On 11/08/09 14:47, KØHB wrote:


"Jeff Davis" wrote in message
...


No matter your position on the mobile issue, does it seem to you that
by taking such a stand the ARRL is exposing itself to a boatload of
liability the first time a mobile operating radio amateur plows into
someone on the Interstate and the amateur operation is cited as a
primary cause for the accident?


I don't think ARRL would be liable for the action of any individual ham.

But I do believe two things:

1) Operating an amateur radio rig while driving is every much a
distraction as talking on a cell phone.

2) Amateur radio operators should not be eligible for "exemptions" not
available to the general public.


I don't know how it is generally in the US, but here in the UK there is
a specific law prohibiting the use of *hand held* phones whilst driving.

This law does *not* apply where hands-free equipment is in use, as long
as the phone itself is fixed in a cradle and not lying around loose
somewhere.

It also applies *solely* to phones and *not* to any other form of radio
communications, including two-way radio (of any type, business radio or
amateur, CB etc.) So I can quite legally use a hand-held microphone on
2m but not a hand-held phone.

Of course the police could quite easily charge me with the offence of
driving without due care and attention or even dangerous driving, but
for some reason they saw fit to introduce a law banning hand-held phones.

73 Ivor G6URP