It was a performance worthy of a Guinness World Record. Barreling along Sydney Road Fairlight, the truck driver was texting on one mobile phone while speaking on another, steering the rig with his knees.

No LOLing matter. Picture: AP

I hit the horn and indicated – in no uncertain terms – he should stop before he kills someone. Still clutching the phones he slowly and deliberately raised his middle finger.

If only he’d read the story of 21-year-old Sarah Page, a serial texter from New Zealand. “It’s fine Mum, I do it all the time!” she’d protest. Until she wrapped her car around a pole in 2009.

Sarah suffered massive brain injuries. Her family turned off her life support. The police returned her belongings including a mobile phone.

There was a message in the drafts folder: “I’m on my way to Napier,” it read. The time was 3.59pm, seconds before she crashed.

Her sister Sam says the tragedy has taught her a valuable lesson. “It only takes a split second while you take your eyes off the road for tragedy to occur, and sending a text is just not worth it,” she writes in a heartbreaking blog.

In 2007 around 45,000 Australians crashed while using a mobile phone. A further 145,000 had a near miss. Using a mobile phone increases the risk of an accident four-fold.

Your eyes are off the road for up to six seconds each time you look down to text. And yet we keep doing it. A survey in Victoria has found 70 per cent of motorists aged between 18 and 25 admit to texting while driving. Around one in five say they surf the net.

I had no idea about the extent of the problem until my hubby got a new work car, the Hyundai iLoad, which is quite a big car.

From that height you see it all: The businessman tapping away on the iPad secreted in his lap; the middle-aged Mum sending an email with her two precious kids in the back; the Gen Y who treats it like an extension of his arm.

So what are our state governments doing about it? 4/5ths of f*#k all. Sure, there’s a $265 fine and the loss of three demerit points.

Last financial year, more than 50,000 NSW drivers paid a whopping $13 million in mobile phone fines. But it’s not changing our behaviour. And it’s the same the world over.

In the United States, around 3,000 people were killed last year by so-called “distracted drivers”. In one incident in Missouri a 19-year-old truck driver sent or received 11 text messages in as many minutes before causing a highway catastrophe, which killed two people and injured 38.

This prompted the National Transportation Safety Board to urge all US states to ban the use of electronic devices while driving. US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood calls it “an epidemic”.

In Utah, texting drivers face three months jail and a $US750 fine. Arkansas bans all mobile phone use for drivers between 18 and 20.

And in Japan, you can’t use a phone in your car full stop. This was being considered by Australia’s transport ministers in last year’s draft national road safety report, which found even hand-free devices dramatically increase the risk of crashing.

Talking on the phone can slow your response time by 35 per cent, to that of a driver with a blood alcohol reading of 0.08.

“In my view it is as dangerous as speed and drink driving,’’ said Superintendent Max Mitchell, the acting assistant commissioner, traffic services branch.

NSW police supported the idea of a ban.

Mark Stevenson, an epidemiologist who studies driving distractions, called for more drastic measures: ‘‘Vehicles could be manufactured with in-built blockers so drivers cannot receive phone reception when the car is turned on.’’ Such devices already exist. But no one seems to have the guts to effect change.

We need to acknowledge that this is the new drink driving. Therefore, we should tackle it in the same way with a combination of hard-hitting TV campaigns and tough penalties.

A shocking ad on the dangers of texting while driving was shown at high schools in the UK two years ago. It was bought by the American Automobile Association to air after 9pm, because it was so graphic.

Why not bring it here? Why not double, even triple, the fine? And why doesn’t mobile phone use cop the same double demerit points as other offences over the holiday period?

I believe we should turn texting drivers into social pariahs.

The problem is, we all think we won’t get caught. Like the truck driver on Sydney Road, we give the middle finger to those trying to curb our freedom. Let’s hope it doesn’t take the death of a loved one for us to realise the error of our ways.

Tracey Spicer is a 2UE broadcaster, Sky News anchor, and principal of spicercommunications.biz

191 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Nathan says:

      05:53am | 04/01/12

      Sounds like using a phone whilst driving has similar impacts to that of drink drivers. If the outcomes are the same then punish them accordingly.

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      12:19pm | 04/01/12

      +1
       
      This is one instance where a fine, loss of license and immediate impounding of the phone (INCLUDING SIM) is warranted.

      In fact, it wouldn’t be technically difficult to change the voicemail message to one that says ‘‘You can’t reach me for 6 months, I’ve been a complete pillock and my phone is currently impounded’’ and have an auto-responder for SMS messages that says similar.

      If you really REALLY need to get some information to someone while you are driving, use a bloody bluetooth headset and RING them.

    • Kika says:

      01:38pm | 04/01/12

      Where’s the limit though? What about driving whilst tired? Are you going to imprison people for driving when tired?

    • bananabender says:

      05:41pm | 04/01/12

      @Kika,
      commercial pilots can be imprisened for flying when tired. One of my friends is an airline Captain. Once he was delayed for several hours on an international stopover. He shut down the plane and and ordered a new crew to be flown in (a 4 hour delay) rather than exceed his maximum hours for the day.

    • Tator says:

      10:12am | 05/01/12

      Kika,
      Heavy vehicle drivers are limited to 12 hours of load related work a day unless certified to exceed that limit through either the Basic Fatigue Management or Advanced Fatigue Management schemes.  Quite a few of the more cowboy outfits are regularly pinched for exceeding hours of driving which adds up quickly the longer they exceed their hours by.

    • KH says:

      06:21am | 04/01/12

      What is it with these people?  I don’t get it - when you are driving a car, you are doing something - DRIVING.  A car is not your loungeroom.  If you want to kill yourself fine, jump out a window and do us all a favour, but putting other peoples lives at risk is unforgiveable.

      The road laws are not there to punish you - they are there to introduce some predictability into driving for everyone.  Obviously fines don’t work.  Maybe take their license for a couple of months.  Impound their cars for a week, and then charge them to get it back.  Or my most dastardly idea - have their phone blocked for a week so they can’t make or receive calls anywhere - presumably phone companies can do that.  That would really hurt them!

      Whilst we are on the subject of dumb drivers - I’ve checked, and in Melbourne, the road rules still state you must stop for a stationary tram with its lights flashing and the doors open.  So when did it become OK to just zoom past the tram and, like the total f**kwit yesterday, nearly kill someone?  Note to Yarra Trams - maybe its time to get some cameras fitted and get these idiots fined before there is a tragedy - its just a matter of time.

    • Phil says:

      09:53am | 04/01/12

      the blocking of the phone for a period of time is the best idea….. i know i wouldn’t do it if it meant me losing all communications.

    • mick says:

      06:21am | 04/01/12

      IMen seem to feature heavily in this article. 

      I have only ever seen younger women texting at the wheel.  Women generally also feature heavily when it comes to talking on mobiles.  Maybe this is a coincidence and I can hear the cries of ‘sexism’ already.

      Both texting and talking on mobiles whilst driving are plain dumb.  Both practices need to be hit hard and significant fines should be handed out as these drivers can pull over to achieve the same end.  They practices are not benign.  They risk the lives of other people.

    • KH says:

      07:22am | 04/01/12

      Funny, I see a lot of men using phones - texting, talking and so on, in cars as well.  I don’t think stupidity is gender specific - from what I have seen on the roads, it is equally distributed.  And its not just texting!  Just this morning - idiot does a u turn over a raised median strip, between two sign poles….........in front of a police car which promptly put on its lights and pulled him over.  Seriously, how dumb can you get?!!

    • nihonin says:

      07:25am | 04/01/12

      If drivers want to nominate themselves for Darwin Awards, by talking or texting on the phone, good for them, but it should be a solo effort for the award at all times.

    • Fiona says:

      08:05am | 04/01/12

      So the young NZ woman featured early on in the article was???
      Mick, open your eyes. Both genders are equally at fault here, I think your observation IS coincidence.

    • Anubis says:

      09:03am | 04/01/12

      Add to this the feminine imperitave to use their rear view mirrors as make up studios while they are driving and you have double jeopardy. A very common site in peak hour traffic is women applying their makeup while driving (in between sending and receiving text messages). Lunacy is not gender specific but some people seem to do it all.

    • JT says:

      10:34am | 04/01/12

      @Anubis - but it’s funny as hell when she has to stop suddenly and the eyeliner/mascara goes down the cheek hahaha, LMAO when i saw that happen yesterday

    • Andy of Sydney says:

      10:55am | 04/01/12

      Nihonin, involving an innocent automatically disqualifies you for the Darwin Awards. Darwin Awards are only given to solo efforts with no one else harmed. It is Rule 1 or 2 of the Awards. I told my boss point blank that I am not picking up the phone when I am driving. Period. And I work in a customer facing job. He accepted that. Driving and texting is just plain crazy. What’s wrong with just pulling over and doing what needs to be done before continuing your journey? I have sat by the side of a road for two hours while on the phone trying to sort something work related out. Just stop the damned car and you can text and talk to your heart’s content!

    • mick says:

      12:47pm | 04/01/12

      I must have one eye. 

      It is not normally 50/50 and the ladies who want to be so easily offended need to see a bit more whilst behind the wheel.  Tunnel vision is as much a problem as texting.

    • lea says:

      04:43pm | 04/01/12

      mick, maybe if you stopped perving on the young ladies in their cars and focused on the road ahead, you wouldn’t see so many texting?

    • mick says:

      06:55pm | 04/01/12

      lea -  One of the signs of a good driver, apart from few accidents, is not having tunnel vision and seeing more than the end of the car bonnet.

      You sound like you are a tunnel vision driver.  If insults not based on observations are the best you can do then God help those in front of you.  Boom boom !!

