Texting thread

[Deleted member 15344]

:thup: :clap:

What are the rules on loose animals anyhow ha

I'm not sure if you get a free drop just like GUR ? :mmm:

 

[woody69]

I believe they are to be selfish and stupid for their actions whilst driving

Nowhere have I stated that - but I know I'm not stupid enough to deliberately increase the risk Of causing an accident and possibly serious harm to people by carrying out illegal activities whilst driving

Not sure there is any need for cheap digs.

Irony?

 

[Ethan]

I used to have a work colleague who swore blind that he was a better driver after 4 or 5 pints than he was sober, if he's still driving I bet he texts too!

Alcohol at all doses is a brain depressant, but at modest doses causes disinhibition which may appear as more confidence.

Or taking your clothes off and running down the High St.

 

[FairwayDodger]

Haven't commented on this yet but it's been a worrying read....

I think I follow the general train of thought regarding different perceptions of risk and so on, but no matter how hard I try I just can't imagine a way in which I could send a text while driving without taking a totally outrageous risk. I can see how I could take a drink of juice, eat a sweet, look in my rear view mirror (does someone REALLY think that's unsafe???), exceed the speed limit even, etc etc without endangering anyone but no way could I send a text without being a real danger on the road.

I've never sent a text while driving, never will and I honestly think anyone caught doing so should have the book thrown at them.

 

[virtuocity]

 

[pokerjoke]

I saw a programme recently about a man who goes to road accidents,finds out what really happened
then has to go and tell the family.
He got called to an accident where a young 21 year old girl got killed.
A works lorry had hit her from behind and the car was a 3rd of its original size.
He had to reach in to grab her bag so they could identify her she was that mangled.
The works van had a driver and his assistant in it,they were taken to the police station and interviewed
separately.
At first they both stuck with a story where they never saw the traffic stopping,until the assistant finally
changed his story telling the police the driver was looking at the works phone only for a few seconds.
For the poor girl and her family it was a couple of seconds too much.
I have seen lots of people on phones whilst driving and I just want to get out of my car and start
shouting at them.
They are muppets.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Interesting, if fractious, debate.

I think there is an interesting debate between advocates of proportionality and those of strict adherence to the law.

It should be obvious that anything which distracts or impairs the responses of the driver is a potential hazard - texting, listening to loud music, having taken alcohol, looking in the back to tell the kids to behave, whatever.

Some of these are easier to legislate for, though. Although there is good evidence that driving performance is impaired at lower levels, we have a drink driving limit. Would a zero limit be safer - yes. Personally I don't touch alcohol if I am going to be in a car anytime soon after. But there are political factors too. No Govt wants to be the one that gets the negative nanny state coverage associated with reducing the level to zero.

Likewise, banning turning to look into the back of the car is rather difficult to implement and police, and is unnecessary because in extreme cases can be covered under due care and attention or similar. But texting while driving is much easier to ban, so they do. And texting is also the purview of young people and young people in cars are something that gets the white middle Daily Mail reader all up in a lather.

I think the argument that something is unlawful and therefore morally wrong is a false one. So is its counterpart, that something which is not unlawful is morally OK.

Can I suggest that there should be strict adherence to the law and any proportionality should be in the sentence handed down? You should not text whilst driving, period. But there is a world of difference between someone who quickly reads a text whilst in stationary traffic and someone who types one out and send it whilst driving along a motorway. Yet under the current constraints of the judicial system both will get the same penalty. And it needs addressing.

I'll disagree; it's not the actual level of the limit that makes it safer, it's the chances of being caught. Given the almost complete disappearance of Traffic Patrols from our roads in favour of cameras, and hence the chance of being tested outside of being involved in an accident reducing drastically, the limit itself makes little difference. I'm not disagreeing with your point that not drinking alcohol is safer than drinking a limited amount before driving, but if you don't believe you will get caught then your attitude to it will be affected and thus the limit is not the primary safety driver in my opinion, but the chance of prosecution.

 

[CMAC]

I saw a programme recently about a man who goes to road accidents,finds out what really happened
then has to go and tell the family.
He got called to an accident where a young 21 year old girl got killed.
A works lorry had hit her from behind and the car was a 3rd of its original size.
He had to reach in to grab her bag so they could identify her she was that mangled.
The works van had a driver and his assistant in it,they were taken to the police station and interviewed
separately.
At first they both stuck with a story where they never saw the traffic stopping,until the assistant finally
changed his story telling the police the driver was looking at the works phone only for a few seconds.
For the poor girl and her family it was a couple of seconds too much.
I have seen lots of people on phones whilst driving and I just want to get out of my car and start
shouting at them.
They are muppets.

agreed, its peanuts to get a hands free installed.

