PMSL. You are getting weirder new ■■■■■■■ every day mate 
robroy:
Looks like we both agree then.
But I promise not to call you ‘Princess’ as I have just bizzarely been.
Cheers sweetheart 
The courts don’t seem all that interested.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article … cence.html
£90 fine + £20 victim surcharge + 5 penalty points for killing a young lad crossing the road whilst chatting on mobile phone (but she wasn’t holding the phone in her hand)
Bluey Circles:
The courts don’t seem all that interested.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article … cence.html
£90 fine + £20 victim surcharge + 5 penalty points for killing a young lad crossing the road whilst chatting on mobile phone (but she wasn’t holding the phone in her hand)
I am not trivialising this at all, it was tragic and I would hate to think it was any of my kids, so I’ll just say that before I get a load of grief on here from the hard of thinking. 
.
Thing is these things happen, accidents, and they have happened long before mobile phones were in cars.
Millions of other conversations took place on phones in cars that tragic day with no events or accidents.
So at the same time, one tragic notable event out of those millions, a young lad was killed who did not see a car coming, the driver was charged with dangerous driving because she did not see him either, and she got an arguable lenient sentence.
At the end of the day the ‘contributing factor’ thing was one guy’s (the Judge) own personal opinion, where as another judge on another day may have thought entirely different, or maybe not, who knows? but opinions none the less. 
That is my point, so now some MP somwhere wanting to make a name for himself, to further his career, will take this opportunity, and will inevitably jump on it, look at mobile phone use in cars and trucks, and call for a ‘Total Ban’ …as usual in these cases to pander to the minority who share that view.
Then a dozen of his mates will give a ‘hear hear’ to him in Parliament, and before we know it we are all looking for MSAs and lay bys, just to make a phone call, even though we have made millions hands free in the past with absolutely no problem.
It all comes down to common sense, also policing, monitoring and upholding, NOT first option/knee jerk reaction impulsive banning , not just in this subject but in many examples and cases.
Soap box back in cupboard. 
robroy:
Bluey Circles:
The courts don’t seem all that interested.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article … cence.html
£90 fine + £20 victim surcharge + 5 penalty points for killing a young lad crossing the road whilst chatting on mobile phone (but she wasn’t holding the phone in her hand)I am not trivialising this at all, it was tragic and I would hate to think it was any of my kids, so I’ll just say that before I get a load of grief on here from the hard of thinking.
.
Thing is these things happen, accidents, and they have happened long before mobile phones were in cars.
Millions of other conversations took place on phones in cars that tragic day with no events or accidents.
So at the same time, one tragic notable event out of those millions, a young lad was killed who did not see a car coming, the driver was charged with dangerous driving because she did not see him either, and she got an arguable lenient sentence.At the end of the day the ‘contributing factor’ thing was one guy’s (the Judge) own personal opinion, where as another judge on another day may have thought entirely different, or maybe not, who knows? but opinions none the less.
That is my point, so now some MP somwhere wanting to make a name for himself, to further his career, will take this opportunity, and will inevitably jump on it, look at mobile phone use in cars and trucks, and call for a ‘Total Ban’ …as usual in these cases to pander to the minority who share that view.
Then a dozen of his mates will give a ‘hear hear’ to him in Parliament, and before we know it we are all looking for MSAs and lay bys, just to make a phone call, even though we have made millions hands free in the past with absolutely no problem.
It all comes down to common sense, also policing, monitoring and upholding, NOT first option/knee jerk reaction impulsive banning , not just in this subject but in many examples and cases.
Soap box back in cupboard.
so do you think the £90 fine was harsh ?
I thought mobile use whilst driving attracted a fixed penalty £100 - somehow she has got a little discount.
Bluey Circles:
robroy:
Bluey Circles:
The courts don’t seem all that interested.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article … cence.html
£90 fine + £20 victim surcharge + 5 penalty points for killing a young lad crossing the road whilst chatting on mobile phone (but she wasn’t holding the phone in her hand)I am not trivialising this at all, it was tragic and I would hate to think it was any of my kids, so I’ll just say that before I get a load of grief on here from the hard of thinking.
.
Thing is these things happen, accidents, and they have happened long before mobile phones were in cars.
Millions of other conversations took place on phones in cars that tragic day with no events or accidents.
So at the same time, one tragic notable event out of those millions, a young lad was killed who did not see a car coming, the driver was charged with dangerous driving because she did not see him either, and she got an arguable lenient sentence.At the end of the day the ‘contributing factor’ thing was one guy’s (the Judge) own personal opinion, where as another judge on another day may have thought entirely different, or maybe not, who knows? but opinions none the less.
That is my point, so now some MP somwhere wanting to make a name for himself, to further his career, will take this opportunity, and will inevitably jump on it, look at mobile phone use in cars and trucks, and call for a ‘Total Ban’ …as usual in these cases to pander to the minority who share that view.
Then a dozen of his mates will give a ‘hear hear’ to him in Parliament, and before we know it we are all looking for MSAs and lay bys, just to make a phone call, even though we have made millions hands free in the past with absolutely no problem.
It all comes down to common sense, also policing, monitoring and upholding, NOT first option/knee jerk reaction impulsive banning , not just in this subject but in many examples and cases.
Soap box back in cupboard.so do you think the £90 fine was harsh ?
I thought mobile use whilst driving attracted a fixed penalty £100 - somehow she has got a little discount.
Don’t really know mate, I aint a judge.
If the guideline fine is 90 to 100 for that particular offence, fair enough.
As for killing the young lad, as a seperate penalty, no I don’t think her sentence was harsh enough, death by dangerous driving.? manslaughter?.. Who knows.
As I said I aint a judge.
If we are talking about people using/holding phones while driving, I’d say set/leave the fine at £60 and use ALL the money to increase resources to catch even more bellends that are looking at their phones and not the road! 
I’m disgusted by the amount of people you see reading something on their phone while driving…
Agree with you there Beez. The amount of texters seems to be increasing every day.
eagerbeaver:
Agree with you there Beez. The amount of texters seems to be increasing every day.
An old mate of mine went over a car in Newcastle about 10 yrs ago, when it met him on a blind bend on the wrong side of the road…his side.
The young girl driver was killed outright, they checked her phone she had been texting at the precise time of the collision to her friend …‘‘Meet you in the Metr’’ (o Centre) she never finished the text.
It affected my mate badly, never see him now but last heard that he jacked in driving because of it.