Increased fines for mobile users
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
since not enough cops to do the job need to allow vigilante-bounty hunters to do the job? Increase the fine to £1000 and the roads will be cleaned up fast? Unlike speeding which needs special gear all you need is a camera?
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
ian s wrote:I know, sensible people don't become MPs - wrote Mick F
The problem it seems to me is that to be elected as an MP these days, one has to be a salesman, hence the country is now run by salesmen and women, with the inevitable consequences
I think sales tactics are bad enough, but it's more the bribery I worry about. It seems to me that if you read the register of members' interests and then look at how they vote, you'd have to come to the conclusion that our parliament must be one of the most corrupt in the world.
Check out how they vote on the NHS against which of them have interests in private health companies (and that's just for starters). And look at who funds parties as well.
Parish councillors with a financial interest in an issue - even within their family, never mind themselves- aren't allowed to vote on it; in some cases they even have to leave the room if it discussed. But when it comes to central government and huge taxpayer funded contracts or major issues about things like wars etc., it seems it's easy for the rich (including people who don't even live here never mind pay tax here) and for large corporate interests to buy votes on anything and nobody minds.
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
Yes, Flinder, I agree, however this is hardly a new problem, it is many years since Marples was Minister for Transport and boss of the company building the M1. I suppose at least that was blatant. These "interests" are why we will never get anything useful done to encourage cycling; the motor industry, the road haulage lobby etc have far too much influence
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
ian s wrote:Yes, Flinder, I agree, however this is hardly a new problem, it is many years since Marples was Minister for Transport and boss of the company building the M1. I suppose at least that was blatant. These "interests" are why we will never get anything useful done to encourage cycling; the motor industry, the road haulage lobby etc have far too much influence
I think it's now more blatant than ever, so much so that people just don't even think about it. We all know about it - and nothing is done. I's like Blatter and Armstrong, but no Americans to help us clean up the mess on this one.
-
- Posts: 4339
- Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
- Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
Courses are good because offenders can learn about mistakes, but also they are an inconvenience to some people and this is a "punishment" on its own. I know of people who have opted just to just pay the fine rather than having the hassle of attending a course. Ideally they should have to attend the course and pay for the cost.Flinders wrote:I gather courses work very well for speeding (though people are not sent on them for exceeding the limit by large amounts).
As fines are fixed, they are chicken feed to some wealthy people, and as your chance of being caught is small, many people would just decide to risk it again. But courses can bring people up short. I know of people who have changed their behavior as drivers as a result of the speed courses and have said it made them better drivers all round as a result and they've been thankful for it.
That is also effective.irc wrote:Fines won't do it. Points and bans. A colleague at work was always speeding and using her mobile. Caught speeding. Caught on the phone. Caught speeding again. Her driving changed completely when she was one ticket away from a ban.
Using a handheld mobile is as dangerous as driving at the legal alcohol limit. 4 pts is still just playing with it. 6 pts for any driver caught using a mobile so they are one ticket away from a ban.
It wouldn't do anything of the sort. It's just public employee "bashing". For example the company director would just pay "peanuts" and be perfectly "fit for the job" according to that argument, whereas it would probably have much more effect if he/she were a high profile person banned from being in charge of a company.blackbike wrote:One way for the offence to get greater publicity would be for public employees who are convicted of it to be sacked if they have a job dealing directly with the public.
A teacher, nurse or other employee who has a duty of care towards the public should lose their job if they commit a criminal offence which endangers the lives of members of the public as it demonstrates they are not fit for their job.
Such a measure would highlight the seriousness of the offence and perhaps influence other employers to take similar action.
The measure should be extended to all serious driving offences such as drunk driving or serial speeding offences resulting in a ban.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
I don't peddle bikes.
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
A short term ban might work.
- ArMoRothair
- Posts: 351
- Joined: 20 Jun 2013, 10:55am
- Location: Londinium
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
toomsie wrote:A short term ban might work.
Bans don't work because motorists successfully argue "undue hardship" and to courts (unbelievably) accept this.
The only thing which will work is the same response which succeeded with parking enforcement. The size of parking fines made no difference but when local authorities starting removing cars to the local car pound, this got drivers' attention.
Bring in the power for the police, and PSCOs, to impound the car there and then, to be collected from the municipal pound later that day - just as is done for parking violations. It wouldn't even need much expense to implement, a few blitzes with some hired-in recovery vehicles would have an immediate affect.
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
blackbike wrote:One way for the offence to get greater publicity would be for public employees who are convicted of it to be sacked if they have a job dealing directly with the public.
A teacher, nurse or other employee who has a duty of care towards the public should lose their job if they commit a criminal offence which endangers the lives of members of the public as it demonstrates they are not fit for their job.
Such a measure would highlight the seriousness of the offence and perhaps influence other employers to take similar action.
The measure should be extended to all serious driving offences such as drunk driving or serial speeding offences resulting in a ban.
Being sacked on the back of being caught handling a phone/media device or speeding is way OTT, not to mention very little in the way of legal grounds for summary dismissal. Unless there was a major incident whilst in the course of your employment whilst operating a motor vehicle or a serious criminal offence outside then that's rarely ever going to be more than a misconduct/final written unless specifically outlined in your contract of employment.
A FPN is not a criminal record offence anyway and whilst I would agree with harsher (driving) sanctions against motorists whom are caught with phones/speeding etc to start 'sacking' people on the back of that just isn't right nor lawful.
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
Tell the Government what you think, they are looking for views on mobile phone use.
http://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/83EV0/
http://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/83EV0/
Whatever I am, wherever I am, this is me. This is my life
https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/
E2E info
https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/
E2E info
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
Thanks for the link.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
Nice to have the options to make comments. I just about refrained from suggesting on the spot 12 months disqualification
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
14. What else would you recommend should be done regarding mobile phone offences whilst driving?
1st offence, crush phone, do not allow offender to recover any data from it first.
2nd offence, crush phone, crush car, do no allow offender to recover any data from phone, nor any personal effects from car, apart from children.
1st offence, crush phone, do not allow offender to recover any data from it first.
2nd offence, crush phone, crush car, do no allow offender to recover any data from phone, nor any personal effects from car, apart from children.
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
Grandad wrote:......... I just about refrained from suggesting on the spot 12 months disqualification
I didn't,although I must be going soft as I only gave them 3months
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
Drop the 'undue hardship' clause.
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------
Re: Increased fines for mobile users
SA_SA_SA wrote:Drop the 'undue hardship' clause.
And replace it with 'if you can't do the time,don't do the crime'
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden