“It’s really encouraging to see the public taking responsibility for road safety”: Police force praises cyclists and other road users for reporting mobile phone-using drivers

Man simultaneously possessing and eating a series of rich cakes decries pastry chefs for supplying unhealthy food...

Pretty sure "snitches" turn into selfless and valuable witnesses if they're of use to your side of a case!

mitsky wrote:

While it is great that Warwickshire Police has come out and said this I would query whether they and other forces have the resource to deal with all the reports.

I doubt it.
Particularly based on my experience with the Met police.

I recieved an email this week from a WMP officer drafted in to help as they were overwhelmed with submissions and falling behind. It said two of the reports I made over a week ago would only result in warning letters as they had been left too late even though they were both worthy of prosecution.

It's very disappointing but at least too many reports is better than too few.

Oxford offers the alternative definition of acting independently without waiting for authority, which is a better fit for these sort of actions, i.e. I'm going to take responsibility for recording the evidence of this crime rather than calling the police to do so.

I would go further and say it is completely incorrect to use the word "responsibility".
As a cyclist (and pedestrian and driver) I am in no way responsible for other people and how they behave anywhere let alone on the roads.

And as has been pointed out, as someone who reports dangerous drivers, those (usually drivers) who consider us to be "vigilantes" are also using the wrong word.
Vigilante implies we are dishing out our own punishment to dangerous drivers.
All we are doing is reporting it and letting the police/courts do the rest.

Far more of the handheld phone drivers I see now are using it to message / scroll / watch something, rather than to have a conversation. 

Exactly - people have got the message obviously calling someone on your mobile while driving is seen as a bit naughty.  But if you're using WhatsApp in the lap they can't touch you.

Or alternatively they're messaging someone / looking up something while also on a call...

mikewood wrote:

Hook up to the Bluetooth or buy a cradle, it's really not that hard!

Better but still dangerous, the majority of drivers in London have their phone in a cradle now, half of them are tapping away on it which I believe is still illegal and a significant proportion of the other half are looking at things on it, anything from Facebook messages to football videos. I've actually learned to watch oncoming drivers' heads to check for the tell-tale crooked neck that shows they are looking at the phone in its cradle rather than the road. It really is time that any phone use at the wheel, handheld or not, was banned – even satnav could be restricted to audio only, you don't actually need to look at the map on the screen. If a police officer saw somebody driving along with a book or a newspaper propped up in front of them which they were clearly reading they would quite rightly be stopped and charged with careless driving, it's beyond me why it's seen as acceptable just because the words happen to be on an electronic screen rather than printed on paper.

Not better at all actually. It's just as dangerous. There is plenty of research into it. TRL has abstracts of numerous papers ont he topic on its website. And TRL has told its employees that using hands free devices while driving is no longer allowed.

I'm pretty sure the specific legislation on mobile phones relates only to "hand held" devices - as soon as it is mounted in a cradle it is not covered by that legislation and so not illegal per se. Obviously could still be considered careless driving.

As someone who uses a phone (in a cradle) for navigation, I would disagree with the suggestion that you don't need the map. Well, maybe "need" is a strong word, but I would certainly say I find the map very useful, probably more so than the voice instructions. 

I think if a phone is in a cradle and not being touched, but still being used for an audio call then that may fall within the law.
ie If the driver used verba commands to start the call without touching the screen.
In theory it is like having a conversation with a person in the car.
Though I don't condone it as it is likely to still be more distracting.

I think there are plenty of clips (ie from CyclingMikey) showinig drivers using their phones on the laps etc that have been FPNed.

Yes you're correct, I should've made clear that I am going on my assumption that physically interacting with a screen while in motion is by definition careless driving - obviously not an assumption shared by every law-enforcement officer.

With the satnav thing, I'm sure you could manage with just the voice instructions, I personally don't think that anything which means you take your eyes off the road when it's not strictly necessary (e.g. checking your speed) is a good idea.

