irishspeedtraps.com

OKenora

and a website that promotes there whereabouts in an effort to dodge them is in my opinion, wrong.

In the UK we have had the locations of the speed cameras in our satnavs and GPS devices for years. It is a LEGAL REQUIREMENT for police forces to publish this information. By all reports knowing there are speed cameras there does reduce the speed of the drivers. The speed cameras are located where the police want you to slow down (like passing schools etc). It does not matter how they achieve that as long as the people slow down. They are like speed limit signs, except if you pass them too fast you get punished (fined) for it.

Of course if you are silly enough to think the primary purpose of speed cameras is to generate revenue then it does totally defeat their use if people know about them and slow down depriving the national coffers of another €60. And there lies the problem, Speed cameras should be used to slow drivers but the Dail are sitting there with their figures for estimated revenue from them as opposed to the cost, mouthing phrases about the carnage on our roads and how safety has to be improved while doing nothing about it that cannot show a profit.

There is little point in placing cameras only on safe roads where they "shoot fish in a barrel" for their speeding offences. Fine, line the M50 with cameras if you have to BUT you must also place them in as many other places they are needed. This is not the Irish way, cameras only seem to appear where they will generate revenue and I have rarely seen one in Ireland anywhere near a genuine accident blackspot like I would driving in the UK.

Perfect example, the N2 to cavan, where do you see cameras ? Surely they are at the top of the brow of a hill to deter motorists speeding over the hill....nope, they are at the bottom of the hill where they have the greatest chance of catching a speeder. Improvement in road safety = minimal, contribution to coffers = maximum.

dfer

stevenk wrote:

the first time i drove mulligar to delvin... what a misleading speed limit!!
there are corers there i wouldnd go around at 60!!

Man, i know what ya mean, i was on that road last week. One sharp turn after another ....... And it was pissin down rain.

jjbrien

dfer wrote:

Man, i know what ya mean, i was on that road last week. One sharp turn after another ....... And it was pissin down rain.

Roads the the N52 Mullingar to Delvin never have speed cameras which are very dangerous and then roads like the M1 which are very staight are riddled with speed cameras. The goverment is not interested in road safty the only reason is the M1 is busy and the N52 is not. As a previous poster said its all about the €€€

gyppo

theres appears to be a common belief here on this thread that speed camera's are primarily used for revenue generation, with road safety being leastmost purpose served.

I don't have any figures for the revenues generated by them (anyone have any link-info on this??), but I would imagine its well below 800 Million Euro PA.

800M euro is the annual cost in road traffic fatalities based on an average of 350 deaths per year (2.28M euro per life lost).

The above figure does not include non-fatal injuries assosiated with traffic accidents.

Those that are saying that speed traps primary purpose is in revenue generation might like to rethink their arguement.

HelterSkelter

gyppo wrote:

800M euro is the annual cost in road traffic fatalities based on an average of 350 deaths per year (2.28M euro per life lost).

Who pays this €800m cost and where did you get this figure from?

Seth Brundle

jjbrien wrote:

Roads the the N52 Mullingar to Delvin never have speed cameras which are very dangerous and then roads like the M1 which are very staight are riddled with speed cameras. The goverment is not interested in road safty the only reason is the M1 is busy and the N52 is not. As a previous poster said its all about the €€€

The M1 has one speed camera which is located a few KM north of Drogheda and captures motorists speeding as they head South. There presumably are several mobile patorls but these may also patrol the N52 for all we know!

MrPudding

CK.1 wrote:

Lads,

just to let you know there is now a mobile version of the site which you can access from your mobile phone/pda/etc

www.irishspeedtraps.com/m

Though not while driving, obviously.

MrP

gyppo

HelterSkelter wrote:

Who pays this €800m cost and where did you get this figure from?

http://www.rsa.ie/DIVISIONS/upload/File/MAT_Table_pdf_June_07.pdf

multiply the figure in this report by the average number of fatalities gives you 800M or thereabouts.


I dont have the exact breakdown on who pays what, but you and me pay for some of it through our insurance premiums.
The rest would be paid by the state. Emergency services at the scene, cleanup costs, damage re-instatement to roadways, barriers, signage, etc.., medical treatment, post mortem costs, preparing book of evidence for coroners court, attendance of coroner, legal people, etc...
There's only the ones I can think of offhand - im sure there are lots more.

