As per radio news today, soon lighting cig while driving will be an offence just like using mobile phone while driving.
It also said that govt. is also considering whether to ban smoking altogether while driving.
It has been updated in new Highway Code.
tinyurl.com/38dz8f
|
Having seen the rigmarole of lighting up, changing gear etc. that my Mum used to go through when driving I'm not altogether surprised that it's been realised that drivers with a hot, burning item in one hand are not fully able to control a car at all times.
Steady 70 on a straight, dry, well-lit M-way, perhaps, but the lanes of Hampshire were a challenge for my Mum.
|
As a motorcyclist I'd support a ban if it put an end to having lit fag ends thrown out of car windows and into my lap (yes it does happen)!
Why do smokers think anything outside their car can be used as an ashtray???
But then aren't we supposed to have anti-litter laws to deal with that????
|
From the interviews that I heard this morning - smoking won't be an offence in itself. However if you have a prang and police decide that the cause was your smoking then they will prosecute for "due car and attention" etc.
Personally, I think all smoking should be banned unless "smoke free" equipment is installed.
|
"if you have a prang and police decide that the cause was your smoking"
Perhaps the new defence will be that you were out of your tree because you couldn't have a smoke. Think of all the stressed-out motorists in traffic jams, unable to have a calming puff...
You'd think this government would know about the law of unintended consequences by now!
|
|
|
|
......... into my lap
When you're astride a motorcycle and your legs are apart, do you actually have a lap?
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
|
|
Having seen the rigmarole of lighting up changing gear etc.
OK lets ban smoking - good as I am going through one of my quitting stages again!!
also let's ban all manual cars as we can't possibly be in full control of a car without having 2 hands on the wheel at all times. Then we might as well ban picking your nose (esp if you eat what comes out) etc etc.
where does this all end?
I actually think that smoking probably saves (ironic I know!!) more lives in cars than it takes away. How many drivers light up when they are tired and this prevents them from nodding off? Well by my own experience, I am sure quite a few.
|
"I actually think that smoking probably saves (ironic I know!!) more lives in cars than it takes away. How many drivers light up when they are tired and this prevents them from nodding off? "
Pah! And chatting on the mobile stops you nodding off as well ......... ?
|
Pah or not! it is a short term fix for tiredness.
The one thing (I know going off topic) that I find very strange is that a lot of motoring organisations, and I think the police as well, recommend that you have one of these caffeinated energy drinks when you are tired. Surely pumping your body full of (legal) drugs is no substitute for a bit of shut eye.
|
|
|
|
Well, LJK Setright would turn in his grave... My affections for him were sealed when I read an article of his expounding on the, perhaps, greatest pleasure known to man (or woman) : driving a fast car whilst smoking.
Depriving an addict of their fix does seem a slightly contradictory way of increasing their concentration levels, but I suppose non-addicts don't understand addiction. As long as the law doesn't specifically prohibit the rolling of cigarettes whilst driving, to which I guiltily confess, (although from reading the outline changes proposed - any activity causing 'distraction' is fair game) the years of surreptitous smoking I've practiced in various non-smoking environments should stand me in good stead.
|
"Depriving an addict of their fix"
Which is why I always carry my hip flask...
:-)
|
"Depriving an addict of their fix"
I hate driving when there are smokers in the car. If you open the window to get rid of the smell your line of blow ends up in the back seat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your right - its comming.
The law is increasingly strict in regulation factors that increase the risk of road accidents - could be drink driving or lighting up. Both risk factors.
Weather it's right depends on how you view risk.
-----------------------------------------------
Torque means nothing without RPM
|
Just how more fascist can our government get?
Is there any data showing a causal link between smoking and accidents? If not then they should not be allowed to bring in a new law, we have far too many already, mostly badly written.
The only positive upside is that they might decide that it's worth putting out more traffic cops to catch these criminals who dare flout the law by enjoying a ciggie whilst driving. Then people will start to drive better, rather than just thinking that the only need is to stick rigidly to whatever the arbitrary posted limit is.
--
I read often, only post occasionally
|
Just how more fascist can our government get?
Or even the Department for Transport.
|
>> Just how more fascist can our government get? Or even the Department for Transport.
soon we will be made to drive around whilst carrying a little red book of what we can and can't do.
|
|
|
|
>>more traffic cops to catch these criminals who dare flout the law by enjoying a ciggie whilst driving.
What are they, traffic cops I mean,rarely seen except outside cafes,it will be like mobile phone use, some get caught but most get away with using them, so smoking at the wheel will be no different
>>Then people will start to drive better
I doubt giving up smoking while driving will make for better driving,but I suppose we all live in hope it may
Apparently its the dropping of lighted fags in the lap that causes the accidents and so the ban
|
|
|
Is there any data showing a causal link between smoking and accidents? If not then they should not be allowed to bring in a new law we have far too many already mostly badly written.
Link: smoking -> Cancer -> deaths <- accidents ??????
-----------------------------------------------
2005 Ford Mondeo Zetec 2.0 TDCi 130ps
|
|
|
|
Can we have car stereos removed then, as that causes a distraction along with a ban on conversations or arguments with passengers, and removal of all controls or dials on the dash that aren't strictly required to operate the car? Then we'd better do something about unnecessary road signs, and attractive members of the opposite sex walking along the pavement in scanty summer clothing....
I suspect all of these contribute just as much to accidents as smoking behind the wheel.
Cheers
DP
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
|
Then we'd better do something about .......attractive members of the opposite sex walking along the pavement in scanty summer clothing....
Must remember not to put on my scanty shorts and t-shirt next summer in case all those ladies drive off the road at the sight of me!
|
|
I have a device fitted in the ashtray which both holds and lights my cigarettes. I have a long tube fitted to the cigarette so that I can do "hands free" smoking>
|
|
|
As this is a non sexist website - surely the above should read:
"Must remember not to put on my scanty shorts and t-shirt next summer in case all those ladies and gentlemen drive off the road at the sight of me!"
If I were you, I'd keep the overcoat on! :)
|
Since when have scientific facts driven legislation? Or facts influenced action?
See the Lancet's scathing attack on GB's proposed new MRSA iniatiative... basically they say it's bull testicles.
See WMD.
I loathe smoking but I'm afraid this is the sign of anincreasing authoritarian approach.
We have more CCTV than anyone.
We have anti- terror laws used to stop peaceful protest unrelated to terrorsim.
I'll say no more. MI5 are coming..
Seriously, it's about time all new legislation was stopped. You cannot legislate people into behaving better.
madf
|
Seriously it's about time all new legislation was stopped. You cannot legislate people into behaving better.
I quite agree, but I'd go further and say over the top legislation actually renders the law as a whole less effective. How can you respect something which is increasingly perceived as unfairly applied, unbalanced and most serious of all, completely ineffective.
As Winston Churchill said, "If you have ten thousand regulations, you destroy all respect for the law." Nowhere has that been better illustrated than in the United Kingdom in the last 10 years in my humble opinion.
Cheers
DP
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
soon lighting cig while driving will be an offence
I have not heard any evidence that this will happen soon. The Highway Code says:
HC> 148
HC> Safe driving and riding needs concentration.
HC>
HC> Avoid distractions when driving or riding such as
HC>
HC> loud music (this may mask other sounds)
HC> trying to read maps
HC> inserting a cassette or CD or tuning a radio
HC> arguing with your passengers or other road users
HC> eating and drinking
HC> smoking
So, it is possible that the fact that someone smoking, and involved in a crash would have their smoking taken into account. It's not currently "illegal" per se.
It also said that govt. is also considering whether to ban smoking altogether while driving.
Personally, considering theit half-baked and perverse banning of smoking in pubs and public places for "health reasons" I think they ought to consider banning smoking completely - I'd pay quite a bit more tax, but it would sort out the dogs breakfast legislation that now exists.
|
|
Hands-free fags will be exempt.
|
>arguing with your passengers<
SWMBO please note...
;-)
|
|
|
|
Fotheringham Thomas has provided the quote. Here is the link:
www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycod...9
The relevant section is 148, but see also sections 149 and 150 which are closely connected.
The point is that smoking is as illegal as drinking from a bottle of water, (something that I do fairly regularly when driving), tuning a radio, (another thing I do fairly regularly), inserting a CD, arguing with a passenger, and listening to loud music.
For some reason not entirely clear to me, distraction by Sat-nav is covered in section 150 rather than 148.
Use of hand-help mobiles (covered in 149) is illegal per-se, unlike the activities listed in section 148.
|
Hands-free fags will be exempt.
But how do they drive in the first place then?
|
Shouldn't they ban the mobile make up scenario as well?
I'm amazed to see women applying eyeliner/lipstick etc. while driving (and talking in a mobile phone at same time holding it on shoulder by inclining the head).
|
I cross a busy junction every morning walking from the car park (dual carriageway 40 limit - in reality anything up to 70 goes) . I know that a red light and a green man mean nothing until the cars approaching have stopped.
This morning, red light, green man, look left and a car is approaching very quickly. Plenty of time to stop, but carries on straight through red. The driver was busy doing her mascara and looking into the rear view mirror. I could tell she had not acknowledged the red light at all.
|
|
|
Isn't make-up covered - like smoking, fiddling with your Ipod or scratching your fundament - by what FT cites above? If it impairs your ability to control the car, don't do it or you may be committing an offence.
As LY commented earlier, there's plenty you can do safely while driving when not much else is going on, and that probably includes (in the narrow sense of safety, at least) smoking. But the unexpected can happen quickly, so the test ought to be how easily you can stop it and concentrate on driving. I can stop rummaging for a jelly baby, or abandon retuning the radio, in a moment; it would take far longer to end a phone conversation or dispose of a half-smoked cigarette, and when I'm travelling at six car lengths a second, that matters.
|
Its practically an offence to simply drive a car now.
But in reality - one more fine to add to the list. I've never seen anyone pulled over by plod for using a phone etc. Quite probably because I can't remember the last time I saw a plod car other than a) at a census or b) at a speed camera site
|
But in reality - one more fine to add to the list. I've never seen anyone pulled over by plod for using a phone etc. Quite probably because I can't remember the last time I saw a plod car other than a) at a census or b) at a speed camera site
I saw a traffic plod the other day; he was on HIS mobile as he travelled towards me at about 50mph.
|
|
|
|
it would take far longer to end a phone conversation
You mean all those polite enquiries about other people's health, remembering you to Uncle Fred, hope to see you next week, yes, hasn't the weather been awful, before you can finally get a word in to say have a nice day and ring off?
I think I would just drop the phone and concentrate on avoiding the accident. There is a time and place for politeness, but in an emergency?
|
|
remember that bra advert that appeared all over the country on large billboards about 15 years ago?, i think that caused a few rear end shunts
|
|
|
|
|
I'm amazed to see women applying eyeliner/lipstick etc. while driving (and talking in a mobile phone at same time holding it on shoulder by inclining the head).
Just cos men can't do multi-tasking ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
I tend to pass a lot of wind in my car (because it is verboten in der haus!) Although not distracting to me, it is to my passengers.
On a more serious note, how about women on their monthly cycle? My wife, bless her cotton socks, was a monster when she drove during her cycle. Not only that, but she was so scatty that if she talked to her passenger, she drove slower and slower until she almost stopped.
|
|
so we will have smokecams all over the place soon then?
|
Instead of ranting here, can we do anything to change these troublesome motoring laws (starting with speed cameras first)?
Unless we can show govt. that motorists are against these laws they will do these over & over again anyway.
I remember, there as a petition where over million people shouted against road pricing and it was abandoned.
Who are the people who actually implement traffic laws, update highway codes etc?
|
1. Judging by the number of drivers who ignore "these laws" perhaps civil disobedience is already rife.
2. Don't think you'll find that road pricing was abandoned.
_______
IanS
|
|
|
Unless we can show govt. that motorists are against these laws they will do these over & over again anyway. over million people shouted against road pricing and it was abandoned.
Most car users are car users, not motorists. Even here in the back room car users sometimes seem to predominate over motorists. Car users are not really against these silly monkey laws and regulations. They make them feel safe, or smug anyway, and give them the illusion that they can drive by numbers and observe the rules so that anything that goes wrong is someone else's fault. I don't know what can be done to reduce the predominance of these essentially infantile imitation motorists who do so much to clog up the roads and slow down the traffic flow. Nothing, probably.
I very much doubt that road pricing has been abandoned by the monkeys. They're just keeping quiet about it for the time being.
|
Perhaps the new forum should be two-tier?
One section for proper motorists and another for lesser car users. Anyone whose opinions meant they fell short of the required standards could be banished to the non-motorists section, where discussion would be limited to the more harmless subjects like which car had the prettiest colour coded bumpers.
--
|
The vast majority of occasions I've seen a stupid manouvere, or met a car on a narrow road and have the driver try to squeeze through a non-existent gap, they'll have a cigarette in one hand or hanging out their mouths. While it would be tempting to say that they smoke because they're poor and rough and therefore are crap drivers, the more reasonable explanation is that the cigarette affects their mental state, even if only slightly.
I don't know of a formal study investigating the effect of nicotine on driving, but it would be interesting to see the results.
|
Sorry David, But I think that is absolute rubbish. You sure they weren't also a particular sex, or maybe of a particular ethnic persuasion, maybe they were wearing a hat? (like HJ????), or a particular age? Did they have grey hair? Were they from a particular nation? Had they justpulled out from a Muckdonalds.
All smokers are poor and rough?
I like my cigars.
By the way, in my experience, all Leeds Uni students are permanently under the influence, have usually lived in a rough bit of Headingley or Burley and own really carp, unroadworthy cars and drive like lunatics. Smiley called for I think ;-)
--
Phil
|
By the way in my experience all Leeds Uni students are permanently under the influence have usually lived in a rough bit of Headingley or Burley and own really carp unroadworthy cars and drive like lunatics. Smiley called for I think ;-) -- Phil
Precisely. :P
I'm just saying that most of the bad driving I see seems to be from people smoking at the wheel, and my point is that this clearly can't be anything but the effect of the cigarettes. ;-)
|
"most of the bad driving I see seems to be from people smoking at the wheel,"
Nay lad!
It's those young blokes aged under 25 - especially those driving Rovers! How old are you by the way? And your car?
I'm a bit of a bigot, and if I wasn't watching the rugby, I'd go for a quick cigar - poor and rough, me!
Regards
--
Phil
|
|
|
|
Most car users are car users not motorists. Even here in the back room car users sometimes seem to predominate over motorists. Car users are not really against these silly monkey laws and regulations. They make them feel safe or smug anyway and give them the illusion that they can drive by numbers and observe the rules so that anything that goes wrong is someone else's fault. I don't know what can be done to reduce the predominance of these essentially infantile imitation motorists who do so much to clog up the roads and slow down the traffic flow. Nothing probably.
Ha Ha! Well put Lud! I remember reading in Autoacr that a motoring journalist from many years ago beleaved that we two types of driver; the 'driver' and the 'getter abouter'. The latter he felt was the lowest form of human life. I could see his point.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I personally find it hard to see what the problem is with using a mobile whilst in a slow moving traffic jam (ie 5mph and below), no doubt others will disagree, but i do think the government is treating us like children on this, and a bit more common sense could have been used when bringing in the law.
|
There is nothing worse than edging along in stop-start traffic and seeing the person behind with a mobile clamped to his/her ear. I always half expect the inevitable crunch everytime I stop, which is no joke when one is likely to end up with boiling coffee and a burning cigerette falling onto one's lap.
--
|
Whilst in Wells-next-the-Sea last Monday, I treated SWMBO to a massive ice cream cornet - it was her birthday - and, I had one myself. In the warm September breeze, it started to melt rapldly and I had to concentrate like hell to stop the drips running down my hands. I couldn't walk and lick my cornet at the same time without risking bumping into litter bins etc.
Half an hour later, on returning to our car, we observed a white-van man enjoying a similar confection whilst threading his van through the narrow, car-lined Wells streets. Unfortunately, we need daft laws for daft people!
|
|
I once had a lift from a smoker who smoked roll you own. He was rolling a cigarette with both hands and steering with his knees. Needless to say,that was the last time I took a lift from him. Go ahead,and ban the filthy habit everywhere I say. Yes ,even in houses.
|
|
there seems to be a disproportionate amount of anti smokers on this forum why?
|
"disproportionate amount of anti smokers "
Only because the 'antis' are always more vocal. Hence the term 'silent majority'.
I think this another example of the law of unintended consequences - cars are practically the last indoor refuge for the smoker, everywhere else having been made unavailable. Having been a very occasional pipe smoker, I must admit that I'm inclined to use it more just to make a point!
|
|
|
|
"Go ahead,and ban the filthy habit everywhere I say. Yes, even in houses. "
I'll drink to that (while I can) and if you like I'll buy you a pint in the local to toast to it if I can find my way through the puking youths in the village and can unstick my feet from the gum on the pavement and shove my way through the drug-pushers outside the school by the pub and identify the pub sign under the graffiti behind the fast food wrappers discarded by the lazy sods who park on the zebra crossing while visiting the pizza place whose door is blocked by 20 stone tubs of lard who live off benefits while driving huge great black Navarros with blacked out windows before returning to their heavily subsidised council houses to beat their partners and children.
Bigotted? Bitter? Grumpy old man? Not me. I shall now have a cigar (outside the back door)
Smoking while driving is a really filthy habit compared to the drink/herion/cocaine/hash stuffed unlicenced/untaxed/uninsured drivers who also inhabit our roads. Smoking in one's own house/car? Are you honestly suggesting that it has ANY effect whatsoever on you? And what bloomin' business of yours is it anyway? What disgusting little habits do you have in your own home or car that we could object to? With a tag like "piggy" - I hate to think. Mind your own bloomin' business as to what I do in my own house.
--
Phil
|
OK mods, I know that won't last long but perhaps
"Leave me alone!!!!!"
might last longer
--
Phil
|
Phil, you are soooo 1980's. It is fashionable now to knock smokers, you really ought to get with it. We all know that everytime you puff a little smoke out of the car window 25 under-privilidged orphans will die a horrible death.
--
|
"Phil, you are soooo 1980's"
Thanks Robin, but I think I am more "soooo" 1960s!! That was the time when my doctor greeted me with "Now then Phil, what's up? Have a cig and tell me"
Oh, and he drove a Hillman Hunter, - what happened to them? - and visited if we were ill in the middle of the night. And popped round on saturday evening when I broke my leg. And drank my Dad's precious last drops of whisky while treating us and then drove off to another patient (and another whisky! ) And when no-one had a peanut allergy. Good old Dr Zissler!! And his receptionist who put her fag in the ashtray while writing down particulars - and when beer was 1/8d a pint , and when petrol was 4 gallons for a quid (note). But when people spent hours waiting for a none-existent bus, and when they had to struggle to a train to go on hols for a wet week in Scarborough.
And now we have cars - the greatest liberating bit of technology for the ordinary family ever invented and they want to stop us using them because they "pollute" - what bloomin rubbish - thankfully people can afford those ridiculous Navarro things - better than a wet, miserable, unreliable wait in a bus shelter for a bus that will take you where you don't want to go - or a freezing (or red hot) train which only went to within 20 miles of your destination.
Back to the red wine (that was a luxury in the '60s like cars and chicken on Sunday) and a cigar, and tomorrow I shall go and visit my Mum in Law for her 80th birthday, by car and it will take me half the time of the train and a quarter the price - especially with 4 of us going. Long live the car - and a cigar outside the back door.
Bad week at work!!
--
Phil
|
I started on two wheels in 1956 and four in 1964 - I've always smoked whilst driving a car (oh for the days of the quarter lights again) and never had any problems whilst doing so.
But I would never use a hand held mobile phone whilst driving and would be very unlikely even to consider a hands-free alternative; in fact I vehemently oppose the former whilst accepting that the latter could just be acceptable.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
|
|
|
Two excellent posts PhilW... probably you were already feeling better by the time you composed them though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do not agree with yet more nanny state laws that this government seem to draw up. However I can see the rationale behind this one. I used to smoke, and before anyone gets the wrong idea, I can assure everyone I am not a self-riteous ex smoker ! However one day I was driving down the busy M4, on my way home, and I went to throw a cig butt out of the window. The trouble was that even though I had done this dozens of time in this car, this time I didn't poke my fingers far enough out of the window, and the slipstream blew the butt back into the car. What followed next was me trying to see where it had gone in a panic whilst doing 70 MPH on a busy motorway ! In the end I had to pull over onto the hard shoulder and look for the butt, which had started to burn the side of the drivers seat sqab !
This incident could have been nasty, and as it was it had ruined my car seat. Afterwards I decided not to smoke in the car any more, even though I continued smoking for over 5 years.
|
im an ex smoker, i remember tapping my ash on the floor cos my ashtray had 300 butts in it already,i remember pulling the glowing bit off the end because the paper had stuck to my lips and this glowing ember falling between my legs as i drove down the dark A1 at 5 in the morning,i remember throwing a ciggy butt on numerous occasions out of the window and it coming back in and i also remember quarter lights,fresh air limited noise and no rain
but it was a very very long time ago in my youth before global moaning nanny states and where children are angels
|
If I'm ever hauled up in front of the beak for 'driving under the distraction of a having a fag' (tobacco type that is) I shall say to the bench:
'M'Lud, I do believe my 'uman rights is bein' impinged upon, by this 'ere diabolical liberty what the guvment is taking by stopping me, an h'acknowledged addict of tobaccy, 'aving my rightful cigarette in my own property. Unless, M'Lud, I have caused an accident, stopping me indulging my addiction is like being prosecuted for a thought crime. I rest my case.'
|
|
I could be mistaken, but I have read the relevant bits. The premise that the changes to the HC amount to a change of law is mistaken. Its advice. All this hot air and invocation of the spirits of the Third Reich for nothing really!
|
|
|
|
im an ex smoker ... between my legs as i drove down the dark A1 at 5 in the morning ... a ciggy butt on numerous occasions out of the window and it coming back in and i also remember quarter lights
Properly set quarter light used to suck the smoke out without making much draught or much noise though. Without quarter lights you had to open the window a crack at the top so the roof lining near the window would get a pub-ceiling sort of look after a while...
I too am an ex smoker bb but I regard it as the height of hypocrisy and bad manners to go on at people about smoking after the way I have polluted the world. Pure dog in the manger stuff to deny others their turn, even though I now notice and don't much like the smell of tobacco smoke.
Of course people who have never smoked at all are just yipping like children. They don't know what they're talking about and so their whole approach is beneath contempt. Let them leave the room if they don't like it... :o}
|
i agree with the phone ban..But if they can now go after the smokers..tell me when they are going to go after the nose pickers...
and the children shouters
and the rubberneckers
and the sign readers
then we should also target the directionists as well :-)
all tongue in cheek....
|
|
|
|
|
|
