Questions re: driving laws/regulations

Dave!

Hey folks,

I've been having a bit of a discussion with my da about some of the laws governing driving in Ireland. Two points were of particular interest and I was hoping someone might be able to clear them up.

1. Seatbelts -- Are you allowed to take them off when reversing?

My dad seems to think that you can, and does so regularly. He also contends that you're legally allowed to do it. I had always assumed that it was an antiquated law from whenever he did his test, and it has been changed since then. But I'm having a look around the legislation, and it's super confusing!

I'm not legal eagle, so I haven't really got a clue how to make sense of all this...

First I looked at the Road Traffic Act 2006:
http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/acts/2006/A2306.pdf

At one point in that act it mentions:

"(d) an offence under Regulations 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9 of the European Communities (Compulsory Use of Safety Belts and Child Restraint Systems in Motor Vehicles) Regulations 2006 (S.I. No. 240 of 2006)."

In the act it doesn't give specific provisions for safety belts, so I went and found the European Communities (Compulsory Use of Safety Belts and Child Restraint Systems in Motor Vehicles) Regulations 2006 (S.I. No. 240 of 2006):
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:JUCOXkNK5xcJ:www.transport.ie/upload/general/7537-0.doc+safeyt+belt+belts&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ie

It has the relevent info on safety belts....

"5. (1) Subject to Regulation 11, every adult occupant of a seat in a relevant vehicle for which a safety belt is provided shall wear the safety belt. "

etc.

"11. (1) These Regulations do not apply to –

(a) a person wearing a disabled person’s belt,

(b) the holder of a certificate of a registered medical practitioner in the form set out in Schedule 2,

(c) a person giving instruction in or in respect of the driving of a vehicle,



(d) a person conducting a test of competence to drive under Part III of the Act, or

(e) a member of the Garda Síochána or of the Defence Forces acting in the course of his or her duties. "


I thought I was vindicated when I found that, but a bit more digging brings me to this:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/travel-and-recreation/roads-and-safety/using_seatbelts_when_motoring

Which says.........

"Exemptions from requirement to wear seatbelts

1. If you are sitting on a seat that is not fitted with a safety belt

2. If you are driving and reversing your vehicle (i.e., moving your vehicle in a backward motion)

3. If you are giving instruction in or in respect of the driving of a vehicle (i.e., you are teaching someone else how to drive). This is another example of a case where it might not be so wise to avail of the leniency of the law.

4. If you are driving test examiner conducting a driving test

....etc"

And at the top of that page it mentions the 1991 Road Traffic Regulations act:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1991/en/si/0359.html

Which says.....

"8. (1) The requirement of articles 6 and 7 of these Regulations to wear a safety belt or to be restrained by a child restraint shall not apply to—

.......

( f ) the driver of a vehicle while reversing the vehicle;"


So I'm really not able to piece all this sh*t together and figure out which is the most up to date regulation. Perhaps someone here (a Garda?) could fill us in (with reference to the legislation preferably) on what's the law.

My da says it's so that you can turn around fully when reversing, but I don't see why you would be allowed to do it still. I can reverse effectively and safely without taking off my seatbelt, and it doesn't matter if you're going backwards or forwards -- if you get hit by a car and you're not wearing a seatbelt, you go through the window! My vague secondary school physics suggests (correct me if I'm wrong) that if you're reversing and someone hits you from the other direction (ie. goes into your rear end), then the force would be even greater!

So some clarification would be great

2. On a motorway or dual carriageway -- can you break the speed limit to overtake?

He's curious about this, but I would assume that you cannot legally break the speed limit to overtake.

The issue is: the right-hand lane is for over-taking... but what if the person in the left-hand lane (whom you are behind and want to overtake) is going say 110 kph? Does that mean you can only go the extra 10 to crawl past him? Overtaking is supposed to be done without holding up anybody who's coming behind you.

I'm not arsed looking for the legislation here, but I woulda thought the limit is the limit is the limit. Any thoughts?

Cheers lads

cazzy

I havent read all your text as the legal bits just bored me but as far as I know you are allowed to remove your seat belt when reversing.
That was always my understanding and Im only a young wan not like your da ! I learned that in some learning to drive book (Although it also said that taxi drivers and driving instructors didnt have to wear a seat belt as well as members of thedefence force and gardai while on duty and those with a medical cert to say they cant wear a belt for medical reasons but I think taxi drivers might have to now ???)

Seth Brundle

You have answered #1 yourself - you can remove your belt whilst reversing.
# 2 - you may not exceed any speed limit. However, common sense is usually applied by the gardai in these situations.

miju

your not allowed to break a speed limit while overtaking. if you have to break the speed limit to overtake then chances are the person is moving at a decent speed or at the legal limit

cazzy

Your never supposed to break the speedlimit to overtake - if you are on a 100 kph dual carriageway and the vehicle in front is going at 100 kpm you are breaking the speedlimit by overtaking him. (but everyone in Ireland does it anyway as far as I can see). A person is also supposed to take their foot off the accelerator when they are being overtaken (on a 2 way road at least) but noone does this in this country either and Ive seen some drivers speed up which is just dangerous on a two way road.

robo

Yep Taxi Drivers do now have to wear seat belts - Link

All SPSV drivers are legally required to wear a seatbelt. The previous exemption for taxi drivers was removed by virtue of the Road Traffic (Removal of Exemption from Wearing Seat Belts by Taxi Drivers) Regulations 2004 S.I. 402 of 2004. Since August 2003 failure by a driver of a car to wear a seat belt has been a fixed charge offence

cazzy

Do instructors have to wear them ?
Why were taxi drivers exemp pre 2004 ?

Pherekydes

DaveMcG wrote:

My da says it's so that you can turn around fully when reversing, but I don't see why you would be allowed to do it still. I can reverse effectively and safely without taking off my seatbelt, and it doesn't matter if you're going backwards or forwards -- if you get hit by a car and you're not wearing a seatbelt, you go through the window! My vague secondary school physics suggests (correct me if I'm wrong) that if you're reversing and someone hits you from the other direction (ie. goes into your rear end), then the force would be even greater!

Your Da is right. You may remove your seatbelt whilst reversing.

If you've never had the pleasure of being rear-ended, then let me tell you that when it happens you get shoved hard in the back; i.e. you are pressed into your seat harder. If it happens while reversing then you will be shoved even harder into your seatback. Your windscreen should remain intact.

Regarding the speeding Q, I would speed to get out of trouble, and I would take it that I would be legally covered to do so. But only in severely limited cases.

Dave!

Ah, cheers Slow Coach, never considered that you get pushed back into your seat. I've not had the pleasure of being rear-ended! Makes sense I suppose, although I'm sure wearing a seat-belt would still be safer in case you're involved in something less straight-forward than a rear-ending.

littlejukka

cazzy wrote:

A person is also supposed to take their foot off the accelerator when they are being overtaken (on a 2 way road at least)

never heard of this. afaik you're not permitted to accelerate while being overtaken, but never knew that you should decellerate.

miju

thinks its more a common coutesy than anything else, a concept lost on most irish drivers

cazzy

You are right I meant to say not to accelerate

cazzy

littlejukka wrote:

never heard of this. afaik you're not permitted to accelerate while being overtaken, but never knew that you should decellerate.

you are right just youre not meant to accelerate

Seth Brundle

but is it the law that you can't acceletrate or just common sense/courtesy?

cazzy

kbannon wrote:

but is it the law that you can't acceletrate or just common sense/courtesy?

It s in the rules of the road book - it says that you cant go over the speed limit when overtaking and when being overtaken you must not accelerate.

littlejukka

cazzy wrote:

It s in the rules of the road book - it says that you cant go over the speed limit when overtaking and when being overtaken you must not accelerate.

that's where i saw it. makes sense. it would be irresponsible to extend the length of time where the other driver is exposed to oncoming traffic. doesn't stop people doing it though.

Seth Brundle

cazzy wrote:

It s in the rules of the road book - it says that you cant go over the speed limit when overtaking and when being overtaken you must not accelerate.

That doesn't mean its the law.

Baraboo

When you are rear ended you are shoved back into your seat - at first. Then you tend to bounce around a bit, so a seat belt is a really good idea in this case because yes you can go through the window, or give it a good thump with your head from a rear ending. Fairly common when seat belts were not compulsory.

Wishbone Ash

The Rules of the Road is a "lay-man's" interpretation of some traffic regulations from a safety point of view. It is not a legal definition of those regulations. Some things which are legal may not necessarily be safer and vice-versa.

For example, it is illegal to use a flashing beacon on an agricultural tractor but many people do as they feel that it is safer to do so.

It would be necessary to refer to the various Statutory Instruments based on the Road Traffic Acts to get the proper legal regulations.

cyclopath2001

littlejukka wrote:

that's where i saw it. makes sense. it would be irresponsible to extend the length of time where the other driver is exposed to oncoming traffic. doesn't stop people doing it though.

It would be more responsible not to overtake at all, especially if the other vehicle is driving close to the limit.

Del2005

cyclopath2001 wrote:

It would be more responsible not to overtake at all, especially if the other vehicle is driving close to the limit.

Generally I find people who dirve close to the limit on straights slow down to a crawl when a bend comes up or another car appears they hit the brakes. I will try and get past these people ASAP as they are really annoying and possibly dangerous, as they will accelerate when you try to get past since they are back on a straight and have no idea what the shiny things in the middle of the windscreen and on the doors are for.

