Spin it is. What will prove the point is the number of prosecutions brought forward. I doubt there'll be many.
If the CPS had any sense or ability at all it would have already 'arranged' for such prosecutions and then highlighted them to the Press.
Why does the CPS feel the need to raise its profile anyway?
This is all about budgets. Follow the money.
The technology is not lacking now, only the money.
Is the CPS really daft enough to try and raise it's profile? As what? A bigger target than ever? The less said about the organisation the better, I'd have thought.
"Technology may provide an answer one day "
And when it does what's the betting that there will be a huge big outcry that 'they're only interested in making money' etc etc from that most hypocritical of hypocrites the great British Joe Public ( I didn't mean for you to do me you know, just those other lawbreakers. I'm special me.)
Best to read the CPS press release etc.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/press...ses/
180_07.html
In answer to your enforcement question - the answer is simple. Police. If only the Govt would invest in them. It is very easy to spot Mobile users in the dark as manufacturers are obsessed with lighting phones up like the proverbial christmas tree.
You can also spot them by the erratic way they are driving. And if they aren't driving erratically, what harm is being caused?
Also, the studies say that even using the hands free variety cause a decline in driving attention and skill. How does that differ from having a chat with a passeneger in your car?
It seems to me the law against using mobile phones is unnecessary. The police can already stop and prosecute for Driving Without Due Care. That covers all forms of crap driving. If not, then surely we need specific laws for driving while using an electric shaver, while eating, while checking a road map, while changing CDs and so on.
The offence used to be "driving whilst not in proper control" which I always thought was a better description and covered many things (all they needed to do was add points). In their wisdom they changed it to specify only mobile phones (difficult to prove). Now they appear to be trying to raise the profile and scare people.
Unfortunately they can invent all the offences they want but if there is no willingness in the Police to enforce (and there isn't) it will all go nowhere.
More tinkering I am afraid.
And, now that all the traffic police have been removed from the roads, who would enforce it anyway?
Alex asks how phone-driving differs from talking with a passenger. I've tried both and it does. Scientists have compared them and proved it does.
Maybe because the person on the other end of the phone can't see what's happening round the car and make allowances for it as a passenger would.
Scientists have also shown the threat of punishment doesn't deter people from offending. People are deterred if they think the chance of being caught is high, even if the punishment is trivial, and they're deterred if they think their friends will disapprove. What's needed here is a hearts-and-minds campaign to get people to accept that drivers should concentrate on driving. Like the years-long campaign that made drunk driving unacceptable.
Commenting by HaloScan
