I saw this on iol news’ website – the campaign against drivers who use their mobile phones when driving is quite rightly spreading. It has now reached South Africa.
For the third offence we will ask… for the motorist to be obliged to appear in a traffic court so the magistrate can apply his mind as to an appropriate sentence.
What a great idea. I doubt it would make much headway in the UK, because a motorist’s human rights are far more important than those of the people he is likely to kill. But good on the South Africans for introducing it.
A pick-up truck went through a puddle of water – and the “puddle” turned out to be a 10 foot-deep hole created by a burst water main washing soil out from under the tarmac.
On first hearing, it sounds amusing – but one of the occupants was taken to hospital with back and leg injuries.
Police said only the size of the vehicle prevented it from being submerged completely (more of the road gave way once they’d entered the hole, so it sounds like it might not even have been there until they drove on to the tarmac which was suspended over nothing). If it had been a smaller car the whole incident could have been tragic.
This BBC story is interesting. A variable speed limit has been introduced on the M4 near Newport, Wales.
One of the things I cover with my pupils when I’m explaining the use of signals is how you can be happily driving along the motorway (or any other fast road with a lot of traffic) when, all of a sudden, the traffic in front is at a complete standstill.
Ironically, it’s caused by traffic going too fast. You know that whatever speed you’re doing, there will be dozens of people going past you at much higher speeds – most of them breaking the limit by at least 20mph. The problem is at some point they will encounter someone going slower than them. So they slow down, and perhaps change lanes to get by – this causes traffic following in any lane they use to slow down as well. As this braking is transmitted down the line, people have to slow down more and more – until someone has to stop.
In the same way the braking had to get greater as it passed down the following queue, so the duration of the stop increases the further back you go. It’s quite common to end up at a complete standstill for 10 minutes or more, and then everything starts moving again and it’s like the jam never happened. Until the next time it happens further up the road.
I call it the caterpillar effect, and it only happens when traffic is heavy and people are speeding or going at vastly different speeds (slow drivers can also cause it, especially if they’re in the middle or outside lanes).
The BBC story points out:
Average speed cameras have been in operation along the stretch of the M4 since September 2009.
The cameras trigger penalty notices when the 50mph limit is exceeded.
More than 6,500 drivers have been issued with tickets according to figures in December 2010.
That 6,500 is the reason there are deaths, accidents, and hold-ups on roads.
The new system detects traffic flow and adjusts the maximum speed limit accordingly – something bad (and Audi) drivers are incapable of doing through sommonsense using their heads.
Personally, I think it is a good idea. It won’t prevent hold-ups – but it will definitely reduce them. If it doesn’t, the government will make a shed load of money out of stupid people.
penalties for using hand-held mobile phones whilst driving
Road safety professionals
Visit the new road safety professional area on the Department for Transport website for information and resources to support professionals in delivering road safety messages including:
THINK! campaign strategies, key messages and recent campaign activity
THINK! research including campaign evaluation
information about using THINK! adverts and brand guidelines
Sorting out your practical driving test is so easy with Directgov
Directgov is the only official site where you can book or change your practical test appointment without paying an extra administration fee.
And now booking or changing your practical driving test with Directgov couldn’t be easier. There’s a couple of new films which show you how to do this, step-by-step.
The Maidenhead Advertiser reports that Keisha Bianca Wall crushed a 63 year old woman against a wall shortly after receiving a text message last February. She denies causing death by dangerous driving. The BBC also has the same story.
Wall, who was 18 at the time, was driving a black Suzuki Jimny she’d been given as a Christmas present. She had passed her test eight months earlier. Her mother – a driving instructor – was in the car with her. The trial is ongoing.
Over in the States (and Canada) at the moment, the issue of texting whilst driving is big news.
NY1 reports on the current campaign to fight what they call “distracted driving”. The report says that 30% of under-30s admit to texting whilst driving, and over 60% admit to using the phone. In 2009, around 5,500 people were killed as a result of distracted driving in America. There is a government website – distraction.gov – which is worth a look.
The same story is covered by 13 News in Florida, and refers to a 17 year old who was killed on her way to school in 2009 – she was texting behind the wheel.
The California Highway Patrol is also actively trying to deal with the problem in a more aggressive way.
KRMG in Oklahoma reports on a bill that hopes to make texting behind the wheel illegal. The Toronto Star reports that “Webbing while driving” is a growing problem. And CBS reports on beauty queen, Miss South Dakota, who is taking on distracted driving.
