Clarification: Cell Phone Driving Rules
Minister of Transport Derrick Burgess clarified the new laws surrounding cell phone use while driving, explaining that driving a car while using a phone via a hands-free kit is not prohibited.
Bike riders can use a hands-free kit with the phone linked to the rider’s helmet via Bluetooth/technology, but having a phone inside of the helmet is an offence, as is riding a motorcycle while listening to music or talking on a cell phone through earphones.
In addition, employers could be held liable if they require their employees to use hand-held mobile phones while driving.
The statement said, “It is now an offence for the driver of any vehicle to use a hand-held mobile phone, a hand-held entertainment device or any other hand-held device while driving the vehicle. It is also an offence for the vehicle to have a television or a display screen that is visible to the driver. A display screen used for back-up cameras is acceptable.
“If a hand-held mobile phone or device can be operated without holding it, through a hands-free kit (headset or Bluetooth), a car stereo system or other hands-free device, then the hands-free equipment is not prohibited in the Regulations.
“Communication on a hands-free device occurs without a person holding it continuously in his/her hand for operation as opposed to a hand-held, which requires the hand for continuous use.
“Under the Auxiliary Bicycles (Construction, Equipment and Use) Regulations 1955, a hands-free kit is acceptable if the phone is linked to the rider’s helmet via Bluetooth or other technology in the helmet. Anyone riding a vehicle with a phone placed inside of the helmet is committing an offence.
“It is also an offence for auxiliary cycle and motor cycle riders to listen to music or talk on the cell phone through earphones when driving their vehicle.
Minister Burgess said that if drivers must take a call on their mobile phone they should find a safe place to pull over on the side of the road before doing so.
“A person stopped at a stop sign or a stop light, holding and talking on a hand-held mobile phone commits an offence under the Regulations, whereas a person pulled over to the side of the road holding and talking on a hand-held mobile telephone does not commit an offence,” the statement said.
“Passengers who readily and visibly assist drivers in the use of a hand-held device i.e. by holding the mobile phone to the driver’s ear are committing an offence.
“Employers could be held liable if they require their employees to use hand-held mobile phones while driving as a normal course of business and also if they fail to take steps to forbid employees to use such phones for company business.
“Employers would not be in contravention of the Regulations by supplying a mobile phone to the employee or by calling an employee who was driving.
Minister Burgess said: “This detailed explanation of the legislation was released to ensure that every driver of a vehicle in Bermuda is in no doubt as to what is an offence and what is not when it comes to using communication or other devices on public roads in Bermuda.”
What about Sat Nav devices that taxi’s use? Is that now illegal as it is a screen that is visible to the driver?
Taxi’s are the worst drivers out there yet they are allowed to look at screens
Oh, come on! Stop splitting hairs here. Let’s make our roads safer. Sat Nav is hardly a distraction compared to talking on a cell phone or completely obliterating the ambient traffic noises that listening to an iPod causes. Part of safe driving is being aware of the sights and sounds around you while driving. I have a big issue with the use of cell phones on the road. Equally, people plugged into their iPod annoy me too. I’ve told my 19 year old daughter (who is guilty of the iPod use on her bike) who is currently taking driving lessons that she will not be allowed behind the car wheel ever if she continues with the iPod use. End of story!!!
Sat nav is d efinitly a distraction have you ever drove behind a taxi driver trying to lean forward to reach his gps while driving. and yes they have to lean forward to reach the device to except the job. I totally agree with royal fan they are the WORST drivers on our roads. They should only be allowed to drive for one year on one year off so there attitudes can change.
Taxi drivers are the worse, they stop short without indicating and them having a GPS doesn’t make it any better!!
What is the difference between listening to headphones on a bike or driving a car with the radio cranked up? That seems a bit of an anomaly to me. I don’t see any mention of that and I think a lot more people drive around with loud sound systems that people wearing headphones on a bike.
to be honest, big difference in my opinion. Car stereos make a lot of noise for sure, but you can still hear ambient cues around you. Headphones do not allow this, and its just the music you can hear. Ive had them in before and an ambulance flew right past me without me even knowing.
It’s all down to volume, if you have it loud it’s no different to being in a car with a loud stereo.
Earplugs help you hear more as they reduce wind noise and make normal traffic sounds more noticable.
its not just down to volume. Headphones block outside noise… whether you want to argue it or not is irrelevant because the basic nature of it sitting in your ear canal, or covering your ears, by the basic laws of physics the actual earpiece itself lessens what you can hear.
Headphones in, volume off vs car stereo off, already you have a disadvantage of hearing just by the nature of what a headphone is.
how you think they make traffic sounds more noticeable is beyond me.
Now turn those volumes up, and speakers are omnidirectional… they allow interference from other noise sources into the mix. Headphones just shoot straight down you ear, while blocking outside noises.
They are distinctly two different things, not based on music preference, but on basic physics.
No they are not.
As a man who boh rides and drives I can tell you right here right now that there is no difference. I ride with my headphones on and can hear absolutely everything. And when I drive my car I can still hear absolutely everything. The problem with it all is that if my headphones are up loud, then I hear nothing. Same goes for my car, being it is a 2011 model, when the windows are up you can ‘barely’ hear anything (that new sound proof tech), time you add in my stereo and turn it up, you can hear nothing! (this includes the ambulance mate!! I am speaking from experience kust in case you are wondering.)
Sorry to burst your bubble, but in this instance you are wrong.
It’s about different frequency sounds. Headphones can block certain frequencies like wind noise and therefore make other sounds like traffic far more obvious.
http://www.webbikeworld.com/r4/noise-reduction-earphones/
Yeah buddy, those are “noise reducing headphones” they are designed to block out noise. 99% of headphones people use on iPods are not the same. Irrelevant comment.
ear bud headphones all reduce background noise, just some more than others, some certain frequencies more than others.
It is a relevent comment as the law doesn’t distingush between types of headphones headphones.
Sorry, but you are wong aswell. Like I said above, as a person that use both modes of transportation I can factually discredit your comment by proof of constant use of both the earphones and the car stereo. No matter how many references you try and use I can dismiss them all by citing my day to day experiences using them both. I can hear all with the volume turned down low and nothing with the volume turned up while using both vehicles. What more proof do you need???? Again, I do this everyday so my opinion is actually a fact!!
I find when I am riding listening to my earphones that I pay more attention to what’s going on around me. I check my mirrors more often and more in tune (pardon the pun) to my immediate environment.
Clearly you have a hearing problem if you have no idea an ambulance is coming with earphones in!! Its people like you who doesn’t need them
LMAO that’s true.
If an ambulance was able to go pass you without you knowing, they either had to not have their siren on or you need to have your hearing check because that is not possible.
Headphones are not made to block out our surroundings only to block our music/conversation from the public.
How the yell they let back up cameras screens in cars not a offense but dvd player n music screens a offense… A lot of ppl have back up camera setup built into the dvd player SMH we will see how long ppl take this lol
So… I can’t put my phone in my helmet and talk, but I can use the bluetooth adapter thingy and talk?
Makes no sense..
And if I pull up to a stop sign I can’t pull my phone out, but if I move to the side of the road by the stop sign I can bring my phone out?
for bikes the bluetooth has to be built into the helmet
i guess it’s having your ears covered and then blocked up with an earpiece…. idk makes no sense to me either
I don’t understand how they can say you are allowed to talk on the phone through the bluetooth handset while riding but not the headphones that clearly come with the phone in the first place. THEY BOTH WORK THE SAME!
Also why can a driver use the phone handset while driving but the bike rider can’t when riding?
The person who put this law into place clearly does not have a clue about technology because majority of phones allow you to change the settings to automatically answer and hang up when the headphones are inserted into the phone (basically the same job as a bluetooth hands free kit)
Also what is the difference between a bike rider listening to his/her ipod and a car driver listening to the radio?
I understand the law being enforced to prohibit hand held devices but it sounds to me like most of this was done without thinking into detail.
agree! Clueless government, clueless police. It’s about the money, nothing else.
Thank you so very much because this is exactly what I’ve been trying to tell people
Simple really…in order for you to use the phone, answer it or make a call and stick it in your helmet you must use your hand which means your hand will be OFF the handlebars and your eyes off the road while you check the screen to see who is calling you, push the button to answer the phone or dial the number, then stick it between your helmet and ear. Then…again the hands are off the handlebars when you end the call and fumble around to put it in your pocket. It may take 5 – 10 seconds, but believe be that is enough for an accident to occur. With bluetooth headsets you can answer at least by pushing a button without taking your eyes OFF the road and some phones will now even allow you to make calls and answer using your voice.
Would you have preferred that the minister say that NOTHING be allowed in your ears at all! Stop complaining, comply buy purchasing a simple bluetooth headset and help make the islands roads SAFER. For ONCE can you all stop complaining put your personal POLITICAL OPINIONS aside and be a part of the solution and not part of the problem.
Oh come on and let’s just think for a moment. I agree with the no phone in the helmet but for them to not allow headphones does not help things. Bluetooth headsets that I’ve seen are covered by the helmets instead of headphones that allows the button to be below the helmet and is actually easier access than a Bluetooth headset.
Personal political opinions aren’t just from the public but those writing the laws as well, only difference is theirs effects all not just them so we should be allowed to have them as well.
What if I put my mobile phone on speaker mode? Do I get a ticket for pressing the speaker button and then putting it down?
POLICE STATE!
Thief state !
for those people with screens in there cars,If it was installed correctly as soon as you drop your hand brake or select drive the screen should go off anyway so whats the problem?
It still doesn’t matter… watch and you will see… Some damn ignorance. Also, for all the people that had screens installed BEFORE it was illegal… what happens huh PLP.
I didnt read it entirely, but i dont think having the screen itself is illegal, its watching video while driving that is illegal…
which you shouldnt be doing anyway…
How is it that a deaf person can legally acquire a licence yet i can’t listen to music while riding? Really makes you wonder if the laws are for “promoting safe driving” or promoting rising sales in extra accessories.
clearly
If you don’t understand why there are exceptions to the rules …then you never will. How can you make such an statement. You are just extremely selfish and arrogant or incredibly daft.
Most hearing impaired people (when possible) use hearing aides and devices to help them amplify outside noises so they can hear people , sirens etc. Headsets…especially those with noise filters, block those outside noises out.
so they clearly might also have music playing on thier earpiece as it is tucked into their bike.
Wow!!! You guys seriously have plain and simple issues.. all you do is complain about whatever is posted on bernews.. GET A LIFE!
The “Speak Your Mind” box on Bernews is clearly here for us as the public to SPEAK OUR MIND.
@Pathetic u need to look in the mirror…….Clearly you don’t have a life if your responding!!
Thats what I was thinking…wow what a negative bunch!
guess just simpler to purchase some bluetooth headphones for the Ipod etc
http://www.mybluetoothearbuds.com/
The Police will back off soon enough, they have more important things to do… then we can all go back to what we used to do.
shame it takes the sound of gunfire to do that.
Why are you people blaming the police? They don’t make the laws, they just enforce them. A lot of police officers weren’t happy with this either, but at the end of the day they have bosses to answer to just like you do!!! So instead of making their jobs harder, just comply. Your anger is totally misdirected sheesh!!!
No we shouldn’t comply. Everyone who is against this should really protest and ride down to Parliment and the police station with headphones on. If 100 plus riders did this it certainly would make a statement!
lol a statement and probably a few accidents
Yes, the statement would be…here are 100 most stupid and selfish bike riders in Bermuda!
You can easily get a bluetooth device as go on taking on your phone, while both hands are one the handllebars. Wouldn’t be easier, safer and make more sense to just buy a simple headset.
If you are driving with the music on your ears are still exposed to other sounds around you such as emergence vehicles sounding the alarm, providing your volume is within regulation, however if you are riding with earphones in your ears are directly plugged with the added covering from the helmet and therefore makes it very difficult to hear anything but the music you are listening to. Plus with earphones there’s no way anyone can determine how loud your music is therefore there’s no way to set a regulation for how loud you can play your music and still be capable of hearing what’s going on around you so there would be no way to enforce such a regulation. Its about ensuring safe rodes by all users being capable of seeing and hearing all signs and signals.
As to the difference between DVD players and back up camera screens, it really speaks for itself. Back up camera screens are a safety device they assist you in backing up your vehicle safely by showing what’s behind you and eliminating blind spots. DVD players show movies which can be a distraction to drivers, how can you watch the road if your eyes are on the screen watching the part of a movie that suddenly caught your interest. Seeing the building get blown up or catching the punchline of the joke is not worth not seeing the child crossing the street at the spear of the moment.
This law is really not that hard to understand. As the saying goes “Better safe then sorry”.
Why is it OK for a driver to use a bluetooth headset, but not OK for a passenger to hold their phone for them? What’s the difference?
The police Force requires their officers to use 2-way radios while driving police cars. the Microphone is a handheld device, so is the Police Force breaking the law?
One of the privilages of being a police officer is you are effectively exempt from laws!
Want tinted windows, speed, run red lights, drive in a dangerous manner, or use your cell phone while driving? Join the police force!
I have a neighbor and I always wondered y his car has been rolling around with limousine tint for the past 2 years. Hmph only to see him one day speaking to his girlfriend who was a damn cop!
Exactly
yeah and the privilege of having to deal with all our aggressive/violent/pissed off people… something most of us can just walk away from.
You would be the first to complain if the Police couldn’t get to your EMERGENCY sooner because they couldn’t use their headsets! The law..and all laws and rules allow for exceptions.
One device not mentioned is the 2 way radio.
Long before there were cellphones businesses used 2 way radios to communicate with staff on the road.
Somehow we managed to used these things while operating a stick shift vehicle. These days even some of the larger trucks are automatic with power everything.
So, what is the status of the 2 way radio?
Not sure why this link isn’t advertised better by the folks that made the law, but anyways it explains the use of 2-way radios, hope that helps
http://www.bermudalaws.bm/Laws/Annual%20Laws/2010/Statutory%20Instruments/Motor%20Car%20(Construction,%20Equipment%20and%20Use)%20Amendment%20Regulations%202010.pdf
MOTOR CAR (CONSTRUCTION, EQUIPMENT AND USE) AMENDMENT REGULATIONS 2010
BR 41 / 2010
The Minister responsible for Transport, in exercise of the power conferred by section 102 of the Motor Car Act 1951, makes the following Regulations:
Citation
1 These Regulations may be cited as the Motor Car (Construction, Equipment and Use) Amendment Regulations 2010.
Regulations 44, 45 and 46 added
2 The Motor Car (Construction, Equipment and Use) Regulations 1952 are amended by inserting the following next after regulation 43—
“Hand-held mobile telephones and other hand-held devices
44 (1) No person shall drive, or cause or allow any other person to drive, a motor car on a road if he is using—
. (a) a hand-held mobile telephone;
. (b) a hand-held device that can perform an interactive communication function by transmitting or receiving data, other than a two-way radio; or
. (c) a hand-held electronic entertainment device that can produce music or gaming systems (wireless and non-wireless).
(2) A person does not contravene a provision of this regulation if, at the time of the alleged contravention—
. (a) he is using the mobile telephone or other device to call the police, fire, ambulance or other emergency service;
. (b) he is acting in response to a genuine emergency; and
. (c) it is unsafe or impracticable for him to cease driving in order to make or receive the call.
(3) For the purposes of this regulation—
. (a) a mobile telephone or device referred to in regulation 44(1) is to be treated as hand-held if it is, or needs to be, held in the hand at some point in order to operate it;
. (b) “interactive communication function” includes the following—
. (i) sending or receiving oral or written messages;
. (ii) sending or receiving facsimile documents;
. (iii) sending or receiving still or moving images; and
. (iv) providing access to the Internet;
(c) “two-way radio” means any wireless telegraphy apparatus which is designed or adapted for the purpose of transmitting or receiving spoken messages;
Prohibition of display screen visible to driver
45 (1) No person shall drive, or cause or allow any other person to drive, a motor car that is equipped with a television, computer or other device with a display screen on any road if that display screen is visible to the driver of the vehicle.
(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply in respect of the following—
. (a) a global positioning system navigation device that has no other function than to deliver global positioning for navigation;
. (b) a logistical transportation tracking system device used for commercial purposes to track vehicle location, driver status or the delivery of packages or other goods;
. (c) a collision avoidance system device that has no other function than to deliver a collision avoidance system; and
. (d) an instrument display screen that is used to provide information to the driver regarding the status of various systems of the motor vehicle.
Exemption
46 Regulations 44 and 45 do not apply to the driver of an ambulance, a fire- fighting vehicle or a police vehicle.”.
The two way radio exemption just highlights how these laws are a farce and nothing to do with safety.
Yes this wasn’t thought of too well as most things done by Government. My main issue is that many new cars today come with head unit displays that always stay on because they have systems like gps built into them. MaN Dont bring in a HyByrd cause those too stay on all the time to monitor your car.
SMH
Have a good one all.
The law is written as such, that you could be booked for using the Ipod, portable CD player etc in your car. So the corrupt government and slavish police officers who serve them can print money as they see fit!
“No person shall drive, or cause or allow any other person to drive, a
motor car on a road if he is using—
a hand-held electronic entertainment device that can produce
music or gaming systems (wireless and non-wireless)”
Lol i was. The officer couldn’t explain to me why either just “it’s a distraction, like you are driving impaired” i had one earphone in, not sure how that’s different from bluetooth. Anwyway if you look at section 3 ( NEPatriots posted above) it doesn’t classify as a hand-held device. The Ipod doesn’t have to be in my hand for me to use it at any point whilst i am driving. I had to take it out of my pocket to show the officer.
That’s why I think if everyone who got booked should plead not guilty. They should make sure they have their Ipod with remote control and bring it to court.
Basically the unit is operable without being handheld.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MA850G/B?fnode=MTY1NDA0Ng
I’m not sure of the numbers booked but if it clogs up the courts then it is certainly worth the trouble. Everyone has the right to defend themselves in court.
The other point is it actually says:
No person shall drive, or cause or allow any other person to drive, a MOTOR CAR on a road if he is using—
I haven’t looked it up, but is a MOTOR CAR just that a car? Cause my definition of a MOTOR CAR is for sure not a MOTORCYCLE!
This is so stupid!
How bout this, we live on a 21 square mile island were it takes all of 35 minutes to get from one end to the other. So therefore, whoever you are calling or texting, would not have to wait long for your response when you eventually get to your destination. Lets try to be as focused as possible while operating motor vehicles, and clearly, using phones while operating a vehicle is contradictory to this notion of using focus..
I personally understand the concerns about cellphones and headphones being a distraction but seriously a tv screen?? Yes I am guilty and I do have one in my car, I also have a sound system in my car but I dont pay the screen any attention when I’m driving, to me its better than a normal head unit in a car, you can touch the screen for the next song and see what u want rather than fumbling with buttons not knowing what your pressing. PLUS some of these new cars that are coming in to the island have a screen in them already, what are you going to do there?? make them bring it in with a big hole in the dashboard?? The way the WORLD is going is in to technology era and bermuda wants to stop the technology. I dont watch DVD’s while I’m driving I use my screen to give me less of a distraction as I dont have to pay much attention to it to change songs. For me my screen is no distraction at all. to ban them is ridiculous, what should be the “new law” pertaining to this is if the police see the front screen in the car playing a DVD then thats when they should be given a ticket, not for having a screen up with Track 1, the name of the song and the time being the only thing “moving”
Yeaaaah so what about texting while driving/riding or at a stop sign?
What about using speakerphone while driving a car?
What about using a bluetooth headset (invisible under a helmet) to listen to music from your phone / ipod touch?
Why not just ban blue tooth as well stop the confusion
How about pushbikes,roller,blades,skateboards?
Why not just ban blue tooth as well stop the confusion?
dont get caught slippin thats it …
So what I can figure from the wording of the law is it’s okay to use a cell phone on a motorcycle provided it is with a bluetooth. So if you wish to listen to your music, then use a phone which can playback music and nothing will change.
The minister can say what he likes but the law days something different. And the courts will uphold the law, not what the minister says. The law is badly written and ambiguous. The law is an ass and we are all asses for voting in under-educated, sloppy and unprofessional legislators.
Is a cigarette counted as a hand held device? If everything else is, then why not?
Damn smokers tapping their ashes in the street while I ride behind them!!
So what if I have headphones that have a microphone on them and can be used for handsfree… like the ipod headphones.? They are stil headphones(apparently illegal) but yet its handsfree (apparently legal) at the same time…
Reading is fundamental and a mind is a terrible thing to waste!!!
Folks just straight tear it out the a** here on Bernews.
Be honest if the shoe fits wear it. It’s an
Issue here on these roads. Hell it only takes
30 minutes to from A to B. Folk wine about everything.
Damn
You all need to buy a smart phone, Samsung Galaxy, does all that, play music, blue tooth even play you dvd, hello!
Bermuda politicians are too fast in making laws instead of researching them first and then looking like … when it has been challenged in court with one of our young smart lawyers! How the hell they say back up screen is allowed and the back up screen is and have to be made from the dvd player screen and device. Come on Derrick, you are way back where are the double standards, then you have a taxi with GPS screen, and a big dvd/back up screen beside it. Not 1 screen but two, so look at the odds of this type of law. Please have it rewritten for cell phone use! We no longer have cassette radio players from your old days, this is new times, so the stereo with the hands free, come with screens, and cars come out of show rooms and off the ships with these screens, I bet the next GP cars will have them, you either are going to take them out or then modify the law!