    • Mike says:

      07:29am | 05/01/12

      Was i nthe car with my girlfriend the other day when she pulled out her phone to check facebook!!!! I freaked out but as usual I got yelled at for not being nice.  Sucks to be a guy sometimes.

    • Tom says:

      12:16pm | 05/01/12

      Fiona, the fact that one man is mentioned in the article and one woman mentioned is not a basis for claiming “equally at fault”. Gawd, its a pity your type gets to vote.

    • Carz says:

      06:50am | 04/01/12

      The day before New Years eve, enjoying some alone time while my kids were at their father’s, I went for a drive to indulge my amateur photography hobby. On the way home I had been admiring the responsible way the driver in front of me had been behaving; sticking to the speed limit, allowing a good safety gap between him and the car in front. That is until we came to a two laned section of road and I was coming up beside him. At 70km/h he started drifting into my lane. I hit the horn and he waved apologetically, which I was prepared to accept until I came right up beside him and saw him texting as he drove. If you care so little about your own life that you will text and drive, please at least have some consideration. My kids could have had a very sad start to their New Year.

    • Mokey says:

      10:40am | 04/01/12

      I almost got run over crossing at a pedestrain crossing by a driver who was turning whilst texting (I had right of way the man was green).  He did actually run over my foot, the only reason he didn’t hit me full on was becuase I saw the car out of the corner of my eye at the last minute and stopped walking before he hit me.  He didn’t even know about it until I started banging on his car and shouting abuse at him.

    • mick says:

      01:58pm | 04/01/12

      same thing happened to me when i was crossing a road last september. scared the hell out of me.. the last thing i want to happen to me, is to die by the hand of some bogan dick playing with his/her phone

    • mick says:

      06:57pm | 04/01/12

      Hey clone this is not me.  Does the Punch allow multiple names

    • Mahhrat says:

      06:51am | 04/01/12

      If you can’t eat a big mac while you’re driving, you shouldn’t have a licence.

      I agree on the texting though.  I get my missus to do that.

    • old fart says:

      08:53am | 04/01/12

      if you eat while you drive, you have just confirmed that you are as big a shithead as those who text while the drive. An earlier commentator put it well.  “its a car not your loungeroom”  If you eat a big mac while you drive, you should’nt have a licence you moron.

    • Ryan says:

      09:33am | 04/01/12

      Don’t you find the lettuce sprays everwhere when you bite? Geez I hate that. Q/pounders for me.

    • Mahhrat says:

      10:18am | 04/01/12

      @old fart:

      For a start, there is no law in any State that I’m aware of that bans eating or drinking while driving.  What the law does say is that you must maintain appropriate control of your vehicle at all times.  If you’re double-fisting a big mac, you are obviously not in appropriate control of the vehicle, wot?

      Which is exactly my point.  If you’re not good enough to drive and sensibly consume a food or (non-alcoholic) drink item, then IMHO you’re as dangerous as the clowns that drive on the phone.

      Driving should be a natural extension of the other movements you make - walking, running and so on.  Driving should require no conscious thought. 

      In addition, if you can’t operate your vehicle with your eyes shut (turn on, turn off, find all the switches etc), then you shouldn’t be driving it at all.

      As to keeping your eyes about you, I entirely agree, and you shouldn’t divert your gaze unless you are stopped and off the road.  No argument there.

      But if you’re driving without the ability to set yourself with an energy snack, sandwich or drink bottle that you can get to without diverting your attention, you shouldn’t be operating a car anyway (other things being equal).

    • Chris says:

      11:50am | 04/01/12

      @Mahhrat: I agree with you but you do need to divert your gaze to look at the speedo. If you don’t then you are driving without due attention and probably speeding (since they don’t need proof anymore). Of course if you do check your speed your not paying attention to the road so it works well. Polititians did well on that one.

    • John Doe says:

      12:28pm | 04/01/12

      It’s contentious - I’ve eaten the odd sausage and egg McMuffin while driving, but usually scoff it so quick I’ve got both hands free by the time I leave the carpark.

      Eating/drinking (non-alcoholic drinks) while driving should be studied more, as it’s certainly something everyone does. I can’t count the number of coffees I’ve swilled back while driving. Actually, I can count a few - they’re lying on my passenger seat floor.

      But is drinking coffee and driving the same as texting and driving? I don’t believe so, as I feel there’s more thought and effort put into texting/calling than there is to drinking. However, statistics may show otherwise.

      As for eating; yesterday I made the 2 1/2-hour trip between two towns and ate a sandwich while cruising at the highway speed of about 100km/h. However, in a more congested city environment I oculd see how that same situation could go sour.

    • Mahhrat says:

      01:56pm | 04/01/12

      You can’t tell your speed by feel?  Really?

      I glance at it only when I’m speeding up, because I don’t want to slip over.  Once I hit a speed though, I can usually maintain it for ages without concern, because I know the noises my car makes.

      Maybe you’ve got one of those super-nice cars that cocoon you from the road.  Those things are horrendous, and I hate them.  Give me a nice clunky Commodore or Falcon any day.

    • Chris says:

      03:01pm | 04/01/12

      In the car its fine. It takes a while to change a bit. The bike is a different story, particularly taking off from lights. I usually hit 60 in about 3 seconds with minimal acceleration and a slight touch of the throttle can add 20kmh in less than a second (its a 1400cc bike). Its easy to tell the difference between 60 and 70 but the law doesn’t work that way. they have a very small tolerance.

      I also was pulled over in my old car one night and as I was going around the corner I had to dodge around some drunk people that wondered onto the road. A police car saw me go around them but decided that I had lost control and wanted to fine me when I couldn’t tell them my exact speed as I went around the corner. They expect you to be staring at the speedo the entire time. It was only that the guys partner saw the drunk people that stopped him from fining me for watching the people falling onto the road instead of my speedo.

      It is police like this that make people lose respect for them.

    • marley says:

      06:23pm | 04/01/12

      @mahrat - well, no, I can’t tell the speed by feel. It depends on the road surface.  Concrete is different from asphalt is different from dirt.

      I can set myself up on a nice highway at 100/110 and keep that speed without having to check the speedometer very often at all.  But where I actually live, nice highways are not what I get to drive on.

      We have roads that are allegedly highways, but with no shoulders, with lots of tough curves, steep drops, one-lane bridges, and cattle crossings, followed by short straight stretches, then more curves - I’m shifting in and out of gear (yes, I drive a manual) and no, I can’t always tell the speed.  I have to drive to conditions, not speed limits.

      And there’ve been an awful lot of accidents here caused by people doing the opposite. 

      And the sound of the engine doesn’t help - it tells me the revs, not the speed.  It works just fine if you’re on the flat, but add hills and dales into the equation, and you’re going to need to keep an eye on the speedo.

    • Roy says:

      07:42pm | 04/01/12

      Mahhrat   if you think it is ok to eat while driving you need to hand your licence in straight away…. that or learn the road rules.

    • Brian says:

      06:58am | 05/01/12

      Sorry Roy, a search of the net finds not one source claiming any state in Australia has a law against eating or drinking whilst driving, provided the drink is not alcoholic.

      I would also argue it’s not as dangerous as texting, depending on the item. I rarely, if ever, eat whilst driving but regularly drink - I know where my drink holder is, so my left hand can find the drink, bring it to my face, take a drink and put it back all without taking my eyes off the road.

    • Mahhrat says:

      06:59am | 05/01/12

      @Roy, you show me where eating and driving is illegal.  I’ll wait.

    • Sick of the BS says:

      08:21pm | 05/01/12

      @mahhrat: you say “Driving should require no conscious thought ” Are you serious? Driving requires lots of conscious thought! Ie paying attention to your surroundings with 100% conscious thoughts to whats happening in them! Its the people who just drive along in auto pilot mode who are the biggest danger on our roads imho!!

    • Mike says:

      07:29am | 04/01/12

      Tracey, you gain demerit points, not lose them. Hence DEmerit points. I do agree with your article though, it’s a very dangerous practice which people seem to think is acceptable in this day and age.

    • SimpleSimon says:

      07:31am | 04/01/12

      I disagree with a device that prevents mobile transmission in a car. It means stopping passengers using phones, preventing the use of a phone in an emergency (you crash on a country road and can’t get out of the car, for example), and, if crudely manufactured, could potentially block data transmission for things like GPS that a lot of people use their smartphone for. Good intentions aside, I think it’s a bad idea.

    • marley says:

      07:57am | 04/01/12

      Well, but you’re a lot less likely to need to phone for help after crashing your car if you’re not texting or chatting on your mobile.

    • KH says:

      08:14am | 04/01/12

      If you crash on a country road, presumably the car won’t be running any more, thus the phone would work - these things only work when the car is running…...............having said that, of course you are right about passengers using the phone.

    • Kebabpete says:

      08:15am | 04/01/12

      Ford already has a system (I think its going to be an option in the next Focus) that stops texting but still allows normal in/out phone calls. This is because the car has a built in handsfree system for phone calls but doesn’t work for texting.

    • thatmosis says:

      07:37am | 04/01/12

      The main problem is that people are becoming or are addicted to technology and the very thought of being unable to respond immediately to some clowm at the other end of the world who wants to know what you are doing this precise instant sends people into a sweat of withdrawal.
      Its time that the police stopped fining peole for speeding and concentrated on fining people for using their phones in a car. Heres and idea, someone set up a name and shame web page where ordinary people can take photos of clowns using their mobiles while driving and post their details on the web page, one way of geeting your 15 mins of fame.
      I was rammed by a clown using his mobile phone and I confronted him and told him I would tell his insurance company that he was using his phone when he hit me and he went to jelly and his father wrote me out a cheque for the full value of my car because he didnt want his stupid son to lose his licence or insurance. There should be more checks done on accidents to find out when the mobile was being used and if found to be used when an accident occured then the insurance would be wiped. Its a simple matter and hopefully will become the norm in all accident claims and these idiots are hit in the only place it really hurts the back pocket.

