Banning hands free in cars

[Holsterman]

MAY BE AS LIKELY...

Even the WHO document you’re referencing doesn’t state it’s s fact!

Your not a member/ex member of the police force by any chance are you?

Preceding bit of that paragraph:

Using hands-free phones while driving has been shown to lead to reduced visual monitoring of instruments in the car and the general traffic situation, and negatively impacts on vehicle control(59). This evidence suggests that hands-free phones are not safer to use than hand-held phones in terms of driving performance(12,13,47,60-62).

Sometimes (often) science throws up unexpected results.

[jaytip]

Why speculate when there is data?

From the WHO document:



Isn't science wonderful? We used to think the earth was flat (it stood to reason), but then we found out that it isn't.

You really are a troll aren’t you. I specifically asked YOU for YOUR opinion and not be linked to any report.
The truth is, you won’t answer the question because you know you will have to backtrack.
People on here have conceded that the actual conversation on the phone, be it hand held or hands free is equally distracting, but the act of picking up the phone and holding the phone while having the conversation is MORE dangerous than having to press a button on the steering wheel.

[Franky Four Fingers]

You really are a troll aren’t you. I specifically asked YOU for YOUR opinion and not be linked to any report.
The truth is, you won’t answer the question because you know you will have to backtrack.
People on here have conceded that the actual conversation on the phone, be it hand held or hands free is equally distracting, but the act of picking up the phone and holding the phone while having the conversation is MORE dangerous than having to press a button on the steering wheel.

He hasn’t and won’t (can’t) answer any questions without referencing websites.....it’s all he’s got

[Holsterman]

You really are a troll aren’t you. I specifically asked YOU for YOUR opinion and not be linked to any report.
The truth is, you won’t answer the question because you know you will have to backtrack.
People on here have conceded that the actual conversation on the phone, be it hand held or hands free is equally distracting, but the act of picking up the phone and holding the phone while having the conversation is MORE dangerous than having to press a button on the steering wheel.

I've given my opinion. Anyone who wanted to make or receive hand-held calls would keep the phone somewhere easily accessible, where they can pick it up without looking.

Looks like the data support this.

[PhilipK]

I think ‘it stands to reason’ is a perfectly valid view when you use common sense in a situation.

By that standard, you would presumably argue that the earth is flat? The problem with so-called "common sense" is that it is wrong in many instances, especially complex, nuanced issues where the reality of the situation is actually counter-intuitive. You are making the same mistake that Andyg made earlier - extrapolation from your personal beliefs to claim that something is generally true.

but the act of picking up the phone and holding the phone while having the conversation is MORE dangerous than having to press a button on the steering wheel.

It may be "more dangerous", but by such a tiny amount that, in the global scheme of things, it really doesn't matter.

We do lots of things while driving which are "more dangerous" than not doing them (turning on the radio, scratching ourselves, changing the temperature, etc, etc), but that extra danger is so small that a risk assessment allows us to take that risk. Answering a phone call (handsfree or handheld) falls into that same category.

There are also things that we could do, but that most us are sensible enough not to do (drive drunk, text, watch TV, juggle hamsters), because the risk assessment says that the benefits gained by participating in such activities is not justified by the additional level of risk involved. Participating in a telephone call (handsfree or handheld) falls into that category.

[PhilipK]

He hasn’t and won’t (can’t) answer any questions without referencing websites.....it’s all he’s got

Let me rephrase that for you: "He hasn't and won't answer any questions without being able to point to a solid body of evidence and research which shows what he says to be true. Unlike others on here, he's not arguing from a set of incorrect beliefs, but instead he is linking to actual facts to support what he is saying."

There you go.

[Dave+63]

Let me rephrase that for you: "He hasn't and won't answer any questions without being able to point to a solid body of evidence and research which shows what he says to be true. Unlike others on here, he's not arguing from a set of incorrect beliefs, but instead he is linking to actual facts to support what he is saying."

There you go.

But his evidence makes no reference to any part of the call except the actual conversation. It doesn’t mention how the call is started or finished, just the conversation in between. Had it done so, even just a note to say it’s negligible then there’d be no argument.

