Speeding: Your Views!!

Mitch Connor · 21-03-2007 1:38pm

OldmanMondeo wrote:

- Why? as I mentioned before nosie is a factor to consider, higher speeds higher noise

But that is not ALWAYS the case. there are roads where the limit does not make sense from a safety or noise polution point of view. You are applying one argument to the entire road netowrk, and the entire road network is not the same. Each road should be properly analyzed fro every perspective - road width, quality, angle, curve, surrounding area, fixed hazzards, everything - each and every road, and each should be given an appropriate speed limit based on an identifiable matrix.

OldmanMondeo · 21-03-2007 1:47pm

Tauren wrote:

But that is not ALWAYS the case. there are roads where the limit does not make sense from a safety or noise polution point of view. You are applying one argument to the entire road netowrk, and the entire road network is not the same. Each road should be properly analyzed fro every perspective - road width, quality, angle, curve, surrounding area, fixed hazzards, everything - each and every road, and each should be given an appropriate speed limit based on an identifiable matrix.

I was talking about Dual carraigeways, most of which are in surburban areas, therefore noise would be one factor to be considered as well.
I do agree that each road should be reviewed before a speed limit is set, but that is off topic, the OP asked about speeding and not speed limits. There is a lot off roads with stupid speed limits, high or low. But we need too stick to the limit set to reduce accidents, if we can't do this on "safe" roads, we f***ked on the dangerous ones.

Zombrex · 21-03-2007 1:51pm

Tauren wrote:

i always try to obey the speed limit, but i'll admit i do not always manage it. sometimes it is set infuriatingly low for no reason.

On the N11, northbound, coming up towards the old turn off for greystones/delgany(the one you can't take anymore) the limit goes down to 60, then 50, for a set of road works. I've no problem with this at all, here the limit makes sense. However, when you clear the roadworks, the limit stays at 60 for a couple of miles, for no reason that i can see.

And....?

How does this "infuriate" you? You get to where you are going 1 or 2 minutes later than otherwise?

I shudder when I read things like this.

I realise that there are biological reasons for this type of reaction, but seriously think about what you are saying for a minute in a rational way. Driving at 50 km/h instead of 60 km/h shouldn't annoy you. It shouldn't bother you at all. For thousands of years man kind managed about 15km/h at most on a horse.

The reason that it does is the issue, not the speed limit.

Mitch Connor · 21-03-2007 1:55pm

OldmanMondeo wrote:

I was talking about Dual carraigeways, most of which are in surburban areas, therefore noise would be one factor to be considered as well.
I do agree that each road should be reviewed before a speed limit is set, but that is off topic, the OP asked about speeding and not speed limits. There is a lot off roads with stupid speed limits, high or low. But we need too stick to the limit set to reduce accidents, if we can't do this on "safe" roads, we f***ked on the dangerous ones.

the dual carraigeway that i am talking about does not go through a residential area, in the area that i am talking about. the limit is dropped to 60 because of 1 house, a couple of hundred yards up the hill from the road?

And so what if the OP asked about Speeding and not Speed Limits? They go hand in hand - its a lot easier to speed whent he limit is set too low for the road you are driving on.

Mitch Connor · 21-03-2007 2:00pm

Wicknight wrote:

And....?

How does this "infuriate" you? You get to where you are going 1 or 2 minutes later than otherwise?

I shudder when I read things like this.

I realise that there are biological reasons for this type of reaction, but seriously think about what you are saying for a minute in a rational way. Driving at 50 km/h instead of 60 km/h shouldn't annoy you. It shouldn't bother you at all. For thousands of years man kind managed about 15km/h at most on a horse.

The reason that it does is the issue, not the speed limit.

It infuriates me because i don't see any need for it other then as a revenue earner.

As i have said, i have no problem with speed limits when they make sense given all the factors involved. Dropping the limit to 60 on a dual carraigeway without a serious bend, and in a non-residential area is NOT aimed at road safety imo. The area used to be dangerous, as cars used to be allowed to cross over the road between teh two exits each side of the road. However, this has been stopped, and has been for years now. Now the cars can only turn left off the road in the exact same way as on a motorway.

