Mandatory "opt in" for phone use on the road

User avatar
Cheesewheel
Posts: 1036
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:22 pm

Mandatory "opt in" for phone use on the road

Postby Cheesewheel » Thu Jul 12, 2018 11:56 am

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-1 ... re/9981462

Man petitions Apple, Google for compulsory 'Do not disturb while driving' feature after friend paralysed

Of course it will probably not happen, but it is a damn good idea: have phones the require you to opt in to receive messages while driving. If you get involved in an accident on account of attending your mobile, you own the culpability (as opposed to this BS completely suspended sentence Katherine Roche got away with for effectively destroying someone's life)
Go!Run!GAH!

eldavo
Posts: 1662
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Contact:

Re: Mandatory "opt in" for phone use on the road

Postby eldavo » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:11 pm

I found a different Katherine Roach when I typo searched for the name with suspended sentence...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -jail.html

User avatar
Cheesewheel
Posts: 1036
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:22 pm

Re: Mandatory "opt in" for phone use on the road

Postby Cheesewheel » Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:47 pm

eldavo wrote:I found a different Katherine Roach when I typo searched for the name with suspended sentence...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -jail.html

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-1 ... gs/9344544
Go!Run!GAH!

warthog1
Posts: 7077
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Mandatory "opt in" for phone use on the road

Postby warthog1 » Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:38 pm

Cheesewheel wrote:
eldavo wrote:I found a different Katherine Roach when I typo searched for the name with suspended sentence...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -jail.html

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-1 ... gs/9344544



A good man. It's hard to even imagine the devastating change he and his family have suffered. The impact statement doesn't even come close.
Almost every time I am on the road I see a driver or drivers using a mobile phone :x

Jmuzz
Posts: 404
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: Mandatory "opt in" for phone use on the road

Postby Jmuzz » Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:40 pm

warthog1 wrote:Almost every time I am on the road I see a driver or drivers using a mobile phone :x


Which is why NSW has added phone use to photo evidence infringements.
All they need now is a photo and numberplate identification and the registered owner is responsible (can identify driver, but if driver says it wasn't them it goes back on the owner).

It's pretty open to allowing most official cameras, RMS can stamp "enforcement device" approval on any digital camera device and it just has to have an anti tamper checksums function.

So they are currently talking up the fixed cameras dedicated to processing phone images. But really any toll, speed, red lights camera is valid and they can easily approve a cheapish dashcam/helmetcam device which is checksum capable to go on unmarked vehicles and take in the fines.

warthog1
Posts: 7077
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Mandatory "opt in" for phone use on the road

Postby warthog1 » Fri Jul 13, 2018 4:19 pm

Jmuzz wrote:
Which is why NSW has added phone use to photo evidence infringements.
All they need now is a photo and numberplate identification and the registered owner is responsible (can identify driver, but if driver says it wasn't them it goes back on the owner).

It's pretty open to allowing most official cameras, RMS can stamp "enforcement device" approval on any digital camera device and it just has to have an anti tamper checksums function.

So they are currently talking up the fixed cameras dedicated to processing phone images. But really any toll, speed, red lights camera is valid and they can easily approve a cheapish dashcam/helmetcam device which is checksum capable to go on unmarked vehicles and take in the fines.


Thanks, that is a little encouraging.
A suitable penalty would be licence suspension in addition to the fine, however.

User avatar
biker jk
Posts: 6096
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Mandatory "opt in" for phone use on the road

Postby biker jk » Fri Jul 13, 2018 4:56 pm

warthog1 wrote:
Jmuzz wrote:
Which is why NSW has added phone use to photo evidence infringements.
All they need now is a photo and numberplate identification and the registered owner is responsible (can identify driver, but if driver says it wasn't them it goes back on the owner).

It's pretty open to allowing most official cameras, RMS can stamp "enforcement device" approval on any digital camera device and it just has to have an anti tamper checksums function.

So they are currently talking up the fixed cameras dedicated to processing phone images. But really any toll, speed, red lights camera is valid and they can easily approve a cheapish dashcam/helmetcam device which is checksum capable to go on unmarked vehicles and take in the fines.


Thanks, that is a little encouraging.
A suitable penalty would be licence suspension in addition to the fine, however.


I agree that licence suspension would be appropriate. But given there will be an at least ten fold increase in the number of motorists caught using their mobile phones illegally with the introduction of new camera technology, the political backlash would ensure that no government would have the fortitude to introduce such a penalty.

Mr McCredie said his technology could make it possible to increase the numbers of people fined for illegally using their phones by thousands every day, which would cause mayhem if many people lost their licences.

"You know if there are 100,000 people crossing the Harbour Bridge, it would be possible to catch 500 in breach of the law," he said. Currently, police catch about 109 people a day using their mobile phones, but his technology could catch that many in less than an hour.


https://goo.gl/2vQVTd

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users