Give him a medal
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Speeding - a few questions
Next: Smartcom 12s relay?
From: PC Paul on 16 Aug 2006 15:38 Simon Finnigan wrote: > uknewsfan wrote: >> On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 17:06:45 GMT, "burt" >> <burtthebike(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >> >> I have yet to meet anyone who has stopped using their mobile whilst >> driving. I imagine the majority here do too, if they are honest. > > You obviously know idiots. I do not, have not and will not use my > mobile when driving. Hands free kits are IMHO an appalling idea - > they do not remove the distraction of trying to hear a poor quality > call with drop out (which is according to a few studies the main > reason mobile phones distract drivers, not the actual conversation). A > hands free kit gives a driver the impression that they are being > sensible and safe and paying full attention to the road, which is > still not the case. > If a call is important, it`s important enough either for me to wait > for the next services (for gods sake, don`t stop on the hard shoulder > to take a phone call - it`s not exactly the safest place in the world > is it?) or for a caller to leave me a voicemail, which I`ll get at > the next services. Ditto. My phone is off while I drive. I have bluetooth and could get a wired or wireless hands free easily, but I won't. When I first had a mobile (admnittedly it was almost too heavy to lift anyway) years ago I did use it in the car. About the third time I used it, it was to look at a text I'd received. Almost as soon as I had started to look at it I was on the rumble strip. Never done it again. I *know* how easily you get distracted, even without watching all the prats doing it now.
From: Abo on 16 Aug 2006 16:00 DieSea wrote: > The situation was that a car towing a tatty old camping trailer was > tailgating me in the middle lane of a motorway , flashing his > lights for me to get out of the way > > I was solo and doing a BIT more than 70 > > He eventfully came up on the inside and pushed me out into the > outside lane You shouldn't have been cruising up the middle lane you dopey fucker. -- Abo www.pickuptruckracing.com 'You see, birds fall from the windowledge above mine Then they flap their wings at the last second'
From: david lloyd on 16 Aug 2006 16:05 "Simon Finnigan" <SimonFinnigan(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4kha8jFc5685U1(a)individual.net... > uknewsfan wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 17:06:45 GMT, "burt" > > <burtthebike(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > > > > I have yet to meet anyone who has stopped using their mobile whilst > > driving. I imagine the majority here do too, if they are honest. I'm honest - I don't have a mobile phone. I think it is one of those things that I would find a use for if I had one, but I don't, so I don't. I think we need a national no-mobile phone day, to show people that they can cope without. > > You obviously know idiots. I do not, have not and will not use my mobile > when driving. Hands free kits are IMHO an appalling idea [snipped a bit] > > If a call is important, it`s important enough either for me to wait for the > next services (for gods sake, don`t stop on the hard shoulder to take a > phone call - it`s not exactly the safest place in the world is it?) or for a > caller to leave me a voicemail, which I`ll get at the next services. > I don't think there is a call that anyone can make that is more important than your or anyone else's life.
From: david lloyd on 16 Aug 2006 16:12 "PC Paul" <urd(a)munge.org.uk> wrote in message news:GtadnfS8NoWu6X7ZnZ2dnUVZ8tKdnZ2d(a)brightview.com... > Simon Finnigan wrote: > > uknewsfan wrote: > >> On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 17:06:45 GMT, "burt" > >> <burtthebike(a)blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > >> > >> I have yet to meet anyone who has stopped using their mobile whilst > >> driving. I imagine the majority here do too, if they are honest. > > > > You obviously know idiots. I do not, have not and will not use my > > mobile when driving. Hands free kits are IMHO an appalling idea - > > they do not remove the distraction of trying to hear a poor quality > > call with drop out (which is according to a few studies the main > > reason mobile phones distract drivers, not the actual conversation). A > > hands free kit gives a driver the impression that they are being > > sensible and safe and paying full attention to the road, which is > > still not the case. > > If a call is important, it`s important enough either for me to wait > > for the next services (for gods sake, don`t stop on the hard shoulder > > to take a phone call - it`s not exactly the safest place in the world > > is it?) or for a caller to leave me a voicemail, which I`ll get at > > the next services. > > Ditto. My phone is off while I drive. I have bluetooth and could get a wired > or wireless hands free easily, but I won't. > > When I first had a mobile (admnittedly it was almost too heavy to lift > anyway) years ago I did use it in the car. > > About the third time I used it, it was to look at a text I'd received. > Almost as soon as I had started to look at it I was on the rumble strip. > > Never done it again. I *know* how easily you get distracted, even without > watching all the prats doing it now. > > It would help if we all recognised that we all can be prats at any given moment. It is just that we can do more damage to ourselves and others when we are in our cars.
From: JNugent on 16 Aug 2006 16:24
PC Paul wrote: > JNugent wrote: > >>PM wrote: > > >>>But was she using one? If not, why would she say >>> >>>"I think it must be (someone following me home) as that's the only >>>way they would find out where you live." >>> >>>Following her home from where? From where she used (someone else's) >>>mobile while driving? Otherwise why not assume it's a random attack >>>on a parked car? >> >>The part: "(following me home)" looks like an context insertion by the >>writer of the article, rather than necessarily being what the victim >>said, otherwise it could simply have been rendered as: >> >>"I think it must be someone who followed me home as that's the only >>way they would find out where I live" (or words to exactly the same >>effect) without the need for brackets. > > > Damn clever inserting it into the video I saw of her being interviewed. > These journo's, eh? *If* that is the case, the rendering with the brackets is very odd written English - and completely supportive of what I posted earlier. |