WANTED! People for speed camera debate on Questions and Answers

I.S.T.

Hi Lads,

I have just been speaking to someone from RTÉ's Questions and Answers. They are having a debate on speed cameras on Monday and are looking a motorist opposed to speed cameras to make their point to the panel during the debate. You will not be sitting on the panel, you will be sitting in the audience and will be asked your opinion when they are discussing the topic.

If you are interested in doing this PM me or email ciaran at irishspeedtraps.com. Please include your email and phone number.

Thanks,
Ciarán

Niall1234

I get the feeling that who ever takes this up will have a very hard task on this show.

Its on RTE so they'll be pure pro the speed cameras. I hope somebody points out that we we don't have the most dangerous roads in Europe (far from it).

milltown

Niall1234 wrote: »

I get the feeling that who ever takes this up will have a very hard task on this show.

Its on RTE so they'll be pure pro the speed cameras. I hope somebody points out that we we don't have the most dangerous roads in Europe (far from it).

Will I get to throw eggs at Auntie Gaybo?

Esel

OP: why are you looking for a patsy?

Seth Brundle

Is there any idea as to who may be on the panel and what other groups have been 'planted' in the audience.
To be honest and given the aformentioned campaign by RTE at reducing road deaths, I reckon it will be a massacre on whoever does this!

Niall1234

11 deaths in the last 72 hours. A complete statistical quirk at the worst time ever.

The pro Speed Camera guys will have a field day. Statistics will be bent far past breaking point monday night.

As kbannon says, massacre could be a good word. Senisible logic will fly out the window and there is no doubt we will have the parent of a crash victim telling us a sob story on air.

boomboombazza

as much as i love driving fast you cant argue againt speed cameras. this debate will be a masacre.


i can see it now

'so 11 people killed in last 72 hours and you dont think speed deterrents are a good idea?'

aahhh....ammmm....errrrr:o but but but....

Seth Brundle

boomboombazza wrote: »

'so 11 people killed in last 72 hours and you dont think speed deterrents are a good idea?'

The first response to that point would be to question whether exceeding the speed limit had in fact anything to do with their deaths.

BlackWizard

^^ Exactly

And how many of them accidents where in Dublin and how many cameras are in Dublin compared the counties that have had those accidents. I feel like every 4th road in Dublin has a speed camera. Even if I wanted to speed, the traffic is too bad to actually do it.

Seth Brundle

Dublin has five fixed speed cameras and also has the usual mobile units (covert cars and vans and also those in marked vehicles). However, given that Dublin has about 1/4 of the population of the Republic, are you surprised about the number of traps?
However, you are right, the majority of fatalities are outside of the capital.

PixelTrawler

I have no problem with speed cameras if they are in a big bright orange box with a huge sign saying "Speed Camera Ahead"...

If they are placed at dangerous locations to save lives, then all is good.

If they are covert cameras and you get a speeding ticket a month later, I fail to see completely how this saves lives - it might make the individual driver a bit more cautious for a while although this prob tends to wear off too after a while. This is just revenue generation.

Its likely theres no good arguement that'll work against them - but there are arguements around how they are deployed and used.

Wertz

I'd love to do this if only to piss some of those nobs in RTÉ off. Afraid I don't come across as well in the spoken word though, so I'll have to pass...

The only thing speed cameras do is make everyone waste a bit of momnetum and fuel as they each in turn brake to pass through the camera's field of view...the one on the M1 at Dunleer being a prime example.
I'd be a lot more favourable toward average speed cameras on roads with a known high fatality rate...I've driven through them up the North and they work; no-one blasting past you, everyone doing in and around the limit and no danger area where everyone's brake lights come on for 2 seconds to avoid a fine.

As observed many times on this forum, speed is only one factor in road deaths...those that we witnessed the past few nights seem to be down to the factors of young drivers out late, possibly drinking, possibly speeding, but inexperience and road/weather conditions probably playing a much larger factor. It's hard to see how a speed camera covering 100m of road would solve this.
The other factor is narrow/winding/bumpy roads that are usually in a state of disrepair, making them dangerous for overtaking...but with traffic volumes the way they are, and the amount of people afraid to drive within 20kmph of the limit, people are left with little choice but to overtake, leading to head ons which are almost always fatal.

