REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Police Forum

Police Forum Police Head Mod: Skidmark
Questions & info about the Motor Vehicle Act. Mature discussion only.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-24-2010, 04:36 PM   #101
The RS Freebie guru
 
InvisibleSoul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: East Vancouver
Posts: 22,029
Thanked 2,489 Times in 859 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post

Would you read a book while driving? Taking your eyes and concentration off the road to read a text message is.. nevermind...
How dangerous is it to take five seconds to read a text message while stopped at a red light?

I just want clarification whether they have defined what "texting" actually envelops.
Advertisement
InvisibleSoul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2010, 10:27 PM   #102
resident Oil Guru
 
LiquidTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,716
Thanked 10,457 Times in 1,794 Posts
^

Just don't whip out the phone at a stop light. What are you going to tell the cop when he pulls you over? You're grasping at straws.
LiquidTurbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2010, 11:37 PM   #103
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
jlenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 3,562
Thanked 330 Times in 163 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by InvisibleSoul View Post
How dangerous is it to take five seconds to read a text message while stopped at a red light?

I just want clarification whether they have defined what "texting" actually envelops.
If you have the phone in your hand... you qualify for a ticket.

If they see you holding it up to the side of your head... I think it's safe to assume that you're talking on the phone, so you wouldn't get a texting ticket. If you're holding the phone out in front of your face though... reading the screen, or using the buttons to type stuff... I think that would net you the texting fine, which is the additional three points. Or instant death penalty, if you're a "N"ew driver.

But that's just me and common sense speaking.
__________________
Don't be the next RS.net statistic - If you drink, don't drive. You'll lose your licence, and the rest of us will laugh at you.
jlenko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2010, 09:52 AM   #104
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: richmond
Posts: 2,834
Thanked 1,485 Times in 568 Posts
I love how cell phone users compare their use of cell phones while driving to the useage of mp3 players and touch screen head units.
Ignorant is how I see it.
A cell phone requires longterm mental and physical interaction that NO other devise requires. A quick scroll through an mp3 menu lasts 5 seconds albiet mildly distracting but only a 5 or so second one. A touch screen head unit is no different.
A cell phone on the other hand requires so much more. Everyone is different but I'm sure the average cell phone interaction is much longer then 5 seconds even something as simple as a text.
Now factor the laws of probability
You spend a few random seconds flipin through an mp3 during a 20 minute drive or you spend a few minutes gabbing on your cell phone to your pissed off girlfriend during a 20 minute drive.
What idiot has the higher probability of causing an accident?

Couple hints for the retards.
1) the mp3 isn't yelling at you.
2) the mp3 requires half your driving attention for a few seconds.
3) your phone is screaming in your ear.
4) your phone is requiring half your attention for minutes.
5) your phone is rotfl at your ass as you crashed into the old lady in front of you, driving to slow but you didnt notice cus for the past 5 minutes you were begging your girlfriend to forgive you for watching internet porn on your Iphone while driving.

Thats my argument but the tech addicts will argue the legalities and unfairness just like a heroin addict will argue that his drug of choice is no differnt then beer.

Besides if you talk to your better half all the way home then what do you have to talk about when you get home.
__________________
Rise Auto Salon

11938 95a Ave Delta
I can be reached VIA text @ 778-232-1465

Oil change special $70 5 liters synthetic oil including OEM filter Fender rolling from $45 per fender
Car Audio:
Focal, Morel, Genesis, Clarion, Scosche, Escort, Compustar, GReddy, Blitz, Tomei, Motul, Endless, Defi, Cusco, Nismo + More


We specialize in:
Custom Car Audio
Race/4x4 Fabrication
Forced Induction
Engine Swaps
General Maintenance
Phil@rise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2010, 03:20 PM   #105
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
One simple Google got this. In summary, the mental distraction is the problem.

Hands Free Mobile Phone Conversations Add Five Meters To Drivers' Braking Distances
ScienceDaily (Dec. 3, 2008) — Research led by psychology researchers at the University of Warwick reveals that mobile telephone conversations impair drivers' visual attention to such a degree that it can add over 5 metres to the braking distance of a car travelling at 60 miles per hour and causes almost twice as many errors as drivers driving without the distraction of a mobile phone conversation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dr Melina Kunar, from the University of Warwick’s Department of Psychology, and Dr Todd Horowitz, from Harvard Medical School, ran a number of experiments in which the participants had to pay attention and respond (by pressing one of two keys on a keyboard) to a series of discs moving around a computer screen.

Some of the participants carried out the task with no distraction. Others carried out the task while also using speaker phones to simultaneously engage in a normal phone conversation, discussing things such as their hobbies and interests. The researchers found that on average the reaction times of those engaging in the hands free telephone conversation were 212 milliseconds slower than those who undertook the task without the simultaneous telephone conversation. A car travelling at 60 miles an hour would travel 5.7 metres (18.7 feet) in that time so the distracting conversation would obviously increase any braking distance at that speed by the same amount. The test participants who were distracted by a phone conversation also made 83% more errors in the task than those not in phone conversations.

The researchers also looked at the effect the hands free telephone conversations had on visual attention if the phone conversation was skewed to a more passively orientated task. To do so they asked the test participants to listen over the speaker phones to a series of words and to repeat each word in turn. The research team also looked at the effect of a much more complicated conversational task in which the test participants had to listen to a series of words and after each word then think of and say a new word which began with the last letter of the word they had just heard.

For the more passive speaking condition, in which words were simply heard and repeated, they found that performance of test participants in this condition was the same as when they took the task without any distraction. However, they found the more complicated conversation in which the test participants were required to create and respond with a new word dramatically worsened the participants’ response times which were on average 480 milliseconds slower than those who undertook the task without any form of distracting telephone conversation. This suggests that hands free telephone conversations which require people to carefully consider the information they hear and then to make complex cognitive choices based on that information (a business decision for instance) have a particularly significant negative impact on a driver’s ability to process and act on the visual information that is critical to their driving performance.

Interestingly the researchers also examined what the effect would be of simply listening to a story while carrying out the task – an experience not unlike listening to speech radio while driving. To test this some of the participants in the experiment tried to complete the task while listening to the first chapter of Bram Stoker’s Dracula. They were also told they would have to answer questions on the story after the task was finished. The researchers found that in fact this activity made very little difference to the test participants response times or accuracy

The lead researcher in the project, Dr Melina Kunar from the University of Warwick’s Department of Psychology, said: “Our research shows that simply using phones hands free is not enough to eliminate significant impacts on a driver’s visual attention. Generating responses for a conversation competes for the brain’s resources with other activities which simply cannot run in parallel. This leads to a cognitive “bottleneck” developing in the brain, particularly with the more complicated task of word generation.”
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2010, 03:53 PM   #106
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,143 Times in 3,365 Posts
^^All good points, but remember too, your average MP3 player or other such car electronics require you to look away from the road to operate them, even if for a few seconds. Talking on the phone, whether with handsfree or not, can be done with eyes still focused on the old lady in front of you. Being distracted but still able to see the road is always > not being able to see the road at all.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2010, 04:28 PM   #107
I contribute to threads in the offtopic forum
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: richmond
Posts: 2,834
Thanked 1,485 Times in 568 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundy View Post
^^All good points, but remember too, your average MP3 player or other such car electronics require you to look away from the road to operate them, even if for a few seconds. Talking on the phone, whether with handsfree or not, can be done with eyes still focused on the old lady in front of you. Being distracted but still able to see the road is always > not being able to see the road at all.
The blind can drive too
Mythbusters did it with no problems. Its not an issue of visual distraction we are surrounded by those. Look out for that bird!! Its mental distraction thats the issue that is further compounded by visual and physical distraction.
__________________
Rise Auto Salon

11938 95a Ave Delta
I can be reached VIA text @ 778-232-1465

Oil change special $70 5 liters synthetic oil including OEM filter Fender rolling from $45 per fender
Car Audio:
Focal, Morel, Genesis, Clarion, Scosche, Escort, Compustar, GReddy, Blitz, Tomei, Motul, Endless, Defi, Cusco, Nismo + More


We specialize in:
Custom Car Audio
Race/4x4 Fabrication
Forced Induction
Engine Swaps
General Maintenance
Phil@rise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2010, 07:32 PM   #108
Rs has made me the woman i am today!
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Richmond
Posts: 4,459
Thanked 2,259 Times in 439 Posts
hey guys. if you're reading a text message while driving does that warrant a ticket?
TheKingdom2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2010, 08:50 PM   #109
I *Fwap* *Fwap* *Fwap* to RS
 
cococly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Van
Posts: 1,591
Thanked 341 Times in 82 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
One simple Google got this. In summary, the mental distraction is the problem.

Hands Free Mobile Phone Conversations Add Five Meters To Drivers' Braking Distances

Some of the participants carried out the task with no distraction. Others carried out the task while also using speaker phones to simultaneously engage in a normal phone conversation, discussing things such as their hobbies and interests. The researchers found that on average the reaction times of those engaging in the hands free telephone conversation were 212 milliseconds slower than those who undertook the task without the simultaneous telephone conversation. A car travelling at 60 miles an hour would travel 5.7 metres (18.7 feet) in that time so the distracting conversation would obviously increase any braking distance at that speed by the same amount. The test participants who were distracted by a phone conversation also made 83% more errors in the task than those not in phone conversations.
0.212sec does not look like a HUGE difference.

Stopping from 60miles/Hr increased by a car length is not that obvious either.

Someone should conduct a research with more profound result.
cococly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2010, 04:49 AM   #110
resident Oil Guru
 
LiquidTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,716
Thanked 10,457 Times in 1,794 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mx703 View Post
hey guys. if you're reading a text message while driving does that warrant a ticket?

YES.
LiquidTurbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2010, 05:26 AM   #111
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
MWR34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: richmond
Posts: 1,380
Thanked 1,956 Times in 286 Posts
how many MM in front disc brakes does one need to upgrade to counter the 212ms lag of texting? Im thinking 8 pot 355mm is an order.

Car A with stock brakes takes 125ft to stop from 60 to 0

Car B with a tommy texter has upgraded 8 pot Brembos, he does take a .212 second delayed reaction to stop, but still manages to stop at 87 ft. While getting rear ended by the idiot talking on his cell phone who never even started braking..
__________________
Out of all the things i've lost before, I miss my mind the most.


http://tickers.TickerFactory.com/ezt...a3fc/event.png
MWR34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2010, 05:57 AM   #112
Willing to sell body for a few minutes on RS
 
underscore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Kel-pwn-a
Posts: 11,964
Thanked 4,950 Times in 2,163 Posts
If Tommy is texting he won't have even seen the car in front has stopped. Now those shiny brakes are in a wrecking yard waiting to be scooped up by some lucky SOB.
__________________
1992 Toyota Celica GT-S // 1991 Toyota Celica GTFour RC FOR SALE // 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD

Quote:
Originally Posted by maksimizer View Post
half those dudes are hotter than ,my GF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevYouUp View Post
reading this thread is like waiting for goku to charge up a spirit bomb in dragon ball z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_KarMa View Post
OH thank god. I thought u had sex with my wife. :cry:
underscore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2010, 09:54 AM   #113
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cococly View Post
0.212sec does not look like a HUGE difference.

Stopping from 60miles/Hr increased by a car length is not that obvious either.

Someone should conduct a research with more profound result.
And the rest of the study showed..

The test participants who were distracted by a phone conversation also made 83% more errors in the task than those not in phone conversations.
..........
. This suggests that hands free telephone conversations which require people to carefully consider the information they hear and then to make complex cognitive choices based on that information (a business decision for instance) have a particularly significant negative impact on a driverís ability to process and act on the visual information that is critical to their driving performance.
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2010, 02:42 PM   #114
Banned (BBM)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 16,146
Thanked 627 Times in 368 Posts
this law is gay, those who never got into accident before means they are capable of driving (with 10 years + experience). Seriously if u know/can drive u can drive, doesnt matter what u are doing. As long as ur eyes are on the road. I still answer calls occasionally and check emails when im stop at a light
Mugen EvOlutioN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 06:28 AM   #115
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
MWR34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: richmond
Posts: 1,380
Thanked 1,956 Times in 286 Posts
I understand the rule for interacting with devices, like texting, emails and social sites or games, but cell phone calls are alot less distracting imho. The Laws are far behind the advancement with technology so this step is in the right direction, and if it works in other countries then it probably will work here.


I do look around at traffic lights and see a cell phone in 50% of peoples hands of the cars around me even as of last night. So I dont know how enforced this law is besides what media has told us.

I do know that it will be a tough habit to break since I do not like the bluetooth (look-a-like schizophrenic) stuck in my ear...

And not every car I own has Hands free yet...
__________________
Out of all the things i've lost before, I miss my mind the most.


http://tickers.TickerFactory.com/ezt...a3fc/event.png
MWR34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 06:51 AM   #116
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,143 Times in 3,365 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MWR34 View Post
I do know that it will be a tough habit to break since I do not like the bluetooth (look-a-like schizophrenic) stuck in my ear...

And not every car I own has Hands free yet...


http://images.google.ca/images?hl=en...-8&sa=N&tab=wi
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 01:14 PM   #117
I don't get it
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: vancouver
Posts: 443
Thanked 145 Times in 26 Posts
ok i have a question regarding this new law in BC, but not about cell phones in particular

i checked the link @ icbc which brings up a list of things prohibited

http://www.drivecellsafe.com/docs/ba...teddevices.pdf

to my understanding, i thought the ban was on all electronic devices,
the particular device i am interested in is a radar detector,

in the aforementioned PDF file, it says bans are on "hand-held" devices only, but it's only an informative PDF rather than "the law"
so are radar detectors regulated? (ie. will i get a ticket if i press the mute button with a class 7 license)

this is of no concern to class-5 people because it is ONE TOUCH to mute, but i have a class 7 driver's license.
jimmerz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 02:58 PM   #118
No Duplicate Accounts Allowed
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: BC
Posts: 819
Thanked 70 Times in 28 Posts
Sort of a loophole if it works.
I carry around a broken phone!
If i get pulled over, show him the broken phone and say some excuse like i was on my way to a cell phone repair shop.

if your holding a broken phone, is it still subjectable to a ticket? if u carry a bag that contains a gun that was broken into 1000 pieces, is it still considered carrying a firearm?
simsimi1004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 03:02 PM   #119
Willing to sell body for a few minutes on RS
 
underscore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Kel-pwn-a
Posts: 11,964
Thanked 4,950 Times in 2,163 Posts
why on earth would you need to hold it if it's broken? expecting a call from Jesus on that thing? If you get a ticket it's cause they saw you staring at the thing, had it in your hand or had it up to your head. Why would you hold a busted phone to your head?
__________________
1992 Toyota Celica GT-S // 1991 Toyota Celica GTFour RC FOR SALE // 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD

Quote:
Originally Posted by maksimizer View Post
half those dudes are hotter than ,my GF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevYouUp View Post
reading this thread is like waiting for goku to charge up a spirit bomb in dragon ball z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_KarMa View Post
OH thank god. I thought u had sex with my wife. :cry:
underscore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 03:20 PM   #120
No Duplicate Accounts Allowed
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: BC
Posts: 819
Thanked 70 Times in 28 Posts
im not talking about the soundness of carrying a broken phone but the technical aspect.
and its not like cops have telescopic vison, although some use binoculars to catch people.
can the cop still give a ticket? have rights to search the car in suspicion of carrying another phone?lol
is broken phone = still a phone or pieces of plastic?
bottle of mace split into half = still carrying mace? or an empty can?
simsimi1004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 04:43 PM   #121
c32
My dinner reheated before my turbo spooled
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,762
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
hey guys i dont want to make a new thread about this but.... can i still use my ipod or no? i connect it to my deck and like the sounds of it better then stupid cds plus cds are a waste and also a waste of space... if i cannot use ipods, well am i allowed to turn on the ipod in park and stash it in the cd holder and listen to the ipod threw the deck? but never touching the ipod while driving?
c32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 04:58 PM   #122
I don't get it
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: vancouver
Posts: 443
Thanked 145 Times in 26 Posts
if you care controlling it TRHOUGH THE DECK i think its ok
u jsut can't mess wth the ipod itself
think of it this way:
u put in a music cd filled with mp3's, same idea, the ipod then just becomes a storage device from which the deck grabs data from

on the contrary, even if you were just using aux plug in, you are allowed to have it there, but you just can't touch it/adjust it/ play with it while you are not parked
jimmerz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 09:03 PM   #123
c32
My dinner reheated before my turbo spooled
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,762
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
cool so i can jus use the ipod switch tracks and put it in the cd holder and they'll never know huh.. unless a cop saw me using the ipod? sounds good to me.
c32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 11:40 PM   #124
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
jlenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 3,562
Thanked 330 Times in 163 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by underscore View Post
why on earth would you need to hold it if it's broken? expecting a call from Jesus on that thing? If you get a ticket it's cause they saw you staring at the thing, had it in your hand or had it up to your head. Why would you hold a busted phone to your head?
Because they don't want to obey the law, so they try to find a stupid way around it.

It's like putting the front plate on the dash, instead of on the front of the car. Why bother? Because someone out there is stupid enough to try it.

Someone has to pay the fines... glad it's idiots like that guy with the broken phone to his head.
__________________
Don't be the next RS.net statistic - If you drink, don't drive. You'll lose your licence, and the rest of us will laugh at you.
jlenko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2010, 11:46 PM   #125
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
And the rest of the study showed..

The test participants who were distracted by a phone conversation also made 83% more errors in the task than those not in phone conversations.
..........
. This suggests that hands free telephone conversations which require people to carefully consider the information they hear and then to make complex cognitive choices based on that information (a business decision for instance) have a particularly significant negative impact on a driver’s ability to process and act on the visual information that is critical to their driving performance.
Just out of curiosity, what techniques do emergency vehicle operators use to ensure that they aren't a danger to other drivers while using a phone or two-way radio?

Also, I'd like to know why this law doesn't apply to cyclists.

Interesting but not unexpected observation: an increase in the number of people stopping at the side of the road in "no stopping" zones, pulling into the shoulder lane on a freeway.. eating burgers..
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.

Last edited by sebberry; 01-27-2010 at 11:54 PM.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, 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