Back in the UK, Essex police are taking on the problem in a blitz on mobile-using drivers. Of course, the problem they have over here is the Law.
Going back to the original story, it doesn’t matter if Keisha Wall was looking at her phone or not. If it can’t be proved, she’ll be let off.
EDIT 10/3/2011: The American side of this topic is being picked up by numerous Stateside (and North America generally) news sources:
CTV News (British Columbia) – apps to stop texting
Just a quick note to the rotund asshole driving the pale blue Vauxhall Meriva (reg. no. BG54 SUK ) in Long Eaton this morning… my pupil was having a bad enough day as it was.
You undertaking dangerously on the inside lane of a merge – when you had no right to do so whatsoever – didn’t help him.
I’m sorry, but this is sci-fi nonsense. No one in their right mind is going to go for this as a means of personal transport.
CBS News asks “Would You Buy a Self-driving Car? ” The vehicle it refers to is a Google experimental car, which is completely independent and uses radar and AI to determine where it is, where other things are, and what to do with respect to that perception of what is around it. It also relies on “the cloud” – in other words, it has to be connected reliably to the internet. There is some Google video footage of the car here. There’s no denying it’s clever – but how clever would it need to be?
As an aside, my TomTom satnav (and the Google Maps GPS app on my smartphone) are very good at navigating across fields and open spaces when the road layout is new and doesn’t quite correspond to the older data Google carries. And don’t even get me started on what happens when connection to “the cloud” is lost or can’t be established!
But back on topic. The latest issue of Despatch – see article immediately below – has a piece on driverless cars. The system here is the EU-funded SARTRE project, and it is nothing like the Google one. It depends on a lead-car with a driver (or maybe it could be one of the Google cars) and all the cars in the so-called “platoon” follow it automatically (as the acronym SAfe Road TRains for the Environment suggests).
At best, people with too much money and too much time on their hands will be able to commute around London – just like with electric cars – whilst pretending they are saving the environment.
It’s scary to think that the SARTRE convoy will no doubt involve electric cars in order to hype up its green credentials. I wonder what would happen if one in the middle goes flat because the owner forgot to charge it properly (or the batteries are knackered and it can’t hold a charge)?
It’ll also be a bit of a pointless exercise if you want to nip down Tescos at 1am for some bread.
The March issue of Despatch is now available. Click the logo to download a copy.
In this issue there is information about the consultation on amendments to the eyesight requirements and issues relating to epilepsy and diabetes. There was a DSA Alert on this in February.
There’s also a story regarding a group of theory test fraudsters. Four jail sentences were handed out.
Another story covers driverless cars – I’m posting an article on this subject shortly. And some general snippets about no longer being able to use Maestro cards for test bookings, ASA complaints about advertising, and posters in test centres.
This one reads like a Monty Python sketch. The Union Leader online newspaper reports that there is a bill in New Hampshire, USA to end tests of suitability on older drivers.
But perceptions that older drivers have more accidents are not supported by some statistical studies.
Note the word “some”. This means that “some” studies show categorically that older drivers ARE a greater risk to themselves and others.
Rep. Bob Williams, D-Concord, doesn’t like the law.
“This is pure age discrimination,” said Williams, 84. “There are no other classes of drivers we make do this. There is no evidence that older drivers are less safe than other drivers. In fact, if you look at the statistics, drivers over age 75 in New Hampshire are safer drivers than the younger age groups.”
Read that again. Bob Williams doesn’t like the law which says those over 75 must re-take their suitability tests. He is 84. His wish is that there would be no re-testing at all on the over 75s.
Just imagine these two scenarios:
Those between the ages of 30-50 can drive without the need for any sort of retesting
Those between the ages of 75-105 can drive without the need for any sort of retesting.
Doesn’t one of them sound ludicrous? Yet that is what the bill is effectively proposing.
Everyone knows that as people get beyond a certain age an increasing number of them become slower and more prone to confusion. Also with age comes the increasing risk of dementia and other age-related conditions.
And people like Williams want these significant dangers and risks to be ignored.
Hey, while we’re at it, why not remove the early age bar to driving? Why not grant licences to people on the day they are born? But people like Williams would probably consider this as being unfair, too, and lobby for the effective date to be the point of conception instead!
EDIT 10/3/2011: Oregon is now getting in on the act after an 87 year old man and 74 year old woman drove into stationary buildings in separate incidents. A bill is being considered that would require over-75s to renew their licences every 2 years and be required to pass a driving test each renewal.