According to this ABC News Article in Queensland, in the first 7 days of the use of cameras to prosecute people for using their mobile phone in contravention of laws, ther were 1,504 offences of which 57 drivers, offended more than once.
I divided those numbers by 7 and multiplied the result by 365 to extrapolate the figures to a year.
That calculates to 78,422 and 2,972 respectively.
The same ABC News Article stated that Mr Bailey, Transport and Main Roads Minister said, said “On average, 29 people are killed and 1,284 seriously injured each year on Queensland roads as a result of crashes where driver distraction played a part,”
Taking my above calculated figures, assuming that none of offenders died or where seriously injured whilst committing the offence, that means 78,393 people are capable of using a mobile phone in contravention to the law in a year without killing themself. And 77,138 without seriously injuring themselves.
Or to to put in another way only 0.036% of people that use a mobile phone in contravention to the law are likely to be killed and 1.6% of them are likely to be seriously injured.
Even though these figures say that it's very unlikely that those that using their mobile phone in contravention to the law are likely to be killed or injured the figures are not comparing apples with apples.
The total number of deaths and injuries caused by distraction are Queensland wide and include every person fitting that category.
However the number of people that use their mobile phone in contravention to the law is only those that have been caught via the new cameras.
As per the above article we don't know how many cameras there are and where they are. But we do know, they not everywhere all the time. So no doubt in the period of a year there would be far more people that use their mobile phone in contravention to the law that are not caught on camera.
Additionally ther are many other things that can distract a person whilst driving, other than using a mobile phone.
Ther was a previous study done that showed that knowing where speed cameras where, drivers would stay within the speed limit at those places but exceed the limit otherwise. The same is likely to happen with mobile phone use detection cameras. This is why the law enforcement do not want to disclose the time and location of cameras. They want drivers to assume they could be anywhere any time. But drivers know they are not, so act accordingly.
Unfortunately this messes up the possibility of calculating the real world effectiveness of such cameras. It could be that the risk of having an accident is 1,000s of times lower than the 1.6% figure I calculated.
To be able to get a licence to drive a car, you have to be able to do multiple things at the one time. Like operate foot controlls at the same time as the stearing wheel. When having a licence test you have to be able to listen to the testers instructions at the same time as operating the vehicle. You are allowed to have a conversation with passengers, listen to the radio, make decisions as to which way are you going to go, all whilst driving.
You are even allowed to take your hand off the steering wheel to operate other devices in the car, except for a mobile phone. You are allowed to eat drink and smoke while driving
So why is this one little device so distracting that it requires special laws?
This research states that handleing a mobile phone whilst driving makes a driver 3.6 times (US) or 4.9 (Aust) more likely to have an accident.
Then why is this not reflected in the above figures. Because the US research, like most research, was based on a sample of data. Not all data. It only appears to be based on accidents within the sample. I'm not able to determine if hand-held mobile distraction was recorded in all instances of those sample driving data, not only crash incidents.
The Australian Research used a sample of data, those involved in an accident whilst using a mobile phone but its control rather than being a different set of people,was the same people driving at another time when using a mobile phone.
It could be argued because these people where involved in an accident that they had a predisposition towards having an accident.
The, becoming available, because of the mobile phone detection cameras, real world data about the real safety of hand-held mobile phone usage, could end up indicating there is no statistically significant safety risk. But in the meantime millions of people will be fined and may loose ther license.
What has not been researched, as far as I can tell, is if fines and loss of licence reduces accidents, or if it just makes poor people poorer and law infringers more likely to infringe because they then don't have a licence.
Just like most people are taught how of drive relatively safely, it could be possible to teach how to drive relatively safely whilst holding and talking on a mobile phone. This could be researched. But I doubt if any research institution is likely to get funding for that.
Like what has happened with speed cameras, where on average in the last 10 years 170% of Queensland drivers (5,723,803 people) had speed camera infringements, will this be repeated with mobile phone use cameras?
Why are you allowed to handle a two-way radio whilst driving?
Transport Operations (Road Use Management—Road Rules) Regulation 2009 section 300.
“mobile phone does not include a CB radio or any other two-way radio”
If you want to use a hand held mobile phone while driving then attach a spiral cord to it and say it's a CB/2-way radio. But I don't recommend it.
In the future when most cars will be driverless ther will be little issue of holding and using a mobile whilst driving. Computers drivers are not distracted.
In the meantime perhaps the money spent on hand held mobile phone usage detection cameras could be better spent on giving or subsidising hand free phone devices for those that don't have them and cant afford them.
From Wikipedia “Discussions of safety often include mention of related terms”