    • Retired Soldier says:

      08:08am | 04/01/12

      thatmosis says: You should have taken the cheque and then reported both of them to the Police, one for negligent driving and the other for offering a bribe. You have brought yourself down to their level by accepting the bribe and permitting two offences to be committed. The same “clown” will continue texting and talking whilst driving and the stupid parent will continue writing cheques to cover the actions of his “clown”. The next time he might run into someone and bring a quick end to their life but you will never know.

    • Siszlak says:

      08:16am | 04/01/12

      “The main problem is that people are becoming or are addicted to technology”
      “Heres and idea, someone set up a name and shame web page”


      Addicted to technology much Moe??

    • Shane says:

      09:15am | 04/01/12

      “ordinary people can take photos of clowns using their mobiles while driving” umm, idiot, you realise that takes as much - if not more, concentration than sending a text message. Are you really saying that people should take their eyes off the road, get their phone, load the camera app, aim, wait for the phone to focus, line up the shot, then take a photo of someone using their phone while driving, while they’re doing the exact same thing?

      “Ordinary people” (as you put it) aren’t police, we’re not meant to be a country filled with dobbers. We have a police force for a reason, it’s just a shame that they’ve all been turned into a pathetic revenue raising department for the State Government and not allowed to do any actual policing.

    • Matthew says:

      10:18am | 04/01/12

      Retired Soldier, it’s not a bribe.  He’s paying for the damage to the car and bypassing his insurance.  This is quite common and not unusual (usually done when the cost of the damage is less than or close to the cost of the excess.

      However, he should have still reported to the insurance company of the other driver as they would seriously like to know about it, even if they didn’t have to pay for it.  They’d have a close eye on that person from then on if they did crash again.

    • ba'al says:

      11:15am | 04/01/12

      @actually for once retired is correct. Failure to report an accident is an offence.
      The clown using his mobile may of been unlicensed, a conviction away from jail. Who knows. The bribe worked, no police involvement and another idiot stays on the road a little longer.

    • JT says:

      11:28am | 04/01/12

      @ba’al - You don’t need to call the cops to every accident, they have enough to do. it’s not a bribe, it’s avoiding a raised premium, people do it all the time. it’s my understanding that unless council property (telephone poles etc) are damaged or the damage is extreme or someone hurt you don’t need to report to the cops as long as the insurance company is told or did I commit a crime when I rear ended someone years ago? oh well, shit happens

    • LC says:

      11:58am | 04/01/12

      Awww…poor thatmosis.

      You damn well could’ve reported both of them. One for dangerous driving and assault and the other for bribery.

    • LC says:

      12:18pm | 04/01/12

      Oops, reading fail. Scratch the “assault” part.

    • Troy Flynn says:

      01:49pm | 04/01/12

      @JT. I believe the law still states only if the damage is less than $500. (May have been raised by now) are you allowed to not report the incident. By all means correct me if I’m wrong.

    • JT says:

      02:18pm | 04/01/12

      @Troy Flynn - you may be correct as I haven’t caused damage to anyone I don’t really know the ‘rules’, when I rear ended some poor bloke years ago it didn’t cause any damage to either car.

    • Tator says:

      02:38pm | 04/01/12

      Troy Flynn,
      it was $500 20 years ago, is currently sitting at $3000 total damage for the accident, ie the damage of both vehicles cannot exceed a total of $3000, which in todays vehicles, isn’t a lot of damage.  I had a minor bingle hitting a dog out on the Nullabor this year in a work vehicle ( dog committed suicide by cop -  go figure) and the cost to replace the front bumper and one headlight assembly and minor panel damage on front 1/4 panel was around $6k

    • Rob says:

      02:45pm | 04/01/12

      I witnessed an accident recently, young P plater merrily cruising alone xtxing like any Gen Y would, she didn’t see the red light nor the car that had stopped for it in front of her. I watched in amazment the whole thing unflod in slow motion. I went over to check on everyones welfare (she hit him pretty damn hard) all was ok. The girl was apologising to the guy saying the sun hit her in the eyes, she coouldn’t see etc etc, then I loudly pointed out that she had been txting for some time and that included during the actual impact. The bloke was furious (he had a small child in the car at the time) about this and she denied and denied it. Finally the police arrive and go through the usual motions. They asked for witnesses to which I responded and told them what I’d seen. Once again the girl screemed in denial that she never txt’d and drove, so the clever police man asked her for her phone, which she reluctantly handed over, he found an uncompleted txt which the girl had been writing at the time of the accident - she was promptly charged with negligent driving, dangerous operation of a vehicle etc etc and on top of all, giving a false statement and hindering the coarse of justice. I hope she loses her licence for a couple of years for that stupidity. The final straw for her was that she now had no insurance - you are not covered if you were enguaging in an offence when the accident happened -thus I’m sure she’ll be paying for the blokes HSV for many a year.

    • lea says:

      04:52pm | 04/01/12

      Pretty sure you have that wrong Rob, and the young woman’s insurance would have still covered her (I know my policy only has exclusions for driving under the influence).
      Otherwise wouldn’t every crash that involved some kind of dangerous or inattentive driving (i.e. EVERY CRASH) result in uninsured drivers?

      (the woman does sound like a massive tool for lying though….)

    • PS says:

      10:20am | 06/01/12

      @Rob: ‘Like any gen y would’? Please don’t paint us all with the same brush.

      She sounds like an idiot - not only for texting and driving, but thinking she could get away with something so easily proven.

    • Pixey says:

      07:59am | 04/01/12

      Technology and Morons do not mix. 
      Let the drivers using text messges be fined as much as the drunken drivers.

    • Retired Soldier says:

      10:42am | 04/01/12

      Perhaps not exactly a bribe Matthew but certainly an enticement to not disclose the truth about the circumstances of an accident. Whichever way you shake it the offer reeks of non disclosure and possibly perverting the course of justice if police had become involved. You may think I’m being harsh but this country is thriving on fraud, minor crime and a total disregard for the rules and values of our society and it has to be stopped as a matter of urgency. The subject at hand is just another example.

    • Kristian says:

      08:00am | 04/01/12

      Oh Tracey, you’re showing your age - everyone knows it’s “ur” not “yr”!

    • Em says:

      01:20pm | 04/01/12

      *sigh*

      It’s YOUR or YOU’RE, depending on context.

      I detest the dumbing down of our language.

    • Aaron says:

      03:44pm | 04/01/12

      Uhh.. I think you’ve missed the point completely. Kristian’s comment was tongue-in-cheek but also an entirely appropriate “correction” as the title of the piece is a play on our texting lingo.

    • Kristian says:

      08:48pm | 04/01/12

      Yes Em, your correct.

      *throws out the bait*

    • Tara says:

      08:09am | 04/01/12

      References for the comment that ‘even using hands-free devices dramatically increases the risk of crashing’?
      Every Australian study I’ve seen suggests it is the CONTENT of the conversations you have that decrease reaction time. Following from that logic, we can have conversations with passengers- we can eat- women apply makeup- we can smoke- we can have a screaming baby in the backseat. Where to draw the line?
      Australian research is limited by the fact that we have (to my current knowledge) only 2 simulators that realistically simulate pitch & yaw, acceleration, people walking out in front of you, other cars driving erratically etc. they are rarely used - because they are both manual. They sit at NRMA headquarters somewhere in Sydney unused. The research being done is by cognitive psychologists on computers. Hardly a realistic situation?
      On top of this, we have recently discovered a sub-set of the population who are ‘supertaskers’. Given complex mathematics whilst driving & talking, their reaction times are on par with somebody in a car with no distractions.
      Whilst tragic, & texting shouldn’t even be considered as it takes your eyes off the road, there is not enough reliable evidence to ban talking on hands-free devices in Australia.
      All of those studies can be google-searched, or if you have access to academic search engines, can be read in even more depth. A ‘government report’ is not good enough a reference.

    • mick says:

      12:55pm | 04/01/12

      The multi-taskers must be the blondes who I frequently see on their mobiles whilst driving their 4 wheel drives.

      I ask my wife not to distract me by engaging in too much conversation when in heavy traffic as I am clearly not a multi-tasker and I can foresee the what will happen after a few near misses.  It is just plain stupid to text or talk whilst driving on anything other than country roads as that split second is all that it takes.

      You know the response when a life is lost….“I’m sorry.  It was an accident”.  Yeh right.

    • JT says:

      02:33pm | 04/01/12

      banning talking? next thing you will be banning singing to music in the car, you can’t drive in dead silence, or I can’t, you may be a more superior species than I however as I need my tunes for drives

    • bananabender says:

      05:56pm | 04/01/12

      The vast majority of people should not be allowed to drive a car because they lack even the most rudimentary driving skills such as placing their hands correctly on the steering wheel.

    • mick says:

      07:35pm | 04/01/12

      JT -  music is another issue altogether as it does not require interaction.  Music might send you to sleep but it shouldn’t distract.  Thinking about responses will distract.  Hope you see where I am coming from.  Cheers.

    • Rob says:

      08:24am | 04/01/12

      Mobile phone use by a driver in a moving vehicle should be a criminal offence equivalent to mid-range DUI as the risks are equivalent. Too many pollies probably talk/text while driving for it to be made a criminal offence though!

