[Article] Government is failing drivers on road safety

A Dub in Glasgo

From the excellent Tom McGurk in the Sunday Business Post

Government is failing drivers on road safety

29 January 2006 By Tom McGurk

Here we go again. Road accident figures are a godsend to our politicians, given that everyone agrees that road accidents involving fatalities and grievous injuries are a scar on the nation. It’s the moment when politicians can turn on the sanctimonious after-burners and accuse ‘the other lot’ of failing to address the crisis.

Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny points across the floor of the Dail and accuses the government of failing in its duty.

The Taoiseach Bertie Ahern replies: ‘‘It is regrettable that it is an issue of ‘Big Brother’ to stop people looking after themselves, but if that’s the way it is, then the government has to follow that with tough measures that will inconvenience the general public, not only those who break the law.”

Very impressive. And then the Taoiseach announces that random breath testing will be introduced, following advice from the Attorney General that it is constitutional after all. Funny, I thought it was the Supreme Court that determined the constitutionality of laws. Apparently pub car parks and areas with high accident levels will be deliberately targeted.

Very impressive. The following day, transport minister Martin Cullen announces that there will be 34 new driving offences that will earn penalty points and 60 other offences that will have fixed charges applying to them. Not only that, but there will also be a new committee charged with coordinating road safety and wider issues.

Looking at it from the outside, it might appear that our politicians and masters are determined to deal with the problem.

By now we must have more traffic legislation than almost any other country in the EU. But those of us who can look from the inside - as citizens – know a very different story.

Take for instance the following examples of how the system actually works, as opposed to the stuff written on the statute book. Some time ago, I wrote about the extraordinary number of drivers on our roads (at the time more than 350,000) who had never passed any driving test and who - uniquely in the EU - were allowed to drive without a licence holder in the car with them and could carry passengers as well.

Not surprising that this situation continues, given the waiting time for a driving test is more than a year in most counties.

At the time, Cullen tried to privatise part of the testing system to reduce the waiting time, but was stopped by the Impact trade union.

Then an Irish solution to an Irish problemwas arrived at and both sides agreed to allow 50 ‘surplus’ (their description not mine) civil servants from the Department of Agriculture to apply to be trained as testers and augment the current 113 existing ones. That, said the minister at the time, will do the business and lower the numbers of untested drivers on our roads. Indeed.

Some months on, I’m afraid I have more bad news for readers. Certainly 50 brave lads and lassies from Agriculture applied for the jobs and guess what - 40 failed. Totally unsuitable I’m afraid. So now, after all that magnificent effort by the Department of Transport and Impact, we have just ten new testers in training to add to the current 113. And I’m afraid the news gets even worse with the number of provisional drivers increasing since last year, by 40,000 to 404,607.

And, given that the rate of new drivers applying is increasing all the time - and with now fewer testers proportionally than ever before – how long will it take to cut awaiting list that is increasing beyond 404,607?

Say, an average of 50 testing weeks in the year with each of the 113 testers doing say 25 per week amounts to over 140,000 tests per year. And with 40 per cent failing and taking into account the 400,000 figure, will some people now have to wait three years to be tested?

So how many provisional drivers have been involved in fatal crashes? Good question, but I can’t tell you, because such a statistic isn’t even kept!

Of course, a three-year wait would give provisional drivers plenty of time to prepare for their test by reading up their copy of Rules of the Road. Problem is they can’t, because - believe it or not - the current copy is ten years out of date and currently lists Brendan Howlin as Minister for Transport. He was, back in 1996.The current issue is so out of date that it is has no penalty points information and no metric speed limits.

Just imagine, the ‘lucky few’ who are currently being tested are being asked questions on a driving safety manual that is ten years out of date.

But we mustn’t be too critical. The Department of Transport said there is a new updated one on the way. Sure that’s grand then. It appears that there are high numbers of untaxed, uninsured and non NCT-tested vehicles driven by non-nationals involved in road accidents. There are currently, it seems, hundreds of these on our roads.

