Hands Free not enough

[SueEllen]

So why do we need more laws if this is already illegal?

Because there is not enough prosecutions.

[doodab]

So why do we need more laws if this is already illegal?

Because we are a nation of potato heads obsessed with getting away with as much as possible.

We should ban people. That would make the world a better place.

[MyUserName]

Because there is not enough prosecutions.

So shouldn't we just be enforcing the driving with due care laws?

[russell]

Having an in-depth conversation DOES distract you from the road, whether with someone inside the car or on the phone. That's why driving while distracted is already illegal.

So does thinking about something, what's next thought police?

[MyUserName]

So does thinking about something, what's next thought police?

They should introduce some law which requires you to have due care and attention whilst driving, regardless of exactly what might be distracting you ... oh ... hang on ...

[SueEllen]

So shouldn't we just be enforcing the driving with due care laws?

That costs money in policing.

Introducing an ill thought out law that won't be enforced is cheaper.

[doodab]

Introducing an ill thought out law that won't be enforced is cheaper.

What about the hidden costs to British business of preventing gobtulipes from gabbling away while they are on the road?

[VectraMan]

That costs money in policing.

Introducing an ill thought out law that won't be enforced is cheaper.

To be fair, due care and attention is subjective, whereas having an explicit law about mobile phones means if the police see someone holding a phone whilst driving they can just stop them without having to have an argument.

I'd rather see harsher penalties for accidents. If everyone that cause even a minor bump had to go to prison for a week, you wouldn't need all the nanny state laws. Punish me for what I do wrong, not what you think I might do wrong.

Of course in reality driving doesn't require your full attention, but you can't say that without people thinking you're some kind of child killing monster.

[MyUserName]

To be fair, due care and attention is subjective, whereas having an explicit law about mobile phones means if the police see someone holding a phone whilst driving they can just stop them without having to have an argument.

I'd rather see harsher penalties for accidents. If everyone that cause even a minor bump had to go to prison for a week, you wouldn't need all the nanny state laws. Punish me for what I do wrong, not what you think I might do wrong.

Of course in reality driving doesn't require your full attention, but you can't say that without people thinking you're some kind of child killing monster.

Oh yeah? Killed any children lately, you monster?!??!!??

[d000hg]

I don't see why this is so hard to understand. Existing laws say driving without paying proper attention is illegal. If specific activities are known to cause distraction, better to explicitly ban them rather than let the driver make the decision what they can or can't do safely because so many idiots will say "I'm such a great driver, I can talk on the phone while eating a sandwich, smoking and getting a hand-job all at once and still be safer than most other road users".

We don't hear anyone suggesting the drink-driving laws be removed since driving while drunk would already be covered by general driving laws.

Oh... maybe those struggling with the idea of their freedoms being eroded ARE the idiots described above?