flashing your lights

Turner

Nuttzyy wrote: »

What a sad bastard of a guard, pity they're not so quick to catch joyriders and the like.

Are they not??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfotQEnQRLw

And of course there are way too many garda cars chasing these two stolen cars!! maybe some of these gardai should be out doing speed checks :rolleyes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqrOW3D8TTo

NBar

blastman wrote: »

Y'see, straightaway the bit after the text in bold tells me that you just another blanket anti-speed ranting troll talking through an orifice not normally reserved for that function, with nothing useful to bring to this discussion. But then I would know this because you have previous form, too. I'd stick to the Daily Mail forums if I was you.

(This a public service post and the end of my response to you, since I know you're only trolling for an argument.)

Yup I should have listened to others about this site it's so PC don't say anything in case we get sued but voice your opinon and get shot for it. Sorry but not stuck in an Office and don't read the Daily Mail, when you become an expert on speed and road safety come back and give us all a talk on it, so go climb back up in your tree and scratch your nuts

Steve

Chief--- wrote: »

And of course there are way too many garda cars chasing these two stolen cars!! maybe some of these gardai should be out doing speed checks :rolleyes:

holy jeebus - 21 cars chasing him.

What did he do? no tax?:D

_feedback_

NBar wrote: »

when you become an expert on speed and road safety come back and give us all a talk on it, so go climb back up in your tree and scratch your nuts

Even if you do end up getting banned for saying that... It was funny

Turner

elviscostello wrote: »

Even if you do end up getting banned for saying that... It was funny

I presume he meant hazel nuts

bazzachazza

When are people going to get it into there thick skulls "LAWS ARE LAWS" just because this law is not based on someone killing someone or selling drugs etc etc doesn't mean you get discretion to break it if you want or don't like it.

As others have said what if you found out after the fact that the person you flashed had in fact got a body in the boot or just raped someone or robbed some old dear and because you flashed them they were able to get away. That is the reason the law is there.

If that car had no tax or insurance turned around and later it rear ended you and you found out that them not having insurance left you up **** creek without a paddle how would you feel then.

I hope you don't get done for this as you seem not to have know about the law at the time. But think on if you do it again what reaction your flashing might have.

astraboy

bazzachazza wrote: »

When are people going to get it into there thick skulls "LAWS ARE LAWS" just because this law is not based on someone killing someone or selling drugs etc etc doesn't mean you get discretion to break it if you want or don't like it.

As others have said what if you found out after the fact that the person you flashed had in fact got a body in the boot or just raped someone or robbed some old dear and because you flashed them they were able to get away. That is the reason the law is there.

If that car had no tax or insurance turned around and later it rear ended you and you found out that them not having insurance left you up **** creek without a paddle how would you feel then.

I hope you don't get done for this as you seem not to have know about the law at the time. But think on if you do it again what reaction your flashing might have.

"WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!:rolleyes:"

We are talking about warning people about sneaky, revenue grabbing speed traps with Sweet **** all to do with road safety. The guard behind the bush on a straight stretch of road on a clear day, pulling those 8kph over the speed limit is the giveaway for that one.

Proper checkpoints, I don't think anyone here has an issue with. Taking uninsured drivers or those with "bodies in the boot"(a regular occourance apparently according to this thread.:rolleyes:) off the road is a good thing.

I agree laws are laws, it just so happens most of many speedlimits are stupid (too low or too high)and it makes a mockery of road safety having johnny law out policing stupidly low limits in such a manner.(que the high horse bandits telling me I have no right to decide if the speed limit is stupid or not, as those in the council office are so much wiser then me:rolleyes::D)

bazzachazza

"Good example is the N4 between Kilcock and Enfield. They also lowered the limit as soon as the (tolled) bypass was opened"

That section used to be 50mph before it was 80kph and has been like that since pre 1997 when i started using it. The only section between Kilcock and Enfield that has been reduced since the motorway was opened is the last klick from the last Yellow sign to the roundabout before Enfield.

I agree it should be 100kph but till the morons in Navan decide otherwise we are stuck with 80kph.