    • nfw says:

      08:30am | 04/01/12

      Yeah, yeah, everybody agrees it’s awful but our NSW state gummit won’t do anything about it.  It was elected with a huge majority to do things, but they don’t and won’t.  I travel the Hume between Sydney and Canberra twice a week and regularly see all sorts of drivers texting while speeding, especially the red and green P-platers with blue & white number plates.  Not to mention being able to smoke at the same time; so much for our expensive government anti-smoking advertising.  Even if there were real penalties attached the courts would just let them off as they do with everything else because “I didn’t mean to do it” and “Of course your Honour I will never ever do it again” ‘til next time.  Look at all the disqualified drivers who were caught driving over the Christmas Holidays.  They do it because they know they won’t really be punished.  Some quality time in the slot might sort them out and be an example to others, but as I say the NSW gummint won’t do anything.

    • Fred says:

      08:36am | 04/01/12

      There were 45,000 crashes from mobile phone use in Australia in 2007? I find that a bit hard to believe. You’d barely be able to go for a drive without seeing a crash.

      I agree with you though. I’m the best driver in the whole world and I always pull over to use the phone.

    • Chris says:

      11:44am | 04/01/12

      Australia has 800000km of roads. It takes say 3 hours to remove a crash (being generous since most are minor). So that means for every 1km you drove you would have a 0.002% chance of seeing a crash. Not that hard.

    • JT says:

      02:35pm | 04/01/12

      @ Chris - unless you drive along the M4 or one of the other ‘M’s’, other than this week so far, touch wood, all the traffic reports I hear on the radio have got at least one smash on one of them

    • Bob Higgs says:

      08:42am | 04/01/12

      I sort of hoped that texting while driving, like speeding, was natures way of pruning the stupid. Unfortunately they usually breed early and take out some other innocent party with their stupidity.

    • Kika says:

      08:44am | 04/01/12

      I bloody hate it when my husband insists on talking on his mobile when driving. It’s so dangerous. He has the attention span of a goldfish sometimes and always runs red lights accidentally…
      I have to admit, I sometimes text when I’m at a red light. Can anyone tell me whether it’s possible to make your Iphone not constantly beep if you get a text? I find that really annoying. You try to ignore the text that came through but because it keeps beeping it distracts you and you have to read it to stop it beeping.

    • Carz says:

      08:59am | 04/01/12

      Depending on the type of phone you have it should be quite easy. You should just be able to go into tones/alerts and adjust it there.

    • HappyCynic says:

      09:25am | 04/01/12

      @Kika

      There is this wonderful little thing called an off switch that should shut the phone up while you’re driving smile

      Either that or silent mode.

    • kyra says:

      09:34am | 04/01/12

      There’s a switch on the side above the plus minus buttons. Also go into settings, then sounds, then where it says silent turn the vibrate on.

    • The righteous one says:

      10:12am | 04/01/12

      you should not be operating your mobile phone while behind the wheel of a car even if it is standing still. You are as bad and as dangerous as your husband, you deserve each other. Trouble is, none of us deserve either of you as road users.  Switch the bloody thing off

    • Kika says:

      10:29am | 04/01/12

      Aren’t you a bunch of nice people?

      @Carz - I said I have an Iphone

      @Happy Cynic - Silent mode is good. But sometimes I forget to switch it over when driving because I hardly ever get a text to worry that much about changing it over.  Because I don’t get a lot of texts I am not too concerned about the text beeping, it’s just the constant beeping over and over again which annoys me.

      @Kyra - thanks. I’ll check it out

      @TheRighteousOne - Nice one thanks. Are you a perfect driver? How many accidents have you ever been in? How many have I been in? None.

    • Kate says:

      12:57pm | 04/01/12

      @Kika - probably not a great idea to admit to doing something illegal and then get defensive about your driving.
      Why don’t you go to Settings > Sounds and then change your text tone to ‘None’. That way you definitely won’t be distracted by it when driving, and you can still check it the second you get out of the car.

    • Kika says:

      01:29pm | 04/01/12

      @Kate -  I am not defensive. I was merely asking how to reduce the beep from the phone because if you had an Iphone they beep until you’ve acknowledged the text. And like I’ve said, I don’t get that many to really put an effort into putting it on silent.
      God people are aggro self righteous twits.

    • KH says:

      02:01pm | 04/01/12

      kika - you just admitted your husband runs red lights, and that you yourself use the phone in the car.  Until the engine is turned off or you are pulled over, you are technically driving, whether at lights or not.
      And you can turn it off, put it on silent, or IGNORE IT. Its a phone, not a child.

    • Alicia says:

      03:18pm | 04/01/12

      @Kika - You can turn off the constant reminder beeps for new messages.

      Go to: Settings > Notifications > Messages > Repeat Alert > Never

      I believe that you need the latest iOS for this option to be available so you might need to update your iPhone software if it’s not the latest one smile

    • Miles says:

      03:56pm | 04/01/12

      Kika, you ae basically ridiculing everybody responding to your post with a sarcastic and rude comments and yet you have a husband who you allow to ‘always runs red lights accidentally’ and you yourseld admit to using the phone whilst driving.  This kind of behaviour puts everybody else on the road at risk of serious and lethal damage - and you want people to show YOU respect??  You can’t even work out the basic settings on your iPhone for pete’s sake….  People like you are proof that driving needs to be treated more as a privilege than a right.  You and your husband should not be on the road - end of story.

    • LJ Dots says:

      05:18pm | 04/01/12

      @Kika. Not trying to be offensive or agro, so I’ll try a different angle to fully understand the context. What were you texting at the red light or what was your hubby discussing when running that red light that could not possibly wait five minutes. Be honest.

    • Alicia says:

      07:43pm | 04/01/12

      @Miles - while texting at the traffic lights can be dangerous, it is nothing compared to talking on your mobile while moving or running red lights!

    • Aussie Battler says:

      08:48am | 04/01/12

      What I can’t understand is why people continuously have a mobile stuck to their ears whilst driving, as after market hands free kits are pretty inexpensive these days. Makes life a lot easier IF you have to speak to someone whilst driving. 
      Texting while driving should be hit hard by the police.
      It should also be pointed out to people who are walking along and texting at the same time.  Lost count of the times I have nearly had an accident avoiding pedestrians who were more intent on their phones than what is happening around them at intersections etc.

    • old fart says:

      08:54am | 04/01/12

      bumper sticker in the US;

      Honk if you love jesus, text if you want to meet him”

    • mick says:

      12:56pm | 04/01/12

      I love it.  Good to see you believe.

    • Shooter says:

      08:55am | 04/01/12

      Not just texting or drink driving. What about women who apply makeup while driving or guys who shave while driving. I see it every morning while driving to work and it scares me that one day they might kill someone.

    • KH says:

      09:09am | 04/01/12

      I once saw someone eating a bowl of cereal whilst driving - I’m not kidding either…........

    • Shane says:

      09:05am | 04/01/12

      The problem with fines is that they’re not relative to the income of the person getting it, sure there’s demerit points which we all have the same amount of, but clearly it’s not a big enough deterrent.

      One possible solution, if you’re caught with a mobile phone even in your hand or lap while driving a vehicle, the penalty should be.

      1. 6 demerit points taken off you, plus;
      2. A fine equivalent to 1 months salary. Or $1000 if you’re unemployed. The 1 month salary figure would be worked out from your previous years group certificate or tax return.

      This sort of fine would then have the same impact on every individual regardless of how much money they earn, it would stop the wealthy dismissing fines as pocket change - which they routinely do - and send a wake up call to the brain dead masses that this will not be tolerated by the police or other road users.

    • CS says:

      09:07am | 04/01/12

      Darwin (Charles) will sort it out eventually.

    • Yuri says:

      09:21am | 04/01/12

      I came across one of these guys only yesterday. A P-Plater coming the other way was staring intently at his crotch (I assume he was texting) and started to veer into my lane. I had to pull over onto the shoulder and hit the horn, he looked up at the last second and managed to swerve violently and very narrowly avoided a crash that probably would have killed both of us. Hopefully it will be an eye-opener for him about the dangers of texting whilst driving, but I doubt that will be the case.

    • Mark says:

      09:37am | 04/01/12

      This will not be a problem at all once voice to text becomes more popular and the AI’s like Siri become more accurate.. Seriously, who cares. The writer needed to go back to 2009 to an incident in another country to find a good example of a serious injury proven to be related to text messaging while driving. Just another example of a media beat up. Yes it is an issue but it is not an issue to the majority of us and as such, should not be legislated against more severely or directly targeted by police resources. But hey, they’ve been targeting drug use for 40 years with no reward or victory- why would these idiots think differently about this issue?

    • PsychoHyena says:

      09:39am | 04/01/12

      Actually I’m curious as to the number of crashes/near-misses resulting from sneezing. When you sneeze your eyes close for even just a split-second, sneezes can happen any time.

    • Troy Flynn says:

      03:12pm | 04/01/12

      Yes I know what you mean and I hate it. By the same token, when I do feel a sneeze coming on, I either pull over if safe to do so, or slow right down till it passes then go back to posted speed.

    • RyaN says:

      09:41am | 04/01/12

      This stuff is pretty dangerous but have you actually seen how people drive these days. Its a free for all out there, cops can’t be bothered with actually enforcing the road laws like fining people who pull out in front of you, people who don’t indicate, people who cut into lanes, people who don’t know the meaning of “KEEP LEFT UNLESS OVERTAKING”. As for the middle finger type gesture, this should be an offense like “inciting road rage” and should be an immediate removal of your license for 3 months, same goes for road rage.
      How about making the roads safer too, like banning all cyclists on major arteriole roads unless under a managed event, banning all parking on major arteriole roads, banning cyclists and any vehicle with an engine capacity of 50cc or under on highways.
      Introduce Green Waves on lights, to reduce congestion.

      Oh and get the bloody police out on the road enforcing the laws of the road, not just being entirely focused on revenue raising.

    • Kika says:

      10:35am | 04/01/12

      What I’ve never understood is receiving a barrage of abuse when the one doing the abusing WAS the party responsible for nearly causing an accident!
      Once we were driving straight when a third party in a van overtook a slow car, IN THE LEFT lane only because they were going to slow, swerved straight into the right hand lane where we were and missed us by about 1cm. They didn’t shoulder check or pay any attention as to whether there were cars in that lane, they were too keen to get around the slow car they didn’t care. When we tooted at him HE ABUSED US! And when he finally turned into a side street he stopped, abused us again and gave US the finger? WHAT the HECK??  Let’s just say I don’t think he has been driving in Australia long.

    • Mark says:

      10:47am | 04/01/12

      Most major roads I travel down here in Melbourne use Green Waves. They work well but the shit really hits the fan if one of lights resets its settings or something.. Havoc.
      “KEEP LEFT UNLESS OVERTAKING”
      Win- people are fucking useless at this one.

      But seriously, our roads are so over regulated it is not funny. Having police pulling people over in peak hour is not going to help congestion. Seriously, they have a department of cops employed to fine people for speeding. How is it NOT about revenue raising, at least to some extent.

    • RyaN says:

      12:08pm | 04/01/12

      @Kika: no offense and I don’t know the situation but from what you explained please refer to the part I posted in caps for the possible reason why you were abused.
      I don’t think any abuse is warranted nor should be tolerated but this is a possible explanation to your situation.

    • mick says:

      01:00pm | 04/01/12

      mark -  given the fantastic and well picked vocabulary in your comment I now understand why you are an Abbott clone.  Make your New Year resolution to improve your vocabulary and demeanor and get out of that gutter.  Have a nice year.

    • Kate says:

      01:02pm | 04/01/12

      @Kika: Wow, you’re not doing well today. You’re one of the idiots that SITS in the right hand land - do you not know that that is illegal? Is this while your husband is on the phone,t oo? You shouldn’t have been there yourself unless you were overtaking - which you clearly weren’t as the van was able to overtake you.
      I’m making a sign and keeping it in the car for all the idiots like you.
      “GET IN THE LEFT HAND LANE, DUMBA$$!”

    • Mark says:

      02:31pm | 04/01/12

      @Mick- cool story Hansel, you obviously are talking about a different man if you think I am an Abbott clone. I despise Western politics and the supposed leaders that front it but that’s a story for another bender.
      RE: My Language- Umad?? Curse words are so colloquial these days that you look like more of a wanker if you are offended by the language then if you use it in everyday conversation. But hey, you can’t teach an old dog new tricks (or language) can you, Mick?
      I just hope I troll opinion forums when I retire just so I can go Rudolph Hess on those whipper snappers’ spelling and grammatical errors, sounds exactly how I would like to spend my declining years.

    • JT says:

      02:40pm | 04/01/12

      @Kate - now lets not bash Kika, if she was driving in a 3 laned highway you can sit in the middle lane, there is a lane to the right of you for those idiots speeding and the left lane for those doing under the speed limit and trucks, I sit in the middle lane doing the speed limit all the time, if people want to pass me they are speeding and if they can’t get into the left lane due to another car then they can just chill oout and wait for them to pass me, not honk their horns, flash their lights and make rude hand gestures.

    • lea says:

      04:57pm | 04/01/12

      FYI the “keep left unless overtaking” rule only applies to roads where the posted speed limit is 90kmph or over.

      (a considerate driver will do it on any road, but its not against the law on most roads….)

    • RyaN says:

      10:24am | 05/01/12

      Oh and joy, in NSW they have decided that the whole “keep left unless overtaking” is not worth 3 demerit points, so as of last year they have made the following demerit point changes.

      Keep left offences

      (These offences have all seen demerit points drop from 3 points to 2 points)

        Drive in right lane on road with speed limit over 80 km/h
        Disobey keep left unless overtaking
        Not keep left of oncoming vehicle
        Not keep left of centre on two-way road
        Overtake vehicle when unsafe
        Overtake to right of vehicle turning right/making U-turn
        Overtake vehicle too closely
        Cut in front of vehicle after overtaking


      The importance placed on policing this is obviously zero.

    • Ngula says:

      09:41am | 04/01/12

      Why not treat texting like honing and confiscate the phone for a month, or even disable their phone account. grin

    • Courtney says:

      07:56pm | 04/01/12

      Now that’s gold!

      I’m all for that!

    • neville says:

      09:54am | 04/01/12

      Piss off Tracey, we do not need you to meddle in our lives.

    • mick says:

      01:01pm | 04/01/12

      Easy on Neville.  Mark has used enough profanities for the both of you.

    • Surely says:

      02:56pm | 04/01/12

      Piss off Mick.

    • Apathy is mankind's greatest sin says:

      07:42am | 05/01/12

      Surely- A man after my own heart.. Are you really that big of a wanker, Mick?? You don’t have an opinion, let alone a constructive one and yet you degrade others for use of colourful language?? You are one really narrow minded person and it’s fucking sad.

    • trav says:

      10:03am | 04/01/12

      7am one morning, I was walking across the Go Between Bridge in Brisbane and saw a driver stopped in the middle, with her head slumped. There were a few cars queuing behind her, but those in front had long driven off, and were nowhere to be seen.  We all thought she’d suffered an epileptic fit, heart attack or stroke. I went to check on her, and two drivers also got out of their cars. As we approached, she looked up from her phone, smiled at us, and drove off.  Unbelievable!

    • S.L says:

      10:06am | 04/01/12

      I hate mobile phone use in cars. Especially watching young girls on P plates dialing while they are starting their car. But one question I must ask is why are Police (in NSW at least) allowed to use hand held mobiles while driving and the public can’t?

    • Tator says:

      11:57am | 04/01/12

      SL,
      I can answer that one for you.  The exemption given to police to use mobile phones is basically because quite a few of the police radio systems have mobile phone functionality.  The SA Government Radio Network radios used by SAPOL are all capable of making and receiving phone calls from so according to the definition in the Australian Road Rules, they are defined as mobile phones.( I was one of the persons trained up to help train people with these radios)  In addition, there were times when it is actually necessary for police to be using a mobile phone whilst driving as many of the police services were very reluctant to embrace bluetooth technology until it was developed better as it believed that it was not that secure a technology.  But one thing to remember, is that this exemption only exists for a police officer in the execution of his duty, which is the same as the other exemptions given to Police under sections 305, 306, 307 and 308 of the Australian Road Rules which exempt police from many of the road rules whilst in the execution of their duties -  but the duties have to be a specific duty

    • Brad says:

      09:24am | 05/01/12

      yeah the good old ‘execution of their duties” excuse. The specific duties is anything they happen to be doing when they get/make a call. Does the exemption include filming with a handycam out the passengers window whilst driving?

    • Tator says:

      11:03am | 05/01/12

      Brad,
      as I stated, the police officer has to be conducting a specific duty to be able to claim the exemption.  There have been numerous officers pinged by speed and red light cameras who have been unable to justify their exceeding the speed limit or disobeying a red light and have had to pay the fine so police officers breaching the Australian Road Rules is dealt with by the Police Services.  If these exemptions were not in place, the police would be severely hamstrung in fulfilling their duties.  I for one, would not be able to do my job at all as I continually breach traffic laws whilst in the execution of my specific duties escorting overdimensional loads around South Australian.  What I and other members of my unit do is based on best practises from around the world and the techniques used are designed to minimise risk and inconvenience to other road users but totally breach the Australian Road Rules.
      BTW, using the handy cam whilst driving is not a specific offence and at worst, would be a drive without due care if he caused an accident as there is no exemption for drive without due care under the Australian Road rules.

    • MacBo11ocks says:

      10:09am | 04/01/12

      The problem I see it is traffic lights.  What else do you do when you are stuck at the n’th set of traffic lights for the n’th time on the way home from work!

      As stupid as it sounds people will always use their mobile phone inappropriately while driving!  Make it allowable to use a mobile phone WHILST your car is STATIONARY.  Red lights = ok to touch a device not attached to your vechile. 

      However the punishment should then be multiplied by the speed the person is traveling in kms.  IE.  Texting whilst driving is $100 + 1 days loss of license / jail time / whatever per km/ph.  So those absolute nut jobs that text whilst swerving all over the motorways will have to sell their car in order to pay their fine.  120km = $12000 fine.

      Win. Win.

    • Mike says:

      11:54am | 04/01/12

      Red lights = ok to touch a device not attached to your vechile. 

      (oooh, matron)

    • Frank the Plank says:

      10:09am | 04/01/12

      People do not care about fines or demerit points, they are not a deterant. How about more police on the roads and when someone is caught using a mobile device while driving the officer confiscates the phone which can then be picked up from a local police station a week later ?

    • Darren says:

      10:35am | 04/01/12

      Blocking phone signals in cars is dangerous, what would happen in an emergency situation and you needed to contact emergency services but couldnt?  What about passengers not being able to use use devices? 

      Mr Stevenson who supposedly studies driving distractions, seems to be a bit distracted and disconnected from reality.

    • JT says:

      11:23am | 04/01/12

      Step 1 - turn engine off
      Step 2 - dial number

      simple

    • Aaron says:

      12:05pm | 04/01/12

      What about the passengers? Fair enough to block the signal so the driver can’t use the phone, but there’s no reason to restrict passengers as well. A completely unrealistic solution.