It’s a shame you don’t know what you’re talking about. I did the research and these provisions are no different to those in other jurisdictions. How about you do your research and come back with some cold, hard facts! Cayman Islands distracted driving laws are stricter.
I couldn’t agree more!!! 30 mins, not 2 to 3 hours as in other countries!!
If they want to improve road safety, make fog lamps illegal and hand out a severe beating to anyone that drives in traffic with full beam on.
The UK passed similar provisions for distracted driving back in 2003. I Aldo highlight that the US is now looking to ban the use ALL cell phones from cars, handsfree or not. And let’s be clear what the ban includes: passengers in the US will NOT be able to use a cell phone either. Bermuda is, on average, 9 years behind other countries in this area of law. I recall a similar outcry when the seatbelt legislation was passed. This legislation is to ensure safe driving, nothing more. Oh, and for the comments re the nav systems in taxis! If you read the Regulations, you will see that type of equipment is exempt. The reason for the exemption: because the equipment used by taxis are approved under a different law.
For many people the cell phone ban and music ban are two different things. In reality the music ban is pretty ambiguous, as there many ways around the wording.
The legislation isn’t about safe driving, if it was there would be no exceptions. The police do not drive without their seatbelts and judged by the numerous accidents they have, seems to have a serious lacking in driving skills.
I still query the wording of the law. In the law books they describe motor cars, motorcycles and motor vehicles. Motor vehicle would seem to encompass everything, where motorcar seems quite clearcut. If this is an obvious distinction and people challenge will be interesting to see the result.
No person shall drive, or cause or allow any other person to drive, a MOTOR CAR on a road if he is using—
Regardless the option to use bluetooth for listening to music seems to be the obvious work around.
Also if every biker who feels the law to be discrimatory they could all just run a thin black/white wire from their helmet. There is no law against that and provided you are not doing anything wrong, would just tie up the the officers time with pointless checks.
Looks like they covered it in the Auxiliary act.
However as noted before it does appear the wording suggests if the device can be operated without being handheld there is no issue.
“No person shall drive or cause or allow any other person to drive an auxiliary
bicycle on a road if he is using—”
“a hand-held electronic entertainment device that can produce music or
gaming systems (wireless and non-wireless).”
This is the bit that suggests having a control on the headphone wire would exempt its use. If it is not held in ones hand and can be operated as such. For sure worth the challenge for those who are to appear in court.
For the purposes of this regulation—
a mobile telephone or device referred to in regulation 12(1) is to be treated
as hand-held if it is, or needs to be, held in the hand at some point in order
to operate it;
http://www.bermudalaws.bm/Laws/Consolidated%20Laws/Auxiliary%20Bicycles%20(Construction,%20Equipment%20and%20Use)%20Regulations%201955.pdf
To date, 74 comments, most of them whining, about something that is common elsewhere &, for once from this Government, makes sense.
The failure of the education system really manefests itself on some of these threads.
The music through headsets ban isn’t common elsewhere nor are some of the other other aspects. The government has created a law which isn’t fully clear with many inconsistancies.
@walls the music through headsets is common in other jurisdictions. Have a look at the UK Road Traffic (Construction and use) Act. Same wording! Same offense!
This is sh***y politics at its finest. I would like to see traffic accident data that links headphone/cellphone use in Bermuda to road traffic accidents. The government is using anecdotes and popular opinion to make laws that infringe on people’s liberty with no discernible benefit to society. You may say “it will make the roads safer.” Fine, all I want you to do is show me the data to back up that claim. As far as I know there was no study performed to determine the actual safety impact of removing rights of citizens.
@ walls…are you really that dumb? You said no, don’t comply..well guess what? This is now law, so until then you have no choice but to do so! My point was to comply with the police, there is no sense debating it with them as so many people are prone to do. They don’t make the laws you idiot!!! I’ll bet you’re one of those people that make a lot of noise but DO NOTHING…in other words, full of hot air!!! You said that everybody should ride to parliament and the police station…since this is your suggestion, are you going to organize this ride on parliament? If so, name the date, time and meeting time!!!
If I was someone affected I certainly would challenge it. For those who have been ticketed and feel strongly about it they can protest as they see fit. I have no issue with suggesting ideas.
