"NSW Police Minister fined for using phone in car, says he didn't know it was illegal"
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-21/nsw-police-minister-troy-grant-fined-for-using-phone-in-car/8372962

Would it have been an offence if he had used a camera, one that didn't have a mobile phone function?

If he could have legally used a camera then the I don't see why there is a law against using the camera function of a phone whilst a vehicle is stationary.

Yes, apparently using a mobile phone whilst stationary constitutes a dangerous distraction for the driver. On the other hand, apparently driving around with three small children screaming and fighting in the back seat isn't distracting at all. Or at least not distracting enough to make it illegal.

It's one of these stupid bloody laws that isn't really designed to improve public safety - it's all about revenue raising. Why not just raise taxes or rego fees or something?

Recent neuroscience research continues to confirm that the human brain is NOT capable of multitasking and particularly complex activities. You can 'get away' with it where different sectors of the brain are involved. But that isn't driving or operating machinery, or many other things.

Bluntly, if you manage a child while walking and you are talking on the mob, you are in fact doing one or the other, not both. It is sequential attention with switching in between. As well, that 05 second you swap attention each time and you will be doing it many times, adds up to totally blank mental screens where you are conscious of NOTHING.

After having looked at the research I turn the damned thing OFF when I get into the car, when I take control of a motor vehicle.

What I have detailed is recent and indisputable, peer-reviewed and in the right journals of course.

Folks, we are already mainly on 'auto-pilot' when driving a car. We have lapses of attention as our mind goes off on the worries of the day, past upsetting events and so on, or simply slides into neutral.

Yes too, some have screaming kids or are talking up positives or the matters of the day with kids as they drive and being inattentive in the process.

I was about to opine that it is a wonder we get there safely, but when I thought about it, many don't.

I often see people using mobile phones while driving.
Also not wearing seat-belts and of course with
kids misbehaving in the back seats. Then there's the
speesters and the erratic drivers. How to encourage
safe behaviour - fines and licence suspension seem to
be the only deterrents because education isn't working.

Other activities that are illegal while driving, but rarely policed.

Eating a hot pie, drinking hot coffee, adjusting the radio, adjusting the GPS, the list goes on, but the only one usually targeted is the mobile phone.

It is my understanding though that if you are pulled upon the side of the road, you can't have your foot on the brake while using the phone, you need to have the car in nutral, with hand brake off if you have the engine running.

While I agree that mobile phones should be turned off when driving, particularly texting capacity, I'm afraid your "recent and indisputable, peer-reviewed" science is a pile of twaddle leoj. Perhaps like climate science, the government funded researchers knew very well the result required by their funders, & arranged their research to supply that result to order

Surely you have seen footage on the many "COPS" shows on TV of the cop in a very high speed car chase, reporting on his radio every turn made by the perused car?

If a motor racing fan you would have seen drivers interviewed at full racing speed around Bathurst, with the interview transmitted live on TV. Even I have repaired an electrical switch problem in a Holden Monaro, while racing around Bathurst. That I did not crash, & actually finished second, destroys the idea of the indisputability of multitasking being impossible, unless I am a god of course.

Sure some drivers are more competent than others. Perhaps we should not be granting licences to the less competent. Like the lady who ran into the back of my parked car, shunting it through a brick fence, & half way through a homes front door. She was worried about her groceries on the back seat falling onto the baby beside them, & not attending to driving.

I did feel like telling her that running into a parked car was more potentially harmful for a baby, but feared she might become even more hysterical. Perhaps we could get your peer reviewed "scientists" to research & then ban the carriage of babies by lady drivers.

Like the charging of a drunk sleeping in their car with drunk driving, I'm afraid there is too much revenue raising potential here for me to trust your peer review or the integrity of our current crop of government funded scientists.

"I'm afraid your "recent and indisputable, peer-reviewed" science is a pile of twaddle leoj"

You are wrong to dismiss the converging, cumulative findings of neuroscience, psychology, chemistry, biology and ors.

Among other measures, the science is supported by brain imaging (MRIs), technology that was not previously available to researchers who made similar observations and had similar findings in the past.

It has nothing to do with climate. That is a red herring.

leoj,

All very interesting but what does it have to do with using a camera (with phone function) when stationary in a line of traffic?

