Queensland drivers will be fined $1000 for using cell phones

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Queensland drivers will be fined $1000 for using cell phones

1 | 2

tehgerbil

1102 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Subscriber

#2363100 29-Nov-2019 19:22

Police in CHCH at least really could not give two stuffs about red light runners, tailgaters, slow drivers, those on their phone etc. It's the wild-west out there, especially red light runners 2-3 seconds after the light's red.

Honestly, there's zero fear about being caught, because your chances of doing so are less than 1 in a several thousand trips (for most people).

You can sit at ANY major intersection in CHCH and see at least 1 in 5 on their phone. They don't care.

DaveDog

336 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2363335 30-Nov-2019 09:33

hio77:
eracode:

hio77:

sesh $1000? that seems a little excessive...

Absolutely not. Think about the misery and overall costs resulting from smashes that can be caused by people texting when driving.

Oh, of course - who do you work for? I would have thought that a responsible telco staffer would agree with the OP.

You have misunderstood.

I do not agree with mobile usage while driving, That is what hands free kits are for or just doing the right thing and pulling over...

i do however feel dropping such an large fine on someone would impact alot more than just the person responsible; think low income family etc. (it's certainly not just the rich i see using mobiles afterall...)

I personally would much rather see it become a demerit deducting offense as well as a reasonable cost.

Then if someone undertakes such actions repetitively, their license is lost. rather than just building debt.

A large fine is supposed to have an impact. That’s the point.

rb99

3422 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2363360 30-Nov-2019 09:57

But that doesn't justify the disproportionately larger effect a fine like that has on someone whose total income maybe half that for a week.

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” -John Kenneth Galbraith

rb99

hio77

12999 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lizard Networks

#2363365 30-Nov-2019 10:09

DaveDog:

A large fine is supposed to have an impact. That’s the point.

the point i was trying to make is, If it's a serious issue that they wanna take on all for it.

But just increasing revenue does not seem to be the right path. If someones caught, make it impact their license. that's a bigger driver than debt, Loss of mobility.

It's much like speeding, Sure the cameras do a fair bit for managing those areas but let's be honest it's a slap on the wrist, but a driver gets flashy lights a few times and they start to go "If i'm caught doing that again, i can nolonger drive."

To be clear, since it seems to be misstake.. my views are nothing todo with my employer, but my personal experience.

Maybe it's just the culture i'm around, but loss of mobility means your basically screwed out here. Public transport simply isnt an option, so it hits far deeper.

#include <std_disclaimer>

Any comments made are personal opinion and do not reflect directly on the position my current or past employers may have.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2364093 1-Dec-2019 16:44

rb99:
But that doesn't justify the disproportionately larger effect a fine like that has on someone whose total income maybe half that for a week.

That's akin to suggesting poor people ought to get lower sentences for murder.

If you can't do the time don't do the crime.

"I'm sorry your child was injured by X who was on the phone whilst driving. We were going to throw the book at him, but he's poor so we slapped him with a wet bus ticket instead. Sorry about that."

rb99

3422 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2364098 1-Dec-2019 16:59

Geektastic:
rb99:

But that doesn't justify the disproportionately larger effect a fine like that has on someone whose total income maybe half that for a week.

That's akin to suggesting poor people ought to get lower sentences for murder.

If you can't do the time don't do the crime.

"I'm sorry your child was injured by X who was on the phone whilst driving. We were going to throw the book at him, but he's poor so we slapped him with a wet bus ticket instead. Sorry about that."

Would disagree. I'm only referring to people being caught using a cellphone while driving. If that use has consequences, like flattening a cyclist while using a cellphone while driving, thats a bit different.

Besides, doesn't seem to be that difficult -

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/06/in-finland-speeding-tickets-are-linked-to-your-income/

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” -John Kenneth Galbraith

rb99

k1w1k1d

1519 posts

Uber Geek

#2364118 1-Dec-2019 17:41

Article says that previous fine was $400, but it wasn't stopping the idiots, so now going to $1000.

Confiscating the phone for a couple of days might have more impact, but they would probably just get another phone.

The company I work for will install a hands free system if you request it. We get occasional internal emails stating the company's policy against phone use in company vehicles while driving. Getting caught will result in a serious reaming from management.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Groucho

524 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2364492 2-Dec-2019 11:44

k1w1k1d:

Confiscating the phone for a couple of days might have more impact, but they would probably just get another phone.

This has some merit. I'd like to see the telcos pony up (or authorities have increased powers if not already) to have the repeat offenders account/SIM/data disabled for 'x' days similar to repeat drink drivers having their cars confiscated. This would mostly get around them just getting another phone though I suspect many would already be paying off the phone they couldn't afford in the first place.

If drink drivers still drive without a license they get their car taken so why can't phone users have their illegally used potential weapon of choice taken as well?

1 | 2