But how can that be a problem when untaxed and uninsured vehicles can be seized by gardai on a daily basis? Well not for our visitors, it seems. According to the Garda Commissioner Noel Conroy, his men can only seize Irish-registered vehicles because of, and I quote him: ‘‘a lacuna or loophole in the law’’.

No sir, if you’re bashing around in a Czech-registered 1960s Lada with neither tax or insurance, just drive on, thank you.

Have you heard enough, or do you want some more joined-up Irish road traffic thinking? Last year an NRA policy decision announced that there would be no dedicated service areas allowed on our motorways. Instead they intended drivers to come off motorways and use off-motorway facilities (imagine the little villages, the small garages, the big trucks and the queues).

Anyway, relax - all will be well now because the NRA has just announced the complete opposite. Yes folks, very soon tenders will be accepted for fully dedicated service areas providing fuel, food, toilets, etc on our motorways.

So enjoy your journey, folks, among the 404,607 (and growing) numbers of drivers without proper licences and the thousands of untested and uninsured foreign vehicles. Oh, and stay away from those pub car parks and watch those yellow boxes as we all look forward to the bright new Rules of the Road regime.

Great, isn’t it?

Shocklingy incompetent stuff highlighted in that article

Chris_533976

Agreed. I was in stiches reading this article.


Then I realised it was all true and wept

dts

And it just keeps gettin worse!

Eight people killed on roads in a little over 24 hours
From:ireland.com
Tuesday, 7th February, 2006



A man in his 40s last night became the eighth person to be killed on Irish roads in just over 24 hours, writes Ruadhán Mac Cormaic.

He died when the car he was driving collided with a truck on the N11 north of Enniscorthy, Co Wexford, at 5.40pm.

Some two hours earlier a two-year-old boy died after the car in which he was travelling collided with a tractor at about 3.20pm. The crash happened at Lispopple Cross on the Swords to Ashbourne road on the Dublin-Meath border.

Their deaths bring to eight the number of people killed on Irish roads since Sunday afternoon. Six others aged under 30 died in crashes in Cork, Galway, Sligo, Kerry and Antrim.

Another serious crash involving five vehicles was reported last night on the Roscommon road outside Athlone, although there were no immediate reports of fatalities.

A spokesman for the National Safety Council, Brian Farrell, said: "If there was one message that people could take from this, it's to remember that using the roads is the most dangerous thing you do every day."

A total of 50 people have now been killed on the Republic's roads since the beginning of the year, seven more than at this time last year. The unusually high death toll comes two weeks after the Government announced that further measures to improve road safety would be introduced this year.

Earlier yesterday, a man and a woman died when the car in which they were passengers hit a low-loader in Co Cork. The crash happened shortly after midnight on the Ballincollig bypass at Lisheens, Ovens. Two others were taken to Cork University Hospital and were described as "critical but stable" last night.

The victims were named yesterday as Thomas Reck (22), of Innishmore Square, Ballincollig, and Ciara Moynihan (19), of Knocknagown Place, Rylane.

At about the same time, a 28-year-old man was killed in a two-car collision at Moyleen, Loughrea, Co Galway. The victim, who had been driving one of the cars, was removed to Portiuncula Hospital for a postmortem.

Pedestrian Damien Crawley (29) was killed in Co Sligo when he was struck by a car at about 11.45pm on Sunday. The incident occurred at Carricknagat on the road between Ballisodare and Collooney.

In Co Kerry, John O'Sullivan (22), from Mountfoley, Kells, Co Kerry, also died on Sunday when he was involved in a two-car collision at 4.20pm near Cahirciveen on the main Cahirciveen to Waterville road. Three others were taken to Tralee hospital with injuries.

Meanwhile, in Co Antrim a 22-year-old man died after a crash on the A57 Templepatrick road at Ballyclare. The incident, in which the victim's car is understood to have left the road and hit a fence, occurred shortly before 11pm on Sunday.

Mr Farrell said last night that although recent Government commitments were a "big step forward", the death toll for the year so far did not augur well.

"At the moment we are killing about 33 people a month. If we are to achieve the Government's own targets we need to reduce that figure to 25 per month. But it hasn't gone too well so far."

