Pretty sure that's a typo WK. Liverpool Street - Shenfield Line. :-)

Pretty sure that's a typo WK. Liverpool Street - Shenfield Line. :-)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Kings_railway_station

---

Oops, looks like we're both misunderstanding :-)

I travelled that route daily 1984-85 in helping the old man's firm prepare for the relocation to Peterborough :-) I meant the line itself is Liverpool St - Shenfield & Not Liverpool :-)

Old news. They've been doing that for the past few years & the government got so concerned, they've upped the fine to a "whopping" £200 & 6 penalty points. To make it more effective the fine should be £1000 1st offence. 2nd offence 6 months inside.

Corrected for spelling.

About time this happened!

Mobile crackdown

Maybe finally over there, but it has been heavily enforced here for several years now, though having the resources to catch everyone doing the wrong thing is impossible as you'll find out.

Cheers.

Yes lets sling all phone users and smokers in jail, that'll teach 'em, and lets bring back the death penalty as well, why not. Oooh and bring back conscription while we are at it! You have to laugh :-)

I can't see where the death penalty was mentioned. What was mentioned was making the fine a painful experience. BUT what has those who govern do? A "Whopping" £200. Where's the deterrent in that?

As for jail did you NOT see 2nd offence was stated?

Anyone can make a mistake but the moment the same one is made again, it's no longer a mistake but a choice.

Yes lets sling all phone users and smokers in jail, that'll teach 'em, and lets bring back the death penalty as well, why not. Oooh and bring back conscription while we are at it! You have to laugh :-)

I can't see where the death penalty was mentioned. What was mentioned was making the fine a painful experience. BUT what has those who govern do? A "Whopping" £200. Where's the deterrent in that?

As for jail did you NOT see 2nd offence was stated?

Anyone can make a mistake but the moment the same one is made again, it's no longer a mistake but a choice.

Probably the best method is to treat all cases where a death occurs due to impaired driving, which includes all uses of mobiles, is to charge them with manslaughter at least. Locking up the guilty ones for 10 years might just deter a few.

---

About time this happened!

Mobile crackdown

Maybe finally over there, but it has been heavily enforced here for several years now, though having the resources to catch everyone doing the wrong thing is impossible as you'll find out.

It has?
Not in the NT (Northern Territory) or QLD (Queensland) or SA (South Australia). I wish it were.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Probably the best method is to treat all cases where a death occurs due to impaired driving, which includes all uses of mobiles, is to charge them with manslaughter at least. Locking up the guilty ones for 10 years might just deter a few.

No effect.
They're all brilliant drivers and using their phone for calls or texting while driving has no impact on their driving. Just ask them, they'll tell you.
As the campaigns against drink driving have shown, it's the hip pocket that gets people's attention. I do agree that any accident involving mobile phone usage should result in a culpable driving charge.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

I don't make calls or receive calls while driving, but My passengers do, but then they pay for the gas, I just drive My friends, state law or not, on cell phones and on competing with non-existent cabs, heck Uber and Lyft don't exist out here...

---

The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's

My dumb phone only gets turned on when I want to make a call (which is very rare and only while I'm out of the car), but as to smoking,...
....., get the f&%# out of here (everyone is allowed 1 bad habit) . ;-)

Grant when was the last time you were in Brisbane?

They're just as hard on mobile usage there as they are all the way down to Melbourne.

Cheers.

Grant when was the last time you were in Brisbane?

October last year.
Couldn't believe the number of Cop cars on the roads, but still every other idiot was driving around while playing with their phone.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Grant when was the last time you were in Brisbane?

October last year.
Couldn't believe the number of Cop cars on the roads, but still every other idiot was driving around while playing with their phone.

That's what I mean about having the resources to catch everyone, while they have 1 pulled up 10 more likely drive pass.

Cheers.

Grant when was the last time you were in Brisbane?

October last year.
Couldn't believe the number of Cop cars on the roads, but still every other idiot was driving around while playing with their phone.

That's what I mean about having the resources to catch everyone, while they have 1 pulled up 10 more likely drive pass.

I was there for a week, and I reckon I saw only 1 vehicle pulled over by a Cop.
I can't imagine all of those other cars I saw driving around were all on their way to something.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Grant when was the last time you were in Brisbane?

October last year.
Couldn't believe the number of Cop cars on the roads, but still every other idiot was driving around while playing with their phone.

That's what I mean about having the resources to catch everyone, while they have 1 pulled up 10 more likely drive pass.

