Comments on: Tom misses the point

By: Whaleoil

Whaleoil — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 07:19:53 +0000

There is a an old rule that applies in this case, never listen or trust anyone with a double barreled name. Anyone who has two fathers should never be trusted.

Same goes for people with moustaches.

By: Peter

Peter — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 06:22:41 +0000

adc

It talks to you. There’s no need to look at the screen if you think it dangerous to do so.

I wonder how many crashes have been caused by people thinking of something else whilst driving? More so than satnav, I’d wager.

By: adc

adc — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 05:07:50 +0000

what size is the average cellphone screen on a cell that can do sat nav?

Surely far too small to view from a meter away when mounted on a dash.

So I think looking at a map is safer, because

a) it’s bigger!
b) it’s clearer!
c) it doesn’t suffer from glare
d) you don’t need to fumble for minute buttons to drive it

In fact most people stop to look at maps, whereas GPS entices people to keep driving, if not adding a sense of urgency (which is also bad IMHO).

I do wonder how many crashes have been caused by people messing with their satnav.

As for the car radio analogy. Well they are designed to be fiddled with while driving, so they have bigger buttons, and knobs etc designed to be easy to use and hit whilst moving.

By: sgthree

sgthree — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 04:03:37 +0000

Under the current wording, if you have an iphone, you can’t use it to play music through your car stereo. I can plug an ipod, including an iphone, into my car stereo system and control the songs and playlists from the steering wheel controls. From 1 November I won’t be able to do that if it is an iphone that is plugged in, but I will if it is an ipod.

By: Alan Wilkinson

Alan Wilkinson — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 04:03:33 +0000

SSB, that might be his point?

By: side show bob

side show bob — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 03:24:50 +0000

Pete, are you having a senior moment or something similar. So we ban the first two years of driving, the problem then goes on to the next two years of driving, do we ban those two years to? It would get to the stage where we have to ban driving all together.

By: Pete George

Pete George — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 01:08:22 +0000

The most at risk drivers are those in their first two years of driving. If they were banned there would be far fewer problems.

By: Elijah Lineberry

Elijah Lineberry — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:42:04 +0000

The actual ‘point’ which is being missed is that the State should not be banning anything, let alone cellular telephone use whilst driving.

This is just Nanny State engaging in busybodyism; pure good old fashioned Communism.

If they really cared about road safety (and they don’t – they simply want to be busybodies) the Government would ban Women and Chinamen from driving as having people with no logic or reasoning abilities driving turbo charged deadly weapons makes our roads highly dangerous.

http://www.nightcitytrader.blogspot.com

By: Alan Wilkinson

Alan Wilkinson — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:34:15 +0000

Teach drivers to manage risks which is what driving is all about. Stop pretending risk can be legislated out of our lives and the idiotic political posturing that goes with that.

By: Fletch

Fletch — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:14:52 +0000

Next thing we’ll have an emergency kit in the car in case someone feels like they’re going to sneeze (which causes one to takes ones eyes of the road). A special kind of sneeze kit that comes in a red package and that you stuff up your nose to stop the sneezing.

Every car must have one…

By: scanner

scanner — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:31:44 +0000

Her we go again, back down the path to “Nanny State”.
What started out as a simple solution to a simple problem is now descending to another peice of overcomplicated, ridiculous legislation.

Why not some thing simple like ” It is an offense to text, or to use a mobile phone to carry out a conversation without a hands-free device from the drivers seat of a vehicle whilst in motion.”

Is this too simple ? , or do we start banning people from -
Talking
Eating
Listening to music
Changing tapes/CD’s
Looking at road signs
Farting
Picking ones noes
and on and on and on

Time for a reality check and the application of the KISS principle.

By: Paul Gardner

Paul Gardner — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:16:40 +0000

I was watching the lovely Petra Bagust on “What’s Really in Our Food” last and noticed that she spoke to the camera (which was in the passengers seat) as she drove. This involved turning occasionally to camera. Does that mean we need a specific clause to ban that too?

Anything too specific is always going to miss dangerous stuff but pick up non-dangerous things. I go along with the fact that actually the current law should be adequate.

By: petal

petal — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:14:27 +0000

Can I please repeat that this is squarely in the domain of shower head flow control? The nation voted overwhelmingly against this sort of politics. Can someone PLEASE yank a chain and get the wayward ministers onto important things?

By: Rodney

Rodney — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:10:36 +0000

Ad hoc governance by business groups who take the transport minister toi lunch, and a prime minister who tweets rather than governs..

turkeys.

By: getstaffed

getstaffed — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:05:51 +0000

Yes, this story is TomTom without engaging his BrainBrain