Mobile: Which one is more dangerous?

[jeffooi]

Heard it over Radio4 this morning.

( 1 ) It is an offence to use mobile phone without hands-free kit
while driving.

( 2 ) It is NOT YET an offence to do SMS while driving.

(Do we have cellphones with hands-free SMS in the market?

Which one is more dangerous on the road?

- Talking without hands-free while driving?
- SMS while driving?

[xweird]

Both are dangerous, not so much that it distracts the use of your hands, but rather the use of your brain...

Try concentrating on 2 things at the same time! You'll find it very difficult.

[jericho]

in term of risk, it is the sms because it distracts your eyesight as well. whereas talking with hands-free only distracts your concentration and hands but still is it dangerous.

they should change the law to :

- It is an offence to have a mobile phone on your hand while driving.

Anyone found guilty of this offence will have their hand being chopped off!:D

[pcyeoh]

First thing first, don't listen to those two DJ. Most of the time they are talking nonsense.

The key word here is "use the mobile phone" There is no need to draft a law to cover sms. If you can send an sms without using your handphone, by all means do so. I can get you acquitted in court. But you may be slapped with a summon for driving without due care.

I have managed to argue my way out with the police when he caught me using my hand phone one morning on my way to work. I was doing a search and was about to dial out when he sirened me to stop. When he said he was charging me for using the handphone, I said "Tada encik, saya boleh bukti." I then gave him a 2 minute lesson by the Federal Highway by showing him the Call Resgister on my Nokia. All the calls received and sent were all yesterday's calls. He was convinced and rode away. I was saved by a press of a button. In fact I should be charged for using the hand phone as I was already in the process of doing so. Likewise, this should apply to sms.

Coming to the question, in the hands of a sms pro, talking on the phone is more dangerous. I have seen a pro doing a 150 chars message without looking at the phone. But not all of us are like him. I still consider both equally dangerous. I have bang into a taxi at the toll booth because I was so egrossed on my phone.

[CH]

Agree with xweird. Both are dangerous.

In fact, even with a handfree kit, it is still dangerous. Especially the one with the earpiece, and with the people that do not wear the earpiece and only trying to wear it when a phone call came in.

I think the best resort for the verbal communication while driving alone, is to have an inplant of the receiver and mic to your body. ;) :D

SMSs? Don't ever think about SMSing when you are driving. Well, unless your handphone can take dictation, doing a voice to text on your message, than that is a different story.

With MMS coming in the pipeline, gaining momentum (yet), I think SMS or MMSing on the road should be banned. Esp. MMSing requires more eye contact on your phone. Here comes the question. How do you know one is MMSing or SMSing? Unless we have a rule that says, whoever while holding the streering wheel, holding a mobile phone, is violating the law, then it will be no way to avoid those "blur sotongs".

I still recall an incident where a bad jam was cause by a driver who is on the mobile phone in Federal Highway. Really don't know what to say ... :( :( :( :mad: :mad: :mad:

[saml]

I do not take calls. I just let it ring until I can get to a rest area or a traffic light when I take a look at who was trying to call me. Where is it stated that I have to risk my own life as well as others so that the caller can get a reply from me and sometimes whom you do not even know.

[jericho]

pcyeoh,

actually the word is "without hands-free kit". usage of mobilephone is allowed on the road provided you are using a hands-free kit. therefore as long as your phone is attached with a hands-free kit you are allowed to sms or do another other thing.

but still, all is depend on the policeman who stop you whether you want to issue you a summon or not.

there is a joke someone told me before. there is this chinaman tied his handphone to his ear using his seat belt! the policeman stop him but he managed to argued his way out!

but do you guys notice that a lot of people (especially during walking) while talking on the phone using a hands-free kit, they still have their handphone on their hand! talk about hands-free kit!

This interesting study carried out by Harvard Center for Risk Analysis on the Risk and Benefits of Cellular Phone Use While Driving (www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-13/driver-distraction/PDF/Harvard.PDF)

[jeffooi]

This can be judgmental:

First thing first, don't listen to those two DJ. Most of the time
they are talking nonsense.

In time of dispute and if one can't prove it, it can turn malicious
for, including but not limited to, causing tarnish to the person(s),
and the organisation - in this case it's government-owned radio
station - that they work for.

Rule of thumb is not to shoot from the hip when offering personal
opinions.

Secondly, the focal point of this thread is NOT on the DJ (this word
did not pop up here).

It's about the danger, or otherwise, of talking and doing SMS
without hands-free kit while driving.

[saml]

We should stick with the subject on hand.If I don't like a dj/station, I just turn to another station.Some may find them to their liking. It is all about preferences and choices. The issue here is also whether or not we get caught using the phone whilst driving. The danger is not just to ourselves but more importantly to the others who are the innocent victims.

[joker2107]

i don't know the exact extent of the law on limiting the use of mobile phones while driving. they may have remote control for tvs and radios and cameras, but mobile phones? if the law says only hands-free while driving, than it would, by my interpretation, bar the act of calling (dialing / searching), and definitely sms-ing. for how else can a call be placed unless one uses his hands. Or is it the intention of the law to require a passenger competent enuf to operate a hand phone should the driver feel unable to keep off the mobile on the move?

sms-ing behind the wheel is an act of insanity. convicted offenders should be banned from touching another mobile telecommunication gadget for a decade.

one thing bewilders me tho. as long as u r behind the wheel on the road, whether or not ur vehilce is moving or stationary, it is legally wrong to use mobile phone. there may be reasons for this, but personally i think the law enforcers should be more reasonable and sympathetic when drivers are stuck real good in unmoving traffic.

[empress_julz]

does anyone have the exact definition of the legislation in question? if not for that we are beating around the bush and plain guessing what the law is.

but i think that the law is probably what pcyeoh said, that you're not allowed to use your mobile phone without the handsfree.... if ppl were to argue sms-ing is ok from the point of view of the law because it is not drafted in legislation, then i guess parliament has to worry about drivers playing snake or bantumi, checking out tgv tickets on their wap, amongst other things, as it doesn't say in the legislation that "Drivers cannot play snake whilst driving, etc.". would the law have to consider all these aspects, updating constantly in accordance with nokia's latest models? i don't think so.

but there are dangers of going beyond legislation and implicitly tying in anything that could come under the umbrella meaning of the issue is that such can lead to abuse.

there is a strict need to follow the law down to the letter - it can't be a contention that "talking on the mobile phone" can mean "sms-ing" as well, as "common sense would dictate so". most would find that no judge would go beyond the meaning of the legislation in question, i.e. no judge would construe any additional "common sense or otherwise" meaning from the law if it does not say so.

the law is not about common sense, it's about principles and black and white rules that are clearly defined. if they have not been clearly defined it is a mischief in the legislation that parliament needs to look at.

however, if the law is not clear, what the judge would look at is the intention of the statute.

in this case, the intention of the statute is clearly to keep the driver's hands unoccupied, so that he can drive without distraction.

i think the court will probably favour this view over the view that "therefore as long as your phone is attached with a hands-free kit you are allowed to sms or do another thing".

what is probably the argument for proponents of the law is that using a mobile phone with a handsfree kit would mean that the driver's "hands are free" during the driving process, in other words SMS-ing is not allowed, as they would undoubtedly occupy the driver's hand/hands.

i doubt if one went to a court on a driving whilst using a mobile phone charge, the court would be merciful to say that sms-ing does not fall within the context of having to use a mobile phone with a handsfree kit....

the judge would probably say that if getting the message through was so important, you could have called and used your handsfree. (amongst other things)

///Ej