Eat a Cheeseburger in QLD, while Driving....$330 plus 3 Demerit points !!!

[blueoval]

whats the law if you have both hands on the wheel and you get your mrs to hand feed you while you drive and watch the road? My mrs does that often for me, is that inattentiveness or me being a smart fart and shirking the law? I'd like a black and white rule on that one.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by blueoval

whats the law if you have both hands on the wheel and you get your mrs to hand feed you while you drive and watch the road? My mrs does that often for me, is that inattentiveness or me being a smart fart and shirking the law? I'd like a black and white rule on that one.

Police discretion?

[EVLKNEVL]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Good, bring it on. I have not read the whole thread as many of the comments don't deserve reading.

Personally I am sick of attending crashes and hearing excuses such as "I only glanced down for a second". As DashGT said, if motorists could use some common sense there would be no requirement for these laws. The truth is your fellow motorists prove daily that they need these laws.

I think you will find that what our fellow motorists prove every day is that these quick-fix laws don't have any effect on how safely people drive. If they had shown any effectiveness, you wouldn't be complaining about the number of crashes you still have to attend.

The governments appoint teams of highly paid experts who have all the data, expertise and judiciousness required to put together policy which is effective and addresses the underlying cause of these dangers on the road, and the best they've managed to come up with is "If you eat a cheeseburger you'll cop a $330 fine and points." ..Come on.

Or is safety and preventing accidents not the principal agenda?

I think that people see resources spent on slap-together policies which don't axe the problem off at the roots, and those resources can't now be spent somewhere productive; that's why there's opposition to these band-aid fixes.

Failing to arrest the problem properly ensures that steady cashflow can be generated from the new policy, and leaves the door open for more wild-goose-chase tactics for revenue and election trickery in the future.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by csv8

EVLKNEVL its not just QLD....http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/geared/dri...straction.html it even mentions eating a cheeseburger !!! I suppose all States have similar rules,,just QLD has made it known!!!!!!

That's not stating that it's the law in NSW as well.

It's just pointing out what distractions are, as some people don't seem to know.

[2011G6E]

There's only one of the "fatal five" that I truly worry about out here...and that's "Fatigue".

If I drive from here the 170-odd kilometers to Rocky, almost every second corner has skid marks gracefully spinning off into the scrub where some hero has thought he could do a twelve hour shift and then drive a few hours back home in safety. Sometimes you see the cars, sometimes not, but thankfully the really big trees are well back from the road so they usually just flatten some saplings and smaller trees.
A few years back we had a Commodore do a neat pirouette across the highway a few seconds in front of us coming the other way, to spin across in front of us in a cloud of tyre smoke, then disappear down into a deep roadside ditch on our side of the road. When we pulled the Landcruiser up and got out, the guy was already out of the car which, miraculously, didn't roll but landed on it's wheels, and he was staggering around in a daze, already on the phone. After checking he was OK, we left. A few seconds later and it would have been a monumental head on with each car doing at least 110kph into the impact...
It was quite obvious what had happened when we thought about it...both my wife and myself had noticed that the car approaching us was drifting off the left side of the road and just left the bitumen and was about to hit the guide posts before he obviously woke up with a start and the car gave a sudden flick to the right as he overcorrected, then it went into a spin as it flicked back the other way.

We did notice when we first moved out here that the signs on the Bruce Highway all say "Don't speed" and "speed kills", but when you head out along the Capricorn Highway inland, all the signs change to say things like "Fatigue: the number 1 highway killer" and warnings to be aware of getting tired.

[irish2]

Originally Posted by Rapid_Axe

Yeah, I do that, but whats more scary for me is that I go into the zone about 5 minutes after I start driving. I just cannot pay attention on the roads anymore simply because to me driving is boring.

Do what I do and cruise over the limit. Then you are alert, whilst looking for hiding cameras. Mind you I only do this on highway runs with low traffic. I am often dodging people around me who change lanes suddenly whilst rubbing their eyes and then rip the steering back. I can see why Victoria made DSC a requirement for new vehicles.

[irish2]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

There's only one of the "fatal five" that I truly worry about out here...and that's "Fatigue".

