Media interviews tomorrow

[T.C.]

If anyone is interested, this will give you a flavour of what was said. This was with BFBS Radio.

The interviews with the other stations went pretty much along the same lines

https://soundcloud.com/hudgellsolicitor ... -the-wheel" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sorry for the ums and aghs. This was the one pre-recorded and the interviewer would yak on and on and then suddenly ask a question abd catch us out even though we were waiting for the next question, and then they let us down on the editing.

The live interviews had none of those issues

[StMarks]

Sounds like it went well IMHO T.C.

.... This was the one pre-recorded and the interviewer would yak on and on and then suddenly ask a question and catch us out even though we were waiting for the next question,,,,,,,

Re; "the technology already exists", perhaps the fact that the vehicle operator is not usually the sole occupant is the basis for not adopting signal blocking.??

We discussed the subject at some length on 675.cc not so long ago.
My suggestion was not as well received as I expected.:

:idea: How about this for a suggestion.:
If they accepted camcorder footage from (independent members of the public * ) as evidence for prosecuting offenders, and rewarded them with 25% of that fine for each conviction.?
I would probably make enough from just filtering through the rush hour traffic that I wouldn't actually need to work when I arrived.



* Aka; Us motorcyclists with helmet camcorders.

I was discussing this in another realm about a month ago, and the most interesting suggestion that I felt was fielded was that rather than enforcing vehicular punishments, the offenders may be more inclined to comply if the penalty were to be banned from having or using a mobile phone for a period.

[Kwacky]

Thanks for the link, I'll take a listen over the weekend.

[T.C.]

Re; "the technology already exists", perhaps the fact that the vehicle operator is not usually the sole occupant is the basis for not adopting signal blocking.??

Apparently the technology exists that can detect whether the person whose phone it is is in the drivers seat or one of the passenger seats and then block the signal accordingly.

It goes way above my level of brain capacity, but by all accounts it has been trialled and does work

But I agree about the penalty and in fact on a couple of interviews I did suggest that a 12 month ban would act as a wake up call as that would cause greater hardship than £200 worth of beer money or 6 points. The word would soon get around

[DaytonAndy]

I genuinely believe the 6 points thing will start to make a difference. Any newly passed driver would face an instant ban. If you've got a clean license that could mean two hits and you've lost your license. Anyone on 6 points could be facing an instant ban.
Ban a few people and let the word get round and I think the number calling while driving will drop.

[Jack]

I think that phones are the most common distraction for drivers but I have seen people using i-pads , eating cereal , seen women doing their make-up , seen a guy putting on his tie (both hands off the wheel) , seen people looking intently at the sat-nav , seen people with paper maps unfolded so that they can hardly see out the windscreen , seen a multitude of short people that are so low in the seat that they can barely be seen and I imagine can see very little themselves and the woman who hit me from behind a few years back was looking at and chatting to her passenger . Technology may stop some of these in the future but while we are still in control of a moving vehicle there will always be accidents due to lack of focus and general fcukwittery