Mobile phone payments ban at takeaway drive-throughs in Australia

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, S w a t s o n said:

 We will use this to fill quotas

This is the vic police, Apart from the fact they don't need to harass people to fill quotas (we have enough idiots on the road to make it easy), they just take it in turns blowing into the breathalyzer to get their numbers up.

 

 

[mr moose]

@S w a t s o n @Jito463  Not sure if you just found the post amusing or if you don't believe this happened,  but:

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-30/victoria-police-record-fake-roadside-breath-tests/9817846

 

 

I have had a lot of dealings with the Vic Police and I have found them to be mostly decent people working hard in a job that earns little respect.   They want to let you off and avoid paperwork as much as the next person, but given every second prick they pull over genuinely thinks it's their god given right to speed that it must be the cop who just wants to make your life difficult I don't blame them for not letting anyone off.  

[Jito463]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

@S w a t s o n @Jito463  Not sure if you just found the post amusing or if you don't believe this happened,  but:

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-30/victoria-police-record-fake-roadside-breath-tests/9817846

A little of both, to be honest, though I can't say it surprises me too much.  Even less so after reading the article through:

Quote

Police Association secretary Wayne Gatt said the finding was disappointing but highlighted the need for more resources.

 

"It comes as little surprise that when unrealistic targets are placed on our members that this sort of thing might emerge," he said.

This is why I'm not a fan of "quotas" for cops.  There has to be a better way to monitor job performance, than how much revenue they can generate through tickets.

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

A little of both, to be honest, though I can't say it surprises me too much.  Even less so after reading the article through:

This is why I'm not a fan of "quotas" for cops.  There has to be a better way to monitor job performance, than how much revenue they can generate through tickets.

 

I fully agree with you there, targets and quotas in that type of field are counter productive.     Although I don't know how to monitor the police force and ensure funding goes where it is needed I am sure there has to be a better way too.

[leadeater]

44 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I fully agree with you there, targets and quotas in that type of field are counter productive.     Although I don't know how to monitor the police force and ensure funding goes where it is needed I am sure there has to be a better way too.

When the police are doing a good enough job crime rates are too low to hit targets so issue infringements for dubious reasons, which erodes trust in the police which increases the crime rate thus allows the police to hit their targets. Mission accomplished 

[bbbbbbb99]

On 8/6/2019 at 8:46 PM, Dabombinable said:

I wonder if my Nexus 7 would count (it actually has NFC, though it hasn't been used). It'd have to be tethered via wifi/BT to my phone, but still...they specify mobile phones. Not tablets. Or better yet, smart watches.

Actually the law was updated around the time smart watches were coming out to include those sort of devices, i think its technically legal though if you pay on the smart watch without touching it. 

[mr moose]

14 minutes ago, leadeater said:

When the police are doing a good enough job crime rates are too low to hit targets so issue infringements for dubious reasons, which erodes trust in the police which increases the crime rate thus allows the police to hit their targets. Mission accomplished 

That's why I think crime rates should only be considered as a metric for funding when rates are high and police presence is low.   The whole concept that funding (or staff numbers) should be lowered just because the crime rate has gone down is a horribly illogical thing to do.

[Kisai]

On 8/6/2019 at 9:10 AM, dalekphalm said:

Whether or not the vehicle needs to be turned off will depend on the country - apparently in Australia, the vehicle needs to be parked and turned off.

 

Other countries may not share that specific variation of the law. I do know that a person in Canada (Surrey, BC - Linus territory) got a ticket for using their phone in a Drive-Thru, but it wasn't specific about whether the person was parked or not (because many people just hold their foot on the brake pedal rather than actually putting the car into park).

 

Keep in mind, this was in BC (The Canadian province of British Columbia) - every province sets their own road laws, and while most (possibly all, now?) of the provinces have distracted driving laws that cover mobile phones, there are variations among the laws between each province.

