On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 09:30:55 +0100, Graeme
wrote:

In message k
Stimpy wrote:

On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 03:06:15 +0100, Robert Neville wrote
Charles Ellson wrote:

The trouble with that is that it opens the door to defendants claiming
that it [using a telephone] was not unsafe in their individual case and
requires case law of the necessary nature to disprove every such claim.
The current law now addresses a specific improper action with common
undesirable consequences and takes away the argument

The problem with banning one specific behavior is that it's an
unsustainable approach to treating the sypmtom, not the problem. By your
logic, we should have - driving while eating - driving while applying
makeup - driving while talking to a child in the back seat - and on and
on and on...

Even assuming that all possible bad behaviors could be defined (a logical
impossibility), the delays in getting laws to prohibit each such behavior
would put you in a permanent catchup mode.

That raises something about which I've often wondered. My car has an iPod
socket so I sometimes use the iPod controls whilst driving. It's not a
phone so is using it specifically prohibited?

Probably not, it is the equivalent of using the controls on a car radio. The
problem with mobile phones is largely the dislocation effect of conducting a
conversation with someone remote from the vehicle. That's why even handsfree
kits are not that effective.

The legislation specifically mentions mobile phones, not any other devices

It actually refers to "hand-held mobile telephone or other hand-held
interactive communication device," and "causing or permitting the
driving of a motor vehicle by another person using such a telephone or
other device." .


though with the latter your caveat below will always apply.


(yes, I know it could be covered under dangerous driving etc, that's not
the question I'm askng)