I.S.T. · 21-03-2007 2:01pm

jonny24ie wrote:

In all fairness if you are caught speeding or breaking the law then stop giving out!! You have broken the law being caught so take your punishment!!

Surely people have a right to complain about a law they consider to be unfair, or is being enforced in an unfair manner. People are annoyed about a law which is being enforced for a reason it was not intended, i.e. to generate revenue from speeding fines rather than to improve road safety.

gyppo · 21-03-2007 2:06pm

jonny24ie wrote:

In all fairness if you are caught speeding or breaking the law then stop giving out!! You have broken the law being caught so take your punishment!!.[/QOUTE]

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

Surely people have a right to complain about a law they consider to be unfair, or is being enforced in an unfair manner. People are annoyed about a law which is being enforced for a reason it was not intended, i.e. to generate revenue from speeding fines rather than to improve road safety.

I think its important to distinguish about the right to complain about a law Vs. breaking the law.

If you don't like the law, and you consider it unjust, then you should follow legal avenues to register your grievance.

OldmanMondeo · 21-03-2007 2:07pm

Tauren and Irishspeedtraps, lewt me ask you a straigh question, is it ok to drive at 60kph in a 50kph speed limit area? Yes or No.

Zombrex · 21-03-2007 2:07pm

Tauren wrote:

It infuriates me because i don't see any need for it other then as a revenue earner.

But why does this bother you? Do you want to drive at 60km/hr in a 50km/hr zone?

Tauren wrote:

As i have said, i have no problem with speed limits when they make sense given all the factors involved.

But "make sense" seems to be allow me to drive as fast as I physically can unless there is a good reason (in my opinion) why I can't, otherwise I'll get annoyed

Tauren wrote:

Dropping the limit to 60 on a dual carraigeway without a serious bend, and in a non-residential area is NOT aimed at road safety imo.

So? Why does this bother you?

Zombrex · 21-03-2007 2:13pm

IrishSpeedTraps wrote:

Surely people have a right to complain about a law they consider to be unfair, or is being enforced in an unfair manner. People are annoyed about a law which is being enforced for a reason it was not intended, i.e. to generate revenue from speeding fines rather than to improve road safety.

No people are annoyed they are getting caught speeding in areas they rationalise that it should be ok to speed because it is ok to do so.

People have always done this. Everyone thinks where they speed it is safe (otherwise they wouldn't speed, clearly).

But why do people feel the need to break the speed limit at all? Anywhere?

Its like I said to Tauren the attitude seems to be let me drive as fast as I want unless you have a very good reason why I can't otherwise I will get annoyed

Have people actually rationally thought about why they have this attitude. Breaking the speed limit often takes only seconds off your journey time. What is the rational reason for doing so?

Mitch Connor · 21-03-2007 2:18pm

Wicknight wrote:

But why does this bother you? Do you want to drive at 60km/hr in a 50km/hr zone?

Probably, yes. But i won't, cause i try not to speed.

But "make sense" seems to be allow me to drive as fast as I physically can unless there is a good reason (in my opinion) why I can't, otherwise I'll get annoyed

I drive to the sped at which i am comfortable in the given situation, and below the speed limit as much as I can (i will admit i creep over the limit on occasion). On a back road, i will not do the 80kmh speed limit because i do not feel it is safe to do so - going at 80 would put myself and other road users at risk, imo, so it is not something i do. It is also the main reason i feel speed limits are a joke in this country, and are not properly maintained or decided on.

My intention is not to drive as fast as i am physically able to, as you put it, and i have never said that it is. For you to suggest it, is rather annoying.

I have said i have no problems with sensible speed limits. Low/average speed through towns, built up areas, residential areas, on poor quality roads etc. My issue is when the limit set is below the standard for the type of road, and with no external factors influencing the change. You seem to be absolutely happy that every speed limit imposed in this country is fitted properly to the road it is set to, that no speed limit is inappropriate (either too high or too low) for the situation, which i think is wrong.

So? Why does this bother you?