The law isn’t clearly written and has inconsistancies
worth challenging. To go to court gives the opportunity to challenge and there is noting wrong with that. Do you think just because laws are created we should all blindly support them?
The police don’t, if they did the courts would be packed with drivers booked for doing 36kph!
I stand corrected…meeting place! Don’t get me wrong, I think the law is poorly written. However, my point was to stop blaming the police. All I hear over and over is the police this and that when it is parliament that passed the bill. How many people actually have contacted their MP about this instead of whining to the media. It amazes me how people act like they have no say. Your MP’s are there for a reason!!! At the end of the day, people should have care and control of their vehicles at all times. I personally don’t feel a specific law was necessary as due care would cover cellphone use if somebody had or caused an accident while using one. This law just seems like it has too many loopholes…
@ walls….so one the one hand you are telling people DON’T comply, in other words BREAK THE LAW and then on the other hand you’re saying you’re somewhat affected…translation you ARE complying because you don’t want to be dragged into court. You are what is commonly known as a s*** stirrer!!!
No need to personal, it’s immature. I’m just telling it as I see it. If I saw laws that percecute black people would I be wrong not to comment or disagree with them? I guess back in them old days I’d have been labled “a s*** stirrer” lol
Agreed that writting MP is a good thing. I do think public forum is a good way to spur discussion and give some gauge to public feeling. You can bet when Paula Cox passed he 35% duty thing PLP politicians took note of comments and PLP supporters who have felt betrayed.
So from that I am sure they will note if the public is upset on these laws. The public will be asking “what have have you done for me lately?”,
As you mentioned the police needed to do was police accordingly.
“At the end of the day, people should have care and control of their vehicles at all times. I personally don’t feel a specific law was necessary as due care would cover cellphone use if somebody had or caused an accident while using one. This law just seems like it has too many loopholes…”
@ walls my main issue with you is telling people NOT to comply with the law!!! Call me immature if you will, but you are attempting to rile people up. When I suggested you organize this ride on parliament, look how quickly you backed up. THAT is why I called you what I did…one of those people that are full of mouth and no action!!!
Obviously that’s your issue with me…..glad I had that affect! You’re welcome sir!
Walls
By the way, being a police officer doesn’t give you license to do whatever you want. You sound totally ridiculous. Police officers are held up and held up harshly by their superiors if they don’t follow the rules. Its such a tired old myth that they can do whatever they want and not get into trouble. Get your facts straight before you spew such silly nonsense!!!
Must really take those blinkers off.
If you think police officers follow rules how would you explain just the few accidents listed below? The actual number is way higher. Wonder if they will be appearing in court and what fines dished out?
http://bernews.com/2011/10/police-car-crashes-into-wall/
http://bernews.com/2011/12/police-car-crashes-in-southampton/
http://bernews.com/2011/05/police-car-crashes-in-st-davids/
http://bernews.com/2010/09/police-in-pursuit-car-overturns-crashes/
http://bernews.com/2010/11/accident-police-car-smashes-wall
Madam:)
mademoiselle
My take on law.
Laws are created by man (and woman) who are flawed, potentially corruptable. Laws are therefore can be flawed. Laws that follow a sense of logic, I can support. I think very few people can honestly say they follow the letter of the law in every circumstance.
This law is just as flawed as the SDO’s, Quigers and foreign spouse licences. I made my comments then, made my suggestions as what I would do, took part in protests and even got a tee shirt!
I was very against the spousal law. If I had a foreign spouse, I would like to believe I would have chosen prison rather than pay any fee.
People are tired of corruption, politicans who answer to no one and yes tired of the police officers that serve without question beneath them.
Is it more dangerous pealing and eating a banana in a car while you’re driving than using a cellphone. Yes, it is. So let’s ban bananas in cars. Yeah, that’s it.
That should read: peeling.
Who says that they “serve without question”? Some do, but others don’t. My point was that at the end of the day they have to obey the commands given to them. If your boss gives you instructions you don’t agree with, you may voice your disagreement but if you refuse to carry through…what do you think will happen? The officers out in the field that have to deal with Joe Public, are they high ranking or just regular constables? How much say do you think they really have? They have bosses…just like you do!!!
I guess they can all be “trickle down” COGS in the wheel!
The whole law of this subject needs to go back and be rewritten. Its too ludricous!!!