She asked for it ...

[DtheP47]

Originally Posted by shillelagh

its quite regular occurrence for people to be using their mobile phones driving through rising bridge ... sales people on their phones booking their next appointment, mums (with kids in the back of the car) talking to a friend, even saw a lorry driver using his mobile ..
oh and a policeman using his mobile ...

Foreign truckers with laptops I see more and more. Yes they may will be using it for navigation via GPS but has to be a distraction
Have a look at Darwin Awards for mind boggling display of mans ingenuity to arrange his departure from the gene pool

[Studio25]

Originally Posted by Eric

Why Serious question ... maybe things are different over there; but I can't see the difficulty. There should be ways of doing this ... for example, the V.I.N. must be registered to someone.

There's a limitation of two weeks on the police sending out a "notice of intention to prosecute". Assuming you haven't done anything to scupper the receipt of the notice (such as moving house without telling them), it is considered to be an acceptable defence to say "I do not recall who was driving". The police send the NIP to the registered keeper - who isn't necessarily the vehicle owner or driver.

It's all a crock, really. While it's possible for anyone to drive a car (with the keeper's permission, if their own insurance covers them) I can guarantee that in the vast majority of cases, the keeper can remember who has driven it, out of the named people on the insurance and the people that have been given permission, for way longer than two weeks.

It's just that the law has to be seen to be fair to everyone, so people like me, who can recall exactly who else has used my car in the last six months have to be treated the same as a fleet manager, who will even have to make notes despite the limitation being just two weeks.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by Studio25

There's a limitation of two weeks on the police sending out a "notice of intention to prosecute". Assuming you haven't done anything to scupper the receipt of the notice (such as moving house without telling them), it is considered to be an acceptable defence to say "I do not recall who was driving". The police send the NIP to the registered keeper - who isn't necessarily the vehicle owner or driver.

It's all a crock, really. While it's possible for anyone to drive a car (with the keeper's permission, if their own insurance covers them) I can guarantee that in the vast majority of cases, the keeper can remember who has driven it, out of the named people on the insurance and the people that have been given permission, for way longer than two weeks.

It's just that the law has to be seen to be fair to everyone, so people like me, who can recall exactly who else has used my car in the last six months have to be treated the same as a fleet manager, who will even have to make notes despite the limitation being just two weeks.

Weird, eh. Don't matter who was driving the vehicle ... the ticket goes to the owner. Somebody has to own the vehicle.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by accyman

....one thing for sure is that if you take away the car and crush it the owner will be easy enough to spot he or she will be the one screming and jumping up and down demanding a replacement car

You don't need to crush it, you can use existing laws about obstruction to remove vehicles. Like you say the owners will soon show there faces and admit who they are.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Studio25

There's a limitation of two weeks on the police sending out a "notice of intention to prosecute". Assuming you haven't done anything to scupper the receipt of the notice (such as moving house without telling them), it is considered to be an acceptable defence to say "I do not recall who was driving". The police send the NIP to the registered keeper - who isn't necessarily the vehicle owner or driver.

It's all a crock, really. While it's possible for anyone to drive a car (with the keeper's permission, if their own insurance covers them) I can guarantee that in the vast majority of cases, the keeper can remember who has driven it, out of the named people on the insurance and the people that have been given permission, for way longer than two weeks.

It's just that the law has to be seen to be fair to everyone, so people like me, who can recall exactly who else has used my car in the last six months have to be treated the same as a fleet manager, who will even have to make notes despite the limitation being just two weeks.

That only needs a change in the law though. As a car owner you should be responsible for knowing who is driving it. If you manage a fleet of 100 cars you should have to keep a log of who is driving that day.

[Eric]

And now we have distracted flying ... Oh, Boeing Guy, where are you?

The end of the first paragraph shows that whoever wrote it has a sense of humour ... surprised there was no mention of "joystick"

Air Canada grapples with 'explicit' material in cockpit - Business - CBC News

[US Angel]

Still sad for the family of this young girl

off topic ( a bit)
One thing they do over here on the Military Posts is display wrecked cars where it be drink, drugs, speed etc after having friends hurt and killed in these do not agreed with this practice. They say it helps bring the numbers down Right ok what every

[Eric]

Originally Posted by US Angel

Still sad for the family of this young girl

off topic ( a bit)
One thing they do over here on the Military Posts is display wrecked cars where it be drink, drugs, speed etc after having friends hurt and killed in these do not agreed with this practice. They say it helps bring the numbers down Right ok what every

It is sad for the family; but obviously, she didn't think about that. There's no shortage of info out there on the dangers of distracted driving. It's not as if the police, or MTO (or whatever the equivalent) are keeping this thing a secret.

We don't have the wrecked car thingy here ... altho' I believe such graphic reminders would have a positive impact ... but there are lots of crosses by the side of the highway, marking accident sites.

[Barrie Yates]

They had them at accident sites in Tucson in the '80s along with photographs of the injured/dead

[Studio25]

Originally Posted by Eric

...We don't have the wrecked car thingy here ...

Yes we do.

[Margaret Pilkington]

This young man's car was on Broadway in Accrington recently.
I think that perhaps instead of leaving flowers as a remembrance at a site where a driver has died, the police should leave a huge poster of the wrecked car.......I was going to say that the wrecked car should be placed at the side of the road, but I reckon this would be a distraction to drivers...more so than a poster.