Rendel Harris wrote:

Yes you're correct, I should've made clear that I am going on my assumption that physically interacting with a screen while in motion is by definition careless driving - obviously not an assumption shared by every law-enforcement officer.

With the satnav thing, I'm sure you could manage with just the voice instructions, I personally don't think that anything which means you take your eyes off the road when it's not strictly necessary (e.g. checking your speed) is a good idea.

If you've got your eyes glued to it, it's no good. But there are times being able to check the position of the 2nd or 3rd exit from a roundabout is incredibly useful, and allows you to get in the right lane as early as possible. 

I was travelling through country roads on my way to a funeral recently and some of the verbal instructions were not at all clear - 'take the next right, then first left' could easily have seen me half way up the drive to a farm house. 

Ideally you'd get a passenger to do that, but that's not always possible. If you are using a Sat Nav where the junctions are nice and clear then it's fair to say you won't need the visuals. If the road signs are nice and big and clear and not blocked by branches then you might not need the SatNav screen, but that isn't always the case. And when there are complicated roundabouts then the signs don't always tell you what you need to know, or are so full of information not relevant to you that you will almost certainly take longer to read that than you would with a quick glance of the Sat Nav to tell you that your particular exit is at 2 O'Clock, and you can ignore everything else.

I meant to say, I don't make or receive phone calls when driving. 

I'd consider sticking it in the cradle if I were going on a particularly long drive on the way to somewhere that I might need to be contacted en route, but I prefer to put my phone in a bag or a pocket of a jacket I'm not wearing to avoid any temptation to answer a call or check a screen.

I hate it when people phone me from their car, and if someone answers a call from me while their driving I offer to call back later, or keep things very brief.

FionaJJ wrote:

If you've got your eyes glued to it, it's no good. But there are times being able to check the position of the 2nd or 3rd exit from a roundabout is incredibly useful, and allows you to get in the right lane as early as possible. 

I was travelling through country roads on my way to a funeral recently and some of the verbal instructions were not at all clear - 'take the next right, then first left' could easily have seen me half way up the drive to a farm house. 

Ideally you'd get a passenger to do that, but that's not always possible. If you are using a Sat Nav where the junctions are nice and clear then it's fair to say you won't need the visuals. If the road signs are nice and big and clear and not blocked by branches then you might not need the SatNav screen, but that isn't always the case. And when there are complicated roundabouts then the signs don't always tell you what you need to know, or are so full of information not relevant to you that you will almost certainly take longer to read that than you would with a quick glance of the Sat Nav to tell you that your particular exit is at 2 O'Clock, and you can ignore everything else.

How about a cheap chinese head-up display instead?

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005005193015273.html

hawkinspeter wrote:

How about a cheap chinese head-up display instead?

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005005193015273.html

That's connected via OBD-II so can't access GPS data, therefore won't help with navigation. 

The research shows that using a hands-free phone system is just as dangerous as holding the phone. The distraction is mental rather than physical. It's only a matter of time before hands-free phone systems are banned. TRL has done plenty of research into just how dangerous this is and it's on the website if you want to check. My advice is that you stop using a hands-free phone system behind the wheel. It is not safe.

With regards to the trend of holding the phone not to the ear for a conversation, whether driving or not, I think this is an indicator that the user is a fan of Star Trek.
Namely the TOS era with Kirk where they used communicators in the same way... 

Reminds me of people holding pistols horizontally. Looks cool and a little bit gangsta, but serves little practical purpose.

Indeed - although there is a story that this actually was done with certain guns for a practical purpose - a test suggested doubtful utility though.

mitsky wrote:

With regards to the trend of holding the phone not to the ear for a conversation, whether driving or not, I think this is an indicator that the user is a fan of Star Trek.

More likely "The Apprentice" - role models to misguided wannabes.
Namely the TOS era with Kirk where they used communicators in the same way...