Wife told me the other night of a merc that drove down that road at 75 then continued at 75 through Enfield (go figure).

The one that gets me is the people that overtake you on it doing 100kph then get on the motorway and continue to do 100kph.

C_Breeze

Nuttzyy wrote: »

What a sad bastard of a guard, pity they're not so quick to catch joyriders and the like. Pity we cant charge the guards for obstruction of justice regarding their lack of catching real criminals.
Just say you were warning the other motorist of a dog you saw straggling about the road.

Too true, sometimes i just boil up inside at these type of situations.

If he was to tell me to expect a summons for in i'd make it worth while and tell him what i really thought

astraboy

@Chief, posting a random youtube of the cops trying to catch joyriders proves nothing. I could post a vid of a cop scratching his arse, would that prove another point? There are countless cars being taken each night in all the major cities in Ireland, and most of the time the cops just have no interest. When they do catch the scum, they get a slap on the wrist, though thats an issue with the judges and not the guards(and I'm sure a cop seeing a week of work catching a scumbag wasted by him getting his 15th slap on the wrist does little for the guards motivation either).

Having a cop on the side of the road giving out points for FLASHING someone is another pointless waste of resources and proves such speed checks have little to do with road safety. That guard would be better off actually chasing some real law breakers instead of catching a guy flashing his lights not hurting or causing harm to anyone(and being a half decent human being IMO by preventing people being caught in a stupid fish in a barrel speed check)

Steve

bazzachazza wrote: »

"Good example is the N4 between Kilcock and Enfield. They also lowered the limit as soon as the (tolled) bypass was opened"

That section used to be 50mph before it was 80kph and has been like that since pre 1997 when i started using it. The only section between Kilcock and Enfield that has been reduced since the motorway was opened is the last klick from the last Yellow sign to the roundabout before Enfield.

Eh, no - it was national speed limit in old money - 60mph. After a crash, the whole stretch was designated 'no overtaking' and the limit reduced to 50mph - rightly so as the traffic was more than the road could handle safely. Since they opened the bypass, there is comparitavely no traffic on the road and it's 100 times safer - yet the no overtaking and low limit are still there.

This road is not the only example, there are plenty, perhaps I picked an inappropriate one.

As to your other comment, I doubt an F1 car could maintain 75mph through the town without crashing into a roundabout or 2.:D

bazzachazza wrote: »

The one that gets me is the people that overtake you on it doing 100kph then get on the motorway and continue to do 100kph.

I call them 'my speed muppets' they drive at the same speed (normally 80kph) regardless of the speed limit - in towns, n-roads or motorways.
At least on the motorway you can overtake and wave bye bye.

congo_90

simply point out you were trying to engage your windscreen washer. but, you were driving the wifeys car earlier which the stalks are opposite and you accidentally flashed your lights instead of washing the windscreen

michelleans

astraboy wrote: »

@Chief, posting a random youtube of the cops trying to catch joyriders proves nothing. I could post a vid of a cop scratching his arse, would that prove another point?

I didn't know that flashing lights for this reason is an offense. I enjoy a good flashing if need be

blastman

elviscostello wrote: »

Even if you do end up getting banned for saying that... It was funny

In a semi-literate way, it almost was..

prod_igy

stevec wrote: »

Good example is the N4 between Kilcock and Enfield. They also lowered the limit as soon as the (tolled) bypass was opened.

God ye, there are plenty of straight stretches on that road between enfield and kilcock and most of them are contiuos white line. I was on the mullingar bus a few weeks back and coming onto the straight stretch at the bog road junction heading west we were stuck behind a slow driver, with about 3 cars between the bus and him/her. Well after about half a second of waiting for one the cars to start overtaking the bus put the boot down and passed all four cars! Some of those bus drivers are crazy, im surprised i havent been in a crash yet on them!

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

[QUOTE=astraboy;55803143
Having a cop on the side of the road giving out points for FLASHING someone is another pointless waste of resources and proves such speed checks have little to do with road safety. That guard would be better off actually chasing some real law breakers...[/QUOTE]
The Garda might catch more law breakers if you didn't flash the offenders to warn them that they are about to get caught! As for the assertion that speed checks have little to do with road safety - I fail to see your point. If in carrying out a speed check a Garda comes across another offence then of course he should act on it. The person flashing on-coming traffic to warn of a Garda check is the one showing little concern for road safety or the law.