I'll say one thing, whoever ends up on the show should avoid rehashing the point on revenue generation...it looks cynical and selfish even if it is true...and is an easily counterable point; "Which do we care about more; our pockets or our safety?" etc
That someone also needs to ask for evidence from the pro crowd of where fixed speed cameras have been proven to reduce deaths and also asking why so many Co councils around the country are happy to leave roads in their charge in the state that many of them are in, whilst spending the money elsewhere...

mike65

May I suggest the OP posts over on Commuting/Transport board as there are one or two regulars who may be be up for this! Esp if they can work in road signage problems!

Mike.

D_murph

i dont know why theyre even bothering to debate this issue on air anyway TBH.

the nanny state has decided that this is "for our own good" :rolleyes: and its going to happen anyway so its pointless discussing it because it will change nothing IMO.

its just another sneaky tactic to gain revenue under the guise of safety and im sure there will be plenty brainwashed members of the population that will actually believe that this will make a difference in reality.

the rest of us that can think for ourselves know better than to fall for that old excuse :rolleyes:

keefg

D_murph wrote: »

its just another sneaky tactic to gain revenue under the guise of safety

Maybe someone should go on and suggest that the government hand over all the cash raised from speed cameras to various charities to prove to us that is isn't just a money making scam to boost the corrupt TD's, and private camera firms bank accounts.

Or perhaps a different punishment for speeding altogether. Maybe instead of a 80 euro fine (or whatever it will be) for your first offence you get a one week driving ban, second offence could be a one month driving ban and third offence could be a 12 month ban. If you are caught driving during these ban periods then you get hit with a hefty fine.

If I got caught once and was forced to rely on public transport for a week, that would make me reconsider my driving behaviour in a much more effective way than "them" dipping into my wallet - that would just p1ss me off.

I would have no objection to speed cameras if "they" could convince me it isn't, as D_murph says, just another sneaky tactic / stealth tax to relieve us of our hard earned cash.

Niall1234

By far the most obvious point would be to get rid of fines completely and just have penalty points for speeding offenses.

This would make perfect sence, but of course, the government won't do this as they want to make money.

javaboy

keefg wrote: »

Maybe someone should go on and suggest that the government hand over all the cash raised from speed cameras to various charities to prove to us that is isn't just a money making scam to boost the corrupt TD's, and private camera firms bank accounts.

Or perhaps a different punishment for speeding altogether. Maybe instead of a 80 euro fine (or whatever it will be) for your first offence you get a one week driving ban, second offence could be a one month driving ban and third offence could be a 12 month ban. If you are caught driving during these ban periods then you get hit with a hefty fine.

If I got caught once and was forced to rely on public transport for a week, that would make me reconsider my driving behaviour in a much more effective way than "them" dipping into my wallet - that would just p1ss me off.

I would have no objection to speed cameras if "they" could convince me it isn't, as D_murph says, just another sneaky tactic / stealth tax to relieve us of our hard earned cash.

I like the sound of the one week ban and increasing bans for further offences. Unfortunately most people would probably not respect it unless it was very heavily policed. Now if they could impound your car for the period of the ban, it might be enough of an inconvenience?

eringobragh

javaboy wrote: »

I like the sound of the one week ban and increasing bans for further offences. Unfortunately most people would probably not respect it unless it was very heavily policed. Now if they could impound your car for the period of the ban, it might be enough of an inconvenience?

Do you reckon that's feasible here, because I certainly don't , maybe if they actually trained gardai properly instead of a 10week course on the pronounciation of the word "ve-hicle" :rolleyes:...... Just look at the "great job" they did policing 1st and 3rd provisionals since the announcement that they'd be enforcing the law, seems to be same as before.... Beggars Belief :mad: ,The UK police are light years ahead of them

javaboy

eringobragh wrote: »

Do you reckon that's feasible here, because I certainly don't , maybe if they actually trained gardai properly instead of a 10week course on the pronounciation of the word "ve-hicle" :rolleyes:...... Just look at the "great job" they did policing 1st and 3rd provisionals since the announcement that they'd be enforcing the law, seems to be same as before.... Beggars Belief :mad: ,The UK police are light years ahead of them

Eh as I said no... unless ve-hicles are impounded.

In fairness to the Gardai over the learner drivers fiasco, they were put in an impossible position by inept politicians. First Dempsey said the rules will be enforced, then he relented a little and said there would be a softly softly approach. No Gardai spokesperson can ever say in public that they are not going to enforce a particular law. It was very unfair to put them in this position. I believe the Gardai are (unofficially of course ) taking the common sense position of waiting until people who had already bought a car or come to rely on one have had the chance to take and pass the test before really enforcing this. On the other hand, after June when the law begins to affect 2nd prov holders maybe nothing will change. Who knows in this country!


Anyway back on topic. Whoever goes forward for this, make sure you do your research and are well prepared. I'm in favour of speed cameras myself as long as they're part of a balanced diet of overall policing ... but I think the anti-speed camera people are awfully underrepresented in the media. I'm looking forward to Monday night's Q&A but I'm afraid it will descend into hysterical repetitive chanting of the speed kills mantra rather than being a sensible debate on the issue.

I.S.T.

esel wrote: »

OP: why are you looking for a patsy?

I'd do it myself but I'm not in the country on Monday. They asked me if I could get someone to talk about the issue instead as they want to hear the views why some motorists are against speed cameras. The person won't be representing irishspeedtraps, they will just talking from their own point of view as a motorist.

I don't think it will be a massacre as some posters are suggesting. I have been on morning ireland twice and they were fine. By the way, have a look at safespeed.org.uk, there is some excellent research there as to why speed cameras don't work. Just go on the show and throw all those stats at them and you'll be fine!

Steve

javaboy wrote: »

I'm looking forward to Monday night's Q&A but I'm afraid it will descend into hysterical repetitive chanting of the speed kills mantra rather than being a sensible debate on the issue.

Totally agree with you. Lets live in hope that they allow some intelligent questions to be posed.

If anyone does go, here's what to say:

"So minister, you believe that these cameras will actually work and stop speeding - I presume this is the reason you are introducing them"

"Of course, yes"

"then tell me minister, why are you projecting a €70m revenue from the cameras if nobody will be speeding?"

[Minister does goldfish impression]

QED

D_murph

stevec wrote: »

Totally agree with you. Lets live in hope that they allow some intelligent questions to be posed.

If anyone does go, here's what to say:

"So minister, you believe that these cameras will actually work and stop speeding - I presume this is the reason you are introducing them"

"Of course, yes"

"then tell me minister, why are you projecting a €70m revenue from the cameras if nobody will be speeding?"

that would be class. argument over in 30 seconds flat

true too if you think about it. if it brings in the money it proves its not working.

oh well as long as it keeps bringing in the money i suppose :rolleyes:

I.S.T.

kbannon wrote: »

Is there any idea as to who may be on the panel and what other groups have been 'planted' in the audience.
To be honest and given the aformentioned campaign by RTE at reducing road deaths, I reckon it will be a massacre on whoever does this!

I am not too sure, somebody from Government, someone from Fine Gael. I will find out tomorrow or Monday

Niall1234 wrote: »

11 deaths in the last 72 hours. A complete statistical quirk at the worst time ever.

The pro Speed Camera guys will have a field day. Statistics will be bent far past breaking point monday night.

As kbannon says, massacre could be a good word. Senisible logic will fly out the window and there is no doubt we will have the parent of a crash victim telling us a sob story on air.

boomboombazza wrote: »

as much as i love driving fast you cant argue againt speed cameras. this debate will be a masacre.


i can see it now

'so 11 people killed in last 72 hours and you dont think speed deterrents are a good idea?'

aahhh....ammmm....errrrr:o but but but....

The question which should be asked is what has been the success rate of the current fixed cameras in terms of reducing accident? What were the accident rates in the 10 years leading up to camera installation and what is the accident rate at the location since the camera has been installed. As far as I know there has been no research done on this. It seems a bit crazy to extend the speed camera scheme nationwide without evidence that the existing cameras have improved accident rates at the locations they were installed.