OKenora

If the cameras are not being used primarily for revenue generation then maybe you can explain why i have not seen a single one anywhere near known accident blackspots yet see many in places where the accident rate due to speed is near or at 0, but they will get a fair few catches of people over the speed limit ?

gyppo

OKenora wrote:

If the cameras are not being used primarily for revenue generation then maybe you can explain why i have not seen a single one anywhere near known accident blackspots yet see many in places where the accident rate due to speed is near or at 0, but they will get a fair few catches of people over the speed limit ?

I don't know, as I, no more than yourself have no say in their placement.
However, the rationale behind the garda mobile speed-traps is to pick an area which is safe for them to operate in, and to catch those who exceed the speed limit. their rationale is that who who drive at excessive speed do so habitually.

Best thing to do if you dont want to pay the fines and get the points is obey the limits.

OKenora

their rationale is that who who drive at excessive speed do so habitually.

Thats a valid argument and I would have to say I agree to a large extent, but I would far prefer them to be outside my sons/daughters school slowing the drivers down and punishing the ones that don't than sitting on the M50, which has a low accident death rate, and catching people doing a few kilometres over the limit when, even though they are speeding, are doing no harm to anyone.

Who is the most dangerous driver to take off the roads, the guy doing 120 in a 100 but on a clear road or the guy doing 70 in 50 at 3.30 during scoolterm outside a school ?

Target the areas where people have speeding accidents, not the areas where people simply speed. Near my home there is one corner on the road that has taken numerous lives and caused many serious injuries over the years, a very bad bend that many people think they can take faster than they really can. They put up a "SLOW BAD BEND" sign to warn you but it is not unusual to travel that road and see cars crashed off into the fields. Less than 2 miles away they put a speed camera in the middle of a dual carriageway where I remember only one accident ever related to speed, I honestly have never seen or heard of any other accidents there at all.

How does this promote road safety ? Everyone knows the camera is there and simply slows for it, then speeds away again after it. The one accident I did hear about.....a non-local saw the camera late and slammed on the brakes, he got rear ended by a truck following him........

We should do what near every other country in Europe does, place cameras where it is important people slow down due to an existing high accident death/injury rate, tell everyone where the cameras are, then worry about the other areas like motorways which have a far lower accident death rate. Of course being Irish we will have to try to re-invent it all, and ignore the proven ways of using them to reduce road deaths, balance the books so they can be show to be a success financially therefore our roads must be safer..

I.S.T.

They used to have speed cops outside the schools on the Long Mile Road in Dublin quite frequently. As a result the traffic there almost always sticks to the limit there now. I agree with the last poster that these, and high accident locations are the places where they should be located, not safe motorways and dual carriageways.

eamon234

Says there's a fixed Gatso on the Dock Road in Limerick - can anyone confirm this?

Victor

OKenora wrote:

If the cameras are not being used primarily for revenue generation then maybe you can explain why i have not seen a single one anywhere near known accident blackspots yet see many in places where the accident rate due to speed is near or at 0, but they will get a fair few catches of people over the speed limit ?

About 40% of all mileage is on national routes.
About 5% of the road network is national routes.

About 60% of all mileage is on regional and local roads.
About 95% of the road network is regional and local roads.

=> national routes are much busier than other roads.

From this, I think we can agree that motorways, which are busier than average national routes might have (say) 3% of mileage (I'm guessing it might even be higher than that).

About 1% of speeding tickets are on motorways / dual carriageways.
About 1% of the road network is motorways / dual carriageways.

A garda sets up his camera on a motorway for X hours - a huge number of people see him.
A garda sets up his camera on a minor road for X hours - few people see him.

Does that explain it?

astraboy

The above point only tries to justify the "fish in a barrel" policing often seen in Ireland. Why not have cameras enforcing areas where there are a high rate of accidents caused by excessive speed? Or as said already, in residental or school areas? 10KPH over the limit on a motorway and out side a school are two different things. People are also placing excessive weight on speed alone as a factor in road deaths. While definately not to be over looked, why are there few threads complaining about letting inexperienced drivers out on the roads, the poor state of many country roads, our our ridiclous car tax system that punishes people financially for buying newer, safer cars or even extra safety features?

Victor

Actually boards is full of such threads.

astraboy

They are few and far between compared to the constant arguing over speed limits. You have the high horse "i never break the speed limit, speed limits are the most important aspect of road safety" crowd on one side and then you have the rest of us driving real cars on real roads living down here in the real world.