Fey!

Welcome to yet another Boards rant about "why don't they go and catch REAL criminals".

The Garda TRAFFIC Corps (the clue is in the name) is there to police our roads, dealing with speeders, drink drivers, tax dodgers, and general idiots.

It is their job to uphold the laws of the land, as dictated by various duly elected governments and local authorities.

So, if you don't think that a speed limit is appropriate for a section of road, write to the appropriate engineer in your local county council. If you think that the Gardai have caught you speeding one time too many, then write to your local politician (threathening them with losing your vote, your familys votes, your friends votes, and your dogs vote, which they never got in the first place because a) yourself and a few others in that group didn't bother their backsides voting and b) the politician in question was the wrong party/gender/race/etc for any of the rest to vote for him/her).

Bitching on an internet forum will resolve NOTHING.

For those of you who will then claim that they've already followed my above advice and nothing has been done, then reproduce a copy of your letter here along with the name and address of the person you sent it to and a copy of their response.

For those who like to cross the white lines; whilst you may feel that in places they are unnecessary, they do sometimes stop you overtaking at junctions, and hitting the oncoming cars coming through those blasted hidden dips.

And for those who wish to be our moral gaurdians, "let he without sin cast the first stone" (about all of the religious learning I can remember); while you may never have gone through an amber light, gone 1kph over the limit, or flashed in a no flash zone, chances are that somewhere along the line you've done something you shouldn't have and been too embarrassed to admit it, and are now making up for it by becoming a fire and brimstone evangelist.

astraboy

David Old-fashioned Golfer wrote: »

The Garda might catch more law breakers if you didn't flash the offenders to warn them that they are about to get caught! As for the assertion that speed checks have little to do with road safety - I fail to see your point. If in carrying out a speed check a Garda comes across another offence then of course he should act on it. The person flashing on-coming traffic to warn of a Garda check is the one showing little concern for road safety or the law.

Standing behind a bush on a straight stretch or road shooting fish in a barrel with a rocket propelled gernade launcer is the best way to implement road safety?! My arse. I have no issue with proper checkpoints or even the odd proper speed check on a dangerous stretch of road(not that I've ever seen any, they are all on nice safe roads). Until then, I'll ruin the Gov's cashpoints as often as I can.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

astraboy wrote: »

Standing behind a bush on a straight stretch or road shooting fish in a barrel with a rocket propelled gernade launcer is the best way to implement road safety?! My arse. I have no issue with proper checkpoints or even the odd proper speed check on a dangerous stretch of road(not that I've ever seen any, they are all on nice safe roads). Until then, I'll ruin the Gov's cashpoints as often as I can.

ZZZZZZZzzzzzzz! Yawn. Here we go again with the "cashpoint" nonsense. The thread was about breaching the law by flashing oncoming traffic to warn of a speed check, or any other Garda activity. No mention was made of the condition of the road, the speed limit in place, etc. You do not have (and shouldn't have) a say in what is a "proper" speed check or not just accept that as it stands the law is the law. If you aren't happy with it take action and lobby Council Repos, Engineers, Politicians - but please stop the pointless bitching about it on a mssageboard.

Turner

I know two gards who started doing speed checks outside a school in their district at around 9am every morning because cars and trucks were flying past the school.

Their superintendent got a letter off one of the mothers saying she couldnt believe they were trying to generate revenue off mothers dropping kids to school:eek::eek::eek:

No matter where gardai do checks some gob****e will always say they should be doing them somewhere else.

astraboy

David Old-fashioned Golfer wrote: »

ZZZZZZZzzzzzzz! Yawn. Here we go again with the "cashpoint" nonsense. The thread was about breaching the law by flashing oncoming traffic to warn of a speed check, or any other Garda activity. No mention was made of the condition of the road, the speed limit in place, etc. You do not have (and shouldn't have) a say in what is a "proper" speed check or not just accept that as it stands the law is the law. If you aren't happy with it take action and lobby Council Repos, Engineers, Politicians - but please stop the pointless bitching about it on a mssageboard.

