Something they've not banned yet ... or have they?
I've just returned from a short family holiday in Norfolk. (We usually take our holidays in Cumbria, but from time to time it is a good thing to have a change.)
While there I saw a lady steering a cabin cruiser (top speed about 6 mph) with one hand while talking into a hand-held mobile phone held in the other.
My first reaction was to laugh, and think flippantly "My word, is there something you are still legally allowed to drive while talking into a hand-held mobile? It should be banned at once!"
My second reaction was that using a hand-held mobile phone while responsible for steering a vessel with a mass of several tonnes on a crowded public waterway isn't a terribly good idea, and if you cause an accident while doing so the police probably could find an existing law to prosecute you.
Just as the authorities could and did prosecute people for driving without due care and attention if they were seen driving while speaking into a hand held mobile phone before the practice was explictly made illegal.
So my mental joke gives rise to an important question. Is it better to have highly specific laws, and try to cover every imaginable circumstance that you might want to ban? Or is it better to try to frame laws which cover basic principles like "It is illegal to operate any vehicle or machine in a negligent way which generates a material risk of accidents likely to cause injury to people or damage to property" - and then risk the situation that there is too much room for different interpretations of the law leading to inconsistent enforcement and potential injustice.
I don't think that relying solely on either approach is likely to be satisfactory.
While there I saw a lady steering a cabin cruiser (top speed about 6 mph) with one hand while talking into a hand-held mobile phone held in the other.
My first reaction was to laugh, and think flippantly "My word, is there something you are still legally allowed to drive while talking into a hand-held mobile? It should be banned at once!"
My second reaction was that using a hand-held mobile phone while responsible for steering a vessel with a mass of several tonnes on a crowded public waterway isn't a terribly good idea, and if you cause an accident while doing so the police probably could find an existing law to prosecute you.
Just as the authorities could and did prosecute people for driving without due care and attention if they were seen driving while speaking into a hand held mobile phone before the practice was explictly made illegal.
So my mental joke gives rise to an important question. Is it better to have highly specific laws, and try to cover every imaginable circumstance that you might want to ban? Or is it better to try to frame laws which cover basic principles like "It is illegal to operate any vehicle or machine in a negligent way which generates a material risk of accidents likely to cause injury to people or damage to property" - and then risk the situation that there is too much room for different interpretations of the law leading to inconsistent enforcement and potential injustice.
I don't think that relying solely on either approach is likely to be satisfactory.
Comments