Had he used a normal camera then there would have been no offence.
Had he needed to use the phone to ring someone urgently he could not have pulled off the road as required, so the law is stupid and there is no wonder that many people would ignore it, or, as in Grant's case, believe that it could apply.

Use of a camera would also have been an offence because the drivers attention was distracted and he could not maintain a sufficient outlook and control his car (hands on camera/mob for instance). Similarly you could expect to get away with looking through binoculars (prescription lenses are a different proposition).

That the car was stationary is irrelevant. He could have been called upon to make a rapid manoeuvre. Unlikely perhaps but it wouldn't be the first time that dangerous situations have arisen affecting lines of stopped traffic.

While the report doesn't exactly say he used the mob to post the image, he did power it up and use the screen and controls. He took a photo AS WELL. Posted and reviewed his post AS WELL most likely.

He shouldn't be trying to rationalise, or make a virtue out of his indiscretion (by saying he turned himself in before police made their inevitable visit) and no, I don't believe for a split second that he didn't comprehend the full import of the relevant traffic regulation.

How is his behaviour any different from the union boss who went on The Box saying that she has no regard for laws and would break them at her choosing?

Should be, Similarly you could NOT expect to get away with looking through binoculars (prescription lenses are a different proposition)".

Plenty of examples of exceptions.
Two way radios can be used while mobile. Usually radios that are
frequency agile have a button on the microphone to enable you to
change up or down channels.
The proposal to jam mobile phones in cars so they cannot be used is illegal.
Generally the jammers work by jamming the control channel.
This can interfere with mobile phones being used by passengers in
adjacent cars, or in adjacent premises or adjacent pedestrians.

The problem of mobile phones in gaols was prevented for some time
for this reason but by restricting the range so that phones
outside the gaol are not interfered with was probably how that was
overcome.
Some restaurants that tried the same thing were prosecuted.
A weapon such as a slingshot is an illegal weapon but I can use one
as I have a radio communications licence.

Some people have bought those modems that provide an ethernet link
between power points in a house but they cause radio interference
and they can be seized by radio inspectors if used as they do not
comply with the appropriate standards.

There are stacks of examples of laws, rules etc of which people are
just not aware.

Perhaps the technology has advanced, and we have have welcomed it, too far in advance of our knowledge and consideration of its effects, both positive and negative. Not just thinking about regulation and enforcement. but the flow-on effect on us as humans.

I cannot even begin to explain to twenties aged children that their 'connectivity' is not even the mirage of relating to other humans. 'I click therefore I exist'?

In fact, I have started to have click-free times - talking about switching off, mob, pc electronic media and so on - to regain and enjoy peaceful solitude and reflection. Otherwise, life just whizzes by.

How typical that some overpaid politician has nothing better than to imagine that anything and everything he encounters in his day is worthy of recording and reporting to the world? Is that what we have become?

Not for me, anyhow.

Leoi,

I can't really imagine a dire emergency, other than a sudden fire, that would cause one to move suddenly whilst stuck in a line of traffic at roadworks; see the man with the sign and the machine on the other side of the road; and in the case of fire one would best get out of the car and move away if here was no room to move the car safely..
An emergency is so unlikely that people often get out to stretch their legs when the bloke with the sign tells those in the front cars that there will be a relatively long delay.

Funny that the Government/Road Safety Authorities/Police don't do something about the appalling centre lines on many of the State's roads; on one 30 kilometre section between Glen Innes and Emmaville
there are at least 12 dangerous places where the centre lines are seriously misleading, at least to non-locals.

These safety lapses include two utterly blind crests that have a broken line going up and over the hilltop, ditto blind corners.

The Gwydir Highway between Inverell and Grafton has many blind corners with broken centre lines to lure the unwary into trouble.

Using a mobile phone in a controlled stopped line of traffic is utterly insignificant.

Apparently using a mobile phone whilst stationary constitutes a dangerous distraction for the driver. On the other hand, apparently driving around with three small children screaming and fighting in the back seat isn't distracting at all. Or at least not distracting enough to make it illegal.

It's one of these stupid bloody laws that isn't really designed to improve public safety - it's all about revenue raising. Why not just raise taxes or rego fees or something?

Your right in that is about nothing else than revenue rasing but you must understand that the purpose of making all these sorts of fines is to raise revenue AND NOTHING ELSE Safety, justice or whatever else has nothing to do with it.

I wonder how long it will take before they tax (fine) taxi drivers who drive along pressing that button on the box they have on the dash?

