Drivers on mobile phones pay for road safety

On 23/12/2011 01:26, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 00:23:44 +0000,
wrote:

On 23/12/2011 00:19, Mr Pounder wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 22/12/2011 19:40, Simon Mason wrote:

"Mr
wrote:

Police said the increasing use of smartphones, which allow users
instant access to social networking sites including Facebook and
Twitter, is behind the rise.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...-mobile-phones...
Can you show me where law breaking cyclists have ever paid for road
safety
Mr Mason?

Speeding and using a mobile phone on a bike are not offences, Mr P.

Neither is using a mobile phone whilst driving a car/van/lorry/bus.
Even a hand-held phone can be used lawfully in some circumstances, and the
casual observer can have no idea whether those circumstances apply in any
particular case. They may "think" that they know, but they don't.

Eh?

What's the problem?
What I wrote is correct.

Maybe,

No "maybe" about it.

but you could expand and tell us in what situations it is legal
to use a hand held mobile phone when driving.
The AA seem to think that the only exception to the law are 999 or 112
calls where stopping would be dangerous.
http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice...le-phones.html

Does that:

(a) undermine, or

(b) support

what I said?

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 07:16:03 +0000, JNugent
wrote:

On 23/12/2011 01:26, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 00:23:44 +0000,
wrote:

On 23/12/2011 00:19, Mr Pounder wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 22/12/2011 19:40, Simon Mason wrote:

"Mr
wrote:

Police said the increasing use of smartphones, which allow users
instant access to social networking sites including Facebook and
Twitter, is behind the rise.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...-mobile-phones...
Can you show me where law breaking cyclists have ever paid for road
safety
Mr Mason?

Speeding and using a mobile phone on a bike are not offences, Mr P.

Neither is using a mobile phone whilst driving a car/van/lorry/bus.
Even a hand-held phone can be used lawfully in some circumstances, and the
casual observer can have no idea whether those circumstances apply in any
particular case. They may "think" that they know, but they don't.

Eh?

What's the problem?
What I wrote is correct.

Maybe,

No "maybe" about it.

but you could expand and tell us in what situations it is legal
to use a hand held mobile phone when driving.
The AA seem to think that the only exception to the law are 999 or 112
calls where stopping would be dangerous.
http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice...le-phones.html

Does that:

(a) undermine, or

(b) support

what I said?

Undermine. You used a plural term, and unless you can provide other
exceptions to the law, you were wrong to do so.

On 23/12/2011 09:06, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 07:16:03 +0000,
wrote:

On 23/12/2011 01:26, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 00:23:44 +0000,
wrote:

On 23/12/2011 00:19, Mr Pounder wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 22/12/2011 19:40, Simon Mason wrote:

"Mr
wrote:

Police said the increasing use of smartphones, which allow users
instant access to social networking sites including Facebook and
Twitter, is behind the rise.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...-mobile-phones...
Can you show me where law breaking cyclists have ever paid for road
safety
Mr Mason?

Speeding and using a mobile phone on a bike are not offences, Mr P.

Neither is using a mobile phone whilst driving a car/van/lorry/bus.
Even a hand-held phone can be used lawfully in some circumstances, and the
casual observer can have no idea whether those circumstances apply in any
particular case. They may "think" that they know, but they don't.

Eh?

What's the problem?
What I wrote is correct.

Maybe,

No "maybe" about it.

but you could expand and tell us in what situations it is legal
to use a hand held mobile phone when driving.
The AA seem to think that the only exception to the law are 999 or 112
calls where stopping would be dangerous.
http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice...le-phones.html

Does that:

(a) undermine, or

(b) support

what I said?

Undermine. You used a plural term, and unless you can provide other
exceptions to the law, you were wrong to do so.

Thank you for confirming what I said, almost to the word.

To the extent that you have a valid point (which isn't very far), it is more
of a misplaced semantic quibble - and you knew it already.

