> The *other* problem being that if everything is a judgement call, it's 
> much harder to prosecute people.

Just hand them a fine for dangerous driving, they can contest it in court if 
they don't agree.  There was a guy who was filmed doing 120mph or something 
on an empty road by the police and was fined/banned/whatever for dangerous 
driving.  He went to court and the judge agreed with him that what he did 
couldn't possibly be dangerous driving because the camera clearly showed a 
huge distance ahead on the motorway that was totally clear.

That's how it should be, maybe in future more stuff can be detected 
automatically by cameras rather than just if you are over the fixed speed 
limit (tailgating should be fairly easy, as should driving too fast in 
fog/rain/heavy traffic).

> That's kinda why they made it explicitly illegal to use a mobile phone 
> while driving - to make absolutely sure people know they WILL be 
> prosecuted and they can't wriggle out of it.

Yeh I think it was more to make people stick to the law rather than making 
it easier to prosecute.  Wasn't there some woman prosecuted for eating an 
apple whilst sat waiting at a red light?

Post a reply to this message