If anyone can show a piece of evidence to show that starting a hand held call is no more distracting than starting a hands free call, or even that it is negligible over the course of the complete call, then I’d like to see it.

[jaytip]

We do lots of things while driving which are "more dangerous" than not doing them (turning on the radio, scratching ourselves, changing the temperature, etc, etc), but that extra danger is so small that a risk assessment allows us to take that risk. Answering a phone call (handsfree or handheld) falls into that same category.

And here we go again. All these examples that you have just given take mere seconds to do, meanwhile holding a phone against your ear takes as long as the phone call lasts which could be well over 10 minutes. Are you suggesting that driving with one hand while holding a phone to your ear for over 10 minutes is only fractionally more distracting than not holding the phone at all.
You seem to like linking to quotes, so can you please link to evidence that the picking up and operating of a phone is not more distracting than simply talking hands free. Just for the removal of doubt, I’m not talking about the actual conversation, I’m talking about the physical act of picking up and holding the phone while driving.

[Holsterman]

Are you suggesting that driving with one hand while holding a phone to your ear for over 10 minutes is only fractionally more distracting than not holding the phone at all.

Yes. Hallelullia! Praise the Lord!

You've got there, finally.

[Holsterman]

If anyone can show a piece of evidence to show that starting a hand held call is no more distracting than starting a hands free call, or even that it is negligible over the course of the complete call, then I’d like to see it.

I doubt that work's been done, would be a difficult study to design. They've looked at risk of crashing hands-free v hand-held. Turns out there's no difference.

I would guess most phone calls initiated from cars would be from a stationary traffic jam, hence reasonably safe. Answering an incoming call (hand-held) is comparatively simple. I used to do it a lot before it became illegal.

[Dave+63]

I doubt that work's been done, would be a difficult study to design. They've looked at risk of crashing hands-free v hand-held. Turns out there's no difference .

So they’ve only studied part of it then? The parts that’s most likely to be the same. Yet they’ve not studied the parts before or after ie. the complete process because that’s too difficult even though it may show that, overall, hands free could be safer.

I would guess most phone calls initiated from cars would be from a stationary traffic jam, hence reasonably safe. Answering an incoming call (hand-held) is comparatively simple. I used to do it a lot before it became illegal.

Not if the phone is in an awkward place eg. deep pocket, which happens on many, many occasions.

[Holsterman]

So they’ve only studied part of it then? The parts that’s most likely to be the same. Yet they’ve not studied the parts before or after ie. the complete process because that’s too difficult even though it may show that, overall, hands free could be safer.

No, they studied the entire process of using a mobile hands-free v hand-held.

Not if the phone is in an awkward place eg. deep pocket, which happens on many, many occasions.

Centre console tray (designed to be a convenient place to stash your phone). Avoid using rear parcel shelf.

[Dave+63]

No, they studied the entire process of using a mobile hands-free v hand-held. .

Not according to the links you posted.

Centre console tray (designed to be a convenient place to stash your phone). Avoid using rear parcel shelf.

That’s irrelevant if you’ve left the phone in your pocket.


It seems to me (and correct me if I’m wrong), that the study concluded that it’s no more dangerous to drive along one handed, holding your phone against your ear than it is to drive along with both hands on the wheel.

[jaytip]

Yes. Hallelullia! Praise the Lord!

You've got there, finally.

Sorry to be blunt, but you are an idiot.

[Holsterman]

It seems to me (and correct me if I’m wrong), that the study concluded that it’s no more dangerous to drive along one handed, holding your phone against your ear than it is to drive along with both hands on the wheel.

Correct. There's discussion about why this might be so on P 26 of the WHO paper. Para is headed "Compensatory behaviour". Hand-held drivers slow down more, mitigating their risk.

[Holsterman]

Sorry to be blunt, but you are an idiot.

Emotional claptrap, and I can assure you that I'm not.

[Franky Four Fingers]

Sorry to be blunt, but you are an idiot.

We've heard that somewhere else before

[Tifa]

9 pages...wow.
Some folk have way tooooo much time on their hands(free)

SWIDT?

[Dave+63]

You may not be an idiot (and I’m certainly not calling you one) but you are consistently failing to see the flaws in your argument.