I am taking action, by preventing other motorists being caught by stupidly placed speed checks. If the speed check is on a genuinely dangerous road, or clearly appropiate(ie outside a school) then I won't flash my lights. But strange as it seems, I have never seen such speed checks, they are all on nice straight, evenly surfaced and clear roads with a limit too low for the conditions. Weird that.:rolleyes: Anyway, contacting the local politicos would be doubtful to yield results, when was the last time a politican argued to have a speed limit raised?!

Most of the roads I travel on are classed as national secondary roads and as such cannot have their limits raised beyond 100kph, even if its a dual carriage way or safe straight stretch.

javaboy

astraboy wrote: »

Anyway, contacting the local politicos would be doubtful to yield results, when was the last time a politican argued to have a speed limit raised?!

If their constituents aren't bothered enough to contact them, why would a politician waste their time on it?

woop

this isnt worth talking about, a gaurd will never bring this to court his mates would laugh at him! as would the judge

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

astraboy wrote: »

I am taking action, by preventing other motorists being caught by stupidly placed speed checks. QUOTE]
You are not taking any action to correct what you see as a flaw in our traffic laws; you are just helping people flaunt the law. Anyway rabbiting on here about it achieves nothing!

cpoh1

David Old-fashioned Golfer wrote: »

You are not taking any action to correct what you see as a flaw in our traffic laws; you are just helping people flaunt the law. Anyway rabbiting on here about it achieves nothing!

Sraneem ask yourself this, is the aim of speed cameras to reduce peoples speed in a dangerous area or to generate revenue and create favourable statistics for the government to throw about next time someone looses their life on our roads?

Personally i will always flash an oncoming car after passing a speed check, after all id much prefer that person to slow down and drive safely than speed through an area and get a fine for it. Its all about safety.

Now what I want is fixed speed cameras with notification that a camera is in that area like in the uk. People will slow down which is what its all about at the end of the day.

ambro25

After a long weekend in the UK, to the risk of repeating myself again, the ideal solution, which involves no Gards, no checkpoints, no flashing of lights, no nothing to debate ad nauseam, and garantees everyone at the limit and safely tucked one behind the other is... speed averaging cameras.

corcaigh07

dead right there ambro. god, there is some awful goody-two-shoes on this. i fully agree with astraboy, i have never seen a speed check in an area that genuinely needed it.

and to that person who said what gave you the impression you could overtake on a straight line? are you that fecking native? i overtaken on perfectly safe straight lined roads(usually a long straight, straight line completely unnecessary)

It also goes the other way, ive seen broken lines around bends with absolutely no visability of whats around the bend. it would take a lunatic to overtake on these, guaranteed Head-on crash if there was an oncoming car coming.

Esel

corcaigh07 wrote: »

and to that person who said what gave you the impression you could overtake on a straight line? are you that fecking native? i overtaken on perfectly safe straight lined roads(usually a long straight, straight line completely unnecessary)

It may be a 'long straight, straight line', but there was probably a junction with a minor road to your right. Ninety nine percent of the time, the continuous line is there for a very good reason. It's not the driver's business to guess the other one per cent.

Steve

esel wrote: »

It may be a 'long straight, straight line', but there was probably a junction with a minor road to your right. Ninety nine percent of the time, the continuous line is there for a very good reason. It's not the driver's business to guess the other one per cent.

In a perfect world, you're correct. Unfortunately on Irish roads you have to second guess every road sign you see because of the ineptitude of the sign placers.

If what you said was true then it would be perfectly OK to overtake on a blind bend just because some muppet in the council put a dashed line there.

The other side of this is you get a fine / points if you decide to use the same level of judgement to overtake when all is perfectly safe apart from the legally binding painted line that you cross.

bazzachazza

Fey! wrote: »

Welcome to yet another Boards rant about "why don't they go and catch REAL criminals".

The Garda TRAFFIC Corps (the clue is in the name) is there to police our roads, dealing with speeders, drink drivers, tax dodgers, and general idiots.