I have said it, many times, BECAUSE IT IS NOT A ROAD SAFETY/NOISE POLUTION/PEDESTRAIN SAFETY ISSUE - THE ONLY REASON I CAN SEE FOR THE PARTICULAR LIMIT I AM TALKING ABOUT IS REVENUE COLLECTION AND THE REASON I AM TALKING ABOUT 1 PARTICULAR LIMIT IN A PARTICULAR AREA IS SO I CAN SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE.

OldmanMondeo · 21-03-2007 2:28pm

Tauren wrote:

THE ONLY REASON I CAN SEE FOR THE PARTICULAR LIMIT I AM TALKING ABOUT IS REVENUE COLLECTION AND THE REASON I AM TALKING ABOUT 1 PARTICULAR LIMIT IN A PARTICULAR AREA IS SO I CAN SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE.

Simple answer, do not speed, do not get a fine, do not increase the revenue. I don't beleive this to be the case. The section of road, unless I am wrong, is the section after the bray turn off. There is a sharp bend and a bridge over the river, Dargle I think. The is also wildlife that can and does run out on roads, you may have noticed some road kill on you journey. This COULD be another reason for the speed limit to be kept slow. Hitting a Deer or Fox at 80 or 100kph is probably going to cause a bigger accident that hitting at the 60kph limit.

But you never answered my eailer question, is it ok to drive at 60kph in a 50kph zone, yes or no?

Wishbone Ash · 21-03-2007 2:28pm

Tauren wrote:

i don't see any need for it other then as a revenue earner.

I don't understand the 'revenue earner' argument. If you believe that it is a revenue earner then you can easily avoid contributing to it. I would think that it costs much more to implement speed checks than any money it brings in.

In other similar threads, posters have described speeding fines as a 'another form of taxation on the motorist. If that is so, then it is the only form of taxation that I know to which payment is voluntary.

21-03-2007 2:34pm

Wicknight wrote:

No people are annoyed they are getting caught speeding in areas they rationalise that it should be ok to speed because it is ok to do so.

People have always done this. Everyone thinks where they speed it is safe (otherwise they wouldn't speed, clearly).

But why do people feel the need to break the speed limit at all? Anywhere?

Its like I said to Tauren the attitude seems to be let me drive as fast as I want unless you have a very good reason why I can't otherwise I will get annoyed

Have people actually rationally thought about why they have this attitude. Breaking the speed limit often takes only seconds off your journey time. What is the rational reason for doing so?

You could have used more bold, underline and italics It wasn't clear enough. :rolleyes:

If my car car can do the extra speed safely on an empty dual carrige way who the hell cares if I'm doing 85mph? Apart from the gaurds of course.

Zombrex · 21-03-2007 2:46pm

Tauren wrote:

My intention is not to drive as fast as i am physically able to, as you put it, and i have never said that it is. For you to suggest it, is rather annoying.

But why then does having a speed limit set at 60 km/hr for few miles or so past a road works instead of the normal 100 km/hr "infuriate you" If you don't mind driving at 60 km/hr then what is wrong with driving at 60 km/hr?

If you are convinced that this was just done to speed trap you then just don't drive over the speed limit. Problem solved.

Tauren wrote:

I have said i have no problems with sensible speed limits.

Yes but my point is why do you have problems with "un-sensible" (in your opinion) speed limits?

I can understand why someone would be concerned that a speed limit is too high, such as 80 km/hr in a build up area or dangerous road, because that could lead to a dangerous accident.

But what is the harm in having a speed limit that is a bit low for the road it is on? You can say that it doesn't need to be that low, but who cares if it is that low?

Tauren wrote:

You seem to be absolutely happy that every speed limit imposed in this country is fitted properly to the road it is set to, that no speed limit is inappropriate (either too high or too low) for the situation, which i think is wrong.

My happiness (or unhappiness) isn't really effected by the speed limit on the nations roads.

Tauren wrote:

I have said it, many times, BECAUSE IT IS NOT A ROAD SAFETY/NOISE POLUTION/PEDESTRAIN SAFETY ISSUE - THE ONLY REASON I CAN SEE FOR THE PARTICULAR LIMIT I AM TALKING ABOUT IS REVENUE COLLECTION AND THE REASON I AM TALKING ABOUT 1 PARTICULAR LIMIT IN A PARTICULAR AREA IS SO I CAN SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE.

