The first cell phone.

Drivers who use mobile phones face jail

Motorists caught using a hand-held mobile phone while driving could be jailed for two years under tough new guidelines issued today by prosecutors. Drivers who adjust sat-navs, tinker with MP3 music players such as iPods or send text messages at the wheel could also face prison sentences. Using a hand-held mobile while driving was outlawed in 2003, but it is estimated that half a million motorists flout the ban each day. Existing guidelines restricted prosecutors to pursuing only a charge of careless driving, for which the maximum fine is £5,000 along with up to nine points on a motorist’s licence. But under the new rules, drivers could be charged with dangerous driving, which carries a maximum sentence of two years in jail. In addition, drivers who kill while using mobile phones could be charged with causing death by dangerous driving, which carries a 14-year jail term. In extreme cases they could be charged with manslaughter for which a life term can be imposed.

This may be a Nanny State law, and a little harsh, but I agree with the basic concept.

  1. MikeN says:

    Agree with the basic concept is how nanny staters get their power.

  2. steelcobra says:

    Sooo, according to this law, if I reach down to quickly hit the next button on my iPod without looking at it, I could go to jail?

  3. RASTERMAN says:

    It might be appropriate to mention which Country or State this tidbit is relevant to in the headline or within the story.

    Yes, I did see the “£” symbol in the article, so I guess we can presume this is relevant to the UK.

    My point is, we should not have to “guess.”

  4. RockOn says:

    “The first cell phone”

    Looks more like a breathalyzer…

    not sure how this is related to a “Nanny state”
    I thought a primary function of governments was to protect it’s citizens, including protecting them from fucktards who yammer on a cell phone when they should be watching the road.

  5. McCullough says:

    #3. Thus the link to the story.

  6. Eric says:

    Is driving while intoxicated a “Nanny State Law”?

    It has been shown that people that are fiddling with all their electronic crap while behind the wheel are even more dangerous than someone who had a few cocktails and then got behind the wheel.

    No one is saying you can’t talk on your cell phone, nor are they saying that you cannot drive. They’re just saying “Pull the heck over to the side of the road before you endanger not just yourself, but the rest of us.”

    How many times have you seen someone do something absolutely retarded on the road, only to see that instead of paying attention to driving, they’re yapping away on the phone?

  7. GigG says:

    Two damn letters in the headline would have been enough.

  8. “drivers who kill while using mobile phones could be charged with causing death by dangerous driving, which carries a 14-year jail term. In extreme cases they could be charged with manslaughter for which a life term can be imposed.”

    This part is not an nanny-state but an essentially perfect solution to the problem. Govt. should advocate against use of gadgets while driving and if you do it anyway and cause accident, you should pay dearly for your arrogance.

    Ever notice how everyone else drives insane while on the phone or tinkering with the gadgets, but “you” do not have such problem, “you” are not affected by it…

  9. Mazinger says:

    There is a difference between “quickly hitting the next button” on your iPod, which could be similar to hitting the Next button on the car radio, and blabbering nonsense for minutes on a cell phone.

    Problem is, some persons really get carried away while talking on a cell phone. A friend of mine is one of the worse offenders I know of. I’ve seen him. He uses to wander around while on a call. The longer the call, the farther he goes away. One day, on a really long call, closing a deal or something, he ended up two miles away from our offices building.

    Take your calls, but do us all a favor and get a hands-free device, and keep your eyes on the road.

  10. gquaglia says:

    With all its silly rules, ugly women and surveillance up the ass, England may be the lest desirable countries in Europe to live in.

  11. MikeN says:

    There’s a difference between and causing an accident and banning cell-phone use outright.

    If an officer sees you talking on your cell-phone and pulls you over that is different than pulling you over for wayward driving.

    Agreed that seat belt laws are more egregious than this.

  12. RockOn says:

    “Agreed that seat belt laws are more egregious than this”

    Exactly Mike! If you choose not to wear a seat belt you only endager yourself, that is the Nanny State in action. When yapping on a cell phone you endanger others, unfortunately in the U.S. the cellular lobby keeps it legal.
    I wear my seat belt because my Mommy told me to when I was a kid, that was her job, I don’t choke every idiot that needs choked because the government will lock me up, that’s their job.

  13. hhopper says:

    I saw that guy in the photo in the car next to me talking on that same kerosene cell phone.

  14. bobbo says:

    A friend called me on her cell phone from her car. I confirmed this and ended the call saying I would call her when she got home, I wanted her to be as safe as possible.

    For some reason, she seldom calls now regardless of location.

    Cellphone use, the window to the soul.