I was there for a week, and I reckon I saw only 1 vehicle pulled over by a Cop.
I can't imagine all of those other cars I saw driving around were all on their way to something.

I wish it was like that when I go there (it's only a 4hr drive from here), they always seem to have people pulled over on my visits and that's if you don't get your pic taken by an unmarked camera car or trailer hiding on the side of the road.

Here is even worse, for a little village we always have 3 Hwy Patrol vehicles regularly prowling it (more on school and public holidays) and those guys will pull you over for just looking at them the wrong way.

Cheers.

Here is even worse, for a little village we always have 3 Hwy Patrol vehicles regularly prowling it

I think we've got 3 highway patrol vehicles for all of Darwin & Palmerston.
Mostly it's just General Duties paddy wagons & a few unmarked cars.

On my last strip it surprised me the number of police cars on the road down south (Qld, NSW, Vic, SA, ACT) compared to up here.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

This a very difficult subject, particularly when peoples lives are at stake. Anyone that kills a person through negligent driving, for whatever reason, needs to be taken off the road before they can do it again. But for how long 5 years, 10years, forever?

Depends on the history of the driver.
This the first accident they've ever been in? Do they have a history of being in accidents? Do they have a history of DUI (Driving Under the Influence)? A history of driving while using a phone? Driving unregistered vehicles? Driving while unlicensed? A history of speeding?

Some people say that even using a hands free phone in a car is taking your attention away from the road in front of you. Others say so, what is the difference between that and chatting to a passenger?

When using a phone, hands free or otherwise studies have found the effect is on par with someone that is at or near (from memory) 0.08 (here in Australia the limit is 0.05). I don't think there has ever been any attempt to determine why it is different, but for some reason it is. Even when chatting to a passenger, people tend not to be as distracted as when it is a phone.

Deterrents are useful, and have been shown to save lives, but people are people, they do what they do.

Depends on the deterrent.
Jail & the threat of jail generally have little if any effect in influencing most people's behaviour. However being hit in the wallet has been shown time and time again to influence people's behaviour.

You are never going to stop company reps on the road being talked to by head office,

If they get fined time and time again, and even do time for repeat offenses, they will stop answering the phone. Or no longer have that job.

you are never going to stop Directors and the like keeping in touch with HQ.

Same as above; although if they're big enough in the company someone can do the driving for them while they get to use the phone.

OK lets go a stage further, what about police car drivers on the radio back to the station, giving a detailed account of the route as they chase a felon? Should that be banned?

On the radio, no.
On the phone, yes.
Why? Because phones have been shown to have the same impact as being drunk on driving ability. I'm not aware of any studies relating to 2-way radio use affecting driving ability/awareness.

Oh some will say, but police drivers are specially trained. Fine, so are we now going to have a special driving test for anyone that has a hands free phone in their car?

Nope.
We don't have special tests & licensees for people who claim they drive better while drunk than when sober. No need for such a thing for phone use.

They are driving a vehicle that weighs between 1-3 tonnes at speeds of 60-140km/h. That's a lot of kinetic energy and if they make a mistake the damage that can be done is extreme (as has been shown in some of the posts in this thread). Motor vehicles in motion are too dangerous to allow unsuitable people to control them.
I'm personally of the opinion that if people think it is acceptable to be in control of such massive objects at such speeds, that they are unsuitable for driving and should under no circumstance be allowed to even go for a licence.

We have to get across the moral and social responsibility that a vehicle driver has, education is the answer not slinging people in jail after the event.

Education is the answer, but people that repeatedly disregard requirements that are based primarily on safety issues shouldn't be allowed to get away with such actions.
As in my first response to this post- what is the driver's history? Is this a one off tragic mistake, or are they a complete and utter @r$hole with no regard for others? If people continually ignore the rules (eg repeat driving while disqualified/unlicensed) they should be jailed, and for longer periods each time they re-offend.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Some people say that even using a hands free phone in a car is taking your attention away from the road in front of you. Others say so, what is the difference between that and chatting to a passenger?

When using a phone, hands free or otherwise studies have found the effect is on par with someone that is at or near (from memory) 0.08 (here in Australia the limit is 0.05). I don't think there has ever been any attempt to determine why it is different, but for some reason it is. Even when chatting to a passenger, people tend not to be as distracted as when it is a phone.

Passenger can usually see when they need to shut up so the driver can focus on the task. A person on the other end of the phone can't.

