im interested in how you know this since tax discs were abolished and there has never been a requirement to display an mot
Lots of time on their hands? https://www.gov.uk/get-vehicle-information-from-dvla 🙂
For all the cries of “that’s not how it works”
Again. that’s not how it works.. ”It doesn’t work and isn’t working so rather than pissing on other people’s chips because their ideas are different to current UK road traffic sentencing guidelines then maybe the current points and fines do need addressing.
but I think you are missing the point as the media do with every offence which they are upset about - murders still happen even with life sentences, and even in countries with the death penalty, yet you even go on to highlight the real issues:
The crux of it is though not enough police tasked with actively seeking out those on the phone , overload cps system to process any increase in potential prosecution and courts without capacity to hear lots of trials regarding phone use.
Because you are absolutely right - forget sentencing, that’s not the main issue - risk of getting caught is the problem.
Phone use is at an all time high , and is only going to get worse as the millennials who have lived umbically attached to a phone get decent jobs and drive more
hey boomer, you know millennials are almost all in their 30s or 40s now. In theory gen Z and gen Alpha have learned to drive in an era where IF CAUGHT they have to retake their test so should have had a massive incentive to break the habit when driving…. But it come back to the risk of getting caught.
there is a fine balance between being “self financing” and being a “sales target” but until a politicians family member or come b-list celebrity is mown down by a phone driver don’t expect anyone to see it as a priority.
We managed a cultural change around drink driving. Could the same be done for phone use while driving? I remember a lot of hard hitting adverts making drinking and driving antisocial.
The phone problem is wider than a car thing, lots of people of all ages are so atached to their phones that safety is secondary to their phone habit. This is why I think that a technological way of preventing drivers from using phones is the only way to prevent them offending.
Maybe the phone should report the driver if they access any other app when driving other than music and navigation?
Just a couple of weeks ago I was travelling in my mates truck and the young lady in front was obviously texting whilst driving. She failed to spot the brake lights of the concrete wagon slowing to allow another driver out of a junction and ploughed straight into the back of the lorry. We stopped to inform the lorry driver what we had witnessed and the other driver was adamant that we were lying. I sincerely hope that the police can check her phone records to prove her misuse of her phone.
I sincerely hope that the police can check her phone records to prove her misuse of her phone.
Disclaimer: I don't know how much time/effort/resources the police put into things like this or if it depends on the severity of the crash (ie a dented bumper vs a fatality).
But imagine if car crashes were treated with the same rigour that literally any other mode of transport gets. Even a near miss in aviation or rail gets a board of investigation, a report, suggestions on safety improvements.
Cars, it seems to be mostly a case of just letting the insurance deal with it all and a driver using the phone (or driving with a slightly - but not obviously - defective vehicle) may never be proved one way or the other.
Just because it’s US-only, it doesn’t mean that your statement that “we’ll never have driverless cars” isn’t wrong.
Then I've totally been lied to by the Internet. Apologies.
Phoenix is the Grid System, is it not? That's a whole different proposition from driving round a UK city centre, or a single track country lane with passing places.
In theory gen Z and gen Alpha have learned to drive
Gen Alpha won't have for a few years yet.
Maybe the phone should report the driver if they access any other app when driving other than music and navigation?
How do you differentiate between driver and passenger?
and those that stick just below the speed limit
It is a limit not an absolute. People shouldn't always be traveling dead on 30, 40 or whatever. Has it been raining, is it overly bright etc. People seeing limits as the speed you must travel or as a target is part of the issue. I'll also happily sit at 50mph on a dual carriageway as it will save me money.
im interested in how you know this since tax discs were abolished and there has never been a requirement to display an mot
As someone else stated, take the number of suspicious cars, check on DVLA site, it tells you if taxed or MoT'd, it's not that rare unfortunately, we had a van around here reported numerous times for dangerous loads and no MoT/Tax, nothing ever happened, well until it went down an A road and the rear axle separated from the vehicle and it overturned, the police managed to send someone out for that.
How do you differentiate between driver and passenger?
Some phones are able to unlock themselves with facial recognition, why not have facial recognition on a driver camera -which detects whether certain functions on the phone owned by the driver is being used and disables call/ texting functions. Most modern cars have been pairing phone to car in background for over a decade so its not too far fetched.
People seeing limits as the speed you must travel or as a target is part of the issue.
Not this again.
You should drive at or near the speed limit unless you have reason not to. Wet roads for example, as you say. Hesitancy is a major fail on your test if you don't.
Some phones are able to unlock themselves with facial recognition, why not have facial recognition on a driver camera -which detects whether certain functions on the phone owned by the driver is being used and disables call/ texting functions.
What if the passenger is using the driver's phone?
What if the passenger is using the driver’s phone?
Facial recognition for the passenger also - it can't be that hard... Volvo have had some sort of face/behaviour nodding off avoidance technology available for a decade, I don't how it works but am pretty sure it doesn't wait until you start snoring. Car detects driver phone usage = phone is blocked, no emotion.
As someone else stated, take the number of suspicious cars, check on DVLA site,
Do people act have so little to do that they can be bothered to memorise a number plate to check later. Perhaps they are using their phone to take a photo of the vehicle 🙂
I mean, it can't be that hard... but would need phone manufacturers to work with car companies. That shouldn't be too bad, there's only two main phone brands - and car companies, well rather than providing completely unnecessary performance and needless leather lined luxury tat could divert some of the billions spent in development to implement a feature which would benefit everyone... as we should all surely aim to be killed by an inattentive driver a little less.
The logic pathway could go something like 1. a. phone detects its in a car through gps, motion and is disabled or b. car detects phone present and pings it to disable features - unless: 2. phone is paired with car and limited features available through wheel controls and infotainment, calls and texts etc. blocked: 3. Phone works only in car if stationary and engine off.
You should drive at or near the speed limit unless you have reason not to. Wet roads for example
Does this include single lanes with national limits? Explains a lot I suppose