    • LC says:

      12:17pm | 04/01/12

      And what about passengers in the car JT? That’s why I will not support any plan to incorporate mobile phone jammers so drivers cannot receive phone reception when the car is turned on. Because it will have a detrimental effect on the passengers.

      I have no sympathy for texting drivers. I would not shed a tear if texting drivers were locked up for life without parole as a mandatory sentence on their first offense.

      But I will not support any move which also penalizes the passengers in the car. That is unacceptable.

    • Em says:

      01:38pm | 04/01/12

      Really Darren?

      Apart from an emergency - and emergency numbers are always accessible even on a phone that’s locked so it would be completely ridiculous to assume that 000 would be blocked -  how often would you really need to use the phone as a passenger?  I mean REALLY… how often?

      Seriously.  Grow up people.  It’s been proven that people talking in a car can be almost as distracting as using your phone. 

      If you’re running late, call the person before you get in the car. Done.  If you’re lost, pull over, stop engine and call for directions. Done.

      My god, how did you survive as a child before mobile phones?! Surely your parents didn’t need to call everyone every time you farted in the car.

      I’m with JT.  You are not that important that you need to risk everyone elses lives for your convenience.

    • Aaron says:

      02:24pm | 04/01/12

      “Seriously.  Grow up people.  It’s been proven that people talking in a car can be almost as distracting as using your phone. “

      Let’s just ban all talking in the car altogether… that’s a better solution. The best way to do that would be to ensure each person sits in a soundproof compartment inside the car, so why not just do that?

    • JT says:

      02:49pm | 04/01/12

      I am unconcerned with whether a passenger can use their phones in the car, talking on the phone whilst in someone else’s car is extremely rude, especially when they are meant to be keeping you company. I hate it when I am driving and one of the passengers in my car decides to make a call or sits with their head buried in their phone texting. whatever it is it can wait until we get to our destination so I will not be weeping if they can’t text or call. Like Em said emergency numbers will not be blocked so what’s the problem?

      really LC? Life imprisonment for a first offence? that’s a laugh considering the state of sentences that get handed down to repeat offenders of violent crimes, drunk or drugged drivers it would never happen.

      I am not advocating banning talking in the car though, that would lead to no singing to music in the car and I can’t drive without that

    • LC says:

      09:23pm | 04/01/12

      Not advocating for it JT, just saying if it happens I would not care.

      It was just a little disclaimer incase someone thought I supported texting and driving, nothing more.

    • Perdix says:

      10:47am | 04/01/12

      I would have thought that the better penalty for someone caught using their phone whilst driving would be to disable to service for a month. It would be relatively simple to introduce legislation that would enable the police to call the mobile company and turn off the service. I suspect that this would have a greater impact that a fine or demerits, and it goes to the offence.

    • Sheridan says:

      04:42pm | 04/01/12

      Dad reckoned they should have their fingers broken.. He didn’t even let me use mine when he was driving!! I get why though, he was driving one day when a 4wd hit us.. He got a broken arm and a few other injuries, I nearly got blinded but thanks to the surgical team I can see, two of my brothers got head injuries and Mum got a broken neck, needed extensive plastic surgery to repair facial damage and other injuries.. That was 30 years ago and she’s still got issues with her injuries e.g. neck pain that affects her arms, loss of sensation in her face etc.. I don’t touch my phone in the car when I’m driving, I pull over because I don’t want to be responsible for putting someone through what my family suffered or worse, killing someone..

    • SG says:

      10:54am | 04/01/12

      Almost all phones now contain a GPS. Why not make it compulsory that once the phone’s detects that it’s speed exceeds 20km/h, all phones must
      - lock out the keypad on the phone, and
      - hold all incoming SMS messages, without any alerts to the user?

      Also, inless the phone is inserted into a vehicle-mounted hands-free system, ALL functions of the phone would be completely locked once over 20km/h, and all incoming calls diverted to voicemail.

      The only was to make or receive a call without a hands-free system would be to stop the vehicle. The only way to send OR receive an SMS would be to stop the vehicle.

    • Danny B says:

      11:31am | 04/01/12

      “All functions of the phone.”

      This would include the GPS navigator app present in most of today’s smartphones - which is a legitimate use of the phone while driving?

      (FWIW, it sits on the central console, with the GPS voice turned up to maximum - no need for me to look at it while driving)

    • Chris says:

      12:23pm | 04/01/12

      Awesome for the passenger in the car or the person on the bus who cannot use their phone anymore. Perfect for all the people who do the right thing and don’t drive while they make their calls.

    • SG says:

      07:35am | 05/01/12

      @Danny B
      I said LOCK all actions of the phone, not BLOCK actions of the phone, (ie. just disable the keypad so you can’t type anything while moving).

      As far as I understand, it is illegal to operate a GPS while in motion (that is, for the driver actually type on it while the car is moving), so you shouldn’t be touching your phone or GPS anyway. If you program your GPS at the start of your trip (while stopped) then locking the keyboard over 20km/h should make no difference to you at all. The GPS instructions would continue.

      @Chris
      If an outgoing call is that important to your passenger, you couldn’t pull over & stop for a minute, even if it potentially saves lives?
      And don’t busses stop fairly regularly? Wouldn’t this then allow bus passengers to make your calls?

    • JT says:

      10:59am | 04/01/12

      My phone sits in my handbag when I am driving, and it’s on silent so I can’t hear text messages

    • Kika says:

      01:32pm | 04/01/12

      WEll done. Bravo. A medal is in the post.

    • KH says:

      01:56pm | 04/01/12

      I do that too…........I also drive a manual car, which means both hands are already busy anyway…........................ grin  Maybe all P platers should be forced to drive manual cars only….......that will make it more difficult to text and drive, and encourages better habits to form.

    • Wynston Cruso says:

      01:57pm | 04/01/12

      Why the attitude Kika? It is well done by JT that they do this. It’s not that hard, yet so many narcisists have a hard time not responding to a text message straight away. God forbid we don’t get to respond within 5 seconds of recieving it huh? f*ck me people are pathetic.

    • Cookie Monster says:

      02:42pm | 04/01/12

      Maybe you could learn from JT - as evidenced from your posts today you’re a crap driver -

    • Miles says:

      04:08pm | 04/01/12

      Kika has attitude because she can’t work out how to turn her alerts off on her phone…  Plus she is a dangerous and illegal driver as evidenced by her posts today.  She demands respect but gives none.  In other words, she is a moron.

    • Millsy says:

      12:05pm | 04/01/12

      Why don’t we just accept the fact that, since the year dot, there’ve been good & bad drivers. Doesn’t matter what lsws/restrictions/whatever that are brought in or considered, nothing is going to change….....ie. there will always be good & bad drivers.
      Accept it, do your best, & hope it isn’t you involved in the next prang.
      Simple as that

    • mick says:

      01:03pm | 04/01/12

      So which are you Millsy?

    • Mitch says:

      12:43pm | 04/01/12

      You can’t drink and drive, smoke with kids in the car and now they want to take our texting / phone calls. What next? No cheeseburgers behind the wheel! My family did the drinking and smoking all the time in the 80s and I’m alive.

    • Em says:

      01:22pm | 04/01/12

      You’re alive.

      You’re also lucky to be so.

      Don’t waste it.

    • Claire says:

      07:24pm | 04/01/12

      During your parent time people were more self control and causious compare of people of to day they are over crowded, restless and busy bodies. They have no respect for themselves and for others. It only about me me me me. They don’t realize in a flip second your life can change for the worst, you and up dead or cripple for the rest of your life and hurting others the same way. Is it worthy driving drunk,texting, talking or eating because drivers around you can be restless too and destroy your life too and you do not have time to react, How would you feel about that?  You need to be alert all the time while driving to avoid restless drivers around you no body is safe on the road to day. Most drivers have drinking, texting, talking and eating problem on the road not only you. You need all to look after your family, friends and yourself and no one can do it for you only
      you.  Be careful. At least learn from other people mistake because it can happen to you too. Don’t ever say it won’t happen to you and you are a better driver you are wrong it’s happen to great driver too. Don’t be too confident, you might had got away before but one day it might be fatal.

    • Dave says:

      12:45pm | 04/01/12

      There’s an easy solution to make the road’s safer: take out radios, cd players, tape players; remove air conditioners and all the other mod cons. I drive but I also ride motorbikes. Mostly I ride bikes. I dont listen to music or otherwise bugger about when i ride (or drive). I concentrate on riding/driving. From a motorbike the stupidity you see on the roads on a daily basis would far outstrip anything you could possibly see from inside a car. Any experienced motorcyclist will tell you that. Car drivers are basically cocooned from the reality of what they are doing - which is piloting 1 ton of metal and people at often high speeds amongst other similar vehicles. Thats a generally safe activity but when its not the results are disastrous. No doubt some people will say “well, youre suggestion would take all the fun out of driving”. No, it wouldnt; you can have just as much fun driving without all these comforts. If you want to switch off, kick back, and listen to your cd collection, or shot the breeze with your friends, do it in your lounge room - not your car. The inside of a car is not a relaxation room. It is the control room of a vehicle. However the vehicle makers seem to have convinced everyone that they need all the crap in their car for relaxing driving. Thats the real hidden root of the problem. If people want to fix this problem they should get real about what the problem really is. Anything else is just a band aid solution.

    • Em says:

      01:28pm | 04/01/12

      I have to agree with this (to a point).

      I was absolutely horrified the day I found out that you could get DVD players installed in your dashboard… and that some cars came ready-built with this feature.

      WHAT THA?!?!

      However air conditioners, radios and inbuilt GPS are necessary for safe driving.  I have nearly blacked out after a long trip in a car with no aircon on a hot day.  I wasn’t driving but if I had been, I may not have had time to pull over and regroup and could have caused a serious accident.

      Similarly, music has a calming effect on people and GPS is simply a necessity these days.  I lost count of how many times I’d driven past someone with a mapbook in their laps or propped up against the steering wheel as they drove.

      I think all the eletronic mod-cons should be accessible depending on speed.  Phones (specifically the ability to make in/outgoing calls and text - NOT GPS) should be disabled unless the car is completely stationary.

    • Dave says:

      02:09pm | 04/01/12

      The last thing you want to be doing while piloting a vehicle at high speed is relaxing - thats kind of the point Im making. If you want to relax go and sit in your lounge room, dont drive a car. To stay safe you need to be concentrating on what youre doing. Take out all these silly mod cons designed to make you think youre stil in bed with a nice cup of cocoa and you’ll see better driving. Its that simple.

      I dont think you need airconditioning in a car but Im prepared to concede that there are wimps out there who cant handle driving with the window open (which is what I did for my first 25 years or so until cars came equipped with air conditioning).

      And why does anyone need a GPS on their dash (other than maybe a taxi driver?) Are you not able to pre-plan your route or stop and look in a map? Seriously, all this stuff is making car drivers more and more infantile. I do long trips on motorcycles; do you think Im checking my map or a GPS every five minutes? No, I plan my route and if things go pearshaped I stop and check the map. In between that I do an amazing thing - i use my brain to remember where Im supposed to be going (call me old fashioned). Maybe the manufacturers should build GPS in the boot compartment or something so all the chimps driving cars are forced to stop when they cant figure out where theyre going? Inconvenient? slightly. Safer? definitely.

    • Aaron says:

      02:46pm | 04/01/12

      Em, are you also against talking on the phone through a handsfree system? Having hands on the wheel and taking a call through Bluetooth is exactly the same as talking to someone sitting in the passenger seat. You could even argue that it’s safer than talking to a passenger as you never feel the need to make eye contact with the person, thus keeping your eyes on the road at all times.

      Also, GPS is as much a necessity as taking calls while driving (in other words, it’s NOT a necessity at all). In fact, using a GPS is arguably more dangerous than using a handsfree system as people tend to look at the display rather than relying on audio cues to determine their next action. When I take a call through bluetooth, there’s no need for me to take my eyes off the road.

      If you want to force people to pull over when they want to take a call, the same should be applied for when they want to work out where to go next.

    • JT says:

      03:24pm | 04/01/12

      Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

      don’t take my air con or tunes away from me, i get distracted if I am not listening to the music and my mind wanders away from driving. leave me my music!!

    • david says:

      12:51pm | 04/01/12

      The first paragraph sounds dodgy. A truck rides higher than passenger vehicles.  Tracey would not have a clear view of what was going on in the cab (particularly his knees) - especially from the driver’s side.

      As well, focusing on what is going on in the other vehicle (when all it was doing was ‘barreling’) means that Tracey is not fully focused on the road. Dangerous.

      It also may be inappropriate use of the horn…

    • Ned says:

      12:53pm | 04/01/12

      More and more cars have bluetooth hands free where you can answer the phone and talk to someone without even taking your hands off the steering wheel. It would be hard to police when people are doing that.

      Also blocking a phone signal is a bad idea, there would be no genuine way to contain the jamming signal to inside the car, so imagine how well that will go when driving past pedestrians or buildings and passing cars block random phone signals as they travel. Or if you get into a car accident, are trapped in the car and suddenly can’t call for help. Plus I am quite capable of not using my phone while driving, I don’t need some device forced upon me to dictate what I use.

      The only thing you can rely on is education. Idiots will still be idiots no matter how many laws and restrictions are put in place, all you can do is hope that sensible people take the advice and that the idiots are caught before they hurt someone.

    • lOLA says:

      01:35pm | 04/01/12

      What’s with all the nanny state ideas about prohibiting people from texting or talking on the phone when driving? Blocking signals? People have the right to do crash their car and themselves if they want. Yes, it’s annoying if you happen to be in the middle of it all. But you could walk outside your work and a pane of glass could fall on your head. Life is a risk. Get over it.

    • LC says:

      02:40pm | 04/01/12

      Short and straight to the point. I like it.

      Life is indeed risky. Some REASONABLE rules and regulations against those who would make that risk greater intentionally (or in SOME cases through negligence) are perfectly acceptable.

      I fail to see how the suggestion of installing jammers into cars so drivers cannot receive phone reception when the car is turned on is a reasonable restriction, because A. It detrimentally effects other people in the car who AREN’T driving and B. it treats the driver as guilty ‘till proven innocent.

      Sometimes I worry for the future of Australia with persistent attitudes like the author’s floating around, and so many pollies (not just Labor either) so happy to turn ideas they find on back-end comments on News Ltd websites and ACA/TT stories into law. It’s as people don’t care about their own civil liberties and the basic legal principle of of the assumption of innocence that their fathers, grandfathers and great-grandfathers fought and died to protect. At what point is Australia going to say “ENOUGH!”, and by the time that point arrives, will it be too late?

    • Seth Brundle says:

      01:59pm | 04/01/12

      With speeding fines and traffic cameras the way they are, I spend far more time constantly checking my speedo than I would spend looking at my phone while sending a message.

      ‘There was a message in the drafts folder: “I’m on my way to Napier,” it read. The time was 3.59pm, seconds before she crashed.’

      I curious as to why the message was in the drafts folder, and why it would be there seconds BEFORE the accident.  Unless she typed out the message and then deliberatly saved it to drafts right before her accident (but why would she?).  I would have thought that the phone would have had to have been left alone for some time (after the accident, for example) before an automatic time-out would send the message to drafts?  Sounds to me like someone is altering the facts for dramatic effect.

    • Dave says:

      02:12pm | 04/01/12

      I suspect that if youve just killed yourself by ramming a pole you would be leaving your phone alone for quite some time - maybe even while theyre removing your dead body from the wreck? thats probably long enough to time the message out to the drafts folder.

    • Semi Concerned Citizen says:

      02:26pm | 04/01/12

      Some phones if you type a message and hit the no/cancel button it automatically save it to the drafts. Maybe a last convulsion hit the no key instead of the yes key.

    • Seth Brundle says:

      02:41pm | 04/01/12

      Exactly : AFTER the accident.  Please re-read the text I quoted.

    • Ben H says:

      02:22pm | 04/01/12

      Tracey, I agree that it is much safer to pull over, or even text when at the lights. Texting while driving is definitely more dangerous than talking, as it requires extended visual contact. Having said that, I feel that the whopping (for so many) fine (which isn’t even means tested so that those of varying incomes incur a similar punishment) and loss of demerit points already border on harsh.

      Prohibition never stops anything, but actually encourages so many to rebel against the law. Look at drugs, for example.

      How many of us common people have ever had a say in the saturation of communications and media technology in our lives? Sure, we can choose not to purchase, but then we are pariahs. It seems like the same tip of the pyramid swamps our existence with information and gadgets, and then seeks to regulate our behaviour via laws governing the use of those products which it has made so indispensable. Perhaps technology is used as a vehicle to program us as perfect automatons.

      Yes, we are sceptical, and often give the finger to those who claim to want to protect our freedoms by taking them away. This has proven to be the modus operandi of diabolical social engineers who are even willing to take the lives of their own to manufacture perceived threats.

      So it is no wonder that established experts are calling for cars to be ‘manufactured with in-built blockers so drivers cannot receive phone reception when the car is turned on.’ Perhaps the police state could just microchip us all and permanently switch off our bodies if we decide not to acquiesce to total inhibition and enslavement! At this pace, that’s the ‘free and open’ ‘lucky country’ just around the corner.

    • Kevin says:

      02:29pm | 04/01/12

      Every morning i see so many people txting and even blatantly with their phone glued to their ears. Most of those I see are females and worst of all, in school zones where you attention to the road is paramount to ensure the safety of children in the area. After months of yelling abuse at these people, and even once gettting out of my car and confronting the person, nothing changes, so I took another approach. Purchased a Mobile Phone Signal Scambler via ebay. I now only need to press the little red button on the device and all those within about 5 metres of my car will have their phone call drop out and show no signal, the little black button is better though, it makes the phone which is being used screech in a high pitch frequency which certainly shocks those using them at the time. I know the device is probably illegal (even though ex president Bush used these when he visited us here to protect his convoy) but I get a sense of satisfaction that I have interrupted their very important phone call that just couldn’t wait. I love watching the reaction in my rearview mirror when the squeel hits them right in the ear. Mind you, I would never use it while cars are moving at a regular pace, only around danger areas like schools and other safe zones - these idiots deserve everything I can throw at them. I think we should triple the fines and double the demrit poits, only then I believe the incidence of these offences will be reduced - when it REALLY starts to hurt their wallets.

    • Aaron says:

      02:51pm | 04/01/12

      So it upsets you that these people are endangering the safety of children in school zones, but then you say that you enjoy shooting a high pitched screech into their ear in these danger areas to shock them? So what if they freak out and swerve their car, hitting a kid on the footpath? Ridiculous.

      I’m not defending people who talk on the phone in these areas, but your actions certainly aren’t respectable either.

    • EC says:

      03:22pm | 04/01/12

      Either this is a troll (but a well written one for a change) or it takes the cake for the most Passive-Aggressive comment so far today.

    • LC says:

      03:34pm | 04/01/12

      Yes, those devices are very illegal. In fact, they’ve been illegal since before mobile founds ended up in widespread use (since 1992 I believe). Whether or not Bush used one is irrelevant.