I would think the nature of the call matters as well. Boss is going to be way more distracting than putting in a reservation at a restaurant.

I wonder if any studies were ever done on using CB radio?

---

Depends on the deterrent.
Jail & the threat of jail generally have little if any effect in influencing most people's behaviour. However being hit in the wallet has been shown time and time again to influence people's behaviour.

In the UK a jail sentence meaning immediate imprisonment, or even a sentence that imposes jail but is suspended pending good behaviour, means it is on public record. It used to be the CRB check it is now the DBS check. The point is that as many people have found out, apply for a job and you won't even be interviewed, apply for car insurance, etc you will get a hefty quote.

Even if you serve your time, and it was years ago, many job applications and other forms ask if you have "ever" been convicted of anything. It is a lifelong social stigma.

The fact is most people, really, aren't all that rational.
"I'm a great driver/ it'll never happen to me". People get all worked up over a train, bus or plane crash & get all concerned about the risks in using them- yet don't really understand or appreciate the risks involved in driving, even in the best of conditions, and no matter what facts are presented to them they either discount it, or don't believe it (alternative facts anyone?), or just feel it doesn't apply to them.
So the threat of jail time just doesn't register; but the risk of losing money, that does.

Hefty fine for a first offence, extremely hefty for a second. Jail time for a 3rd. And that's just for using a phone while driving ( If they're texting then jail for a second offence. Actually I'm inclined to go for jail on a first offence. It's one thing to hold a conversation that studies have shown to be on par with being drunk, but to actively take your eyes off the road, hands off the wheel and concentrate on something other than driving?)

If they've got a record of other poor driving behaviour, then the first phone use offence should result in jail time IMHO. If they care so little about themselves and others, the least that can be done is protect others from them.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

I respect your opinion, but I do find myself disagreeing with it. I know of a chap in his early 40's that when he was early 20's had a drunken punch up outside a pub. Unfortunately, and unintentionally, the other chap ended up in intensive care for some days. He was given 3 years for GBH, served 18 months, then let out on parole for good behaviour. That was 20 years ago, but it still counts against him in many ways. He is known as an ex con, has to disclose the fact on forms etc. It has lost him many jobs.

It's only a deterrent for him (or yourself) because you are now aware of what the results are, and how long lasting they are.
But was the risk of jail any sort of deterrent from him getting in to that punch-up?

For something to act as a deterrent, it has to deter people- yes?
But if they don't appreciate the consequences, or feel it would never apply to them then it's not a deterrent.

The risk of jail is really only a deterrent to most people that (generally) wouldn't consider taking any actions that would be likely to result in jail.
Here in the Northern Territory (Australia) they've had all sorts of to & fro over sentencing for general crimes (break & enter, stealing, criminal damage etc). They've brought in-out-in (and I think out again) mandatory sentencing (set periods for certain offences, increasing for repeat offenders), increased jail terms, increased non-parole periods etc.
The overall effect, no real change in the number of offences. It hasn't had any effect in deterring offenders.

People won't see jail as a deterrent until it happens to them and their families.

That's what it boils down to. Better it doesn't get to that stage.
Many years ago, hardly anyone wore seatbelts. Especially for a short trip down to the shops or to visit friends. But getting hit with fines, or the risk of getting hit with fines has resulted in pretty much everyone wearing them these days. Same for drink driving- everyone used to do it, greatly reduced these days.

But let's look wider at this. the UK's prisons are already busting at the seams with criminals and murderers, We simply cannot afford to cram even more in for mobile phone offences. G4S wouldn't cope!!!

I agree, people done for repeat drink driving, phone use, or just culpable driving resulting in death shouldn't be kept with people there for break and enters, assaults etc (unless they've already done time for such offenses). Time for some new detention buildings.

I would advocate more a name and shame policy, where people convicted of using mobile phones whilst driving are highlighted in local and national newspapers

First or second offense, fair enough. Jail shouldn't be the first option.
But for a 3rd offense, or a first offence of using a phone but a history of other offenses, it's time for jail IMHO. If they care so little about themselves and others, the least that can be done it to protect others from them.

EDIT-

it is a privilege to hold a driving licence not a god given right.

I think that is the biggest issue- everyone seems to think they should be allowed to drive. Unfortunately many of them while having the technical ability to drive, don't have the appropriate attitude or mindset to be allowed to drive on public roads IMHO.

---

Grant
Darwin NT