Can you use an ipad while driving?

[LTDHO]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Its not a hand held phone is it, what do you think?

Is it a smart thing to do while you are driving, taking your eyes off the road for an extended period of time? Not really and if it resulted in an a crash, the charge of "driving without due care" has your name written on it.

I'm asking the question to be answered, not asked back.

How can it be ever proven? so a 'Driving without due care' charge will never stand.

[screaminB]

Originally Posted by mickxr8

ipad+driver =istupid

my 2c

i agree 100% only thing that should be in your hands is the wheel.!!

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

I'm asking the question to be answered, not asked back.

How can it be ever proven? so a 'Driving without due care' charge will never stand.

I did answer your question, the installed head unit of a car is not a hand held mobile phone, refer to the legislation that someone else was good enough to post.

As for the "driving without due care", it is a charge that sticks often. They do not have to prove exactly what you were doing, just that the events that occurred and the way they occurred would not have happened if you were driving with due care.

Not that this is something I really have any desire to talk about this less than 12 hours after cutting a brain injured person 5 years younger than me out of his car with a brain injury after he went head on into another car, probably road fatality number 4 for me this year.

Serious crash, Camp Hill: Police are currently at the scene of a serious head-on collision which occurred at Camp Hill this morning. A sedan was travelling south on Stanley Road about 3.45am when it appears to have crested a hill and collided head-on with a taxi. Each vehicle contained only a male driver. The driver of the sedan was trapped in his vehicle and had to be cut from the wreckage. He has been taken to hospital in a critical condition. The taxi driver received serious injuries which are not considered life-threatening.

This is the police press release. This crash occurred in a 60 kph zone and it appears the driver of the sedan may have been on the wrong side of the road based on initial scene appearance (forensic crash will confirm). Someone was not driving with due care and this is the price that people pay.

So next time you look down to adjust track whilst driving assess the risk, perhaps the next red light or pulling over might be a better idea. 10 seconds of inconvenience may be better than death or a lifetime with a brain injury (not said directly at you LTDHO but a general point for everyone).

[LTDHO]

Those in the emergeny services may think it stick, but it doesn't.

Unless you are speeding, you can do what you want out there!

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

Those in the emergeny services may think it stick, but it doesn't.

Unless you are speeding, you can do what you want out there!

It does when you have a crash as a result.

What information or experience are you making your statements based on? Is this personal experience or just opinion based on the what you see in the media or reading forums such as this?

The reason I ask this is in my experience I have talked to many cops about the causes of crashes that I have attended and many times a driver is being or will be charged with failure to drive with due care. It is amazing what admissions people make after they have been in a crash thinking it will excuse their causing a crash.

Perhaps one of the biggest issues we have is that attitude that "Unless you are speeding, you can do what you want out there". To me this attitude that I read so often here hints the person making that statement does believe at least subconsciously that they can do anything as long as they don't speed.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Or any member of the emergency services.

It is not illegal for any member of the emergency services to use a device for communication including mobile phones whilst driving, as long as they are using due care and attention.

The individual services have a condition under their code of conduct that states they are to only use a mobile phone whilst driving in emergency situations. Failure to comply with this can result in disciplinary action and legal action if it results in a negligent act. We are certainly under tighter scrutiny than the average road user.

An example in the ambulance service is if we were driving to hospital, the officer in the back is too busy with the patient and the driver has to consult with the hospital to gain urgent medical advice, authorisation for advanced clinical procedures, arrange a meeting point with an intensive care paramedic or notify the hospital of the expected arrival time of a multiple trauma patient so that they can be prepared.

All these situations call for rapid and reliable communications that a radio is often inappropriate and delay could be life threatening.

I am very sure the police have the same sort of situations, trust me, radio communications are not available everywhere in all conditions.

As for the topic of this thread, why do we need to define every electronic device as they are released? Next people will be asking if it is legal to read an electronic book whilst driving. Common sense has to come in at some stage.

I dont get it why emergency services vehicles dont have handsfree / bluetooth car kits, the police still dont use them?? I see detectives driving around all day in plain cars using mobiles, its an insult to the rest of us who are just doing our jobs when we all play by the rules and run handsfree carkits...