      Who the f*ck do you think you are? One of the Watchmen?

      What if someone is making a call to a relative/friend and giving them emergency medical advice, or making a 000 call from their parked car without the engine running? You may very well end up with innocent blood on your hands. Extreme examples, maybe, but don’t think it doesn’t happen.

      What next? Are you going to get a gun off the black market and when you spot a red-light runner, you’ll pull them out of their car and put a bullet between their eyes? The law is there to prevent this sort of tit-for-tat bullsh*t and the direct and indirect consequences it leads to.

      I also find the fact you seem to get pleasure from playing that high pitched noise into people’s ears disturbing.

      @ThePunch mods, I would suggest you forward this guys IP to the AFP, before something really tragic happens because of this fool’s actions.

    • LC says:

      03:38pm | 04/01/12

      @EC, I certainly hope it’s a troll.

    • Ben H says:

      05:39pm | 04/01/12

      You’re either a useless troll, or a downright cockhead for thinking you can interrupt and endanger people’s lives with your petty scrambler. I hope someone takes that thing at sticks it up your arse!

    • bananabender says:

      02:46pm | 04/01/12

      Firstly introduce aviation style driver training:
      1. require a comprehensive medical including a professional eye test
      2. begin driving at 16 (daylight only no passengers) with a licensed instructor
      3. have a 5 year probation period before granting a full licence
      4. require separate driving tests and endorsements for night driving, highway driving, 4x4 and high performance vehicles etc
      5. mandatory suspension of licence for non-trivial traffic offences
      6. mandatory prison sentences for unlicensed driving, DUI, high level speeding and reckless driving.
      7. ban all distractions including loud stereos and handsfree phones
      8. Have income based fines (European countries have fines equivalent to tens of thousands of dollars for serious traffic offences).
      9. ZERO alcohol for all drivers.
      10. Practical driving tests every 5 years (every year after age 70).

    • dd says:

      03:36pm | 04/01/12

      Thank goodness there are some intelligent people out there. Good post.

    • Miles says:

      04:14pm | 04/01/12

      Point 6 - Our prisons would be overflowing in no time!!  This is why the government doesn’t want to actually want to punish people and instead seeks to fine them.  Otherwise they would have to spend more to build more prisons and staff them etc.  Mind you, I still think that would be the way to go.

    • Toby says:

      09:06pm | 04/01/12

      Is this guy a communist?

    • TheGuru says:

      03:03pm | 04/01/12

      ATTENTION IDOITS:

      That is you if you vaguely think it’s okay to txt/talk on a mobile phone whilst driving!  You need to hit a light pole or a very big tree trunk doing 100km/h while texting/talking; that should stop you doing it!  Oh, but you’re also dead!

      It’s funny because it’s also these idiots who are too stupid to setup a Bluetooth pairing!

      Could the idiots please get off the roads!

      Using a Mobile phone while driving should be the same offence as mid-range drink driving.

    • bananabender says:

      05:29pm | 04/01/12

      There is no safe way to use a phone and drive. if you want to talk stop the car.

    • Sheridan says:

      03:25pm | 04/01/12

      Make fines relative to incomes and impound phones, car keys etc. for a week or two.. There’s NO excuse for endangering the lives of others but the and the egocentricity found in today’s society means that not a lot of people really seem to care about things like that.. It’s all very well to say to someone “I didn’t mean to, it was an accident” but it wasn’t your loved one that was killed was it.. Your life isn’t so busy that you can’t spare a thought for others and switch off your phone..

    • Steve says:

      03:31pm | 04/01/12

      Fines, demerit points and loss of licence don’t mean much these days.  They pay the fine, or plead hardship or drive without a licence.  The punishment should prevent reoffending not encourage a different offence.  So first offence, no warnings, crush what ever car they happen to be driving, theirs, mum’s or dad’s.  Unlikely someone will lend you a car after you have had one crushed.  Oh, and leave the mobile in it.  I don’t care if loss of the car causes family hardship, so does having you father, mother, son etc killed or severly injured in a car accident.  They all know it is illegal but do it anyway.  It is a blatant disregard for others safety.  If 50,000 were caught in NSW how many were there really?

    • TheGuru says:

      03:55pm | 04/01/12

      Agree 100%,  crush the car and cancel the licence.

      There is NO excuse, justification or explanation for using a mobile phone while driving.

      We managed before mobile phones!  Nothing has changed!  Why can’t the idiots stop using them now??

      To the idiots:  Here’s an idea, pull over and stop the car if you need to use a mobile phone while driving, it’s not rocket science!!

    • Courtney says:

      04:02pm | 04/01/12

      Forget license disqualification (they’ll just drive anyway, trust me I know plenty of people that do) Take their cars away for 3 months! Make them schlep their way around either by walking, public transport or begging for transportation from a friend.

      But really this is a societal issue. Having a speeding fine is like a red badge of honour to the younger generation. They proudly display the picture and fine on their bedroom wall as a display of their vigilantism.

      Another idea: Tours of a morgue to show the offenders the dead bodies of crash victims. Maybe then they’ll stop thinking it’s “cool” to drink and drive or speed.

    • Cookie says:

      04:04pm | 04/01/12

      All people cauhght texting should be forced to ditch their cars and ride motorcycles no texting there.

    • LC says:

      06:42pm | 04/01/12

      David, at least with a motorcycle an innocent party will be less likely to pay the price for their idiocy.

    • thatmosis says:

      06:14pm | 04/01/12

      I didnt fail to report the accident, bit hard when the car behind the clown that hit me was a copper. As for taking the money, I am a pensioner and couldnt afford to have my car fully covered so thats why i accepted the money. Necessity and all that. As for the bloke that hit me, his father took his phone and car away until he got a job and paid him back and i know this because his father and I still correspond.

    • Roy says:

      07:38pm | 04/01/12

      I did not think anyone was stupid enough to text and drive…...... but then I saw a woman driver yesterday driving more than 60 km/hr and obviously texting as she was looking at her lap for a fairly long period.

    • Toby says:

      09:03pm | 04/01/12

      Time spent driving a car is a great opportunity to catch up on work phone calls and to remain productive.  I will ignore any efforts to try and prevent me from doing my job by restricting phone use in cars.

    • Burton Erni says:

      09:10pm | 04/01/12

      I go off at folks I see texting in cars next to me as I drive. My wife gets up me asking what concern is it to me what others do. I always remind her that the motorcyclist that they might kill while texting could be her husband: me! It hasn’t sunk in to her yet. Maybe if I wake up in hospital injured she might support me in my anger.

    • jase says:

      10:06pm | 04/01/12

      Everyone overlooks the obvious cause and solution to the problem. Clearly we have a complacency problem if people find reasonable to text, make calls, eat, drink or whatever takes your fancy.

      The clear solution would be to increase the speed limit, to a speed at which drivers no longer feel complacent and focus on driving. I know for a fact that when the speed limit is set at a speed which is way too low for the conditions, you have a tendency to get distracted. Think about this for a minute, peoples minds wander, they fiddle with stereos and generally do not focus. If you claim this does not happen you are either not a very capable driver, or you are lying to yourself.

      The obvious solution would result in less revenue from “speed fines” so it will never happen. Oh and btw its been proven to work in countries such as Germany, where driving is a hell of a lot faster, and much much safer.

    • Underling says:

      05:55am | 05/01/12

      You do realise Tracey, you have broken the law by using your horn in such a way.

      It’s not meant to be a device to converse with people, it’s for emergencies only.

      Not only that, it’s hazardous to alarm a distracted person in such a way. Had he been surprised by you tooting, he may have slammed on his brakes or jerked the wheel involuntarily.

      Where were you looking while you were watching his antics?

    • prosperity says:

      08:27am | 05/01/12

      Don’t worry, mobile phones are no more than a passing fad and by the end of 2012 we’ll all be back to hula hoops.  (Banned while driving).

    • Colin says:

      08:43am | 05/01/12

      People who drink drive or text drive have no regard for people or other road users. If they crash and kill only themselves, I really don’t care. You can fine them all you want, but people will never learn until it’s too late.

    • Nik says:

      11:17am | 06/01/12

      I know people who drive better while reading a newspaper and steering with their knees than most of the drivers out there today. If we put more emphasis on river training and less on “punishment” in the way of fines, deaths would surely go down.

      That or we can set speed limits to 30 km/h to make sure when all the idiot drivers out there crash, they won’t kill themselves. Lets face it, who can be bothered training people right? Lets just reduce speed limits everywhere rather than teach people how to handle the 1 - 2 tonne vehicle’s you all keep proving you’re incapable of driving.

    • Mark says:

      06:57pm | 06/01/12

      i recently sent an email to QLD police suggesting that, particuarly during festive seasons, the penalty for drink driving, speeding, and hell, add mobile phone use to the list, should be a $20,000 fine and loss of licence for 12 months with no avenue for appeal

      it would stop some - but not all

    • Zopo says:

      01:43pm | 09/01/12

      It doesn’t help that all new cars have Bluetooth connections, iPod connectivity, GPS, and every other control you can think of.

      If the studies are correct shouldn’t car manufacturers reduce this technology in cars so we can all focus on driving.

      I heard its even illegal to answer a call if you are driving even if you have an earpiece.. whats the difference with that and turning the volume up on your radio?

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

#markwebber just wasted petrol faster than everyone else in monaco #f1

Anthony Sharwood

In my sports column on The Punch tomorrow: why Eurovision was easily the best game on the weekend. Mummy bloggers, you'll like this one!

Daniel Piotrowski

The Logies could learn a lot from Eurovision #lamethings#sbseurovision

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @ellehardytweets: Already despondent about the next fifty one weeks. #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter