mobile 'phone offence

[Avocet]

i am completely excluding any phone in my comments so unless nokia do a ship to shore type preselected frequency type radio my thoughts would exclude then as only click to talk type actions are required

Sorry, I must have been half asleep when I read your post. You did say "...other than a phone"!

 

[fixitflav]

but to state that a person is 'driving' when their vehicle (& all those around them) is forcibly prevented from moving is taking the ..

Over-zealous legislation IMO.

 

[JohnD]

Are they in control of a car?

 

[mattylad]

I think the argument is that the driver needs to be alert in case the traffic starts moving again, and he can't predict when that will happen?

To a certain extent when at traffic lights you can if you are familiar with them.
I know (to within a couple of seconds) when the lights on my journey are going to change.

When I can I do use the hands free options my car has and dislike it when I need to answer the phone from er indoors when I don't have bluetooth enabled.

 

[Avocet]

To a certain extent when at traffic lights you can if you are familiar with them.
I know (to within a couple of seconds) when the lights on my journey are going to change.

When I can I do use the hands free options my car has and dislike it when I need to answer the phone from er indoors when I don't have bluetooth enabled.

Yeah, I used to use, on occasions, hand-held mobiles whilst driving. this was back in the days before it was even thought of as a bad thing - never mind illegal. I think the "hand-holding" thing is barking up the wrong tree, somewhat. I think the danger lies largely in the distraction rather than the physical impairment. A one-armed man can still drive a car, as far as DVLA are concerned. But there are lots of things where the law has to "draw a line", even though it's pretty obvious that in certain circumstances, it's probably OK.