Driving While On The Phone

[Caran]

Just watching a police programme. The police quite often use their walkie talkies while driving. This means they have to drive with one hand.
What is the difference. Surely they too are breaking the law.

[Islay]

Doesn't the passenger generally use the radio whilst the driver drives?

[bhg481]

There isn't always a passenger ie, sometimes single-crew cars.

[retrocop]

Definitely.Always used to be a crew of three on a Met Wireless car if manpower permitted. Driver, R/T operator and observer.
Nowadays most county constabulary cars which cover outlying rural areas are single manned due to cutbacks.
Vehicles were fitted with press to talk buttons on the steering wheel and the horn button could be wired to accept the on/off function of the whooper and wailer so it really should be all hand free apart from pressing accessible controls on the steering wheel.

[roopower]

Never seen a police driver texting while driving unlike some drivers.

[retrocop]

or shaving!! :-)

[bhg481]

I was once overtaken on a motorway by a man driving a Ford Scorpio who had his phone in one hand and was writing on a pad with the other. I suppose, being on a motorway, he thought steering didn't matter much.

[bednobs]

sounds like from chris's link, it is not one rule for us, one rule for them

[Islay]

I am sure that its probably in the rules that if they use devices whilst driving it must be for official purposes.

All this one rule for them rubbish is demeaning of you !!

[New Judge]

Of course it is. There are remarkably few accidents involving police vehicles (considering the number of miles they collectively cover). When they happen they often make the headlines. To suggest that they should not use communication devices or to exceed the speed limits when responding to emergencies is naïve.

Life is risky and any injury or loss of life on the roads is regrettable. But the emergency services need to be exempt from some of the rules that cover most drivers.

[Buenchico]

Just a couple of additional points from me:

1. It's just not the police that are exempt from the rules on using mobile telephone when, instead, they use two-way radios.

If Joe Bloggs buys a pair of walkie-talkies from Maplin's and then uses them to communicate with his Aunt Ethel (in a following car) as he drives down a motorway, he (and Aunt Ethel) can't be prosecuted under the legislation relating to the use of mobile phones. (However it's possible that they might still be prosecuted for not being in full control of their vehicles, as users of mobile phones always could be before the current legislation came into force anyway - assuming that the police and the CPS could actually prove it).

2. NJ writes: "There are remarkably few accidents involving police vehicles".
Possibly that needs "that we get told about" added onto the end of it!

I used to deliver car parts to the vehicle workshop at Suffolk Police's HQ, often calling there several times per week. Nearly every time I visited there was a newly-pranged vehicle (or sometime several) awaiting repair!

[Old_Geezer]

Still seems an unnecessary and avoidable risk.

[Caran]

What started this with me was a single policeman in a car. He had his walkie talkie fastened to his tunic. He was pulling it towards his face and twisting his body to get nearer to it. He was driving one handed and didn't look as in control as he should have been.
I'm not having a go at the police. I just thought it didn't look safe.

[shoota]

//Still seems an unnecessary and avoidable risk.//

No. It is a necessary and unavoidable risk.