Slashdot Mirror
For New Zealanders, No More Phones As Sat-Nav Devices
rixth writes "From the 1st of November, it will be illegal to use cell phones while driving in New Zealand. Today, the Government clarified that you can't use your mobile phone as a navigational device, even if it is mounted on the dash board."
" 2 degrees chief executive Eric Hertz admitted rear-ending another vehicle at an intersection in Auckland a few weeks ago while glancing at directions on his iPhone, which was mounted on a hands-free kit in his car. Under the new law, that would be illegal"
If the law takes that tact then It makes me wonder how children being taken to school rates on the distract-o-meter.
As little johnny stabs his sister with a blunt pencil, I would presume it to be less so than an iPhone on the dashboard.
But yes, it would be political suicide to go near that hot potato.
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
you can, only its going to cost you $30 instead of $300.
No, it's a dumb decison. Take the most popular smartphone - the iPhone. I have one running Tomtom Navigator, and I also have a standalone Tomtom 720. They're pretty much identical: approximately the same size screen, no hardware buttons - just touchscreen, with the same interface. Why should they be treated differently? My old WinMo handsets running Tomtom were much the same: same interface, same operation.
As you should do it in all cases - park your car, enter the destination, wait for the route calculation, go on driving.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
There are already (I'm in the UK) laws against driving without due care and attention. They passed a law to specifically cover sending text messages, and generally touching your phone at all (i.e. a bluetooth headset is OK, but hand-dialling isn't) which you can kind of understand, but what's next? Passing a law making it illegal to eat an apple whilst driving? To tune your car radio?
The point is there are a large number of activities that are a Bad Idea whilst driving, including talking to passengers. You don't need a law for each and every one.
... when you're a company that makes dedicated car navigation devices. Ain't it great when the guv'ment creates a captive audience for what you happen to be selling? All the auto insurance CEOs jizzed all over themselves the day that California mandated auto insurance but then didn't provide any. The same thing happened twice again when California also mandated helmets for motorcycles and bicycles, but then didn't provide any and didn't even use the state's collective buying power to negotiate a good deal for all the state citizens. Of course they should have done at least that much for auto insurance, too (and they kinda did, very belatedly).
Let's see if New Zealand screws up just as bad or surprise everybody and do it right. If you're gonna require something by law - or effectively do the same thing by banning something else - you'd damned well better keep a lid on the profiteering that is sure to ensue.
Legally that's correct - you must have both hands on the wheel otherwise legally you're not in control of the car. I presume there are exceptions for changing gear..
In this case the key phrase is "she negotiated a left turn with an apple in her right hand". She wasn't just driving - she was trying to turn with one hand on the wheel. The was then issued a fixed penalty notice for what would normally be considered a minor breach of the law - she refused that remedy, demanding a court appearence - hence the cost to defend the case.
Most of the "dedicated' GPS units on the market actually have bluetooth which technically turns them into proxy mobile phones. So aren't they really saying that almost all GPS units are now illegal?
So you can make calls on a mobile (in a cradle) while driving, and use a GPS while driving, but you can't use a phone in a cradle as a GPS????
Holding a phone to your ear not only ties up a hand, but also probably means you're having a conversation.
A sat nav, on the other hand, is designed so that you don't have to touch it once it's set up. Its voice instructions are designed so you don't usually have to even look at it. If you do have to look at it, it's designed so that a glance is sufficient.
What's more, many people's alternative to a sat nav is to refer to a paper map while driving. That's obviously more of a distraction.
BTW - Studies have shown that having a phone conversation is more distracting than having a conversation with a passenger. Something to do with passengers knowing when to give you space to concentrate on a road hazard. Do your own Googling.
Not only that, but you can concentrate on the road instead of the highway signs looking where you are going, as well as not having to squint for the random road sign, or when you are close to your destination, looking at house numbers. Less miles driven due to being lost as well, as well as a lot less anxiety in a new place - I would say sat navigation makes the road safer overall.
Except for the idiots who a) take it too literally and ignore road signs the satnav doesn't know about (like some one-way systems that aren't on its maps, or junctions that aren't really there, or U-turns that you could take but probably shouldn't), b) just enter a destination and get lost because it isn't accurate enough or it picked the wrong one, c) decide that the best time to fiddle with the route is while still driving or d) leave all of their indicating and moving to the last minute rather than having planned ahead even vaguely.
I was told people who have a driver's licence are qualified to operate a car.
you were lied to. People with a license simply passed a very easy and incredibly rudimentary testing. They are not skilled enough to safely drive a car, they are not educated in collision avoidance or defensive driving.
At least here in the USA, it's that way. Honestly, around here a baked potato can get a drivers license.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Passengers should be banned, too. That increases reaction time. Hell, anything you do other than keenly staring ahead and in your mirrors reduces reaction time.
Driving is dangerous. We already have laws that ban dangerous and distracted driving... if someone is being dangerous, pull them over. Do we not have video cameras for evidence?
Banning everything someone might do piecemeal is asinine. Stupid people will find a way to do stupid things without explicitly breaking the law.
BTW, those cell-phone studies were almost certainly done with people right at the legal limit for "drunk" driving. Makes you think about how stupidly low those limits are, eh? MADD is a prohibitionist organization.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Yes, but people with passengers in the car WITH them actually recovers a bit from risk from what you would see with cell phones, as apparently passengers, during a tricky driving moment or such, know when to shut up or may even alert the driver to dangers in the road. The studies on this have already accounted for that factor.
Dispute the facts all you want, but driving and talking on a cell phone depletes attentional resources considerably.