If I drive from here the 170-odd kilometers to Rocky, almost every second corner has skid marks gracefully spinning off into the scrub where some hero has thought he could do a twelve hour shift and then drive a few hours back home in safety. Sometimes you see the cars, sometimes not, but thankfully the really big trees are well back from the road so they usually just flatten some saplings and smaller trees.
A few years back we had a Commodore do a neat pirouette across the highway a few seconds in front of us coming the other way, to spin across in front of us in a cloud of tyre smoke, then disappear down into a deep roadside ditch on our side of the road. When we pulled the Landcruiser up and got out, the guy was already out of the car which, miraculously, didn't roll but landed on it's wheels, and he was staggering around in a daze, already on the phone. After checking he was OK, we left. A few seconds later and it would have been a monumental head on with each car doing at least 110kph into the impact...
It was quite obvious what had happened when we thought about it...both my wife and myself had noticed that the car approaching us was drifting off the left side of the road and just left the bitumen and was about to hit the guide posts before he obviously woke up with a start and the car gave a sudden flick to the right as he overcorrected, then it went into a spin as it flicked back the other way.

We did notice when we first moved out here that the signs on the Bruce Highway all say "Don't speed" and "speed kills", but when you head out along the Capricorn Highway inland, all the signs change to say things like "Fatigue: the number 1 highway killer" and warnings to be aware of getting tired.

Every day there are new sections of guard rail demolished on the M1 between Brisbane and the Gold coast. Most of the time it is in dead straight stretches of 5 lane highway.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by EVLKNEVL

I think you will find that what our fellow motorists prove every day is that these quick-fix laws don't have any effect on how safely people drive. If they had shown any effectiveness, you wouldn't be complaining about the number of crashes you still have to attend.

The governments appoint teams of highly paid experts who have all the data, expertise and judiciousness required to put together policy which is effective and addresses the underlying cause of these dangers on the road, and the best they've managed to come up with is "If you eat a cheeseburger you'll cop a $330 fine and points." ..Come on.

Or is safety and preventing accidents not the principal agenda?

I think that people see resources spent on slap-together policies which don't axe the problem off at the roots, and those resources can't now be spent somewhere productive; that's why there's opposition to these band-aid fixes.

Failing to arrest the problem properly ensures that steady cashflow can be generated from the new policy, and leaves the door open for more wild-goose-chase tactics for revenue and election trickery in the future.

Firstly you are assuming that I am attending the same number of crashes per shift/week/month/year. That is a big assumption to make with no specific knowledge to base it on. I have not done an audit on 5 years worth of case sheets (about 7,500 case sheets) to get an accurate figure as I have much better things to do with my time. Having said that it is most certainly my impression that I attend less crashes now than I did 5 years ago. That impression is somewhat reinforced by the fact that the number of road fatalities per vehicle registration is decreasing.

Yes the number of road deaths is only making modest improvements if any but they are not growing at the same rate as the number of vehicle registrations. So therefore despite an increase in the number of vehicles on the road we are not seeing a proportional increase in the number of fatalities. So if that is the case then something must be working, something must be making a difference. What on earth could it be?

Could it be that the vast majority of motorcyclists wear helmets? I think that has knocked off a few fatalities each year. Could it be that it is now second nature for the majority of road users to wear a seat belt? Again, that will attribute to some of the road toll reduction. Could it be that it is now socially unacceptable to drink and drive, thus reducing the number of alcohol related crashes? Again, there is no doubt this had a positive effect on the road toll. Maybe the fact that the majority of parents would not consider having a child in a car that is not in an effective restraint? That used to be acceptable, but now we go to less children fatalities (I have never been to one, been to dead parents though).

So what was the common theme amongst all of those? Thats right, there is law supporting their compliance. The simple fact is the laws are made for the lowest common denominator on the road, without telling people what to do they will not do it. Even the people that should know better are the worst offenders, just look at cabbies and truck drivers.

I can understand where they are coming from, inattention causes crashes and there is no disputing that. If people can not improve based on education and there has been a lot of work done trying to educate the public. Perhaps people need to be hit with a big stick to get the message, it has worked on other causes of fatalities.