It is their job to uphold the laws of the land, as dictated by various duly elected governments and local authorities.

So, if you don't think that a speed limit is appropriate for a section of road, write to the appropriate engineer in your local county council. If you think that the Gardai have caught you speeding one time too many, then write to your local politician (threathening them with losing your vote, your familys votes, your friends votes, and your dogs vote, which they never got in the first place because a) yourself and a few others in that group didn't bother their backsides voting and b) the politician in question was the wrong party/gender/race/etc for any of the rest to vote for him/her).

Bitching on an internet forum will resolve NOTHING.

For those of you who will then claim that they've already followed my above advice and nothing has been done, then reproduce a copy of your letter here along with the name and address of the person you sent it to and a copy of their response.

For those who like to cross the white lines; whilst you may feel that in places they are unnecessary, they do sometimes stop you overtaking at junctions, and hitting the oncoming cars coming through those blasted hidden dips.

And for those who wish to be our moral gaurdians, "let he without sin cast the first stone" (about all of the religious learning I can remember); while you may never have gone through an amber light, gone 1kph over the limit, or flashed in a no flash zone, chances are that somewhere along the line you've done something you shouldn't have and been too embarrassed to admit it, and are now making up for it by becoming a fire and brimstone evangelist.

Well said. Couldn't have put it better myself.

Cionád

ambro25 wrote: »

After a long weekend in the UK, to the risk of repeating myself again, the ideal solution, which involves no Gards, no checkpoints, no flashing of lights, no nothing to debate ad nauseam, and garantees everyone at the limit and safely tucked one behind the other is... speed averaging cameras.

As I've said before this would not work in practice for a couple of reasons:
a) Country roads usually have limits of 80km/h or 100km/h, however many of these roads you would never get anywhere near this speed as your average, even if you were a joyrider!!

b) Same goes for National Primary roads where the limit is generally 100km/h, you'll sooner or later pass through a town, get stuck behind a dawdler/ tractor etc

The only place where this would 'work', would be in the same places where they shoot people in barrels now; on motorways & dual-carriageways. So I'd be against them for this reason alone (i only ever really exceed the limit (slightly) on motorways anyway!)

I'm all for speed traps outside schools, in housing estates & through villages/towns, But on straight stretches on the new N3 or M4 it's rediculous.

corcaigh07

thank you stevec, couldnt put that one better myself, 100% faith in the road marks, no thank you, id prefer to use my 1%! im not going to stop overtaking on straight lines i know are safe. on a strange road, ill think twice, ill wonder "why is there a straight line here" and be a lot more cautious. theres several ones i know of near bantry. i wont be overtaking on some broken lines in west cork either on esel's advice!

odd thing happened lately,the speed limit of the secondary road from Kealkill to Cork has increased from 80km/h to 100km/h. there are some sections that 100 is nice but a lot of it isnt deserving of 100. its a fairly bendy road in places and only a looper would travel at 100 the whole way.

why cant the RSA put more effort into their speed limits, the KM/h changeover was the perfect time to overhaul the speed limits for safer roads? now, there is much confusion about speed limits in areas near kealkill and bantry. why cant they put up slower limits for more testing sections of open road beats me? new 70km/h and 90km/h speed limits would come in handy too for certain situations.

Esel

corcaigh07 wrote: »

i wont be overtaking on some broken lines in west cork either on esel's advice!

Where did I advise this?

I don't think I ever mentioned broken lines, but I will now. A broken line does not mean 'it is safe to overtake', it means you can cross that line if it is safe to do so. Ever see the direct result of a head-on collision?

One of the problems on the roads is drivers who think they know it all. They usually know stuff-all about the laws of physics.

pow wow

If the person you flashed wasn't speeding then how is it obstruction of justice? No crime has been or was about to be committed (I know you wouldn't really be able to tell how fast they were going unless they were flooring it...but you know what I mean).

I understand why they stop people etc. etc. but the obstruction of justice accusation seems a bit inappropriate.

ambro25

Cionád wrote: »

As I've said before this would not work in practice for a couple of reasons:
a) Country roads usually have limits of 80km/h or 100km/h, however many of these roads you would never get anywhere near this speed as your average, even if you were a joyrider!!