HelterSkelter

Victor wrote:

A garda sets up his camera on a motorway for X hours - a huge number of people see him.
A garda sets up his camera on a minor road for X hours - few people see him.

Does that explain it?

So, is this about the guards trying to look like they are doing something by setting up speed checks in places where they are more likely to be seen and ignoring the places where the accidents take place? Would they not be better off on a regional/local road where not as many people see them, but they actually catch the idiots who are causing all the deaths and hopefully put them off the road for good?

BTW, where did you get these figures, especially the ones about the types of roads on which the speeding tickets are issued?

daedalus2097

HelterSkelter wrote:

So, is this about the guards trying to look like they are doing something by setting up speed checks in places where they are more likely to be seen and ignoring the places where the accidents take place? Would they not be better off on a regional/local road where not as many people see them, but they actually catch the idiots who are causing all the deaths and hopefully put them off the road for good?

Coupled with the added side effect that this strategy will result in more revenue generated, yeah, that's about the size of it.

MrPudding

HelterSkelter wrote:

So, is this about the guards trying to look like they are doing something by setting up speed checks in places where they are more likely to be seen and ignoring the places where the accidents take place? Would they not be better off on a regional/local road where not as many people see them, but they actually catch the idiots who are causing all the deaths and hopefully put them off the road for good?

BTW, where did you get these figures, especially the ones about the types of roads on which the speeding tickets are issued?

Also, one of my favourite question for this argument is this, which no one has adequately answered thus far is this:

How does having a highly visible garda presence on the M50 or the N11 stop young drivers speeding in Donegal or taking a dangerous corner within the posted speed limit but beyond either his own level of skill or the capability of his vehicle?

I have asked that question of a number of people that have put forward the “people that speed on the M50 will speed other places” or even the “more people will see them there” arguments.

For me if it was a safety camera it would generate little or no revenue. To use an extreme example, let say we have a boy racer, actually no, lets have a middle aged driver. He had a bunch of penalty points on his license and has gone past a camera on the M50 speeding and is about to lose his licence. He doesn’t know this yet. Now, lets say he is on a nice twisty road approaching a nasty corner, this corner has seen a few incidents but he does not know this. Lets say he messes the corner up badly and ends up wide and on the other side of a road and hits an oncoming car and wipes out half a family. Do you think the surviving half of the family will take much consolation from the fact that he was about to lose his licence? I doubt it.

How about this. He is approaching the same corner when he sees a sign “Fixed Speed Camera 1K,” 500metres down the road he sees “Fixed Speed Camera 500m,” then another at 100metres. As he approaches the corner he cannot help but see the brightly painted and highly reflective camera. What speed do you think he will take that corner at? What side of the road do you think he will be on half way round it?

I know it is a bit of a silly example but I think it illustrates a point. Cameras on the M50 or the N11 or whatever will have an effect on road safety but it not immediate. People speed. They will not slow down until they receive the points. Fixed cameras on safe roads will generate a lot of money and points but don’t stop those people speeding until they realise there is a real risk they will lose their licence. Then they will slow down. But then where will they slow down? They will look at where they have picked up points and be more careful there. So they are likely to slow down on the roads where a little excessive speed will less likely to cause a problem.

If the reasons for the camera was purely safety then they would be in areas where people are dying or being injured, they would be highly advertised and highly visible and they would influence driver behaviour right there in at that time and in that place, not six months down the road when the penalty points arrive in the post and the driver realises he is close to a ban.

MrP

MrPudding

daedalus2097 wrote:

Coupled with the added side effect that this strategy will result in more revenue generated, yeah, that's about the size of it.

How much does the government spend on cleaning up the aftermath of road traffic incidents? I don’t just mean cleaning the roads, I mean medical care, emergency services time and stuff like that. How much does it cost the economy as a whole? If they actually reduced the number of incidents at the expense of reducing the amount of revenue generated from speeding tickets would there be a net gain for the government?

MrP

HelterSkelter

If the Government want to prove that speeding checks are not about revenue generation they can do this quite simply by removing the fine aspect of being caught. Just give people the points. People are more scared of getting points and losing their licence than a fine anyway.

astraboy

MrPudding wrote:

Also, one of my favourite question for this argument is this, which no one has adequately answered thus far is this:

How does having a highly visible garda presence on the M50 or the N11 stop young drivers speeding in Donegal or taking a dangerous corner within the posted speed limit but beyond either his own level of skill or the capability of his vehicle?