DRIVERS eating or playing loud music could be fined $330 for inattention under Queensland's Fatal Five police campaign to cut the state's rising road toll.

Not everyone agrees with the government's logic.

Yeppoon P-plater Monte Van Geest said the new laws were a case of over-regulation.

"Will they take radios out of cars too ... ? Where does it end?," he said.

"I think this is about money."

Police Minister Jack Dempsey launched the new Fatal Five highway patrol cars yesterday with the news that 15 days into the new year and Queensland had recorded the same number of road fatalities as this time last year.

And some of those deaths could have been avoided, he said.

"That's why we've added distraction as one of the fatal five."

Speeding, drink-driving, not wearing a seatbelt and driving while fatigued make up the rest of the Fatal Five.

Police Commissioner Ian Stewart said officers did have discretion between fining someone eating a chocolate bar and someone trying to eat a stir-fry behind the wheel, but even loud music could be distracting enough to result in a fine.


Police Commissioner Ian Stewart
"We've all seen it in our own lives, people reading something, looking away, picking something up off the passenger seat when they should be watching the road as the vehicle is moving forward.



"It will depend on the circumstances, but anything that causes inattention while that driver is in control of the vehicle can be considered by police officers."

"Every one of those (crashes) can be avoided by people being smarter - not texting on their phone, not eating that pie, not trying to put their make-up on or trying to do their hair as they drive into work."

Mr Stewart said officers had handed out almost 600 tickets - worth a $330 fine and three demerit points - for inattention over the Christmas period.

He said statistics showed about 1200 of the state's injury crashes in the past 12 months had been attributed to inattention.

"It's a shame the public don't seem to be getting this."

Forum keyboard warrior sensationalism aside, let look at this.

First off, great reporting here. For a start they get a key comment regarding road safety off a P plater. I am convinced, end the argument there.

Police Minister Jack Dempsey launched the new Fatal Five highway patrol cars yesterday with the news that 15 days into the new year and Queensland had recorded the same number of road fatalities as this time last year.

Disappointing, I was hoping for fewer but the year is not over yet, we can still get better.

"That's why we've added distraction as one of the fatal five."

Speeding, drink-driving, not wearing a seatbelt and driving while fatigued make up the rest of the Fatal Five.

No mention of cheeseburgers or eating, just driver distraction.

Police Commissioner Ian Stewart said officers did have discretion between fining someone eating a chocolate bar and someone trying to eat a stir-fry behind the wheel, but even loud music could be distracting enough to result in a fine.

So the officers have some discretion here, open food that is easy to handle is ok but a plate of stir fry with a fork or chopsticks is not, sounds reasonable to me.

Police Commissioner Ian Stewart
"We've all seen it in our own lives, people reading something, looking away, picking something up off the passenger seat when they should be watching the road as the vehicle is moving forward.



"It will depend on the circumstances, but anything that causes inattention while that driver is in control of the vehicle can be considered by police officers."

"Every one of those (crashes) can be avoided by people being smarter - not texting on their phone, not eating that pie, not trying to put their make-up on or trying to do their hair as they drive into work."

Wow, the amount of times I have seen someone on this forum on their soap box about how the cops should be doing something about these things rather than focussing on speeding. Now they are and now we are on our soap box criticising them for it. Tough audience.

Mr Stewart said officers had handed out almost 600 tickets - worth a $330 fine and three demerit points - for inattention over the Christmas period.

He said statistics showed about 1200 of the state's injury crashes in the past 12 months had been attributed to inattention.

"It's a shame the public don't seem to be getting this."

Sounds like a fair call to me and I know that the AFF road safety consultancy group has said the same thing in previous threads.

A big point to remember here, this is not new law, it has always been there. They are just adding it to their focus in an effort to keep the roads a safe place to be. If you use your brain and pay attention you have nothing to worry about, just like before. If you don't use your brain and cop a fine, too bad at least you are helping fund the government health system, indirectly of course. Lets just say it is a user pays system, those at greater risk pay.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

There's only one of the "fatal five" that I truly worry about out here...and that's "Fatigue".

