Deterring mobile phone use

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 14917
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby Cyril Haearn » 23 Jan 2017, 5:03pm

reohn2 wrote:
ianrobo wrote:So he/she is potentially driving a killer and basically a slap on the wrist ? chances of being caught is low yet punishment is low ? Should not be doing it, no excuses so lets have harsh punishments


I don't consider the penalties I've outlined to be a 'slap on the wrist' for a first offence or second one FTM.

...

TBH like TC has mentioned above the problem isn't one of penalties,it's one of detection.
Most offenders if they knew they'd be caught wouldn't commit the crime.
Of course that's not the whole story for everyone driving as the recent case of someone done 8 times for mobile abuse at the wheel...


The UK desperately needs an effective police force not only for traffic but across the board,but joe public decided they prefer lower taxes :?


Maybe we should get used to writing "first DETECTED offence".
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies

landsurfer
Posts: 5307
Joined: 27 Oct 2012, 9:13pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby landsurfer » 23 Jan 2017, 5:08pm

reohn2 wrote:The UK desperately needs an effective police force not only for traffic but across the board,but joe public decided they prefer lower taxes :?


When was "Joe Public" asked the question ?
Be More Mike.
The Road Goes On Forever

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby reohn2 » 23 Jan 2017, 5:40pm

landsurfer wrote:
reohn2 wrote:The UK desperately needs an effective police force not only for traffic but across the board,but joe public decided they prefer lower taxes :?


When was "Joe Public" asked the question ?


When it voted for a government that promised low taxes.
-----------------------------------------------------------

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby reohn2 » 23 Jan 2017, 5:44pm

Cyril Haearn wrote:Maybe we should get used to writing "first DETECTED offence".


If the police had enough manpower and their morale wasn't in their boots,and if we stopped electing useless police commissionaires,there'd be more crime detected,which in turn would lead to potential criminals not risking it.

A good police force is a deterrent,an undermanned one is absent.
-----------------------------------------------------------

landsurfer
Posts: 5307
Joined: 27 Oct 2012, 9:13pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby landsurfer » 23 Jan 2017, 5:56pm

reohn2 wrote:
landsurfer wrote:
reohn2 wrote:The UK desperately needs an effective police force not only for traffic but across the board,but joe public decided they prefer lower taxes :?


When was "Joe Public" asked the question ?


When it voted for a government that promised low taxes.


Did they promise to reduce the number of police .?
Be More Mike.
The Road Goes On Forever

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16696
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby mjr » 23 Jan 2017, 6:01pm

reohn2 wrote:If the police had enough manpower and their morale wasn't in their boots,and if we stopped electing useless police commissionaires,there'd be more crime detected,which in turn would lead to potential criminals not risking it.

I think the change from unelected police authorities to "electing useless police commissionaires" has made no difference to this either way yet. The overwhelmingly-dominant problem is police manpower and morale.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby reohn2 » 23 Jan 2017, 7:49pm

landsurfer wrote:Did they promise to reduce the number of police .?


There's a problem that some don't seem to be able to figure out,it's simply that less money buys less.
-----------------------------------------------------------

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby reohn2 » 23 Jan 2017, 7:51pm

mjr wrote:I think the change from unelected police authorities to "electing useless police commissionaires" has made no difference to this either way yet.

Then what's their use?

The overwhelmingly-dominant problem is police manpower and morale.

We're agreed on that then :)
-----------------------------------------------------------

landsurfer
Posts: 5307
Joined: 27 Oct 2012, 9:13pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby landsurfer » 23 Jan 2017, 7:57pm

reohn2 wrote:
mjr wrote:I think the change from unelected police authorities to "electing useless police commissionaires" has made no difference to this either way yet.

Then what's their use?

The overwhelmingly-dominant problem is police manpower and morale.

We're agreed on that then :)


I think that Commissionaires are just another level of management ..... totally pointless ..... but their salary .... oh yea ! less than a police officer if you include pension, holiday, overtime ..... etc ...
But still useless .....
Be More Mike.
The Road Goes On Forever

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16696
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby mjr » 23 Jan 2017, 10:23pm

reohn2 wrote:
mjr wrote:I think the change from unelected police authorities to "electing useless police commissionaires" has made no difference to this either way yet.

Then what's their use?