The research shows that hand held calls and hands free calls are equally distracting yet only focus on the main point of distraction (the conversation). There is no mention of getting into and out of this part of the call in any study. Where was the phone placed prior to the hand held call? We don’t know as the research doesn’t look at this or focus on this. Therefore as evidence, it’s incomplete.

Assuming that the phone was handily placers on the centre console, the results are as we would expect. If the phone was in the wife’s handbag on the passenger seat or worse still, the footwell, it would be safe to assume that the results would be quite different.

Your failure to acknowledge that whilst constantly citing “the evidence” does tend to make you look somewhat blinkered.

[Holsterman]

You may not be an idiot (and I’m certainly not calling you one) but you are consistently failing to see the flaws in your argument.

The research shows that hand held calls and hands free calls are equally distracting yet only focus on the main point of distraction (the conversation). There is no mention of getting into and out of this part of the call in any study. Where was the phone placed prior to the hand held call? We don’t know as the research doesn’t look at this or focus on this. Therefore as evidence, it’s incomplete.

Assuming that the phone was handily placers on the centre console, the results are as we would expect. If the phone was in the wife’s handbag on the passenger seat or worse still, the footwell, it would be safe to assume that the results would be quite different.

Your failure to acknowledge that whilst constantly citing “the evidence” does tend to make you look somewhat blinkered.

Please read page 26 of this pdf (confusingly P23 of the original). It explains why the risks appear identical. After you have read it, you might understand.

https://www.who.int/violence_injury_...ng_en.pdf?ua=1

[Holsterman]

Assuming that the phone was handily placers on the centre console, the results are as we would expect. If the phone was in the wife’s handbag on the passenger seat or worse still, the footwell, it would be safe to assume that the results would be quite different.

This assumes that people who are expecting to use their phone while they drive would place the phone somewhere very awkward to reach. They don't. There's any number of dashboard mounts for mobiles, and that's where they tend to be. I used to use a tray in the centre console which was just the right size.

[Dave+63]

Please read page 26 of this pdf (confusingly P23 of the original). It explains why the risks appear identical. After you have read it, you might understand.

https://www.who.int/violence_injury_...ng_en.pdf?ua=1

I get that and it makes perfect sense. It’s not the conversation per se that we’re at issue with here, it’s the pre conversation part. The study concludes that talking to someone on the phone is equally dangerous whether you’re holding the phone or using hands free.

What the studies font address are the parts immediately before and go a certain extent, after the conversation. It’s not part of the study and hadn’t been mentioned.

Surely you accept that leaning into the passenger footwell, fiddling round with a handbag and pulling out the phone whilst driving us far more dangerous than picking it up off the centre armrest?

If you say no, the evidence doesn’t show that, then that’s because the research didn’t actually look at that or the evidence is flawed.

Do you see my (our) point?

[PhilipK]

The research shows that hand held calls and hands free calls are equally distracting yet only focus on the main point of distraction (the conversation). There is no mention of getting into and out of this part of the call in any study. Where was the phone placed prior to the hand held call? We don’t know as the research doesn’t look at this or focus on this. Therefore as evidence, it’s incomplete.

But the overall end-to-end risk is the same in both cases, and as the actual conversation is the same the only point of difference is the physical set-up/holding/shut-down. If this was materially more distracting/dangerous than handsfree, then the evidence would have shown a corresponding greater number of collisions. But it doesn't - hence the logical deduction from the evidence is that there is no material (statistically significant) difference.

Assuming that the phone was handily placers on the centre console, the results are as we would expect. If the phone was in the wife’s handbag on the passenger seat or worse still, the footwell, it would be safe to assume that the results would be quite different.

That's utterly spurious, and shows a real lack of understanding of how scientific method works. You can always find outliers (my cars allow me to dial a call, digit by digit, using a touch screen in the centre console - but that's classed as handsfree!), so you need to have a large enough data set to get an overall average.

Of course rooting around in a bag in the footwell to find a phone is more dangerous than an "average" call, just as typing in the digits on the screen would be. But when you compare 10,000 or 100,000 or whatever handheld and handsfree calls, then these extremes don't influence the overall result.