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by bfiipursuit

I dont get it why emergency services vehicles dont have handsfree / bluetooth car kits, the police still dont use them?? I see detectives driving around all day in plain cars using mobiles, its an insult to the rest of us who are just doing our jobs when we all play by the rules and run handsfree carkits...

One simple answer, cost.

To fit out all QAS vehicles with hands free kits and supply a mobile phone would cost in excess of $2000 per vehicle. Multiply that by the number of vehicles, lets just say 1000 for example (not sure how many there are in QAS but it is probably more) and you are looking at $2m initial expense plus ongoing service costs. . There is not the budget required for this, we have only just received sat nav in each vehicle after years of asking for them and that was only about $400 per vehicle, what chance do we have of getting phones? At the moment it is only Intensive Care Paramedics and Station Officers that get mobiles and car fit outs.

The police would be in the same boat as us, most do not get work phones either.

Things may change for them a bit once bluetooth becomes more common in the base vehicles they use as they will be able to hook up to the vehicle bluetooth. It will be a lot longer before we have that advantage as our base vehicles are glorified delivery vans and not many of those come with bluetooth standard.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

One simple answer, cost.

To fit out all QAS vehicles with hands free kits and supply a mobile phone would cost in excess of $2000 per vehicle. Multiply that by the number of vehicles, lets just say 1000 for example (not sure how many there are in QAS but it is probably more) and you are looking at $2m initial expense plus ongoing service costs. . There is not the budget required for this, we have only just received sat nav in each vehicle after years of asking for them and that was only about $400 per vehicle, what chance do we have of getting phones? At the moment it is only Intensive Care Paramedics and Station Officers that get mobiles and car fit outs.

The police would be in the same boat as us, most do not get work phones either.

Things may change for them a bit once bluetooth becomes more common in the base vehicles they use as they will be able to hook up to the vehicle bluetooth. It will be a lot longer before we have that advantage as our base vehicles are glorified delivery vans and not many of those come with bluetooth standard.

Yeh I see your point but the rest of the world has had to cover the costs, so really why shouldnt they?

The last bluetooth kit I had to get fitted was in my 2005 Territory and it only cost me $395 back then, im sure if you were doing alot of them they would probably only cost $250 now, plus most peoples phones have bluetooth! It just makes more sense to me.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by bfiipursuit

Yeh I see your point but the rest of the world has had to cover the costs, so really why shouldnt they?

The last bluetooth kit I had to get fitted was in my 2005 Territory and it only cost me $395 back then, im sure if you were doing alot of them they would probably only cost $250 now, plus most peoples phones have bluetooth! It just makes more sense to me.

I do see your point and to a degree I agree with you.

The problem is it is not the service coughing up the cash, it is the public and they do not want to pay any more. Could you imagine if they increased the amount of the compulsory ambulance contribution in QLD to cover this expense? The public would not be happy. We don't cover our costs, you cover our cost.

So with no additional increase in budget, the money has to come from somewhere, meaning the service misses out on additional paramedics (an extra 75 across QLD under the new budget), additional stations (a large number coming soon), new monitor/defibrillators, new vehicles to replace some of our aging fleet etc. The trade off has to come from somewhere and personally I would prefer to loose something like a phone and get a new $25,000 monitor/defibrillator, more paramedics at about $70,000 a year or a new $160,000 vehicle instead. These things are going to assist me deliver a better service to the public a lot more each day rather than a phone and handsfree that I will rarely use.

Added to that, unfortunately kits with microphones mounted in the interior do not work well in an emergency service environment as the microphones pick up too much ambient noise and make communication difficult, if not impossible. It needs to be remembered that in our vehicle we do not have a stereo that can be muted during the call. We often have an engine that is working hard, sirens going and communication radios that are pretty loud so we can hear them over the siren. I have just been doing Station officer and had a mobile phone and handsfree fitted to the turbo diesel Hilux that I had, In a code one drive the handsfree is pointless, you can not hear well enough and all the other person can hear is the siren.

[LTDHO]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

It does when you have a crash as a result.

What information or experience are you making your statements based on? Is this personal experience or just opinion based on the what you see in the media or reading forums such as this?

The reason I ask this is in my experience I have talked to many cops about the causes of crashes that I have attended and many times a driver is being or will be charged with failure to drive with due care. It is amazing what admissions people make after they have been in a crash thinking it will excuse their causing a crash.

Perhaps one of the biggest issues we have is that attitude that "Unless you are speeding, you can do what you want out there". To me this attitude that I read so often here hints the person making that statement does believe at least subconsciously that they can do anything as long as they don't speed.

I deal with the aftermath, and deal with TOG and vitcims. Not from forums or media.

Oh and it's not the attitude, it's the fact. "Safety cameras" don't pick up those who are on the phone, driving wrecklessly, driving un-roadworthy cars, etc. Camera's only pick up those going 3klm or mor over the limit.

So "Unless you are speeding, you can do what you want out there".
Oh and this is not my moto and I do not endorse this.

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by Yellow_Festiva

It does highlight the stupidity of it however. What about the use of CB radio? Pressing / programing a low set car stero, those computer things cabbies use for communication etc etc etc?.

i've often ridden with our forestry guys, and seen them clumsily reach for the CB while driving. it's an odd exception.

Originally Posted by the_article

Next, let’s not forget CB radios: using a CB (or any other type of two-way radio) is allowed – even though you have to physically hold the microphone and remember to press to talk, complexities that don’t pertain to use of a mobile telephone in speaker-phone mode.

what's so hard about remembering to press to talk?

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

I deal with the aftermath, and deal with TOG and vitcims. Not from forums or media.

Oh and it's not the attitude, it's the fact. "Safety cameras" don't pick up those who are on the phone, driving wrecklessly, driving un-roadworthy cars, etc. Camera's only pick up those going 3klm or mor over the limit.

So "Unless you are speeding, you can do what you want out there".
Oh and this is not my moto and I do not endorse this.

I agree with you, cameras do not pick up other offences and I would personally prefer to see many more police cars, both marked and unmarked on the road. Unfortunately the simple fact is that each extra police unit costs about $250,000 to $300,000 minimum per annum to run, where is that extra funding going to come from? A camera unit is much cheaper to run over the term of a year and like it or not, they do slow the public down. Is that moving the problem from one area to another, such as from speeding to driver inattention? It probably is but what is a better solution?

As for the notion of "as long as you don't speed, you can get away with anything", I understand that you do not intentionally endorse that theory, but by making the statement you do spread the notion, whether intentional or not. Some here, perhaps due to missing your intent due to it being printed word, will believe you and have that ideal implanted into their consciousness and therefore influence their actions and decisions.

That is why I never make that statement nor do I ever support it, in fact I vigorously oppose it (whether it may have an element of truth or not). I would prefer that the public have the belief that there is always a high potential of being caught and prosecuted for traffic offences, any place and any time. The more people that believe that, the easier my job is and the less people I have to scrape off roads and peel out of cars.

I hope that makes sense and please understand that I am not trying to be insulting or have a go at you. I just do not understand the spreading of that notion by people that have either a professional or personal concern regarding road safety.

Peace and happy/safe motoring.

[dogfish]

What about eating/drinking and driving that is just as distracting as being on your phone if not more.
one hand digging round a bag looking for fries whilst chomping down a burger trying not to spill it on yourself whilst the drink and it's holder sit precariously somewhere in the front of the vehicle ready to topple at any given point.
human instinct will make the driver (IF ALONE) try to save one of the following from spilling as they do not want to damage or stain there interior or their clothes etc etc.
I have done this myself whilst driving long trips and it is dangerous.

[kyro_02]

nothing new, i call and dial using my iphone, nothing stopping me using my gps , and nothing will stop me using an ipad... all whilst driving, oh guess what, never had an accident, let alone will i ever have one when i use such devices!