I have asked that question of a number of people that have put forward the “people that speed on the M50 will speed other places” or even the “more people will see them there” arguments.

For me if it was a safety camera it would generate little or no revenue. To use an extreme example, let say we have a boy racer, actually no, lets have a middle aged driver. He had a bunch of penalty points on his license and has gone past a camera on the M50 speeding and is about to lose his licence. He doesn’t know this yet. Now, lets say he is on a nice twisty road approaching a nasty corner, this corner has seen a few incidents but he does not know this. Lets say he messes the corner up badly and ends up wide and on the other side of a road and hits an oncoming car and wipes out half a family. Do you think the surviving half of the family will take much consolation from the fact that he was about to lose his licence? I doubt it.

How about this. He is approaching the same corner when he sees a sign “Fixed Speed Camera 1K,” 500metres down the road he sees “Fixed Speed Camera 500m,” then another at 100metres. As he approaches the corner he cannot help but see the brightly painted and highly reflective camera. What speed do you think he will take that corner at? What side of the road do you think he will be on half way round it?

I know it is a bit of a silly example but I think it illustrates a point. Cameras on the M50 or the N11 or whatever will have an effect on road safety but it not immediate. People speed. They will not slow down until they receive the points. Fixed cameras on safe roads will generate a lot of money and points but don’t stop those people speeding until they realise there is a real risk they will lose their licence. Then they will slow down. But then where will they slow down? They will look at where they have picked up points and be more careful there. So they are likely to slow down on the roads where a little excessive speed will less likely to cause a problem.

If the reasons for the camera was purely safety then they would be in areas where people are dying or being injured, they would be highly advertised and highly visible and they would influence driver behaviour right there in at that time and in that place, not six months down the road when the penalty points arrive in the post and the driver realises he is close to a ban.

MrP

Pretty much what I was thinking. Your point of view is an island of sense in a sea of madness!:)

Niall1234

A few good points made on this thread.

1. If as people claim, that setting up traps on inter-urbans are to give Gardai a presence on the road, then how does this stop speeding on Regional roads considering everyone believe there are no speed traps on regional roads (there are no speed traps on regional roads).

2. Too much emphasis is put down to outright speeding. A lot of crashes happen due to, excessive speed in bad conditions (but still below the actual speed limit), reckless overtaking and people not sticking to their side of the road.

3. Poor road surface has an awful amount to do with road crashes. This is hardly ever mentioned though.

From what I can tell, most of the media outlets try to put the blame on the drivers and none on the government. Poor road surfaces, bad bends, narrow roads and inappropriate speed limits are big factors in road fatalities.

corkcab

hi folks,

I just recently bought a Sat Nav which claims to show speed cameras.
I expect this is only fixed cameras.

What advice would you give on buying a laser/radar detector.


Any help appreciated

Corkcab

.Longshanks.

corkcab wrote:

What advice would you give on buying a laser/radar detector.

Apart from the fact that they are illegal in Ireland...

corkcab

Hi

I understand that they are illegal, but I believe they must prove that you are using one .

Can yo give any advise on which is best

Regards

kikel

corkcab wrote:

Hi

I understand that they are illegal, but I believe they must prove that you are using one .

Can yo give any advise on which is best

Regards

AFAIK Discussion of ilegal items is forbidden on Boards. Not that i could help anyway.

It BeeMee

corkcab wrote:

Hi

I understand that they are illegal, but I believe they must prove that you are using one .

Not so, it's illegal to even have one in the car, operating or not.

~~SKYHIGH~~

My friend uses one, a snooper s3. he has it disguised on the dashboard as somthing else so you wouldnt really look at it and say " oh thats a radar detector". When I asked him why he got and if he gets caught your in trouble blah blah his answer was simply this...... When i see the Gardai hiding in bushes, up trees, down drains, behind signs, lamposts, benches, bustops and on top of bridges nailing people for wandering a small excess over the speed limit I need to protect myself. Ultimately I understand his view completely, However I would rather just get a satnav and program it via co ordinate POI's to identify mobile laser sites etc. I'm convincing him to do this at the minute so he can just scrap that detector he is using... he only really uses it when he is driving a long distance otherwise he would leave it at home.