![]() |
Driving Without Due Care Are there any rules in writing on what constitutes driving without due care? Are you allowed to smoke while driving? Are you allowed to eat a hamburger while driving? Are you allowed to drink a beverage? |
Quote:
Can you be charged for eating while driving? | Wheels.ca Quote:
|
Also curious about this. I think its stupid that we can't talk on the phone but we can change, eat, drink, smoke or read a book. I have more control of my car talking on the phone than any of the others above. The only driving without due care I've personally seen was my friend ripping it in lansdowne parking lot at night... Posted via RS Mobile |
Quote:
Eating, drinking, smoking are momentary things that don't take your concentration away from driving. Talking on the phone is not momentary and requires you to process what is going on in the conversation. |
You could be charged for the actual behaviour you exhibited. This was always a charge long before cell phones & texting ever came along and I laid charges back in the late 1980's for due care behaviour. Most of it results in horrendous driving actions/crashes etc so it is easy to identify. Couple of examples not involving cell phones or eating...car running a stop sign fishtailing across the road, almost hitting the curb and a car in their path (me in an unmarked)...or passing 3 cars (including me in an unmarked) stopped at a yellow light that was turning red to allow 4 small children to cross at an intersection crosswalk and running the red at about 80k in a 50, accelerating hard. |
how many points is it for this ticket?? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Posted via RS Mobile |
^ Or grabbing a hot drink and the lid pops off and spills everywhere and you try to clean it up. I'm sure that takes more attention than talking on the phone. I'm not defending people who talk on their phones, I'm just saying that there are worse things that are not illegal. |
Quote:
How much brain power does it take to eat a burger? Not much. Compare that to having a conversation on the phone, thinking, remembering details, etc... I will say that I don't think we need a dedicated "electronic device" law. The police already had existing laws to deal with people distracted by texting, talking, etc... The number of people I still see texting and driving like idiots amazes me. |
Quote:
When did common sense become so uncommon? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
now texting and driving is a different issue. that should be an automatic driving without due care... it's pretty much like driving with your eyes closed half the time... but to tell me that it's "safer" for me to use a handsfree bluetooth device than to hold a phone in my hand.... come on |
Quote:
It's the act of holding a conversation with someone who is not in the vehicle that is the key problem. I'm sure many collisions happen because a driver is distracted by kids fighting in the back seat, or had turned to look at their passenger while talking to them. |
Quote:
To make the roads full of drivers that are concentrating TOTALLY on the road and driving would be awesome...but unattainable! Even a driver singing to their favorite song on a CD has been distracted..........:whistle: |
The decision to ignore the studies that show the mental distraction of both hand held and hands free devices are almost equally destructive and dangerous, was made for political reasons. Studies were available long before they decided to just ban hand held. the power decided to ignore them, in spite of medical advice and pleas from Law enforcement. Same sort of thinking went into a lack of proper implementation of photo radar and the decision to withdraw it in the end. |
WHAT????? Am I seeing or reading this right? Zulu and Seb agreeing on something???? :whistle: |
Quote:
If photo radar ever came back and everyone drove at the speed limit, I'll continue to apply the logic that driving at 10kph slower than the flow of traffic will keep me safe. |
Quote:
involved the same car and same driver, about 2 years apart. The X walk incident trial was almost over when he was testified that it was all untrue and I was just harassing him over almost killing 4 kids on a crosswalk... just because he almost killed me 2 years earlier. JP thought that was a wonderful admission for him to make. Driver got reamed and fine increased, plus the JP contacted the Supt MV himself over it. Any surprise that he was driving 5.0? JP told him to never ever appear before him again in any courtroom as HE had a long memory too. JP and I are both retired now. One of our treasured moments from traffic court. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Drivers need to take responsibility when they screw up, (i.e. crash), cause someone else to crash, etc... but the government needs to recognize that regardless of the potential penalties, people will still occasionally screw up, either on purpose or by mistake. Red light cameras for example don't stop people from running red lights. Even the government has come out sand said this. So what they need to do is ensure that when such a screw-up occurs, they've taken steps to reduce the possibility of a collision (i.e. proper light timing) I've put the evidence in front of you several times now, yet you and others continue to ignore it go along with whatever the government wants you to hear. |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:28 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net