I had a guy behind me for miles chatting and laughing on his phone, totally oblivious. A 'tap' on my brake lights (whilst accelerating) soon got his attention, he was furious! imagine how furious the family would be of someone he killed or maimed for life.

Idiots! they need a slap!

 

[chrisd]

The front page of the Mail is interesting today, they say the police are going to check mobiles when they are called to accidents to see if they were being used when the accident occurred

 

[Pin-seeker]

The front page of the Mail is interesting today, they say the police are going to check mobiles when they are called to accidents to see if they were being used when the accident occurred

This was mentioned on traffic cops,a young girl crashed her car on a duel carriage way. She claimed that she swerved to miss a rabbit,however the skid marks suggested otherwise. The police officer said that if any one had been injured they would have checked phone records.

 

[guest100718]

I think I saw your car woody...

 

[CMAC]

two weeks ago a friends car was written off along with 3 other cars, get this, they were stationary at the traffic lights outside a primary school, woman in a RR Sport ploughed into them writing off 4 cars the force was so bad. Using her mobile? possibly but denied, she didnt see them stopped is the defence.

It beggars belief the carnage that could have been if the primary kids were crossing at that time.

Zero tolerance, massive fines and driving bans should be for a 1st offence. Do it again you lose your licence, do it again when you get it back, you lose licence for life and your car confiscated and sold, end of.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

two weeks ago a friends car was written off along with 3 other cars, get this, they were stationary at the traffic lights outside a primary school, woman in a RR Sport ploughed into them writing off 4 cars the force was so bad. Using her mobile? possibly but denied, she didnt see them stopped is the defence.

It beggars belief the carnage that could have been if the primary kids were crossing at that time.

Zero tolerance, massive fines and driving bans should be for a 1st offence. Do it again you lose your licence, do it again when you get it back, you lose licence for life and your car confiscated and sold, end of.

Ah but it's OK because she took a calculated risk

 

[Slime]

I believe they are to be selfish and stupid for their actions whilst driving

Nowhere have I stated that - but I know I'm not stupid enough to deliberately increase the risk Of causing an accident and possibly serious harm to people by carrying out illegal activities whilst driving

Not sure there is any need for cheap digs.

Never broken the speed limit Phil?

I don't text and won't text, but I'll be perfectly honest, I do break the speed limit.
Like woody69, I take a 'calculated' risk. I'm not proud of it, but I do do it.


Slime.

 

[SocketRocket]

So is the theory: If you speed then why not text as well?

 

[Pin-seeker]

So is the theory: If you speed then why not text as well?

In for a penny,in for a pound
Might aswell neck a bottle of JD whilst you're at it.

 

[JCW]

Should not be texting and driving , nuff said , most are not aware that the police can pull up your phone records if they suspect you been on your mobile , I think anyone done for this offence should get 9 points and the 2nd time will lead to a ban and the insurance companies then load your premuim even more as you are a at risk driver .................thats my call on it

 

[SocketRocket]

In for a penny,in for a pound
Might aswell neck a bottle of JD whilst you're at it.

Thats just wrong!! I hate JD, Bush Mills is much better.

 

[DaveM]

You are of course correct, that such an incident could occur. But it could also happen because said person tries to light a cigarette or fails to check their blind spot and pulls out or swerves to avoid hitting an animal or some
thing in the road. Getting in a car is a potentially dangerous thing and people make mistakes and accidents happen. Perhaps I have an unrealistic view on my driving abilities and coordinated activity of sending a text and driving, but not once have I ever felt out of control.

Most of the above is just an excuse to try and justify a dangerous and illegal action. I agree every time you get in a car there is the potential for an accident. So why increase the odds. There is nothing more dangerous than the person who thinks they are a great driver. Everyone can make mistakes. The driver who realises he/she can is generally the better driver.

 

[Slime]

I think if we are all totally honest, a large number of us would admit to having done something stupid, and therefore risk increasing, at the wheel of a car.
We've probably all taken 'calculated risks' at some time or other and got away with it.
I have NEVER texted whilst driving a car, and nor will I, but I have done the following;
Driven when I was too tired.
Taken a phone call.
Driven too fast ...... far too fast.
Overtaken when I shouldn't have.
Stared at pretty young things for too long.
Messed around with the stereo for too long.
Driven after a drink. NOT over the limit mind you, but there was alcohol in me.
Undertaken on a motorway.

There are probably more to add to the list, and I can honestly say that none of the above are regular occurences.
I guess what I'm saying is that what woody69 does is wrong, very wrong, but none of us are really whiter than white ........... are we?
Hands up anyone who thinks they are!


Slime.