Oops..

[sadjack]

I think the punishment has a lot to do with why people commit offences whilst driving.

If I was to carelessly kill someone with a knife I would rightly face a charge of manslaughter. Yet if I do it with a car its "Careless Driving".

Lets call it what it is, manslaughter, and the offenders should face the full weight of the law.

Only then will people think twice about texting or otherwise distracting from their driving.

If their is clear evidence of careless behaviour driving, why should that be treated any differently than careless actions with another implement that results in death? Everyones life is valuable and just because someones driving a big heavy vehicle should not mean they are treated more leniently

 

[Typo]

Whoever's meant to be enforcing the law, why can't they set up a few roaming video cameras to do the job? They'd probably need someone to actually watch the footage, rather than just push a button & out pops the fine, but I'm sure it'd still be a nice little earner.

Oh, & loads of road users might live longer too, which would be nice.

 

[downfader]

Whoever's meant to be enforcing the law, why can't they set up a few roaming video cameras to do the job? They'd probably need someone to actually watch the footage, rather than just push a button & out pops the fine, but I'm sure it'd still be a nice little earner.

Oh, & loads of road users might live longer too, which would be nice.

Write to your MP and ask for it. If enough people ask they sometimes see the growing public concern (and fear for losing their job in the next election if they dont act)

 

[garrilla]

Wasn't there a campign against mobile and hidden cameras such that the government agreed to place signs 50m before thecamera to give people a chance to anchor?

 

[downfader]

Wasn't there a campign against mobile and hidden cameras such that the government agreed to place signs 50m before thecamera to give people a chance to anchor?

Yep. Like I said - MPs will sometime bring in what the people want to save their bacon. Also the cameras get turned off at random times iirc, all on the say so of the common public.

Sometimes we're our own worst enemies...

 

[PBancroft]

Wasn't that also the reason they were all painted yellow? Just so people would see them and know to slow down...

 

[downfader]

Wasn't that also the reason they were all painted yellow? Just so people would see them and know to slow down...

Ofcourse, becuse drivers ALWAYs see yellow

 

[PBancroft]

Ofcourse, becuse drivers ALWAYs see yellow

I think you might mean "red"

 

[Cubist]

Wasn't that also the reason they were all painted yellow? Just so people would see them and know to slow down...

Gets quite complex here.

There is an argument to say that the more people who are caught on camera the better, because they will supposedly be deterred from committing the same offence again later. There's a big "however" here, because the cameras are billed as "Safety cameras", not speed cameras. They are there to make sure drivers stick to the speed limit, not to catch them unawares, as this only plays into the hands of the "you only use them as an additional source of revenue" brigade. What no one ever seems to accept is that if you don't exceed the speed limit, you won't get fined!

As a personal opinion I honestly believe that this has meant an era where a significant percentage of the population genuinely believe that you only have to stick to the law if there's a chance or even strong possibility that you'll get caught. That's why motorists speed between cameras, then anchor on when they see the camera or the gradations painted on the carriageway. People will keep using their phones while driving unless they can actually see a police officer, as only on the evidence of an officer in uniform will anyone actually be brought to book for the offence.

 

[Arch]

That's kinda my point - three points and/or a fine isn't a deterrent enough to stop people from doing it. You need to get caught four times in order to lose your licence - and the sheer number of drivers doing it would indicate that even with totting up its a pretty remote chance of that happening.

Maybe it should be something like 3 points and fine for first offence, then if you are caught again you are obviously so stupid that you deserve the ban.

Everyone makes mistakes, we on here are especially aware of safety, but many people are oblivious as opposed to actively lawbreaking. One warning and points should be ample to shake them out of that, then no excuses.

 

[downfader]

Maybe it should be something like 3 points and fine for first offence, then if you are caught again you are obviously so stupid that you deserve the ban.

Everyone makes mistakes, we on here are especially aware of safety, but many people are oblivious as opposed to actively lawbreaking. One warning and points should be ample to shake them out of that, then no excuses.

Yes but there are mistakes and selfish behaviour. Everyone knows the rules on mobiles, its been all over the news, in mags and the papers, as has the research. But they choose to ignore it. And that is the point, they have chosen, its not like taking your eyes off the road for a fraction to look in a wing mirror and finding the car in front has stopped, this is a calculated decision and a weighing up of the risks of getting caught.

 

[magnatom]

With regards to punishment, why not hit mobile phone users where it hurts the most...

If your caught using a mobile phone whilst driving, your phone is disabled (i.e incoming and outgoing calls to your mobile number) for 1 month. Of course emergency numbers would still be operational.

Just imagine... not having a mobile phone for a month. That would be hell for some people!

 

[summerdays]

With regards to punishment, why not hit mobile phone users where it hurts the most...

If your caught using a mobile phone whilst driving, your phone is disabled (i.e incoming and outgoing calls to your mobile number) for 1 month. Of course emergency numbers would still be operational.

They would just get a new phone

 

[magnatom]

They would just get a new phone

Yes but you block the sim (i.e. their number). Just think of the hassle they would have having to get a new sim, and a new number, and letting everyone know about their new number.

 

[downfader]

They would just get a new phone

I made a similar suggestion to the phone companies earlier this year saying they could do more to influence people.They just said they were worried people would get a temporary unregistered PAYG phone. And tbh I think they had a point.