galah some references (not sure about the originating stats though) returned from http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=mobile+phone+handsfree+driving&btnG=Google+Search&meta=cr%3DcountryAU

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1412283.htm "Drivers who had used a mobile phone, either holding it to their ear or using a hands-free system, were 4.1 times more likely to have an accident in the next 10 minutes than if they had not made a call.

The comparative risk with a hand-held phone was no less than 4.9 times, and with hands-free phones it was 3.8 times."

The paper was supposedly published on the British Medical Journal website in mid July 2005 but I've not yet found it.

Some local work at http://www98.griffith.edu.au/dspace/handle/10072/5177?mode=full&submit_simple=Submit "Using a closed-circuit driving track environment, we investigated the influence of using a hands-free mobile (or cell) phone on various biomechanical and perceptual factors that underlie the control of driving. Results showed that in three tasks representative of everyday driving conditions, the perceptual control of action was compromised when compared to a control condition where no mobile phone conversation was present. While conversing, critical control actions related to braking were postponed on approach to a corner. During controlled braking, as when approaching a stationary car at a traffic light, the degree of braking was reduced and braking style was altered in a non-optimal manner. During an obstacle avoidance task, car dynamics were affected as a result of the conversation. Interpretation of the results is motivated by the ecological approach to perceptionaction and the theory of affordances. It is concluded that a driver's sensitivity to prospective information about upcoming events and the associated perception and awareness of what the road environment affords may both significantly be degraded when simultaneously using a hands-free mobile phone. Implications for intervention and policy are discussed."

R0bert

Thanks for that RObert, a lot to go thru thoroughly

Yes it frustrates me too. Why should we have to take extra risk on the road just because others want to talk on the phone while driving!?

I have very little knowledge of technology but wouldn't it be possible for a clever technician to invent some kind of mobile phone blocker, which, as soon as one gets into the car his/her mobile phone is disabled?
This, once invented, should be installed compulsory in all cars.

"citizens...powerless", ludwig. quite right.

but on the phone question: the only solution is technology. our masters will discover too many people are causing accidents, so they will legislate to disable phones in cars. or they won't. but like any other question in oz, nothing the serfs can do about it.

and yes, hands free doesn't help much, the distraction is equivalent to being dwi. does help some, though- some woman nearly collected me yesterday cause she clipped a corner due to steering with one hand. either that or hadn't grasped the significance of the center line.

there is another side to it, ludwig: if a private person accuses, they are subject to retribution. your photo of someone driving and phoning wouldn't stand up in court. it probably needs legislation , driving technology to nobble phones in cars. won't happen any time soon, due to rule 1.

take 2 bex and lie down, nothing we mug ozzies can do.

I find your response somewhat curious DEMOS.

You are an arch advocate of effective democracy. Well, surely effective democracy sits very well with a strong rule of law and an effective ability for the average citizen to play a part in upholding it….so that everything in our society is as fair and as safe as possible for us all.

I would have thought you would be all for improved policing and better empowerment of the populace.

There should be major publicity campaigns telling the public how to do their bit to uphold a strong rule of law. Instead, what we effectively have is an expectation by the police and authorities for the public to do NOTHING when subjected illegal activity, unless a very serious incident has occurred….at least as far as road-safety issues go.

People are put in a position of either having to cop illegal, dangerous and offensive activity in their faces without offering any response, or take matters into their own hands and approach the offender or show then their discontent in an offensive manner. It's no wonder that road rage has become so significant.

The right sort of evidence WOULD hold up in court. Why would you think that photos that show the necessary details wouldn’t constitute the necessary evidence?

We’ve had a neighbour watch network around the country for many years. People are encouraged to report suspicious behaviour. They don’t have to wait for an incident to occur or even for anything illegal to be done.

We also had a ‘dob in a smoky vehicle’ campaign running for many years, where people were encouraged to report smoky exhaust-emitting vehicles.

I’ll also note that the police will act on very minor complaints of unusual types.

But, it appears that when it comes to road safety issues – mobile phones, tailgating, etc - THINGS THAT FREQUENTLY LEAD TO ACCIDENTS, INJURY AND DEATH OF INNOCENT PEOPLE – the policy is completely different.

WHY?? ?? ?? ??