If I drive from here the 170-odd kilometers to Rocky, almost every second corner has skid marks gracefully spinning off into the scrub where some hero has thought he could do a twelve hour shift and then drive a few hours back home in safety. Sometimes you see the cars, sometimes not, but thankfully the really big trees are well back from the road so they usually just flatten some saplings and smaller trees.
A few years back we had a Commodore do a neat pirouette across the highway a few seconds in front of us coming the other way, to spin across in front of us in a cloud of tyre smoke, then disappear down into a deep roadside ditch on our side of the road. When we pulled the Landcruiser up and got out, the guy was already out of the car which, miraculously, didn't roll but landed on it's wheels, and he was staggering around in a daze, already on the phone. After checking he was OK, we left. A few seconds later and it would have been a monumental head on with each car doing at least 110kph into the impact...
It was quite obvious what had happened when we thought about it...both my wife and myself had noticed that the car approaching us was drifting off the left side of the road and just left the bitumen and was about to hit the guide posts before he obviously woke up with a start and the car gave a sudden flick to the right as he overcorrected, then it went into a spin as it flicked back the other way.

We did notice when we first moved out here that the signs on the Bruce Highway all say "Don't speed" and "speed kills", but when you head out along the Capricorn Highway inland, all the signs change to say things like "Fatigue: the number 1 highway killer" and warnings to be aware of getting tired.

And you know for a fact that none of those skid marks involve a plate of stir fry, how?

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by irish2

Every day there are new sections of guard rail demolished on the M1 between Brisbane and the Gold coast. Most of the time it is in dead straight stretches of 5 lane highway.

That section of road is highly likely to be driver distraction rather than fatigue, at least that is my experience attending crashes there.

[XR6TCraig]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

And you know for a fact that none of those skid marks involve a plate of stir fry, how?

LOL He is talking about a road in a remote location in the middle of nowhere, not some inner city arterial. Just where would someone have procured a stir fry in the middle of nothing? You couldn't buy one along there if you wanted to, so the chances of a stir fry being involved are next to nil.

It is much, much more likely that in this part of the world those skid marks were caused by fatigued drivers doing shift work throught the night and then trying to drive 200klm to get home to see the family.

[EVLKNEVL]

Sorry mate, I have not read your whole post as many of the comments don't deserve reading.

Maybe there are fewer accidents on the road because vehicle safety has improved drastically. Maybe it's because of the reasons you described. Neither of us has provided tangible evidence to support our theories, so I'm not going to sit here and argue with you about it. That's how threads get closed.

[xtremerus]

Can sitting in a parked car with the keys in the ignition, or pocket, and eating a cheeseburger constitute a crime?
It does if you had a ''few to many'' and decide to sleep it off in the car. The intent is there that you could drive.
AHHH constables discretion.

[XR6TCraig]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Yes the number of road deaths is only making modest improvements if any but they are not growing at the same rate as the number of vehicle registrations. So therefore despite an increase in the number of vehicles on the road we are not seeing a proportional increase in the number of fatalities. So if that is the case then something must be working, something must be making a difference. What on earth could it be?

Could it be that the vast majority of motorcyclists wear helmets? I think that has knocked off a few fatalities each year. Could it be that it is now second nature for the majority of road users to wear a seat belt? Again, that will attribute to some of the road toll reduction. Could it be that it is now socially unacceptable to drink and drive, thus reducing the number of alcohol related crashes? Again, there is no doubt this had a positive effect on the road toll. Maybe the fact that the majority of parents would not consider having a child in a car that is not in an effective restraint? That used to be acceptable, but now we go to less children fatalities (I have never been to one, been to dead parents though).

So what was the common theme amongst all of those? Thats right, there is law supporting their compliance. The simple fact is the laws are made for the lowest common denominator on the road, without telling people what to do they will not do it. Even the people that should know better are the worst offenders, just look at cabbies and truck drivers.

You missed one very important change ( probably the biggest in terms of how the road toll has been affected) and it isn't through legislation that it has occured.

It revolves around the vast improvements by manufacturers in making cars safer simply because the buying public now demand it. Safety cells, ABS, multiple air bags, pretensioner seat belts, etc, etc are doing a lot more for the road toll than fining people who eat while driving will ever do.