[Dave+63]

This assumes that people who are expecting to use their phone while they drive would place the phone somewhere very awkward to reach. They don't. There's any number of dashboard mounts for mobiles, and that's where they tend to be. I used to use a tray in the centre console which was just the right size.

No, I’m not assuming that people are expecting to receive calls; I’m assuming that most people aren’t.

[Holsterman]

Surely you accept that leaning into the passenger footwell, fiddling round with a handbag and pulling out the phone whilst driving us far more dangerous than picking it up off the centre armrest?

Of course, but that scenario is unrealistic. Everyone knows phones are distracting, so they reduce some of the distraction by having the phone somewhere super-easy to reach - hence the market for dashboard cradles. I don't know whether these are still sold, but I still see them now and again.

[Holsterman]

No, I’m not assuming that people are expecting to receive calls; I’m assuming that most people aren’t.

If your phone is not easily to hand, you would have to be completely insane to go rooting around to try to answer it while driving!

[Dave+63]

But the overall end-to-end risk is the same in both cases, and as the actual conversation is the same the only point of difference is the physical set-up/holding/shut-down. If this was materially more distracting/dangerous than handsfree, then the evidence would have shown a corresponding greater number of collisions. But it doesn't - hence the logical deduction from the evidence is that there is no material (statistically significant) difference.


That's utterly spurious, and shows a real lack of understanding of how scientific method works. You can always find outliers (my cars allow me to dial a call, digit by digit, using a touch screen in the centre console - but that's classed as handsfree!), so you need to have a large enough data set to get an overall average.

Of course rooting around in a bag in the footwell to find a phone is more dangerous than an "average" call, just as typing in the digits on the screen would be. But when you compare 10,000 or 100,000 or whatever handheld and handsfree calls, then these extremes don't influence the overall result.

I gave an extreme example to try to highlight my point. There’s no links to show any of the parameters of the research so without any data to back it up, how do we know whether such a scenario has been considered statistically irrelevant or nit?

Of course, but that scenario is unrealistic. Everyone knows phones are distracting, so they reduce some of the distraction by having the phone somewhere super-easy to reach - hence the market for dashboard cradles. I don't know whether these are still sold, but I still see them now and again.

You’re making the assumption that people aren’t stupid here and will do the sensible thing.

If your phone is not easily to hand, you would have to be completely insane to go rooting around to try to answer it while driving!

Yes but people do!

[Holsterman]

You’re making the assumption that people aren’t stupid here and will do the sensible thing.

I'd assume most do it for an easier life. No more rooting around for the damn phone.

Yes but people do!

On a par with attempting to re-tie your shoelaces.

[mikeveal]

Fortunately the majority of the population is capable of understanding that issues like this, drink driving, the wearing of seatbelts, and excessive speed can be contributory to accidents, or to the severity of accidents. Most of those who question the hypothesis and look at the data are sensible enough to accept it.

Unfortunately there will always be a core of individuals who will refuse to accept that the data applies to them because they are special. "Two pints doesn't affect me, my limit is four." "I don't need a seatbelt because I've never had an accident." "My car has better brakes, so I can drive faster." "I am not distracted by taking a phone call whilst driving." "The data is rubbish because I don't agree."

Fortunately society empowers our government to pass legislation and to ensure that the latter group of drivers comply. This essentially leaves these drivers three options:

1/ Comply with the legislation.
2/ Don't comply & accept the penalty when caught.
3/ Go and live in another country.

They don't have to like it and frankly their opinions are irrelevant. Personally I can't see the point in arguing the toss with them. It doesn't matter how much evidence you supply, you will never get them to understand because they do not want to accept the outcome (not drink driving / wearing a seatbelt / using appropriate speed / not taking a call whilst driving.)

Unfortunately very few of the drivers in the latter group exercise option 3 in my list.

[stuie-t]

There are far too many permutations to be able to say that hands free calls have the same risk as using a handheld phone. If you are driving an automatic car on a motorway with not much traffic it probably doesn’t make much difference. But if you’re in a manual car, in traffic, lots of junctions and roundabouts and maybe a few hill starts to negotiate, then clearly having to do all that one handed has to be more challenging to the driver and therefore likely more dangerous than using hands free.


Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

[Ruggertech]

But if you’re in a manual car, in traffic, lots of junctions and roundabouts and maybe a few hill starts to negotiate, then clearly having to do all that one handed has to be more challenging to the driver and therefore likely more dangerous than using hands free.


Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

Totally agree, it physically has to be more dangerous and I just cannot fathom how anyone can think otherwise. Even if they are "experts".

[jaytip]

There are far too many permutations to be able to say that hands free calls have the same risk as using a handheld phone. If you are driving an automatic car on a motorway with not much traffic it probably doesn’t make much difference. But if you’re in a manual car, in traffic, lots of junctions and roundabouts and maybe a few hill starts to negotiate, then clearly having to do all that one handed has to be more challenging to the driver and therefore likely more dangerous than using hands free.


Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

Totally agree, it physically has to be more dangerous and I just cannot fathom how anyone can think otherwise. Even if they are "experts".

No, no,no. Holsterman and PhillipK have read the reports and the reports say that there is no difference. Come on now chaps, you can’t argue with the ‘evidence’.

[JasonG]

Enough!

It is currently NOT prohibited to use a hands-free phone; the legislation is very clear.

If you don’t like that particular fact then you are most welcome to not make or receive handsfree calls.

If you want to make handsfree calls then go ahead, so long as it does not make you unable to operate the vehicle properly.

On a related note, I would politely request that the participants in this particular exchange provide details of what car(s) they drive, whether or not they make or receive calls.


Sent from my calculator using a lawnmower.

[Seamaster73]

It's about hands-free calls. Hands-free texts don't exist, so can't be compared.

“Hey Siri, send a text to Holsterman...”

FWIW, years ago I worked for a well-known manufacturer of mobile phones. We were not permitted car kits or hands free accessories of any kind in company cars. The corporate policy — of a manufacturer of car kits and hands-free accessories! — was no calls should be made or received while driving.

[adrianw]

Enough!

It is currently NOT prohibited to use a hands-free phone; the legislation is very clear.

If you don’t like that particular fact then you are most welcome to not make or receive handsfree calls.

If you want to make handsfree calls then go ahead, so long as it does not make you unable to operate the vehicle properly.

On a related note, I would politely request that the participants in this particular exchange provide details of what car(s) they drive, whether or not they make or receive calls.


Sent from my calculator using a lawnmower.

AMG GT-yes
Noble-yes, but its a bit noisy
Renault Sport Spider- yes
Mini JCW-yes
Mercedes Sprinter 313-yes

[Ruggertech]

On a related note, I would politely request that the participants in this particular exchange provide details of what car(s) they drive, whether or not they make or receive calls.


Sent from my calculator using a lawnmower.

Ford Ecosport, fitted with Ford-sync. Allows me to make and answer calls, and have incoming texts read out to me by moving my thumb an inch, pressing a button on the steering wheel once and talking.
Apparently as dangerous as picking up a phone, looking at it, pressing buttons, and holding it to my ear whilst driving one handed. According to experts.

[Holsterman]

“Hey Siri, send a text to Holsterman...”

FWIW, years ago I worked for a well-known manufacturer of mobile phones. We were not permitted car kits or hands free accessories of any kind in company cars. The corporate policy — of a manufacturer of car kits and hands-free accessories! — was no calls should be made or received while driving.

Well I never.

Very sensible ... and somewhat cynical to be selling the kits when they knew using them is dangerous.

[mikeveal]

Since you ask, Malone Skunk & no, I find being on the phone far too distracting.

[MurrayMint]

I get that and it makes perfect sense. It’s not the conversation per se that we’re at issue with here, it’s the pre conversation part. The study concludes that talking to someone on the phone is equally dangerous whether you’re holding the phone or using hands free.

What the studies font address are the parts immediately before and go a certain extent, after the conversation. It’s not part of the study and hadn’t been mentioned.

Surely you accept that leaning into the passenger footwell, fiddling round with a handbag and pulling out the phone whilst driving us far more dangerous than picking it up off the centre armrest?

If you say no, the evidence doesn’t show that, then that’s because the research didn’t actually look at that or the evidence is flawed.