TheNog

honestly dont know about taking off your seatbelt to reverse but having said that if u were rear-ended u would be thrown about a bit and ur head could possibly come in contact with the steering wheel which is surprise, surprise quite hard. i have never come across anyone yet who does take off their seatbelt when reversing and i wouldnt look on it too lightly.

however for those ppl i have stopped that are not wearing a seatbelt i always say "if u are involved in a collision u could use the seatbelt to stop u going thru the windscreen. If u are not wearing ur seatbelt u could always try using ur face to stop u going thru the windscreen. Which option do u prefer?.

always get a horrified look from the driver or passenger but hey its the truth, isnt it?

littlejukka

cyclopath, not overtaking at all is hardly a solution to driving in ireland when we have such a huge network of single -lane roads wher overtaking is the only way to progress safely and smoothly in the absence of a decent system of dual-carraigeways or even 2+1 systems. don't be stupid

for The Nog, would it be possible to enforce the law using the law and the associated terms used with each offense, rather than attempting to be a smart ar.se and ending up sounding like a miseducated half-wit.

Senna

littlejukka wrote:

for The Nog, would it be possible to enforce the law using the law and the associated terms used with each offense, rather than attempting to be a smart ar.se and ending up sounding like a miseducated half-wit.

well if your stupid enough to not ware your seatbelt, its not likely that using the 'correct terms' will get it through your thick head. (general, not saying you)

if i was a garda, i would give every single moron not wearing a seatbelt belt a fine and penalty points, i'd turn a blind eye to many things, but not wearing a seatbelt deserves punishment.

cyclopath2001

littlejukka wrote:

cyclopath, not overtaking at all is hardly a solution to driving in ireland when we have such a huge network of single -lane roads wher overtaking is the only way to progress safely and smoothly in the absence of a decent system of dual-carraigeways or even 2+1 systems. don't be stupid

It depends on your expectations. Good driving requires discipline and patience.

I've seen plenty of stupid situations where people have overtaken only to stop or make a turn a short distance ahead.

Pherekydes

Senna wrote:

if i was a garda, i would give every single moron not wearing a seatbelt belt a fine and penalty points, i'd turn a blind eye to many things, but not wearing a seatbelt deserves punishment.

The thread is not about wearing a seatbelt; it's about wearing it when reversing: quite legal. Try to keep up.

daedalus2097

I'd always have my seatbelt on while reversing, though having been in a car being driven by a "larger" person, it's actually quite restricting for them to have the seatbelt on and means they can't look fully over their shoulder. Far safer I reckon to take it off so they can see where they're going...

Pherekydes

Slow coach wrote:

The thread is not about wearing a seatbelt; it's about wearing it when reversing: quite legal. Try to keep up.

Or not wearing it while reversing: quite legal. Try to keep up, slow coach.

oleras

I would say the seat belt law goes back to the days when seatbelts were like trouser belts, i.e they were not self adjusting like they are now, when it was on it was on ! It would have been very restrictive to turn around in them, and turn around you had to, off side mirror wasnt standard either.

As for the overtaking one, common sense prevails.

TheNog

littlejukka wrote:

for The Nog, would it be possible to enforce the law using the law and the associated terms used with each offense, rather than attempting to be a smart ar.se and ending up sounding like a miseducated half-wit.

I am educated in the law but the majority of people are not so do you think that i should begin quoting sections of the road traffic acts or explain to people what they are doing wrong and get them thinking. I don't say what i say in a smart way. I have more respect for people than that. I also explain to people the fine and the penalty point they will receive and even how they can pay for that fine.

Just enforcing the law is not good enough on its own but put that with educating people and i feel i could get a better result. It is true that when an unbelted person is involved in a collision they go out through the windscreen head first. Am i right or wrong?

I remember the first person i stopped for not wearing their seatbelt. It was a mother of 2 young children. She had the children belted but not herself. I asked her why did she take time to belt her children but not herself. I'm pretty sure her children would like to have her still with them and not 6 feet under.

Now for you, how many fatalities have you witnessed? How many people did you see who are screaming with pain and then there are those who are dismembered or maybe a dead child. Thankfully I haven't seen any fatalities but it really is only a matter of time. Its time people got off their high horse and begin thinking about road safety seriously.

Wishbone Ash

oleras wrote:

I would say the seat belt law goes back to the days when seatbelts were like trouser belts, i.e they were not self adjusting like they are now, when it was on it was on ! It would have been very restrictive to turn around in them, and turn around you had to, off side mirror wasnt standard either

That would be my view also - the old belts did not have the inertia reel and were simply adjusted, like aircraft seat belts, to fit the motorist.
It was a common sight to see them trailing out of car doors picking up all the dirt on the road which served as a deterrant to wearing them.

TheNog wrote:

I am educated in the law but the majority of people are not

In my experience, the many Gardaí have a very scant knowledge of the Road Traffic Statute Instruments. What makes it particularly annoying is that, when the mistake is pointed out to them, the reply is usually along the lines of "move along now" with no apology or admission of a mistake. Presumably they just wait for a softer target who may be less knowledgable or unwilling to challenge the Garda's authority.