The really ridiculous thing is allowing touch screens for things like air conditioning & radio controls.

Of course talking on a phone is distracting, but mucking about trying to hit the right spot on a touch screen is not apparently.

Keep laughing folks, it's that or go mad.

"If he could have legally used a camera then the I don't see why there is a law against using the camera function of a phone whilst a vehicle is stationary."

You've won me over Is Mise, doesn't make a lot of sense does it.

He dobbed himself in.
What a total knobhead.
Why do I get the feeling this was a 'Dorathy Dixer' of sorts with him deliberately trying to get some cheap media attention?
Stupid modern technical age, every fool is now pushing their own brand...
Maybe not, but the whole thing seems pretty stupid.
What was so special about the sheep anyway?

After reading a few stories today, I have to ask myself 'How would we feel if this was the VIC Police Minister'?
These were the stories I read...

Man Attacked In Own Bedroom at 12:50am By Machete Weilding Youths - Almost Died
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/man-seriously-assaulted-car-stolen-in-violent-home-invasion-in-thomson-geelong-20170321-gv3g3g.html

Machete Maniacs Attack Dad in Terrifying South Melbourne Robbery
http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/news/national/machete-maniacs-attack-dad-in-terrifying-south-melbourne-robbery/news-story/9125aa5fd7969d8d086a8d527c032d61

'Protect Victoria' Facebook group (from previous link) has doubled membership in recent days.
http://www.facebook.com/groups/217134422085889/

So then I look at it all and though its a different state I wonder who gives a crap about snap-shots of sheep?
Doesn't he have any other pressing crime related work he should be more focused on?
Nothing at all?

...And it's at this point it hits me I've just wasted several minutes or more of my life on this insignificant sheep snapper that I'll never ever get back.

"...the government funded researchers knew very well the result required by their funders, & arranged their research to supply that result to order. Surely you have seen footage on the many "COPS" shows on TV of the cop in a very high speed car chase, reporting on his radio every turn made by the perused car?"

It's official then, using a mobile phone does not affect driver reaction time! Thanks for clearing that up.

I've spent too many k's stuck behind people having a chin-wag at 10-15 kph below the limit, and had a friend killed by a donkey who put her need to to stay connected with ahead of the safety of others.

Some would trust arrogant, 'I am above the law', politicians to make laws for them. What about this arrogant clown?

"Bill Shorten has been caught holding his mobile phone while behind the wheel on one of Melbourne's busiest streets - and now Victorian police have his number.
Video obtained by the Herald Sun shows the federal Labor leader with his phone in his hand while driving in a 40km/h zone along Kings Way.
..
Publication of the video follows a November incident in which Mr Shorten crashed his late mother's car into two parked cars in Carlton while reportedly drinking coffee."
http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/shorten-fined-for-using-phone-in-car/news-story/d738c7e96910dbc6d98c4a5cbe118145

But any politician who occupies a position that sets policy for and regulates traffic should have the grace to resign if s/he flouts the law by something as serious as operating a mobile while a driver.

The rules are set to curb the road toll. We are doing reasonably well compared to other countries.. The US where if you kill yourself while driving is your fault. The road toll is 30'ooo per year. It's ok to destroy yourself but they have a habit of taking innocent people with them.
More controls are being mounted on the steering wheel now. Ovcourse you have to have a new car to get that.
Laws are there to protect your safety and innocent persons safety. Do the wrong thing and you should be find heavily..

But what is wrong in using a camera, that happens to have a phone function, in a car that is stationary in a Road Work queue?

It's like the, now rescinded, law that used to operate in NSW, where if one crossed the unbroken line on the left-hand side of the carriageway and did not stop or turn then one was committing an offence.
It all came to a head when a farmer, towing a horse trailer pulled over the said line to allow traffic to pass him.
The last car to go bye was a police car and when he pulled back onto the road they booked him for the 'offence'.

Some laws are stupid.

Using a mobile is no worse than using a 2way radio mike.
Police do it all the time, Truckles do it all the time and couriers do it all the time.
Ambos, Firemen and Taxis do it.
What is more dangerous? Using a phone or watching a satnav mounted on the dash?

Chris, there is a big difference. You pick up the mike press the ptt button and talk while not looking away from the windscreen one second.
Hard to do that with a mobile phone unless you have hands free.
Even that need to press a button the radio in my case.