He added that while Government action was imperative, drivers themselves should be vigilant.

dochasach

Excellent article. Bertie, are you listening? I have nothing to do with the property, construction, railroad, auto industry or any related lobby. I'm just a person who hates seeing mothers, fathers, sons and daughters needlessly killed on Irish roads. Here is what I believe must be done:

1. Throw out any CSO/gardi statistics on ethnic propensity towards traffic accidents and focus on whether drivers who've passed or who've failed the driving exam are more likely to crash. Control for number of years on road/number of miles driven. Try to corellate crashes with individual examiners who pass reckless driver and fail cautious drivers. Place a GPS/webcam device in each car during a driving exam. Corellate average speed, position and acceleration with pass/fail records.
2. Regulate the driving instruction industry. Standardise on defensive driving techniques which have been successful outside of Ireland for several decades. Retest all driving instructors and driving examiners based on modern, scientific, objective safety criteria.
3. After reviewing these statistics and test results, fire driving examiners as appropriate and replace them with agricultural department employees, or examiners from one of the many countries which have a lower traffic fatality rate than Ireland. (there are plenty to choose from.)
4. Replace the driving instruction manual with a modern defensive driving manual, focused on scientifically proven safety techniquies and not superstition.
5. 6 penalty points for not wearing a safety belt, 12 for > 10 mph over speed limit, 50 for drink driving or not having a child in an appropriate restraint and safety seat.
6. Require retraining and retesting for any instructor, driving examiner, bus/taxi/hackney driver who has been found at fault in a crash.
7. Cut the speed limits on all non-national roads in half and in the rare cases where there is a straight/safe segment of road, raise the limit for that section.
8. Remove the radar cameras from the motorway and place them on rural roads which are known to be dangerous. Buy more radar cameras, place those in towns, near schools and pedestrian crossings.
9. NCT is actually working reasonably well, expand it to cover all imported vehicles.
10. Create a website for gathering driver reports of dangerous road conditions and a bad driver registry.
11. Hire road safety inspectors who are tasked review this information and clear trees and shrubs which obscure signs, replace ambiguous signs, place blind corner mirrors, post 5mph, 10mph, 15mph signs on tight curves/blind intersections where appropriate.
12. Design the speed ramps such that cars going the correct speed do not have to speed up or slow down between ramps. Modify driving instruction and testing appropriately.
13. Put speed ramps and/or rumble strips wherever a minor road meets a major road to encourage drivers to slow down instead of going full speed and suddenly braking at the last second (as the examiners appear to encourage.)
14. Require the transportation minister and his staff to use public transportation every day. Improving this will allow more people to choose to stay off the road.
15. Create a modern GPS based public bus and rail infrastructure. See Norway, Bulgaria, Spain or Germany for examples.
16. Pray that Ireland never has snowy and icy winters like parts of the U.K., much of Europe, the U.S. and Canada. Our driving record is already worse than many of these places and we seldom have to deal with severe weather. (hang in there Gulf stream!)
17. Change laws so that pedestrians and cyclists always have right-of-way over cars. There is no way a pedestrian or cyclist can dodge a car moving at several times their speed. If a driver kills a cyclist or pedestrian, the driver should be found 100% at fault.
18. Stop the euphemisms such as "knocked down" and "came into contact with". e.g. "The boy was fatally injured when the car he was travelling in came into contact with a tractor."
19. Slow down. Isn't a relaxed attitude towards time still one of the strengths of Irish culture as compared to British, Germans or Americans? If so, why do they have a more relaxed attitude behind the wheel and Irish drive as though they're trying to outrun the devil?

Calina

dochasach wrote:

Change laws so that pedestrians and cyclists always have right-of-way over cars. There is no way a pedestrian or cyclist can dodge a car moving at several times their speed. If a driver kills a cyclist or pedestrian, the driver should be found 100% at fault.