That is a bit of a silly argument, because the cost to monitor all these areas with guards, or to set up working speed cameras, to actually collect this "revenue" would vastly out weight any profit brought in by it.

In reality you have no idea why the speed limit was set. You are just assuming that its the guards trying to make money. This seems to be a quite common scape goat, a bit like the bit in the Simpsons where the skate boarder complains about the police taking is board way and then saying that you just know that the cops are skating around the police station with them.

Iit is rather baffling why people get worked up about a speed limit being too low. As I said I realise that there are biological reasons for this, but you just need to consider the situation rationally and realise that going 10 or 20 km/hr fast will get you to your destination (which is normally the next set of lights) only a few minutes or even seconds quicker.

Mitch Connor · 21-03-2007 2:46pm

Wishbone Ash wrote:

I don't understand the 'revenue earner' argument. If you believe that it is a revenue earner then you can easily avoid contributing to it. I would think that it costs much more to implement speed checks than any money it brings in.

In other similar threads, posters have described speeding fines as a 'another form of taxation on the motorist. If that is so, then it is the only form of taxation that I know to which payment is voluntary.

and i do my best to not contribute to the little earner, however, that does not stop me from getting annoyed at the attempt, and should not mean i may not get annoyed at it either.

Zombrex · 21-03-2007 2:48pm

ronoc wrote:

If my car car can do the extra speed safely on an empty dual carrige way who the hell cares if I'm doing 85mph? Apart from the gaurds of course.

You own your own personal empty dual carriage way? Wow, how much did that cost? :rolleyes:

Kimbot · 21-03-2007 2:50pm

ronoc wrote:

If my car car can do the extra speed safely on an empty dual carrige way who the hell cares if I'm doing 85mph? Apart from the gaurds of course.

I care!! Because if you lost control of your car because of a bump in the road and hit me or any member of my family that caused a death to them I would be first blaming you for speeding and then the gardai for not being there to stop you!!

is_that_so · 21-03-2007 2:55pm

Wicknight wrote:

Iit is rather baffling why people get worked up about a speed limit being too low. As I said I realise that there are biological reasons for this, but you just need to consider the situation rationally and realise that going 10 or 20 km/hr fast will get you to your destination (which is normally the next set of lights) only a few minutes or even seconds quicker.

I think part of it also is where speed limits are applied. That in itself is baffling sometimes. I am happy enough with most of the speed limits but I personally find the 60 kph way too slow especially where it is applied on large urban roads(without traffic lights). I also find it ludicrous that a speed limit of 100 kph is posted on an off-ramp of the M1 or that 80 kph is posted within 200 metres of a roundabout. All the councils did when we changed over was switch the signs, drop a few speed limits and apply no common sense whatsoever.

Mitch Connor · 21-03-2007 3:00pm

jonny24ie wrote:

I care!! Because if you lost control of your car because of a bump in the road and hit me or any member of my family that caused a death to them I would be first blaming you for speeding and then the gardai for not being there to stop you!!

but at 80kmh if he hit a bump or lost control and killed someone you would say "unlucky, you were doing the speed limit after all"?

Doing 5kmh over the limit on a DC isn't the worst thing in the world imo. I don't do it myself, because i don't want the points, but i don't care if someone overtakes me on a DC, or on the M50. There are far more likely places for people to be killed as a result of speeding, and far more likely causes of death then just speeding (such as drink/drugs/general poor driving)

I do have a problem with excessive speeding, but 5kmh isn't enough for me to get worked up over. If someone is invovled in a crash, that they caused - it won't be down to simply doing 5kmh over the limit on a wide, straight stretch of road, it will more likely be because of failing to stop at a light or sign, or carrying too much speed into a corner, or being unaware of the situation around themselves.

I really do think someone doing 80 at night on a back road, with an 80 limit, is a more dangerous driver then someone doing 85 on and 80 stretch of DC, or 125 on a 120 stretch of motorway.