Do you see my (our) point?

You are assuming that the pre-conversation part of a hands-free call just involves moving one thumb and pressing a button. It could equally involve fiddling around looking for the bluetooth earpiece, turning it on, pairing it with your phone and attaching it to your ear.

If you are going to make a hand-held call in your car you are prepared and make sure the phone is handy. If you are going to make a hands-free call in your car you are prepared and will just need to press a button. If anyone makes hands-free calls thinking them to be less risky, then that is a mistake, as you (plural) seem to agree - "it’s not the conversation per se that we’re at issue with here".

It's take me three days to catch up with this thread, so I'm a little late.

[MurrayMint]

Makes you wonder, when these limiters appear in cars, what are the authorities going to go to make up the short fall in revenue? Ditto the speed 'awareness' courses which are a VERY lucrative earner for the local council!

Are there any figures as to how much speed cameras and courses actually make in profit? The cameras need maintaining and the courses need to be arranged and manned, neither of which can be free.

- - - Updated - - -

I've been to the PEC where they get you to drive at 100, put both hands on the roof lining and do an emergency stop with both hands off the wheel.

What happened?

[Holsterman]

What happened?

You might find this hard to believe, but the car braked to a stop. Anticlimax, sorry.

P.S. One of the other fun things was full emergency braking from 70, combined with an emergency lane-change. I think a lot of cars would spin, and some would roll.

[jaytip]

P.S. One of the other fun things was full emergency braking from 70, combined with an emergency lane-change. I think a lot of cars would spin, and some would roll.

You think wrong. Certainly with regards to cars built in the last 5 years.
https://youtu.be/7-2UAfsbyZo

[adrianw]

You might find this hard to believe, but the car braked to a stop. Anticlimax, sorry.

P.S. One of the other fun things was full emergency braking from 70, combined with an emergency lane-change. I think a lot of cars would spin, and some would roll.

Don't all cars have to pass the moose test now?

[Holsterman]

You think wrong. Certainly with regards to cars built in the last 5 years.
https://youtu.be/7-2UAfsbyZo

You've found something I'm wrong about after nine pages.

I doubt many cars would match the braking capabilities. And PASM is incredible. Cue some high-end stuff which does...

[Franky Four Fingers]

You've found something I'm wrong about after nine pages.

I doubt many cars would match the braking capabilities. And PASM is incredible. Cue some high-end stuff which does...

Hilarious

[Franky Four Fingers]

Dragging this thread back from the depths.....never knew that there was a loophole that meant people could get away with using the net and gaming whilst driving.
Interesting little bit added at the end of the report saying that they’re trying to ban handheld as well but it’s likely never to happen.

[ben4watches]

I always thought using your phone for anything was banned.

If you watch cycling-mickey on YouTube nearly everyone he collars and reports to the police are using their phones for Facebook, Twitter or WhatsApp and they all get points and fines.

So Whats the loophole and is it a case of nobody knows how to fight it.

Dragging this thread back from the depths.....never knew that there was a loophole that meant people could get away with using the net and gaming whilst driving.
Interesting little bit added at the end of the report saying that they’re trying to ban handheld as well but it’s likely never to happen.

[Franky Four Fingers]

I always thought using your phone for anything was banned.

If you watch cycling-mickey on YouTube nearly everyone he collars and reports to the police are using their phones for Facebook, Twitter or WhatsApp and they all get points and fines.

So Whats the loophole and is it a case of nobody knows how to fight it.

The loophole is quite simple I believe, phone technology as come on quicker than legislation and so talking and texting only forms part of the law. It surprised me but apparently it’s ok to go on the net and play games

[Franky Four Fingers]

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-while-driving

[Boss13]

Not sure if this is just a media storm, as per the article:

allowing drivers to escape charges when spotted with a phone.

The government will update the law to close the legal loophole, which currently defines the offence as only “interactive communication”.

That may be all true. But if I decide to text somebody whilst driving - if the police officer who stopped me stuck me on for 'interactive communication' I can see how I may be able to get away with that with a good lawyer exploiting the loophole...but really they could just stick me on for 'driving without due care and attention' could they not (assuming they knew the law)?