The truth is that accident rates haven't dropped and while we set licence tests to a very low standard so that everyone can get one, and then let them out on roads that outside of the major urban centres are like roads in a thrid world country, that wont change.

While what you mentioned ( legislation of compulsory seat belts and child restraints), has made the outcomes different in some cases, the biggest difference is from a change in the manufacturing process of vehicles that has nothing to do with the way that we are over legislated at all!

[XR6T0Y]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Firstly you are assuming that I am attending the same number of crashes per shift/week/month/year. That is a big assumption to make with no specific knowledge to base it on. I have not done an audit on 5 years worth of case sheets (about 7,500 case sheets) to get an accurate figure as I have much better things to do with my time. Having said that it is most certainly my impression that I attend less crashes now than I did 5 years ago. That impression is somewhat reinforced by the fact that the number of road fatalities per vehicle registration is decreasing.

Yes the number of road deaths is only making modest improvements if any but they are not growing at the same rate as the number of vehicle registrations. So therefore despite an increase in the number of vehicles on the road we are not seeing a proportional increase in the number of fatalities. So if that is the case then something must be working, something must be making a difference. What on earth could it be?

Could it be that the vast majority of motorcyclists wear helmets? I think that has knocked off a few fatalities each year. Could it be that it is now second nature for the majority of road users to wear a seat belt? Again, that will attribute to some of the road toll reduction. Could it be that it is now socially unacceptable to drink and drive, thus reducing the number of alcohol related crashes? Again, there is no doubt this had a positive effect on the road toll. Maybe the fact that the majority of parents would not consider having a child in a car that is not in an effective restraint? That used to be acceptable, but now we go to less children fatalities (I have never been to one, been to dead parents though).

So what was the common theme amongst all of those? Thats right, there is law supporting their compliance. The simple fact is the laws are made for the lowest common denominator on the road, without telling people what to do they will not do it. Even the people that should know better are the worst offenders, just look at cabbies and truck drivers.

I can understand where they are coming from, inattention causes crashes and there is no disputing that. If people can not improve based on education and there has been a lot of work done trying to educate the public. Perhaps people need to be hit with a big stick to get the message, it has worked on other causes of fatalities.



Forum keyboard warrior sensationalism aside, let look at this.

First off, great reporting here. For a start they get a key comment regarding road safety off a P plater. I am convinced, end the argument there.



Disappointing, I was hoping for fewer but the year is not over yet, we can still get better.



No mention of cheeseburgers or eating, just driver distraction.



So the officers have some discretion here, open food that is easy to handle is ok but a plate of stir fry with a fork or chopsticks is not, sounds reasonable to me.



Wow, the amount of times I have seen someone on this forum on their soap box about how the cops should be doing something about these things rather than focussing on speeding. Now they are and now we are on our soap box criticising them for it. Tough audience.



Sounds like a fair call to me and I know that the AFF road safety consultancy group has said the same thing in previous threads.

A big point to remember here, this is not new law, it has always been there. They are just adding it to their focus in an effort to keep the roads a safe place to be. If you use your brain and pay attention you have nothing to worry about, just like before. If you don't use your brain and cop a fine, too bad at least you are helping fund the government health system, indirectly of course. Lets just say it is a user pays system, those at greater risk pay.

I agree with every point you have made, and I know other do as well.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by EVLKNEVL

Sorry mate, I have not read your whole post as many of the comments don't deserve reading.

Maybe there are fewer accidents on the road because vehicle safety has improved drastically. Maybe it's because of the reasons you described. Neither of us has provided tangible evidence to support our theories, so I'm not going to sit here and argue with you about it. That's how threads get closed.

So you are suggesting that helmets, seat belts, child restraints and decreased drink driving have made no tangible effect on road safety. There are many safety councils, motoring bodies and governments that will disagree there.

[XR6T0Y]

delete

[XR6T0Y]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Australian motoring forums, the haven of jumping to conclusions and assumption without basing it on any fact whatsoever! .