****'n newbies!

ps: I also use my thighs to steer while I eat take-away food whilst driving

I like having personal choices, that's why I do it, stupid dictators.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by kyro_02

nothing new, i call and dial using my iphone, nothing stopping me using my gps , and nothing will stop me using an ipad... all whilst driving, oh guess what, never had an accident, let alone will i ever have one when i use such devices!

****'n newbies!

ps: I also use my thighs to steer while I eat take-away food whilst driving

I like having personal choices, that's why I do it, stupid dictators.

Yep, and all the other people I have been to after a crash because of the same actions thought the same as you, until the crash.

I hope you are joking.

[04redxr8]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

I deal with the aftermath, and deal with TOG and vitcims. Not from forums or media.

Oh and it's not the attitude, it's the fact. "Safety cameras" don't pick up those who are on the phone, driving wrecklessly, driving un-roadworthy cars, Drink Driving etc. Camera's only pick up those going 3klm or mor over the limit.
So "Unless you are speeding, you can do what you want out there".
Oh and this is not my moto and I do not endorse this.

Unforutnately this is the attitude I have been seeing for the last 5-6 years in the construction industry.

The attitude stems from a very clear lack of Police on the roads in Queensland. When you do see a Police officer they have forgotten all Police procedures.

I got pulled over last week (no numberplates), and while I was surprised to be breath tested, I offered my license to the officers. They didn't want to look at it.

What happened to Police doing warrant checks and license validity checks on people who are pulled over?? The state of the Police force (I'm assuming its those allegedly running our states police force) in Queensland is woeful. Lately it seems the only authority they seem to have is setting up Revenue Cameras, and commandeering the station photocopier.

Beauracratic madness.

[roadrage77]

Just because something is legal doesn't make it right.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I agree with you, cameras do not pick up other offences and I would personally prefer to see many more police cars, both marked and unmarked on the road. Unfortunately the simple fact is that each extra police unit costs about $250,000 to $300,000 minimum per annum to run, where is that extra funding going to come from? A camera unit is much cheaper to run over the term of a year and like it or not, they do slow the public down. Is that moving the problem from one area to another, such as from speeding to driver inattention? It probably is but what is a better solution?

As for the notion of "as long as you don't speed, you can get away with anything", I understand that you do not intentionally endorse that theory, but by making the statement you do spread the notion, whether intentional or not. Some here, perhaps due to missing your intent due to it being printed word, will believe you and have that ideal implanted into their consciousness and therefore influence their actions and decisions.

That is why I never make that statement nor do I ever support it, in fact I vigorously oppose it (whether it may have an element of truth or not). I would prefer that the public have the belief that there is always a high potential of being caught and prosecuted for traffic offences, any place and any time. The more people that believe that, the easier my job is and the less people I have to scrape off roads and peel out of cars.

I hope that makes sense and please understand that I am not trying to be insulting or have a go at you. I just do not understand the spreading of that notion by people that have either a professional or personal concern regarding road safety.

Peace and happy/safe motoring.

Even at $300,000 a year to run each car has only got to recover $1000 a day. If you cant make $1000 out of an undercover hwp car a day then theres something seriously WRONG, down in logan city I could just about make that an hour out of a plain coloured GT.

The funny part is we see 15 - 20 police cars parked on the side of roadworks every night around Brisbane, burning petrol doing nothing with a happy meal monster sitting there playing with himself!! Its got me stuffed as to why we need to have a police car on every km of road works when we have private organisations with flashing lights sitting there, why not just give them blue and red lights?

[Hardtopxb]

Any idiot can use an Ipad while driving. Any sensible person would not..

[kinksta]

Originally Posted by XR-CHIEF

Why is that a problem? It is part of their job, how would you feel if you were in a life or death situation and there were problems with the radio comms (happens a lot) and because of some stupid law they have to pull over and add 5 or so minutes to their response time and they were late to assist you leaving you with multiple broken bones and lacerations?

Interesting you know this...i was next to an officer at the lights and i heard quote, "nah forget Gary, just get a slab and head round to mine, f#$k Gary, he'll ruin the night."

So unless slab and Gary are code for something else, they don't always use them for work situations.

Poor Gary mind you.

[GORDZ]

how is an ipad different from any other device in the car?