Sorry. Given that every day I have to contend with cyclists who 1) cycle into oncoming traffic 2) do not have lights 3) do not wear helmets 4) who blatantly break redlights (as in, don't just try to skim the end of a yellow, but don't bother stopping at all when the light has been red for 30 seconds or more) 5) who cycle on the roads when cycle paths are provided, I cannot agree with this. Why should cyclists, by merit of being cylists, be absolved from responsibility for accidents which they may cause, just because the other involved party may have been a car? In addition, this idea will cause total gridlock. As such, it's not a safety measure, it's an ideological anti-car measure.

Your position does not appear to be predicated on improving driving per se, but on getting more people into public transport. While this is a laudable objective, it would be better supported by improving same rather than making life even more hell for the average driver. This is not needed to improve accident statistics in Ireland.

For the record, I would prefer to see a separate cycle way network built so that cars and bicycles did not have to be anywhere near each other.

As for driving safety measures, a modicum of forcing responsibility on people, by way of improved traffic law enforcement would go a long way. Viz France, which has cut its annual road fatality rate by 50% in the last 5 years. But we in this country are too fast to find other things to blame, like the testing system, the number of learner drivers, the this, the that.

Enforce the law and suddenly, a lot of other things will sort themselves out almost like magic.

Seth Brundle

Some very extreme points dochasach. Do you drive?

Anyhow, I know Bertie has gotten involved in the whole thing and therefore something is likely to be done (as Cullen didn't/couldn't/wouldn't do much). However, in the last few years two FF TDs have been involved in high profile drink driving cases. Nothing happened them from within the party. I don't think they are in a position to lecture us on road safety.

robfitz

Calina wrote:

1) cycle into oncoming traffic
2) do not have lights
4) who blatantly break redlights (as in, don't just try to skim the end of a yellow, but don't bother stopping at all when the light has been red for 30 seconds or more)

I agree, agree, agree, but were is the active enforcement of these laws?

Calina wrote:

3) do not wear helmets

Cyclists are not required by law to wear helments.

Calina wrote:

5) who cycle on the roads when cycle paths are provided, I cannot agree with this

I cannot agree with this. The cycle track network isn't worth the white paint it's painted with, it wasn't designed by cyclists for cyclists or even with there safety in mind. There are many places where it is more dangorus to use a cycle track then take up position a lane of traffic.

Calina wrote:

For the record, I would prefer to see a separate cycle way network built so that cars and bicycles did not have to be anywhere near each other.

That would be very nice but it could never happen. There's not enough land to put a parellel network of cycleways, for the thousands of kilometers of roadway.

BrianD3

dochasach wrote:

Put speed ramps and/or rumble strips wherever a minor road meets a major road to encourage drivers to slow down instead of going full speed and suddenly braking at the last second (as the examiners appear to encourage.)

That's an interesting point. When I was learning to drive and passing my test I always felt that there was too much emphasis on "making progress" in urban areas. Last second braking was part of this as was driving right at the posted limit whenever physically possible.

I know some drivers can be over cautious. But there's a happy medium somewhere and I feel the way I was taught and examined there was too much emphasis on driving at the arbritary 30 mph limit and not nearly enough on hazard perception/awareness.

seamus

dochasach wrote:

[*]After reviewing these statistics and test results, fire driving examiners as appropriate and replace them with agricultural department employees, or examiners from one of the many countries which have a lower traffic fatality rate than Ireland. (there are plenty to choose from.)

Why agricultural dept employees?
Personally I'd prefer if all testers/instructors were required to be IAM Silver qualified or better. If they can't pass, they get an administrative job and are taken off the testing circuit. Hire 4 times as many as they have now. Screw the union.

[*]Replace the driving instruction manual with a modern defensive driving manual, focused on scientifically proven safety techniquies and not superstition.

Just to be clear, the ROTR isn't an instruction manual on how to drive, it's more of a reference manual, though in it there is some advice on best practice. Everything in it is perfectly sound, there's no superstition in it. I've no particular problem with the ROTR myself except that it's painfully out of date.

[*]6 penalty points for not wearing a safety belt, 12 for > 10 mph over speed limit, 50 for drink driving or not having a child in an appropriate restraint and safety seat.