This sums up this section perfectly

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

So you are suggesting that helmets, seat belts, child restraints and decreased drink driving have made no tangible effect on road safety. There are many safety councils, motoring bodies and governments that will disagree there.

Of course they have!
I don't think anyone on here will argue against that but the fact is that improving driver competence is one thing that will make a dramatic difference.

It is also one that will cost a lot of money so its not popular with the law makers, although if you compare it to what crashes cost the community in lives and money it could possibly be cost negative.

Imagine the hue and cry from the media if pilots were trained to the level of the average driver on our roads.

[MITCHAY]

Just stop to eat it and remove all doubt. Honestly is anyone is too busy to stop for a meal and/or a smoke and have a walk around and stretch their legs?

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by noflac52

Of course they have!
I don't think anyone on here will argue against that but the fact is that improving driver competence is one thing that will make a dramatic difference.

It is also one that will cost a lot of money so its not popular with the law makers, although if you compare it to what crashes cost the community in lives and money it could possibly be cost negative.

Imagine the hue and cry from the media if pilots were trained to the level of the average driver on our roads.

No doubt, I am actually a big advocate for increased driver training and assessment. This is based primarily on the effect that this training and assessment had on me, I see the value.

I just don't subscribe to the notion that it is the silver bullet any more than I agree that speed limit compliance is the silver bullet.

Road safety is a multi faceted problem that requires a multi faceted management approach, I am sure most will see my logic there (some won't).

[Auslandau]

The biggest problem I have with all this and it is become the norm as far as Road Safety (sometimes in very loose terms) is the word Discretion. Things should be black and white. "Do it this way or become a criminal ... " Where is the cut off?

Also .............. EVERYONE HERE HAS A RIGHT TO AN OPINION AS LONG AS THAT OPINION IS STATED IN A NICE MANNER!!!!!!! NO ONE NEEDS TO HAVE A CRY BECAUSE THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION TO SOMEONE ELSE ...... DISCUSS THINGS NICELY! IF EVERYONE HAD THE SAME OPINION THE THREAD WOULD HAVE FINISHED AFTER POST NUMBER 2!!!!! That is all thanking you all.

[tweeked]

Is it ok for someone to eat a mobile phone while driving?

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by tweeked

Is it ok for someone to eat a mobile phone while driving?

...... talk with a mobile phone to your ear is against the law. The law states, don't talk on a mobile phone while driving. Easy!

[tweeked]

Originally Posted by Auslandau

...... talk with a mobile phone to your ear is against the law. The law states, don't talk on a mobile phone while driving. Easy!

What about if you can get a hands free kit for your cheeseburger?

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by tweeked

What about if you can get a hands free kit for your cheeseburger?

...... there is and its called the Mrs!

[OzJavelin]

Hmm .. My LHD '74 Javelin should be and extremely safe vehicle then? LHD so it's difficult to go though a drive through .. No cup holders nor centre console to hold food/drink .. And needs two hands on steering wheel to keep it going in a straight line (keeps your attention)

[SSD-85]

I think its safe to speculate that the majority of "inattention" accidents (fatal or non-fatal!) were caused by bona-fide dumbasses who had both hands on the wheel.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by csv8

EVLKNEVL its not just QLD....http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/geared/dri...straction.html it even mentions eating a cheeseburger !!! I suppose all States have similar rules,,just QLD has made it known!!!!!!

i know someone in victoria back in 1987 who had "eating a hamburger" written on his fine - like most of the sky is falling threads, it is nothing new

these threads are funny because most get on here and over react about their perception of the powers that be over reacting

yet another storm in a teacup - but curse those mongrels for actually telling ignorant people what the rules are

[BENT_8]

You have got to be joking me, no more macca's...

Im sick of that nanny state, its being overtaken by dictators i tell you.
My civil rights are being eroded as i type this and im not a happy meal, i mean camper...

Oh, sorry, relax, its nothing to do with cheese burgers.
Its my shares in Krispy Kreme and Donut king, they've taken a massive hit...
Whats good for the goose and all that!

Lighten up guys, anyone who whips out a cheesy and scoffs it down infront of a copper deserves a fine i reackon.