As you are no doubt aware, the word "circumstances" is in general use as a
plural, even when it refers (objectively) to only one (sort of) set of
circumstanceS. The law envisages a situation where various circumstances (eg,
driving, an emergency, lack of safe and/or practical place to stop or some
other reason why stopping would not be safe / practical) intersect.

"Simon Mason" wrote in message
...
On Dec 22, 8:01 pm, "Mr Pounder"
wrote:
"Simon Mason" wrote in message

...
On Dec 22, 5:00 pm, "Mr Pounder"
wrote:

Police said the increasing use of smartphones, which allow users
instant access to social networking sites including Facebook and
Twitter, is behind the rise.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...-mobile-phones...

--

Can you show me where law breaking cyclists have ever paid for road
safety
Mr Mason?

Speeding and using a mobile phone on a bike are not offences, Mr P.

--
Simon Mason

That is not an answer Mr Mason.

It *is* an answer but perhaps not the one you wanted.

--
Simon Mason

I'll ask again.
Can you show me where law breaking cyclists have ever paid for road safety
Mr Mason?

On Dec 23, 12:44*pm, "Mr Pounder"
wrote:
"Simon Mason" wrote in message

...
On Dec 22, 8:01 pm, "Mr Pounder"
wrote:





"Simon Mason" wrote in message

....
On Dec 22, 5:00 pm, "Mr Pounder"
wrote:

Police said the increasing use of smartphones, which allow users
instant access to social networking sites including Facebook and
Twitter, is behind the rise.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...-mobile-phones....

--

Can you show me where law breaking cyclists have ever paid for road
safety
Mr Mason?

Speeding and using a mobile phone on a bike are not offences, Mr P.

--
Simon Mason

That is not an answer Mr Mason.

It *is* an answer but perhaps not the one you wanted.

--

I'll ask again.
Can you show me where law breaking cyclists have ever paid for road safety


OK.

A cyclist gets fined 400 quid for riding on the pavement.
Some of that money goes into the Treasury big pot.
A bit of that money then goes to Kingston upon Hull City Council to
pay for pothole repairs.
A car driver who would have had to swerve to avoid damaging his tyres
no longer has to do so.
Therefore the cyclist has paid to improve road safety.

--
Simon Mason

"Simon Mason" wrote in message
...
On Dec 23, 12:44 pm, "Mr Pounder"
wrote:
"Simon Mason" wrote in message

...
On Dec 22, 8:01 pm, "Mr Pounder"
wrote:





"Simon Mason" wrote in message

...
On Dec 22, 5:00 pm, "Mr Pounder"
wrote:

Police said the increasing use of smartphones, which allow users
instant access to social networking sites including Facebook and
Twitter, is behind the rise.

http://www.thisishullandeastriding.c...-mobile-phones...

--

Can you show me where law breaking cyclists have ever paid for road
safety
Mr Mason?

Speeding and using a mobile phone on a bike are not offences, Mr P.

--
Simon Mason

That is not an answer Mr Mason.

It *is* an answer but perhaps not the one you wanted.

--

I'll ask again.
Can you show me where law breaking cyclists have ever paid for road safety


OK.

A cyclist gets fined 400 quid for riding on the pavement.
Some of that money goes into the Treasury big pot.
A bit of that money then goes to Kingston upon Hull City Council to
pay for pothole repairs.
A car driver who would have had to swerve to avoid damaging his tyres
no longer has to do so.
Therefore the cyclist has paid to improve road safety.

--
Simon Mason

But the cyclist does not get fined 400 quid.

On Dec 23, 3:28*pm, "Mr Pounder"
wrote:
A cyclist gets fined 400 quid for riding on the pavement.
Some of that money goes into the Treasury big pot.
A bit of that money then goes to Kingston upon Hull City Council to
pay for pothole repairs.
A car driver who would have had to swerve to avoid damaging his tyres
no longer has to do so.
Therefore the cyclist has paid to improve road safety.

