Texting Drivers: Penalty Points And Fines To Double

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37389800

Too little and too late. An increase from £100 to £200 is neither here nor there....ditto for the 6 points.

"Earlier this week, a survey by the RAC suggested nearly a third of UK motorists text, make calls and use apps while at the wheel, with the number having risen since 2014"

If the above is true, then I am hugely surprised that there aren't more accidents.

[New Judge]

“…fines and bans aren't a deterrent but i bet having to retake your driving test would be”

Yes it is, aelmpvw (and there was an error in my earlier post – the “New Drivers” regulations apply for two years after the first test is passed). I have seen many a young driver (and the New Drivers’ Regs affect predominantly young drivers) in traffic courts pleading with the Bench to disqualify them rather than impose more points. Young male drivers in particular are absolutely mortified at the thought of having to put ‘L’ Plates back on their car – it destroys their “street cred”.

[Zacs-Master]

NJ, 'the offence should carry the same penalties as drink-driving'
Have you read my link? The penalties for drink driving don't seem to be coming even close to eradicating the problem.

[baza]

Ban them as they do with DD , watch people walking , using mobiles, in a world of their own, and to hell with anyone who does not get out of their way.

[trt]

What about cyclist, they cant be banned, can they?

[New Judge]

No they don’t eradicate the problem, Zacs. Few punitive measures do – for any offences. People still commit murders even though they face lengthy spells inside.

I did read your link. Among the information it contained was that over half a million breath tests were carried out in a year and that 20% of these proved positive. If nothing else it has removed 100,000 drunks from the road for at least a year (or 9 months if they do their "drink drivers' rehabilitation course"). Furthermore, there is little doubt that people who may have driven whilst over the limit do not do so because they know they face a 12 month ban whereas they might if faced with a just few points on their licence.

Nothing will eradicate mobile phone use whilst driving (bar a technological innovation which prevents the driver – and only the driver – from using one). But a mandatory ban coupled with more rigorous enforcement will have a twofold effect: it will make drivers think a little harder before they offend and it will keep offenders off the road (hence keeping the rest of us safe from their activities) for a while.

[hc4361]

Unfortunately some disqualified drivers do continue to drive, so they will be uninsured as well.

I don't know what the answer is

[Baldric]

I just don't see the need to do it, we have 3 cars (4 if you count our guest) at home and they all have Hands Free fitted as Original Equipment, the cost when compared to the cost of a fine or inconvenience of a Ban is negligible, there is no excuse

[Old_Geezer]

IMO the results from the tests are very strange. If it shows their subjects are more affected by the mobile hands-free "speaking" than a real person, or the sat nav, or the radio, then they need better test subjects. Life has distractions, it is the driver's responsibility to ignore/filter out when one thing needs priority. Otherwise there'll be calls to ban the radios and sat navs too.

[hc4361]

OG, a passenger can see potential hazards and 'tricky bits' and usually shuts up at that point. Children, the radio and other background noises and distractions can be ignored. During a phone call, however, the driver feels an unconscious need to continue the conversation regardless of what else is happening and that is what makes it dangerous.

[Old_Geezer]

No adequate or better driver feels a need to do anything but say/yell, "wait a minute".

[Old_Geezer]

Besides it hardly applies to text messages and text 2 speech / speech 2 text,

[mushroom25]

all the fines, penalty points, bans, etc in the world are irrelevant if there's no machinery to enforce the law. north wales chief constable richard brunstrom and his breed decided that the most heinous driving offence (punishable by death, in his humble opinion) was speeding, resulting in the proliferation of speed cameras like dandelions all over our roads, and a corresponding reduction in traffic patrols because the cameras were so good at catching these most dreadful of offenders, as well as raising thousands for police coffers. but cameras can only catch speeders; they don't identify poor or dangerous driving, or any other type of offence that our police used to be good at spotting. unless the policing policy changes, nothing else will and people will continue to be killed by texters.

[hc4361]

mushroom, the revenue from speeding cameras goes to the treasury, not the police forces.

[gina32]

what makes me laugh is when you see the "real" police programmes the police are always on the walkie talkies, surely that is just as bad, although I realise its not for the same reason.

[Baldric]

Gina, "Don't do as they do, do as they say"

[thelewisgang]

As someone who knows of a lady who was killed by another motorist using their phone whilst driving, I think an automatic ban should be the way to go. What I can't understand is why this new 6 points system isn't coming into force until next year!

[mushroom25]

//mushroom, the revenue from speeding cameras goes to the treasury, not the police forces. //

most, but not all, HC; the police are entitled to claw back a proportion of revenue accrued. this is the justification for proposals to permanently switch on speed cameras on managed motorways, to help cover the current funding gap in many forces.

[New Judge]

Are you complaining about speeding being rigorously enforced, mush, or just about the revenue that it raises? Or what?

“Life has distractions, it is the driver's responsibility to ignore/filter out when one thing needs priority.”

The problem is, OG, that many idiots do not. In fact they actively create distractions by initiating phone calls, reading or writing texts or farting about on so-called social media. Almost all of it is unnecessary and in fact I would argue that nothing is so urgent and nobody’s time is so valuable that these activities have to be undertaken whilst driving.

“…otherwise there'll be calls to ban the radios and sat navs too.”

Fiddling about with devices (or eating a banana or combing your hair) is already subject to action under “Careless Driving” or “Failing to have proper control”. Mobile phones are subject to a specific offence when mere use is punishable without the need to prove carelessness or no proper control.

[mushroom25]

//Are you complaining about speeding being rigorously enforced...//

not as such - but that the pursuit of it above all else now means that cameras have replaced a good proportion of actual policing, and that cameras can't detect bad driving like the now absent himan officers could.

[sinderella]

My view. Seize their phone for 48 hours. instant £100 penalty and 3 points