  15. Mister Taser says:

    What is wrong with pulling them over and hitting them with the taser? Signs on the highway should state, “cell phone users will be tasered.” It won’t take long for people to learn, especially the repeat offenders. This should extend to people using their cell phone in a restaurant as well. At minimum we should be able to deliver a good bitch slap.

  16. v says:

    I always laugh at people who equate drunken driving to cell phone usage. Why doesn’t it ever occur to anyone, especially the people doing the “studies,” that when you’re on a cell phone you can choose to set it down at any point.

    We already have laws to deal with people who wind up speeding through red lights and swerving around the roads for whatever reason. It’s called RECKLESS DRIVING.

    Cause is irrelevant.

  17. bobbo says:

    #17–v==”when you’re on a cell phone you can choose to set it down at any point.”

    Because while true said fact is irrelevant?

    Good job, bucky.

  18. MikeN says:

    They should just ban cell phone use for all but emergency calls. Use a landline. There’s even the possibility that all these waves are causing damage. It’s common sense that that much energy flying around would cause problems, and we’re putting it next to our ears.

  19. Raff says:

    Can I still use my C.B.?

  20. doug says:

    yeah, this is not a nanny-state law, since it is for the protection of OTHERS from the recklessness of the cell-phone yappers. try crossing a street with one of them careening through the stop sign.

    shut up and drive, you morans.

    #13. and when the paramedics come to the scene of the accident and find out that the guy who went through the windshield was not wearing a seatbelt, they should just leave his broken libertarian self sprawled across the hood to die. no reason the taxpayer should pay to save them from the consequences of their own folly.

  21. Mazinger says:

    As long as you’re riding in my car, you have to wear a seatbelt. I don’t need any human missiles flying around in the event of an accident.

  22. Glenn E. says:

    Just the other day, I narrowly avoided having an accident. When an SUV driver blew thru a four way stop, without noticing the stop signs. It’s only been a four way intersection for about 10 years now. I didn’t see who was driving, or what was distracting them. But I can safely bet they were on a cellphone. Fortunately, I had given another driver, on my right, the go ahead to go first. And just as he cleared the intersection, I start to accelerate. And the SUV, coming from my left, flew past my front bumper. I managed to break hard enough to not even touch him (or her). The SUV then breaked, after passing thru the intersection. But by then, I was on my way again, past them. The SUV’s driver was probably concerned about their rear quarter paint job. And thinking, “Why do they hid these stop signs so they’re so hard to see at night” and “better hang up for now.”

  23. Glenn E. says:

    It isn’t just cellphones. Having a group of noisey friends in one’s car, all talking at once, can also be very distracting. I know, I had the experience of missing a stop sign on a lonely country road, out in the sticks. I had to be a bit unpopular and tell the others to shut the hell up while I was trying to drive them somewhere safely.

    That was many years ago, when they only had 8-track tape player. A few years later, I heard of someone crashing their car because their car’s player ate their favorite tape. They got distracted by the thin ribbon of tape shooting out of the slot, or the thing suddenly playing faster. The tape transport technology was pretty crude at the time.

    One just has to ask oneself, Is anything they’re talking about or listening to, worth their life, or the life of someone else? To realize it most likely isn’t. And restrict these activities to parking lots, not while actively driving. I don’t even like working my car’s dashboard controls, for long, for fear of missing something. I wouldn’t have (or use) one of those LCD trip navigation systems. You won’t find many professional / commercial drivers using them, either.

  24. RockOn says:

    “heard of someone crashing their car because their car’s player ate their favorite tape”

    My 8-track was a dangerous distraction too, you had to wedge a book of matches “just so” under the tape to get it to play right! 🙂

  25. McCullough says:

    #26. I too remember that, good times.

  26. Joshua says:

    #28…Pedro….Funny you should mention those… Dad told me he had one in his car….around 1965 or so I believe.

    Anyone arrested for this crime need not worry, since serial murder with rape included of 6 y/o girls will only get you 12 year’s top’s in the UK. Not only do they NOT have the death penalty, but they don’t believe in life without parole, hell, they don’t believe in 15 years without parole.

    I was out for my morning run about 3 week’s ago. I got to the corner, and waited for the Walk sign to come on then headed across the cross walk, when a guy grabbed me from behind…..some well dressed 20 something, blonde bitch in a big black SUV was making a left turn onto the 4 lane street I was crossing, with a cellphone to her LEFT ear, blocking her view of who was in the cross walk and she was heading right for me. I buy that guy a six pack everytime I see him now, he f**king saved my life.


Bad Behavior has blocked 6653 access attempts in the last 7 days.