--
Simon Mason

But the cyclist does not get fined 400 quid.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I thought that you did not want me to post evidence of pavement
cyclists getting stung for nearly 400 quid?
Make your mind up.

Here is one I prepared earlier which was for 275 quid and some recent
ones have been for £380.

http://www.swldxer.co.uk/fines.jpg

Note the drunk driver only got done for £215.
--
Simon Mason

On 23/12/2011 15:40, Simon Mason wrote:

"Mr wrote:

A cyclist gets fined 400 quid for riding on the pavement.
Some of that money goes into the Treasury big pot.
A bit of that money then goes to Kingston upon Hull City Council to
pay for pothole repairs.
A car driver who would have had to swerve to avoid damaging his tyres
no longer has to do so.
Therefore the cyclist has paid to improve road safety.

But the cyclist does not get fined 400 quid.

I thought that you did not want me to post evidence of pavement
cyclists getting stung for nearly 400 quid?
Make your mind up.

Here is one I prepared earlier which was for 275 quid and some recent
ones have been for £380.

http://www.swldxer.co.uk/fines.jpg

Note the drunk driver only got done for £215.

And of course, the seventeen-month disqualification from driving and ten-year
licence endorsement (with all the implications they carry for future
insurance costs) are of no consequence at all, are they?

On Dec 23, 3:28*pm, "Mr Pounder"
wrote:

--
Simon Mason

But the cyclist does not get fined 400 quid.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Next time I see a cyclist getting fined nearly 400 quid I will make a
point of photographing it for your attention.

--
Simon Mason

Some readers' comments:

by pallo
Thursday, December 22 2011, 7:53AM

“IMO, I still think a ban is the only deterrent, hit them where it
hurts. If statistics are to be believed drivers caught using mobiles
are still on the increase, every day you see drivers ignoring the
warnings, they might think twice if the punishment was a 3 month ban!”

by hcfchcfc08
Thursday, December 22 2011, 8:16AM

“All people driving unsupervised on the road have passed or should
have passed their driving test and shouldn't be in need of a
considerate driving course. Fines and points should be ratcheted up to
say £500 and 6 points for mobile phone offenders, because they know
they are doing wrong.

I feel distinctly uncomfortable when I see them through my rearview
mirror talking or texting while tailgating and some are even trying
the evasion of holding their phone in a handkerchief as if they've got
a cold. When I have an offender behind me I carefully slow down and
led one idiot for well over a mile at 15mph in a 30 zone as a long
queue developed behind him and the clown was oblivious as he was
jawing away. I'm waiting for one to pull up alongside when we have had
to stop, get out of their car and challenge me.”

by ULLFCFAN
Thursday, December 22 2011, 10:27AM

“Those who drive using their mobile phones are inconsiderate to all of
those that may be affected by that persons selfish action.

I had seen this article and I had to reply, because this Monday as I
was driving my daughter to School, I cut through Staveley Road, half
way down the road there is a small roundabout, that seperates the
cross road of Hopewell Road.

I was going straight up towards Barham Road, as I was just exiting the
small round about, I had to swerve out the way because the BMW on the
opposite side of the road at the approach to the round about came
accross my lane, as he was using his mobile phone!

I had to swerve to avoid clipping his near side by mounting the kerb,
whilst scratching my alloys, and damaging part of my tyre!

My daughter was in the front seat and she was very upset and
frightened, I was mad, could not get his license plate but if I had
more time to play with, I would have turned around and followed him
and told him what I thought!

He after-all drove off, with no sorry jesture, or anything.

I'm 22, the generation that loves mobiles, mp3's, computers, all
technology, I have a mobile phone and rely heavily on it, but not ONCE
have I even thought of taking my hand to it whilst driving.

*****!!”
by QKhumba
Friday, December 23 2011, 3:41PM

“Well done to PC Ward, next mission please, target all of those
numptys who misuse their fog lights and dazzle people when visibility
is almost perfect. I'm sure that you will make quite a few quid with
that one too.
Keep up the good work !”

--
Simon Mason