Police not knowing the rules

Forums › Off topic › Police not knowing the rules

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15

Nil Einne

469 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 35

#723710 27-Nov-2012 16:12

John2010:
dickytim:
...To be safe you could try and pull off the road...

I wouldn't be so sure about that unless you pulled into private land to which the public did not have access.

The Land Transport Act interprets a "road" as being "a place to which the public have access, whether as of right or not" so even if you pull off the road and that place you pull off onto is not a designated car parking area (and which strictly speaking may still be a road, so there! ?), such as would likely be the case on a non-urban road, then if you remain in the driver's seat you must be still driving on a road, not parked .

I am quite certain that is the law, as it is written in "black and white" and so therefore completely beyond dispute and must be applied; good sense must be thrown away in its interpretation and application. And the law is never an asss (extra "s" to get around the forum's naughty word filter filtering out the name of an animal ) is it?

On the other hand lets remember that the definition of a road doesn't always matter. The ban is on a driver while driving, so it doesn't matter whether you are on a road provided you are not a driver driving. As I mentioned a few threads back presuming this comes to court, this is the only plausible out for the driver given the totality that I've read about, bearing in mind IANAL but i find it difficult to see it would work. (As I also mentioned if the phone was mounted there is an out for the camera but not the reading an SMS bit whatever claims he may make about not unlocking the phone or faulty advice from NZTA that he didn't actually know at the time. Although, and I cannot remember if I mentioned this before I guess the OP could claim he wasn't sure whether he got an SMS or a phone call or what and was checking to see. But if he knew it was an SMS or continued reading once he realised it was an SMS then this defence would also go down the toilet.)

Nil Einne

469 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 35

#723753 27-Nov-2012 17:52

Nil Einne: On the other hand lets remember that the definition of a road doesn't always matter. The ban is on a driver while driving, so it doesn't matter whether you are on a road provided you are not a driver driving. As I mentioned a few threads back presuming this comes to court, this is the only plausible out for the driver given the totality that I've read about, bearing in mind IANAL but i find it difficult to see it would work. (As I also mentioned if the phone was mounted there is an out for the camera but not the reading an SMS bit whatever claims he may make about not unlocking the phone or faulty advice from NZTA that he didn't actually know at the time. Although, and I cannot remember if I mentioned this before I guess the OP could claim he wasn't sure whether he got an SMS or a phone call or what and was checking to see. But if he knew it was an SMS or continued reading once he realised it was an SMS then this defence would also go down the toilet.)

Forgot to mention, for the camera thing there is the possibility he could try the 'it isn't a mobile phone' argument others have suggested but to me this argument is even less likely to hold water then the driver thing and in any case still doesn't help him with the SMS he read.

gzt

18756 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7883

Lifetime subscriber

#723757 27-Nov-2012 17:57

No, the legislation defines any device with a phone function as a phone.

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#723834 27-Nov-2012 20:37

Nil Einne:
John2010:
dickytim:
...To be safe you could try and pull off the road...

I wouldn't be so sure about that unless you pulled into private land to which the public did not have access.

The Land Transport Act interprets a "road" as being "a place to which the public have access, whether as of right or not" so even if you pull off the road and that place you pull off onto is not a designated car parking area (and which strictly speaking may still be a road, so there! ?), such as would likely be the case on a non-urban road, then if you remain in the driver's seat you must be still driving on a road, not parked .

I am quite certain that is the law, as it is written in "black and white" and so therefore completely beyond dispute and must be applied; good sense must be thrown away in its interpretation and application. And the law is never an asss (extra "s" to get around the forum's naughty word filter filtering out the name of an animal ) is it?

On the other hand lets remember that the definition of a road doesn't always matter. The ban is on a driver while driving, so it doesn't matter whether you are on a road provided you are not a driver driving. As I mentioned a few threads back presuming this comes to court, this is the only plausible out for the driver given the totality that I've read about, bearing in mind IANAL but i find it difficult to see it would work. (As I also mentioned if the phone was mounted there is an out for the camera but not the reading an SMS bit whatever claims he may make about not unlocking the phone or faulty advice from NZTA that he didn't actually know at the time. Although, and I cannot remember if I mentioned this before I guess the OP could claim he wasn't sure whether he got an SMS or a phone call or what and was checking to see. But if he knew it was an SMS or continued reading once he realised it was an SMS then this defence would also go down the toilet.)

Um, rude. Don't put words in my mouth. I knew what the nzta site said before this happened, I could remember it word for word and had double checked after.

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#723835 27-Nov-2012 20:42

Nil Einne:
Nil Einne: On the other hand lets remember that the definition of a road doesn't always matter. The ban is on a driver while driving, so it doesn't matter whether you are on a road provided you are not a driver driving. As I mentioned a few threads back presuming this comes to court, this is the only plausible out for the driver given the totality that I've read about, bearing in mind IANAL but i find it difficult to see it would work. (As I also mentioned if the phone was mounted there is an out for the camera but not the reading an SMS bit whatever claims he may make about not unlocking the phone or faulty advice from NZTA that he didn't actually know at the time. Although, and I cannot remember if I mentioned this before I guess the OP could claim he wasn't sure whether he got an SMS or a phone call or what and was checking to see. But if he knew it was an SMS or continued reading once he realised it was an SMS then this defence would also go down the toilet.)

Forgot to mention, for the camera thing there is the possibility he could try the 'it isn't a mobile phone' argument others have suggested but to me this argument is even less likely to hold water then the driver thing and in any case still doesn't help him with the SMS he read.

I don't plan to use that argument. It is a phone and that's all it ever has been (iPhone users may say other wise, phone + mini computer maybe). I didn't read the SMS when I took the photo. I knew there was a notification there when I turned the screen on, but I had no idea what it was until I still, but I presumed it was a txt because I heard the audio stop for a sec when I had music playing through my car (connected via aux). I read the text when I arrived at an imterem destination in Auckland CBD (exited the car after parking in a car park to collect some items before going to final destination in ponsonby)
So was not even in the car at the time.

mattwnz

20523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4798

#723836 27-Nov-2012 20:42

I don't personally have any problem with someone who is stopped using a mobile device. But the number of people, mainly realestate agents, who I see on their phones, I can see why the police are hard on this.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

gzt

18756 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7883

Lifetime subscriber

#723871 27-Nov-2012 21:40

I learned something from this discussion anyway - it's legal to use your hand held phone to call 111 or *555 while driving.

Which would be kind of funny - if you were in traffic and called *555 to report an out of control person in front of you using a phone - and then the person behind you reports you for using a phone - and so on..

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#723898 27-Nov-2012 22:32

mattwnz: I don't personally have any problem with someone who is stopped using a mobile device. But the number of people, mainly realestate agents, who I see on their phones, I can see why the police are hard on this.

I totally agree. I'm all against using phones while the car is in motion, and I don't even use mine when stopped at lights and stuff, I only used mine while at that crash because I believed it was legal to do so becuse I read that nzta site

old3eyes

9158 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1365

Subscriber

#723977 28-Nov-2012 08:33

tardtasticx:
mattwnz: I don't personally have any problem with someone who is stopped using a mobile device. But the number of people, mainly realestate agents, who I see on their phones, I can see why the police are hard on this.

I totally agree. I'm all against using phones while the car is in motion, and I don't even use mine when stopped at lights and stuff, I only used mine while at that crash because I believed it was legal to do so becuse I read that nzta site

How many crashes do you come across in a day??

Regards,

Old3eyes

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80682 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41136

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#724012 28-Nov-2012 09:56

Just received, a little bit on topic:

Help is at hand for drivers battling the urge to respond to incoming TXTs, thanks to Vodafone DriveSafe. Available to all Vodafone customers free of charge, DriveSafe will send an automated reply to any TXT message received, letting the sender know that the driver is on the road and unable to respond.

Although illegal for more than three years, TxTing while driving is still a major issue and a key target in the Police’s current cell phone blitz.

Endorsed by the NZ AA and the NZ Transport Agency, DriveSafe is activated by TXTing ‘DRIVE ON’ to 760. The service is then turned off by TXTing ‘DRIVE OFF’ to the same number. Anyone TXTing the driver during this time will receive the message “I’m driving right now. I’ll read your TXT as soon as it is safe to do so. Vodafone DriveSafe.”

Vodafone’s General Manager of Products, Greg McAlister says DriveSafe is aimed at helping New Zealanders use their mobiles safely.

“Texting and driving is such a topical issue in New Zealand, and Vodafone wants to play its part in contributing to road safety. We would love to see all our customers using DriveSafe.”

McAlister says that all Vodafone sales staff who are regularly on the road are now using the service.

AA Motoring Affairs General Manager Mike Noon says Vodafone DriveSafe is simple, yet effective. “One of the worst things about texting and driving is that drivers know they shouldn’t do it but many cases just can’t seem to stop themselves when they hear a message arrive.

“Vodafone DriveSafe is a simple tool that can help drivers to leave the phone alone. The driver can relax knowing the person who texted them has been sent a reply and, as a bonus, it is spreading the message that texting and driving are a potentially lethal mix.”

Vodafone New Zealand and DriveSafe won the User Safety Innovation category at the Global Telecoms Awards in London earlier this year.

DriveSafe is Vodafone’s third innovation that gives customers control over who contacts them and how. It follows Vodafone Blacklist which allows customers to bar malicious calls and TXTs and Vodafone Guardian, an Android app which enables parents to control functionality on their children’s smartphones.

This service has been around for some time now, I guess the couple of articles in the papers in the last few days made Vodafone send out a press release again.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#724015 28-Nov-2012 10:00

old3eyes:
tardtasticx:
mattwnz: I don't personally have any problem with someone who is stopped using a mobile device. But the number of people, mainly realestate agents, who I see on their phones, I can see why the police are hard on this.

I totally agree. I'm all against using phones while the car is in motion, and I don't even use mine when stopped at lights and stuff, I only used mine while at that crash because I believed it was legal to do so becuse I read that nzta site

How many crashes do you come across in a day??

I see maybe 1 or 2 here and there, but I regularly travel rather large distances around Auckland, not uncommon for me to do maybe 2 hours of driving in 1 day.

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15