Mobile use while driving

[FarAwayHills]

I am so cross and fed up of seeing people using their phones while driving I counted 5 today on a pretty short journey. Having read the news today regarding the tragic death of a mum and her 3 children due the a lorry driver using his phone, I am insensed that people continue to do this. What the hell can be that important.

I am not a technical person but could there be some way that devices could be automatically disabled while a vehicle is being driven. It seems like the only way because people just can't help themselves and fines and penalties are clearly not working.

AIBU to think more needs to be done about this?

purpledaisies- you are very mistaken if you think all emergency service personnel are double crewed

I don't think you meant me...I never said anything like that.

It is an interesting one as causing death by dangerous driving is one of the few offences where jurors who think of themselves as law abiding, upstanding citizens will think 'there for the grace of god'.

Surely not in a case like this though? I don't buy the reluctance to convict excuse, certainly not in a case like this - and in any case, isn't the Judge supposed to direct against irrelevant stuff like that?

The accident would have been the same if he had been searching an iPod. But there would be no outcry as it would have been the same as searching through your box of cassettes

There would have been exactly the same "outcry" from me.

wasonthelist look at how many people on here and talking about seeing people using phones whilst driving. Some of those people will be on juries.

I hope Im on a jury because I'd convict anyone who uses a phone while driving. The law is the law.

I never searched through a box of cassettes whilst driving.

And an ipod or MP3 player would have caused just as much outrage in my mind.

To me, it is more about cultural use of mobile phones. There seem to be a lot of people who are incapable of being separated from their phones for anything. Their phones always take precedent.

sadly, some people will continue to use phones when they drive regardless of the penalties. Until society accepts that phone calls can wait.

I wasn't suggesting mandatory life - it's just odd that the maximum is 14 years. I am advocating more discretion not less, but for very serious cases like this, and for example the one at Great Heck, I don't think 14 years is enough. It seems that as a society we are saying that killing people by doing very obviously risky and/or illegal things which are patently avoidable isn't as serious as if it's done with malice using a weapon. My contention is that the standard of driving shows such a reckless disregard for the safety of others that that distinction becomes irrelevant - and, by the way, the victims (who have a direct causal link to the drivers' reckless actions) aren't any less dead.

Of course it isn't as serious as killing someone with malice and a weapon! Are you serious?

Agree was on the list and a family member had to identify the bodies.

I personally think the crime is the phone use. I think the punishment should be more similar independent of whether your stupidity happened to cause an accident or happened not to.

So much tougher sentences for anyone caught using a phone.

Of course it isn't as serious as killing someone with malice and a weapon!

Why not? The outcome was just as foreseable and they are stiĺl dead - the only difference is vehicles can kill more people at once - why is it less serious?

Nothing can kill a person more than once

Of course there is a huge difference between planning and executing a murder with the prime intention
Of ending a life and answering your mobile while driving. And the law recognises

sadly, some people will continue to use phones when they drive regardless of the penalties. Until society accepts that phone calls can wait.

I agree and that's why education and achieving a cultural shift akin to what's happened with attitudes to drink driving in the past 40 years would be more effective than exemplary punishments. A strategy based on catching and punishing enough people severely for it to be a deterrent
on its own.

The odds are that if you are talking on the phone is you aren't going to be arrested as the police have to catch you in the act. A drunk who drives home drunk in a 30 minute journey will remain drunk for the duration of the journey, someone on a phone may be on it for 2 minutes of that 30 minutes. People may report a drunk driver staggering out of the pub and into their car. Even if you report someone driving off with a phone welded to their ear, the odds are that by the time the cops intercept them, they'll be off the phone.

That. In fact I can't think of a legal system which doesn't recognise the difference so think your view is quite frankly bonkers. You're just getting carried away on an Internet forum

Heres hoping nobody on here's family member is killed by a twat on a phone. When you pick up that phone while driving you are breaking the law instantly

I think it goes without saying we all hope nobody is killed by a driver on a mobile

So the answer is "because I can't think of a legal system that doesn't recognise the difference"

I feel the sentence in this case is inadequate and shows we feel using a 44 tonne truck to kill 4 people in totally avoidable circumstances with reckless disregard for anyone is less serious than a single murder. Surely it's at least as serious? Don't some other legal systems recognise recklessness with fatal outcomes as similarly serious? Why do we set an absolute maximum of 14 years?

Yes and I think punishments should be stronger. I had to identify a family member killed by a moron texting. If you've ever had to do that then you'd never contemplate even looking at a phone

I don't know what you mean by the answer (what was the question?) but I am not aware of a legal system which doesn't differentiate between murder/ manslaughter/ death by dangerous driving, no

Portia not a single person on this thread has said that driving with a phone cradled under their chin is a good idea. I have never done it and hold people in contempt who do so. One person has defended using hands free (which whatever we think of it remains legal)and someone else said they'd called the police when driving and was condemned for it. So stop building your strawman please.

A quick glance at this thread will tell you that the debate has largely centred around how to reduce the level of mobile phones use when driving. However to claim that anyone who advocates anything other than 'lock em up and throw away the key ' or think that other strategies might be more effective isn't condoning driving and calling. To suggest that is tne case is grossly unfair.

BTW you're welcome to call me bonkers for feeling the law is out of line - it seems to be a standard reaction from anyone in the legal industry to any suggestion from an outsider that something might be wrong - I have no idea if you're in the industry or not, but you're fitting the MO.

Ok here is a simpler question (again) - why do we need a maximum sentence of 14 years for this crime?

If I saw someone drinking a can of Special Brew while driving I would view that as no worse than someone on their mobile while driving. It is fucking disgusting.

Btw I am not advocating a "throw away the key" approach either.