What's the point in giving someone 50 points? Or banning someone for a speed infringement? The current system allows for gross speeding to be charged as dangerous driving, which carries a penalty of 5 points and a mandatory court appearance. This is almost OK by me, except that you would have to do this three times to be banned. 6 points for any of the serious offences (dangerous driving/overtaking) and twelve points + 3 year ban for the criminal ones (drink-driving, no insurance) would make far more sense.

[*]Cut the speed limits on all non-national roads in half and in the rare cases where there is a straight/safe segment of road, raise the limit for that section.

Contrary to popular belief, cutting the speed limit on a road doesn't necessarily improve safety. Drastic reductions (such as halving) of the speed limit in practice get ignored by the majority of drivers, who will simply continue to drive at the speed they are comfortable with.
What would make sense is a blanket rule whereby the road is automatically a 60kph zone if it doesn't have a yellow line marking the edge of the roadway.

[*]Create a website for gathering driver reports of dangerous road conditions and a bad driver registry.

Good idea, but tough to implement in practice. First off, if someone was contained in this registry, they would have the right to know about it, and therefore the right to contest it. If they contest it, the person who reported it would have to testify. Ultimately, the bulk of reported drivers couldn't be kept in the system, unless they were convicted for the offence.

post 5mph, 10mph, 15mph signs on tight curves/blind intersections where appropriate.

Again, as above, posting painfully low limits will just result in them being ignored by the majority of drivers.

[*]Change laws so that pedestrians and cyclists always have right-of-way over cars. There is no way a pedestrian or cyclist can dodge a car moving at several times their speed. If a driver kills a cyclist or pedestrian, the driver should be found 100% at fault.

As posted above, this isn't fair as the driver isn't always at fault. It also opens the door for the compo culture, where a cyclist or pedestrian simply has to show a damaged bike or bruised leg to get compo for there own idiocy.

Anything I didn't quote, I agreed with. Mainly though you're looking to increase the legislation. This is what the Government has been doing, and it has no effect because there's no enforcement.

The flipside of this, is that if driver education is improved, then there's less need for enforcement, and consequently less need to implement laws to protect people from themselves.

Seth Brundle

kbannon wrote:

Some very extreme points dochasach. Do you drive?

Anyhow, I know Bertie has gotten involved in the whole thing and therefore something is likely to be done (as Cullen didn't/couldn't/wouldn't do much). However, in the last few years two FF TDs have been involved in high profile drink driving cases. Nothing happened them from within the party. I don't think they are in a position to lecture us on road safety.

and another FF TD gets into motoring trouble

sobriquet

Calina wrote:

...who cycle on the roads when cycle paths are provided, I cannot agree with this.

Many cycle paths provided are ridiculously badly designed. One I know enters onto a roundabout with four road entries - and it gets better, the right hand side is obstructed so you can't see traffic where you're supposed to see it. Tried using it once, was nearly killed, won't use it again. In more general cases, the entrance/exits between paths mean you're crossing traffic in ways that drivers don't expect, and it's bloody ridiculous.

Calina wrote:

Why should cyclists, by merit of being cylists, be absolved from responsibility for accidents which they may cause, just because the other involved party may have been a car?

Very true. I see idiotic cyclists do all sort of crap, and then calling me nuts for vehicular cycling (ie, cycling in traffic, not hopping on and off paths, weaving in traffic etc).

Calina wrote:

For the record, I would prefer to see a separate cycle way network built so that cars and bicycles did not have to be anywhere near each other.

I wouldn't. To engineer such a thing would be an immense task, and I can't see it ever happening. In an ideal world I'd like to be able cycle in traffic and be treated as a valid road user.

I can generally sympathise with you though. I think it'd be counterproductive to raise cyclists rights above any other road users for ideological reasons. It's absurd for anyone on a bike to behave like a pedestrian sometimes and a road user sometimes - and expect to be respected on the road. Thing is, I can understand it though I don't condone it. As a cyclist I find myself being put in very dangerous positions by drivers who seem to think that I shouldn't be treated as a road user at all, and I find myself having to compensate for their behaviour. So, I'm not surprised then when some cyclists take to doing to stuff like that.

dochasach

BrianD3 wrote:

That's an interesting point. When I was learning to drive and passing my test I always felt that there was too much emphasis on "making progress" in urban areas. Last second braking was part of this as was driving right at the posted limit whenever physically possible.

