west refinery, their site induction includes instructions that they can't walk and talk on a phone. Yup, if they are having a conversation they have to be standing still. maybe the Nanny State is actually being driven by the mining industry, not the government...?

That's not such a bad thing. You personally might be able to watch out when taking a call, but there seem to be lots of people out there that can't. They lose focus on what's around them and focus on the conversation only.

I wouldn't want those people around a potentially dangerous site, so the best way is to stop anyone doing it.

^^^ the alternative is natural selection - and if you can't walk and talk ( ) maybe you are just destined to be selected out.

Well as an ex employer I ended up having the no walk and talk rule on building sites after 2 lots of workers comp for guys walking into stuff, one sliced his head open and the other broke his nose... apparently..

Select to expand quote

Chris6791 said..
I was chating to some friends the other night that work at a south west refinery, their site induction includes instructions that they can't walk and talk on a phone. Yup, if they are having a conversation they have to be standing still. maybe the Nanny State is actually being driven by the mining industry, not the government...?

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
^^^ the alternative is natural selection - and if you can't walk and talk ( ) maybe you are just destined to be selected out.

Like this woman you mean? It would have been the bloke behind her if she hadn't got there first.

How about a heads up display integrated into the windscreen of the car with voice control. That way you can make phone calls, navigate through text messages and ever read the "sea breeze" forums, all in the name of road safety.

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
^^ Probably full of that stuff you think should be legalised.

And therein lies the irony of this thread.

Yeah... but I'm also for harsher punishments when you screw up... so fine if you can use the phone and be at the lights, but she messed up so she should lose her license.
If she hit somebody while txting, then she should also be put down... so through natural social selection we get more capable people, so that we don't have to cater for the lowest denominator.

seems pretty obvious that not of you guys have actually taken the time to work out how to use your phones.

Turn on Siri or Androids alternative and you can simply speak "create text" into your phone then talk your message out and send it.
also make or answer phones without touching it.

ready for the red thumbs

Catalyst just reported on research on driving and talking on a phone. MRI scans show the brain diverts resources from processing peripheral vision to processing the conversation. Hands-free operation, although legal, is no better. It's the conversation not the fingers that takes up brain power. Conversation with a traffic-aware passenger is OK as the passenger will pause conversation when tricky situations demanding more attention arise. Kids on the other hand are a dangerous distraction.

Check it out on the Iview, make sure I've summarised OK, seems to be based on good research.

Also saw Catalyst - pretty solid research.

AND blows most of the arguments/discussions in this thread out of the park.

Please view before commenting further.

In the Catalyst story they say the brain is devoted to the conversation or driving, not both. In my experience I find that I prioritise the driving ahead of the conversation.

I often get people asking me why I have gone quiet if I am talking on the phone in the car, and stop talking when I'm concentrating on something on the road. The scary thing is that some other people seem to go the other way and prioritise the conversation.

The other problem with phones and driving is the dialing and looking at the screen to do this. Newer phones are worse than the older ones as you can't dial without looking at the phone. Texting is even worse. Again, I think in the past it might have been easier when using the old style of entering texts using the number keypad. After a while you know which key is where, and you know which letter uses which number. There's also a ridge on the '5' so that figuring out which button you are pressing without looking at it is not too hard. Now, with smartphones, its not as easy.

I have been more worried about other drivers looking down at their phone than talking on them. I would much prefer they took a call than sent texts.

Upshot of the program was to ban kids from being in a car to prevent them from distracting you. Maybe give them phones??

P.S. I am also a bastard. When I see the person stopped at the front of the lights in front of me looking at their phone and texting, I get ready to blow the horn at them, because in most cases they won't be looking at the traffic lights at all. It always seems to be the person at the front of the queue that does this. Why is this?

^ Because they have been so distracted while driving (slowly, while texting or talking) that they don't make the green light, and end up in front.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..
In the Catalyst story they say the brain is devoted to the conversation or driving, not both. In my experience I find that I prioritise the driving ahead of the conversation.

I wish I could say the same, and I have tried to do this........ but the phone takes over, and hands free makes no difference at all.
Best thing is to turn the phone off while driving.

My current car has a numeric keypad on the dash so I can still control the phone and dial out etc but technically the phone is hands free so
I'm not breaking the law. Go figure.