According to safespeed.org.uk the speed cameras have actually made the roads more dangerous. Before they were installed the UK had a accident rate that was falling steadly each year. Since the cameras were installed the accident rate has levelled off (http://www.safespeed.org.uk/againstcameras.html). They attribute this to the Government relying too much on cameras doing the work of police. The police patrols, which catch people doing much more dangerous things than exceeding the speed limit by 10kmh, have been reduced drmatically. As a result a load of dangerous drivers who may have been caught by the police are still on the roads and causing accidents.

The people who run this site have really done their research.

keefg wrote: »

Maybe someone should go on and suggest that the government hand over all the cash raised from speed cameras to various charities to prove to us that is isn't just a money making scam to boost the corrupt TD's, and private camera firms bank accounts.

Or perhaps a different punishment for speeding altogether. Maybe instead of a 80 euro fine (or whatever it will be) for your first offence you get a one week driving ban, second offence could be a one month driving ban and third offence could be a 12 month ban. If you are caught driving during these ban periods then you get hit with a hefty fine.

If I got caught once and was forced to rely on public transport for a week, that would make me reconsider my driving behaviour in a much more effective way than "them" dipping into my wallet - that would just p1ss me off.

I would have no objection to speed cameras if "they" could convince me it isn't, as D_murph says, just another sneaky tactic / stealth tax to relieve us of our hard earned cash.

Niall1234 wrote: »

By far the most obvious point would be to get rid of fines completely and just have penalty points for speeding offenses.

This would make perfect sence, but of course, the government won't do this as they want to make money.

They are excellent points. The majority of people who get caught speeding are more worried about the points than the fine. So if the Government are serious that this is not about revenue generation then get rid of the fine altogether. And for the people who say that the system will run at a loss, what about all the lives that will be (supposedly be) saved, the reduction in medical costs, emergency service costs, etc etc?

I.S.T.

mike65 wrote: »

May I suggest the OP posts over on Commuting/Transport board as there are one or two regulars who may be be up for this! Esp if they can work in road signage problems!

Mike.

Good idea :-) Done

E92

The UK are actually planning to get rid of some of their speed cameras apparently.

I agree with the others about the pro speed camera argument having a field day on Monday night on Q&A.

Sometimes when tradgedies happen common sense goes out the window I'm afraid.

JHMEG

E92 wrote: »

The UK are actually planning to get rid of some of their speed cameras apparently.

Last summer I drove 900 miles across the UK, roughly from Holyhead to Dover, more than 800 miles of which was motorway, and didn't see a single speed camera.

I find it funny that the Brits are always complaining about speed cameras, but as far as I can see they only have them where the roads are dangerous. There doesn't seem to be any turkey shoots (like the camera opposite the Spa Hotel on the N4).

Bit like I find it funny how they complain about having a crap train service. If their's is crap, what's ours?

D_murph

E92 wrote: »

Sometimes when tradgedies happen common sense goes out the window I'm afraid.

its true unfortunately. theres never a good time for things like this to happen but this was particularly badly timed in relation to the speed camera debate IMO.

i mean no disrespect to those involved either and my condolences to their families.

Steve

I dont mean any disrespect to the recently bereaved families.

Does anyone actually know the details of these incidents, the only one I heard about was the guys going the wrong way on a dual carriageway.

Reason I'm asking: it speed cameras had been in place, would they have prevented any of these deaths?

Niall1234

stevec wrote: »

I dont mean any disrespect to the recently bereaved families.

Does anyone actually know the details of these incidents, the only one I heard about was the guys going the wrong way on a dual carriageway.

Reason I'm asking: it speed cameras had been in place, would they have prevented any of these deaths?

Accident in Castletownbere seems to have happened when a car was being pulled out of mud by another car. Again, not to do with speeding.

D_murph

stevec wrote: »

I dont mean any disrespect to the recently bereaved families.

Does anyone actually know the details of these incidents, the only one I heard about was the guys going the wrong way on a dual carriageway.

Reason I'm asking: it speed cameras had been in place, would they have prevented any of these deaths?

well it does bring around a good point actually.

if a guard saw them he might have been able to stop them in time but a speed camera will remove the need for having one there.

that and if they were even speeding in the first place, the picture would arrive in the post in a few weeks time :rolleyes:

what good will that do?

Steve

D_murph wrote: »

that and if they were even speeding in the first place, the picture would arrive in the post in a few weeks time :rolleyes:

Maybe it would offer some consolation to the greiving family.