I know some drivers can be over cautious. But there's a happy medium somewhere and I feel the way I was taught and examined there was too much emphasis on driving at the arbritary 30 mph limit and not nearly enough on hazard perception/awareness.

Last second braking and accelerating between speed ramps are some of the weirdest aspects of Irish driving and the testers and trainers reenforce these behaviours. I wonder if the CSO could collect statistics on miles per brake pad or miles per clutch and compare it to countries with better traffic safety records. I need to go into business selling brake pads. Again, I'm thankful snow and ice are rare here, otherwise hundreds of drivers per day would crash in the winter.

dochasach

kbannon wrote:

Some very extreme points dochasach. Do you drive?

Yes, I've driven over a quarter of a million miles (the distance to the moon) without a crash. Yes I'm touching wood and I can't let it go to my head because it would make me a dangerous overconfident driver like so many of the drivers around me. I once even got a speeding ticket for 8 mph over the limit. I deserved it. I recognise that defensive driving takes on a whole new meaning in Ireland where most drivers are offensive.

None of my points would be considered extreme outside of Ireland. In Germany, Denmark, Belgium and California, when pedestrians step off the curb, drivers must stop. In many U.S. states, drink driving once means you lose your license (even if you're a senator/TD.) You could go to jail for drink driving or not putting a child in a proper safety seat (unless you're Brittany Spears.) In Uraguay, people have faced execution for drink driving.

The only point I would back down from is assigning drivers 100% liability when faced with reckless cyclists. But the burden of proof should be on the driver. A bad cyclist can commit darwinism on him/herself, a bad driver can take out you or me or many others. Pedestrians should always have right-of-way. Yes, this can open up the possibility for lawsuits, but even in the U.S., probably the only place in the world with a stronger lawsuit culture than Ireland, such faked pedestrian accidents are extremely rare and are usually sussed out before it goes to trial.

When you speed around a tight curve, you should consider that there might be a child, blind person, or frail elderly person crossing the road immediately after the curve. If that doesn't make you a safer driver, consider the possibility that there could be a broken down lowery just around the corner.

Conflict of interest statement:A great aunt was killed by a car whilst crossing a road. I watched an old man die after being struck by a car whilst crossing a road. My nephew still has a scar from the car which struck him while crossing the street to his school. My wife's father was killed by a reckless driver while cycling as part of an organised long distance cycle for charity, her mother had her back broken and another woman died as a result of the same collision.

The National Safety council advertisements might not look any more violent than the average TV movie or video game, but they reflect a reality that drivers, testers, teachers and lawmakers need to become familiar with.

Calina

dochasach wrote:

None of my points would be considered extreme outside of Ireland. In Germany, Denmark, Belgium and California, when pedestrians step off the curb, drivers must stop.

In Germany, it is against the law for a pedestrian to jaywalk. In Ireland, if a pedestrian steps off the pavement at a Zebra crossing, the driver must stop.

I must confess that having lived in Belgium, Germany, France, Finland and the UK, I do still consider many of your points to be extremely excessive, and pretty much everyone whom I know from those countries would agree with me. On the other hand, I still reckon that enforcement of existing legislation would go a long way towards improving things.

dochasach wrote:

But the burden of proof should be on the driver.

No. You're watering down your original position yes, but this is still wrong and unfair.

dochasach

Calina wrote:

In Germany, it is against the law for a pedestrian to jaywalk. In Ireland, if a pedestrian steps off the pavement at a Zebra crossing, the driver must stop.

Yes, enforcement and obedience to existing laws is the main issue. I often see cars fly through a Zebra crossing and against the light in Ireland. I've never seen this in Germany. It's odd visiting Germany or Denmark, approaching a crossing and just assuming that the drivers aren't going to stop (as they don't in Ireland) and see the driver's exasperated look as they wonder why you haven't started across. How would I express, "sorry, if I did that at home I would die" in German or Danish?

No. You're watering down your original position yes, but this is still wrong and unfair.

If it ever comes to the point where reckless pedestrians and cyclists are killing more than one person per day, I may come around to see the point of view of you and the people you know in Finland, Germany, France and Ireland.

MorningStar

Calina wrote:

1) cycle into oncoming traffic
2) do not have lights
4) who blatantly break redlights (as in, don't just try to skim the end of a yellow, but don't bother stopping at all when the light has been red for 30 seconds or more)

robfitz wrote:

I agree, agree, agree, but were is the active enforcement of these laws?

Can I just point out the people killing and being killed on the roads aren't cyclists! Inotherwords they aren't the danger on the roads no matter what they are doing. It is also not pedestrians. THe people being killed and casuing the deaths are the drivers. A lot of the time the deaths include the person driving.

The people I see breaking rules and putting people in danger are drivers and everything says the problem is those driving. Many cyclists may break rules but don't put themselves at risk.

I see more cars break lights and enter yellow boxes illegally than cyclists breaking lights. I see cars in bus lanes and cycle lanes everyday. Cars park in one that puts my life at risk everyday.

The vast majority of road deaths are put down to driver error.

THe people responsible are not the government, lack of enforcement, bad roads or cyclists. It is simply the people driving

Common driver excuses
"The traffic is so bad that once you get an open strech you put the foot down"
"The lights was amber I just sped through"
"I was in a hurry!"
"There was nobody else on the road"
"I know these roads very well"
"I have can drive fine after 5+ drinks"
"The rules are impracticle"
"When I learnt to drive you were told... or you could..."
"If they fixed the roads I wouldn't have to ... "
"THe road is designed wrong how are they so stupid ... and common sense tells you ..."
So you know none of the above excuses driving 4 tons of metal at speed what way you think is right. Every time you chose your rules of the road for the actual rules of the road you are taking a risk that you truely don't know the odds of.
If you know every streach of road you are on at all time and the breaking distance of all your car under all condition you can't do that. There are too many variables. Playing russin roulete once a week does not mean you odds change each time put the probibility is you will kill yourself.

The person who speeds and drives baddly is responsibly for thier action. Hold yourself responsibly and others

civdef

THe people responsible are not the government, lack of enforcement, bad roads or cyclists. It is simply the people driving

Damn right.



Anyone know if the following statistics are available? I've been looking at the National Safety Council and Garda sites to no avail.

% of fatal car accidents involving a single car.

Breakdown of fatal car accidents by weekday and hour.


People will improve their driving behaviour if they fear getting caught/punished as seen temporarily during the penalty point introduction period.

Some methods I'd look at to improve this:

Fixed speed cameras at accident blackspots (currently being implemented, apparently).

Lots of unmarked Garda Traffic Corps cars on the roads (think of how many offences you see driving daily. Also think how you might drive if you suspect the car behind you is an unmarked squad car with a book of tickets waiting to be filled).

Gardai stop enforcing road tax (this is the case in the UK, Revenue computer systems are more than capable of tracking road tax defaulters, no need for the checkpoints looking for road tax you see regularly here).

More checkpoints on roads leading from towns, between midnight and 3am or so, on weekends. Descend on a town, cover all routes - currently if a checkpoint is setup, mobile phones circulate the fact in minutes.

Rovi

dochasach wrote:

... consider the possibility that there could be a broken down lowery just around the corner.

Huh?




:D:D

.

Capt'n Midnight

113 Instructers, well over three times that many deaths a year - how does that compare to other countries ??

dochasach wrote:

.

