Originally Posted by
Washington DC
Of course not, but that's not the rule. We apply common sense to a very clear rule to avoid a farcical situation.
Some people here are firmly stating that the letter of the law must be followed, regardless of the availability of evidence or reason (I wonder how many of them have a military background?) - it's an interesting position to take on the internet, but not something that can realistically be followed in the real world.
As such, we have to all use our judgement and common sense to interpret the quoted CAA rule and can't take it literally. We all must draw a line somewhere that is not in the same place as the written text.
I think you may be misunderstanding the legal position on this. CAA "rules" relating to the use of Personal Electronic Devices are part of the Joint Aviation Authorities regulation 1.110 (a EU law) which is enforced on United Kingdom registered aircraft by the Civil Aviation Act, an Act of Parliament.
You can clearly read here what the definition of a Personal Electronic Device is:
http://www.easa.europa.eu/certificat...l/TGL%2029.pdf
Your original post seemed to suggest that if up against a judge for (one presumes) disobeying the instructions to turn off your Kindle, you'd attempt a defence based on "the law is an ... because a wristwatch is an electronic device and you don't ask us to turn those off" which I don't think would get you very far.
Either that, or you would argue that laws are merely guidelines and that it's up to you as an individual to use your common sense and judgement (which of course, could never be clouded by your motive...) which again, would get you similarly far.