To have one sort-of-accountable full timer, which is probably cheaper than the fourteen unelected part-timers of the old police authority. The drawback is that someone who has to stand for ejection might be reluctant to take unpopular steps that would reduce crimes... especially true of motoring crimes?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Psamathe
Posts: 12210
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby Psamathe » 23 Jan 2017, 10:45pm

One thing I can't understand is why people are driving and holding their phone to their ears when driving. Ignoring the issue of even talking hands-free whilst driving (which I accept is a big issue but thinking only about compliance with the law), my pretty cheap and 8 year old car radio automatically connects to my phone whenever both are switched on and in bluetooth range and the radio becomes a hands free unit (no need to charge anything, nothing to remember to stick in your ear, simple). I never have to even think about plugging anything in, never think about connecting - car in phone, engine on and it's automatically hands-free. This is cheap old proven technology comparative pricing to a tank of petrol for many.

So why is anybody risking killing or seriously injuring somebody as well as fines and points when there is such cheap easy convenient technology available.

And as some cars come supplied with weird shape non-standard radios, introduce a new law/regulation that any car supplied new or registered after <e.g. next week> that includes a car radio must include functionality built-in for hands free operation through bluetooth (through the radio). I'd be amazed if they don't already (I know of a Ford that is 5 years old that does not!).

Ian

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby reohn2 » 24 Jan 2017, 12:17am

mjr wrote:
reohn2 wrote:
mjr wrote:I think the change from unelected police authorities to "electing useless police commissionaires" has made no difference to this either way yet.

Then what's their use?

To have one sort-of-accountable full timer, which is probably cheaper than the fourteen unelected part-timers of the old police authority. The drawback is that someone who has to stand for ejection might be reluctant to take unpopular steps that would reduce crimes... especially true of motoring crimes?


Ain't that the truth :? :evil:
-----------------------------------------------------------

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 14917
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby Cyril Haearn » 24 Jan 2017, 4:51am

reohn2 wrote:
mjr wrote:
reohn2 wrote:Then what's their use?

To have one sort-of-accountable full timer, which is probably cheaper than the fourteen unelected part-timers of the old police authority. The drawback is that someone who has to stand for ejection might be reluctant to take unpopular steps that would reduce crimes... especially true of motoring crimes?


Ain't that the truth :? :evil:


Action against motoring crimes would be popular with all right-thinking people. Anyone here against it??

Crass publicity is needed, for example reports on drivers whose stupidity killed members of their own family and the psychological consequences.
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 14917
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby Cyril Haearn » 24 Jan 2017, 4:55am

Psamathe wrote:One thing I can't understand is why people are driving and holding their phone to their ears when driving. Ignoring the issue of even talking hands-free whilst driving (which I accept is a big issue but thinking only about compliance with the law), my pretty cheap and 8 year old car radio automatically connects to my phone whenever both are switched on and in bluetooth range and the radio becomes a hands free unit (no need to charge anything, nothing to remember to stick in your ear, simple). I never have to even think about plugging anything in, never think about connecting - car in phone, engine on and it's automatically hands-free. This is cheap old proven technology comparative pricing to a tank of petrol for many.

So why is anybody risking killing or seriously injuring somebody as well as fines and points when there is such cheap easy convenient technology available.

And as some cars come supplied with weird shape non-standard radios, introduce a new law/regulation that any car supplied new or registered after <e.g. next week> that includes a car radio must include functionality built-in for hands free operation.. .

Ian


Hands-free calls also distract and should be banned. The law is behind the times here too.

Best not to hear radio or music either, except perhaps on the motorway, that is my rule I find driving quite relaxing.
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby reohn2 » 24 Jan 2017, 11:08am

Cyril Haearn wrote:Action against motoring crimes would be popular with all right-thinking people.

The problem is not everyone is right thinking.
Anyone here against it??

I don't think you'll find anyone disagreeing with you,but then almost everyone here is a vulnerable road user.

Crass publicity is needed, for example reports on drivers whose stupidity killed members of their own family and the psychological consequences.

Could help,though people think it'll never happen to them.
That's why I see so many people using mobiles whilst driving,the answer IMHO is a definite and appreciable possibility of being caught,their licence taken away,a heavy fine,points and the cost of a rehab course.
Though for that to happen we need(effective policing)what we as a society have decided we don't need because they cost too much.
-----------------------------------------------------------