1. Replace the driving instruction manual with a modern defensive driving manual, focused on scientifically proven safety techniquies and not superstition.Or approve a UK one. Add an Irish suppliment - just like the motorway one they added to the rules of the road. Could be done tomorrow
2. 6 penalty points for not wearing a safety belt, 12 for > 10 mph over speed limit, 50 for drink driving or not having a child in an appropriate restraint and safety seat.Just do as they do abroad for every 10Kmph over the limit an additional point and the fine doubles. Simple and scary. At present a road users is 100 times more likely to be killed than disqualified.
3. Hire road safety inspectors who are tasked review this information and clear trees and shrubs which obscure signs, replace ambiguous signs, place blind corner mirrors, post 5mph, 10mph, 15mph signs on tight curves/blind intersections where appropriate. That reeks of nanny state. If drivers can't be trusted to drive at an appropiate speed they should not be allowed on our roads.
4. Design the speed ramps such that cars going the correct speed do not have to speed up or slow down between ramps. Modify driving instruction and testing appropriately.
   Can't do as that would put Dentists and Chiropracters out of work
5. Put speed ramps and/or rumble strips wherever a minor road meets a major road to encourage drivers to slow down instead of going full speed and suddenly braking at the last second (as the examiners appear to encourage.)
   People who can't drive should not be given licenses rather than engineer the road to an extent that means they don't use their brains. I refer you to the crossings in America with four STOP signs. - And when I passed the test the Examiner told me I was wasn't slowing down early enough.
6. Require the transportation minister and his staff to use public transportation every day. Improving this will allow more people to choose to stay off the road. This to also include all planning officials - but lets say every second week rather than every day.
7. Create a modern GPS based public bus and rail infrastructure. See Norway, Bulgaria, Spain or Germany for examples.Dublin Bus only get €60m a year off the Govt and it just about covers the time the buses are delayed on the roads. This shows a level of commitment to public transport similar to Eircoms investing in the network by an ammount similar to depreciation of g capital assets.
8. Pray that Ireland never has snowy and icy winters like parts of the U.K., much of Europe, the U.S. and Canada. Our driving record is already worse than many of these places and we seldom have to deal with severe weather. (hang in there Gulf stream!)24 crashes on Christmas morning 2004 on the M50. First frost this year and South Lucan just stopped. 15 minutes to get out of the estate. If I hadn't being going in the opposite direction then I wouldn't have bothered.
9. Change laws so that pedestrians and cyclists always have right-of-way over cars. There is no way a pedestrian or cyclist can dodge a car moving at several times their speed. If a driver kills a cyclist or pedestrian, the driver should be found 100% at fault.Already covered, but like most laws not enforced. Cars are third class road users, behind cyclists and pedistrians, and all road users must yield to traffic already at the junction - enforcement/education is the key.
10. Stop the euphemisms such as "knocked down" and "came into contact with". e.g. "The boy was fatally injured when the car he was travelling in came into contact with a tractor."early days yet, at least the word Accident is not used anymore since most of the time it is human error. Also the liable laws in this country aren't the kindest.

Capt'n Midnight

Calina wrote:

Sorry. Given that every day I have to contend with cyclists who 1) cycle into oncoming traffic 2) do not have lights 3) do not wear helmets 4) who blatantly break redlights (as in, don't just try to skim the end of a yellow, but don't bother stopping at all when the light has been red for 30 seconds or more) 5) who cycle on the roads when cycle paths are provided, I cannot agree with this..

3) A bike helmet won't help if you get hit at more than 40mph for that you would need a Motorbike type helmet. Look at the stats for bicycle accidents during racing, very few deaths despite multiple crashes, and in at least two deaths helmets would have been of no use.
2) RANT and a lot aren't pointing in the right direction and are those flashing things that have a narrow beamwidth and most are invisible compared to the OVERKILL of car lights, RANT RANT
4) Drivers break red lights frequently - especially the Amber Gamblers not just sneaking through on the left.

5) If a cyclist is on the main road they have right of way over secondary roads. If they use a cycle path then they have to yield right of way to the secondary road. The energy needed to get back to cruising speed on a bike can be the same as travelling 300m at cruising speed, never mind the extra time it takes. Stopping is something cyclists want to avoid.
oh yeah 80% of cycle accidents happen at junction - a big reason not to use them
and how often is the glass removed from them ?

MontgomeryClift

All these new rules won't make any difference, because they won't be enforced, just like existing rules. The roads around my house are basically a race track at night. If the Gardaí wanted to they could set up there any night and catch them all for serious speeding.

Though institutional changes are needed. And as I stated in another thread, those most likely to pass the test are most likely to have accidents. What does that say about the test?