 

In BC, you certainly could be hit with the distracted driving fine if you use the NFC feature of your phone in a drive-thru. However I feel the only way you would actually get the attention of a cop in a drive-thru is if they are behind you and you didn't put the car in park. Remember the reason it's distracted driving is because you're checking the phone while it's still in drive.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/explainer-distracted-driving-ruling-1.5066810

 

Quote

Part 3.1 of the Motor Vehicle Act forbids drivers from using mobile phones and other electronic devices while driving or operating a motor vehicle.

Drivers can use their cellphone in their car if they are legally parked off the road. They can also use it if they are using the "hands-free" function, but the device must be mounted to the vehicle using a cellphone holder or other mechanism.

 

[dalekphalm]

9 hours ago, Kisai said:

 

In BC, you certainly could be hit with the distracted driving fine if you use the NFC feature of your phone in a drive-thru. However I feel the only way you would actually get the attention of a cop in a drive-thru is if they are behind you and you didn't put the car in park. Remember the reason it's distracted driving is because you're checking the phone while it's still in drive.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/explainer-distracted-driving-ruling-1.5066810

 

 

A key point there is that there are two qualifications: legally "parked", and "off the road". Parked while "on the road" - which one could argue that the Drive-Through may count as "on the road", may be enough of a technicality for them to get away with it.

 

And I know that the case in BC that happened, they actually had RCMP officers on foot in person beside a drive-through ticketing people.

 

I think this definitely highlights that tweaks need to be made to the laws.

[FakeNSA]

Wait, deremit points? WTH?

[mr moose]

31 minutes ago, Aelar_Nailo said:

Wait, deremit points? WTH?

In Victoria you accumulate demerit points every time you are caught speeding, drink driving etc.   If you accumulate  more than 12 points you lose your license.

 

It's to stop people from just paying the fines and continue speeding.   Because contrary to popular belief we have people here with more dollars than cents.

[Kisai]

6 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

A key point there is that there are two qualifications: legally "parked", and "off the road". Parked while "on the road" - which one could argue that the Drive-Through may count as "on the road", may be enough of a technicality for them to get away with it.

 

And I know that the case in BC that happened, they actually had RCMP officers on foot in person beside a drive-through ticketing people.

 

I think this definitely highlights that tweaks need to be made to the laws.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surrey-rcmp-no-phones-drive-thrus

 

Quote

Although the driver was warned for using his phone prior to entering the drive-thru, Surrey RCMP says that under the BC Motor Vehicle Act, parking lots and drive-thrus are “considered part of the roadway, and are subject to enforcement of the BC Motor Vehicle Act which prohibits the use of electronic devices while driving.”

 

So as it turns out, the specific case in BC was the driver was warned, because he had been using the phone before entering the drive-thru. 

 

Anyway, yeah a tweak or a specific clarification for when vehicles are not in a position to drive should be added to the motor vehicle code:

 

A) At a red light or stop sign, do not touch the mobile device, vehicle is still in drive.

B) In a drive thru or automated car wash, only if the vehicle is in park

C) On a ferry/ferry parking lot, only when the vehicle is parked and the engine is off.

 

It appears the law in Victoria, AU chose to interpret "being parked" as having the engine turned off, which in a drive thru wouldn't make a lot of sense unless your order is going to take a few minutes.

 

[Fnige]

38 minutes ago, Kisai said:

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surrey-rcmp-no-phones-drive-thrus

 

7 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

And I know that the case in BC that happened, they actually had RCMP officers on foot in person beside a drive-through ticketing people.

If using NFC, wouldnt phones act the same as credit cards? Would I have to carry around cash in the future just because of PhoneCampers

[dalekphalm]

1 hour ago, SlimyPython said:

 

If using NFC, wouldnt phones act the same as credit cards? Would I have to carry around cash in the future just because of PhoneCampers

The law doesn’t care why you’re using your phone. NFC or not, technically it would still be considered using the phone. 

[FakeNSA]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

If you accumulate  more than 12 points you lose your license.

Interesting idea, thanks for explaining it to me.

Quote

Because contrary to popular belief some people have more dollars than cents.

+100 pun points. Nice!