_Kaiser_ · 21-03-2007 3:04pm

Speed limits and, more importantly, road conditions on a lot of our roads is a bad joke.

You have twisty narrow, poorly surfaced backroads like the one between Finglas and Blanchardstown signposted as 80 km/h, then you have the Trim road between it and the N3. One of the best roads in Meath froma surfacing and visibility standpoint, and it's limited to 80 km/h.

Anyway I digress, we all have examples like the above.. The fact is that, like so much else in this backwater of a country, speed limits, maintainence and enforcement is done in a very inconsistent and haphazard way with an "ah sure it'll be grand" attitude coupled with the "it depends who you get on the day" scenario.

The problem is that there's too many vested interests. Despite the whole campaign of trying to get us out of our cars and into public transport, the government makes too much money from motor tax, VRT etc to ever be really serious. Why are they spending a fortune on road building/upgrading otherwise? Why not more buses, trains, metros etc?

Add to that that a lot of politicians have (financial/ownership) interests in pubs themselves, and is it any wonder that things are the way they are.

Although the Gardai and many here will dispute it, most speed traps at the moment are revenue oriented. They sit on the side of nice, wide stretches of N/M-roads with their arm out the window of the car (always at the bottom of a hill if possible) and then tell us that it's about "safety" :rolleyes: Add to this stories of one fella getting away with a warning, and others being done for the same thing and it's no wonder that it gets people's back up.

As someone else already said, if they were serious about "safety", why aren't they out on the backroads (at night), or outside the pubs ready to catch people as they stumble to the car?

The reason is simple: in addition to the above, there's an election coming up, and rather than actually tackle the problems on our roads (after all, if people here can come up with very good ideas, I'm sure the overpaid "consultants" they bring in can too), which would cost money and time, it's a lot easier to be "seen" to be doing something - and the quickest way at the moment is to generate revenue and stats that (I'll guarantee you) will be used to prove how successful the pentalty points system and speed checks have been.

Unfortunately, this being Ireland, we're great at bitching to our friends in the pubs and on places like this, but how many of us will make it an issue with the local TD's as they go canvassing to your door in the next few months?

21-03-2007 3:05pm

jonny24ie wrote:

I care!! Because if you lost control of your car because of a bump in the road and hit me or any member of my family that caused a death to them I would be first blaming you for speeding and then the gardai for not being there to stop you!!

Well done reading all of my post.

Kimbot · 21-03-2007 3:08pm

Tauren wrote:

but at 80kmh if he hit a bump or lost control and killed someone you would say "unlucky, you were doing the speed limit after all"?

Doing 5kmh over the limit on a DC isn't the worst thing in the world imo. I don't do it myself, because i don't want the points, but i don't care if someone overtakes me on a DC, or on the M50. There are far more likely places for people to be killed as a result of speeding, and far more likely causes of death then just speeding (such as drink/drugs/general poor driving)

I do have a problem with excessive speeding, but 5kmh isn't enough for me to get worked up over. If someone is invovled in a crash, that they caused - it won't be down to simply doing 5kmh over the limit on a wide, straight stretch of road, it will more likely be because of failing to stop at a light or sign, or carrying too much speed into a corner, or being unaware of the situation around themselves.

I really do think someone doing 80 at night on a back road, with an 80 limit, is a more dangerous driver then someone doing 85 on and 80 stretch of DC, or 125 on a 120 stretch of motorway.

Reread his post he said MPH!! Which is a hell of alot faster!!

stovelid · 21-03-2007 3:10pm

There should be cameras on these roads. Some people do OTT speeds on these roads too. That's not the problem.

The problem is that most of the camera's are in the places where accidents are least likely to occur or worse, they just function as revenue gathering devices (putting them just where the speed limit unexpectedly slows own)...:(

galwaytt wrote:

the only problem is that the law, as it currently stands, can be unjust. Speed cameras on motorways and dual carraigeways only incite anger, resentment and malice generally towards the subject.

.

Mitch Connor · 21-03-2007 3:12pm

jonny24ie wrote:

Reread his post he said MPH!! Which is a hell of alot faster!!

i would assume he ment kmph, but if not, then i agree with you, as i would consider that to be excessive speeding.

However, i still stand by the main points of my post in relation to the sense of certain speed limits, and the enforcement of them. I honestly believe you can be more dangerous doing the speed limit on certain roads then you would be going slightly over it on others - and that is one of the biggest annoyances imo. the reason for any limit on any road should be clear, and it should be set according to a set of standards and a little common sense. In too many cases I feel this is not what has happened, and my favourite backroad vs slow DC is, imo, proof of this.

Kimbot · 21-03-2007 3:15pm

ronoc wrote:

Well done reading all of my post.

ronoc wrote:

If my car car can do the extra speed safely on an empty dual carrige way who the hell cares if I'm doing 85mph? Apart from the gaurds of course.

You mean this post???

Cop on and think about it!! You are cruising down a DC @ 85MPH and your phone rings/you want to change the radio station. You look ahead and the road is clear!! You divert your attention away from the road and a car merges on front of you as your not looking you don't know it has!! By the time you realise it you have crashed straight into the back of them and caused an accident!! Simple.... you attitude is wrong like the majority of drivers in this country that "own the roads" and do as they wish because they will never get caught or never have been caught!!

Kimbot · 21-03-2007 3:17pm

Tauren wrote:

i would assume he ment kmph, but if not, then i agree with you, as i would consider that to be excessive speeding.

However, i still stand by the main points of my post in relation to the sense of certain speed limits, and the enforcement of them. I honestly believe you can be more dangerous doing the speed limit on certain roads then you would be going slightly over it on others - and that is one of the biggest annoyances imo. the reason for any limit on any road should be clear, and it should be set according to a set of standards and a little common sense. In too many cases I feel this is not what has happened, and my favourite backroad vs slow DC is, imo, proof of this.

I do agree that a lot of backroads have too high a limit but the thing is you are not aiming to get to that speed on the road so the fact of the matter still is that you can do under that speed if you think its safe but not over it!!

stovelid · 21-03-2007 3:21pm

If somebody says they like doing big speeds on "empty motorways", I'm not sure their love of speeding just ends when in other situations.

I never really go much over the speed limit and as a result I don't spot an empty motorway and see it as an excuse for a rally ride.

jonny24ie wrote:

You mean this post???

Cop on and think about it!! You are cruising down a DC @ 85MPH and your phone rings/you want to change the radio station. You look ahead and the road is clear!! You divert your attention away from the road and a car merges on front of you as your not looking you don't know it has!! By the time you realise it you have crashed straight into the back of them and caused an accident!! Simple.... you attitude is wrong like the majority of drivers in this country that "own the roads" and do as they wish because they will never get caught or never have been caught!!

Mitch Connor · 21-03-2007 3:21pm

jonny24ie wrote:

I do agree that a lot of backroads have too high a limit but the thing is you are not aiming to get to that speed on the road so the fact of the matter still is that you can do under that speed if you think its safe but not over it!!

i know you can go under it, and that is what i do as i do not feel i could go even close to the limit on some of those roads, but my point is that the speed limit set for that road is not appropriate. If you accept that, and i do not know that you will, then why is it such a leap to accept that not all other limits appropriate either(a lot a appropriate, but not all), and then accept people's (mine) annoyance at this?

21-03-2007 3:22pm

jonny24ie wrote:

You mean this post???

Cop on and think about it!! You are cruising down a DC @ 85MPH and your phone rings/you want to change the radio station. You look ahead and the road is clear!! You divert your attention away from the road and a car merges on front of you as your not looking you don't know it has!! By the time you realise it you have crashed straight into the back of them and caused an accident!! Simple.... you attitude is wrong like the majority of drivers in this country that "own the roads" and do as they wish because they will never get caught or never have been caught!!

Again you seem unable to see anything apart from the speeding in my post.

I'll make it nice and simple.
An empty motorway, not a soul for miles, doing 85mph. Its not something that should be done with traffic on the road but you seem happy to make that assumption.
I'm not even suggesting it should be done with anyone else around anywhere.

Speeding: Your Views!!

Comments