Well, to use a well-coined adage of some long-time goody-two-shoes motoring Boardsies, 80 (or 100) is a limit, not a target. Moreover, I said it is a solution, not "the only solution for every single km of road".

Cionád wrote: »

b) Same goes for National Primary roads where the limit is generally 100km/h, you'll sooner or later pass through a town, get stuck behind a dawdler/ tractor etc

Which is why speed averaging, where it is used on (British) A-roads (and there are plenty of places, but particularly Lincolnshire), is only taken between towns, but does not include travelling within towns. As for being stuck tractors/dawdlers, so what? Overtake and be done. Do you understand how averaging works?

Cionád wrote: »

The only place where this would 'work', would be in the same places where they shoot people in barrels now; on motorways & dual-carriageways. So I'd be against them for this reason alone (i only ever really exceed the limit (slightly) on motorways anyway!)

One of the worst portions of A-roads in the UK for years was the Manchester to South Yorks road over the Pennines (via Tintwhistle), for road deaths per year. About 10 clicks of beautifully scenic and painfully slow-going national road with a fairly 'alpine' feel (A1-grade road surface and signage, but sharp bends and short straights alongside a mountain), followed by 20 clicks of "straight-as-an-I" nicely wide straights on A1-grade road surface. Needless to say, morons stuck behind an artic on the 10 kms section had a routine of catching up on their average speed by flooring it on the 20 km section. Cue much spectacular accidents per any given time period, with stats to match.

This section, which is neither a motorway nor a double-carriage lane (there are two short 2-lane sections on severe inclines, for overtaking struggling lorries/tractors - represents about 10% of the total distance) was put on speed averaging about 2 years ago, and I have never seen anyone speeding there since. In my book therefore, that works. Simple as.

Same goes for motorway - if the purpose of the exercise was to free up Gard manpower to do something more productive than speed limit enforcement, just put the M50, the Irish portion of the M1 and the "large" N roads (e.g. N11) on speed averaging and hey presto, no need for any manpower on these busiest sections ever = more Gards for backwater areas with more troublesome stats, but where permanent infrastructure (like Gatsos or speed averaging cameras) would not be economically feasible.

Doesn't take a f*cking Genius, now, does it? :rolleyes:

Cionád

ambro25 wrote: »

Which is why speed averaging, where it is used on (British) A-roads (and there are plenty of places, but particularly Lincolnshire), is only taken between towns, but does not include travelling within towns. As for being stuck tractors/dawdlers, so what? Overtake and be done. Do you understand how averaging works?

Doesn't take a f*cking Genius, now, does it? :rolleyes:

This is why I don't get involved with most of these petty debates, nothing gets solved/agreed upon, and someone usually has a go at someone for no reason.

The speed limits are limits, I know, but even people who use them as a target and break them are sooner or later going to have to corner, try doing a sharp corner at 100km/h.

I was merely pointing out my opinion on why it wouldn't work, nothing more. Many Primary roads in Ireland have long periods of white lines, junctions etc, it's not always so easy to overtake, especially if your car is not very powerful. British roads are generally far better than their Irish equivalents anyway.

I am well aware what averaging means, but back up you go to your condescending pedestal :rolleyes:

ambro25

Cionád wrote: »

This is why I don't get involved with most of these petty debates, nothing gets solved/agreed upon, and someone usually has a go at someone for no reason.

The speed limits are limits, I know, but even people who use them as a target and break them are sooner or later going to have to corner, try doing a sharp corner at 100km/h.

I was merely pointing out my opinion on why it wouldn't work, nothing more. Many Primary roads in Ireland have long periods of white lines, junctions etc, it's not always so easy to overtake, especially if your car is not very powerful. British roads are generally far better than their Irish equivalents anyway.

I am well aware what averaging means, but back up you go to your condescending pedestal :rolleyes:

I wasn't having a go at you and if you thought my post condescending, then I apologise. That said, as you understand speed averaging, then I still don't understand your own argument about "being stuck behind a tractor/dawdler".

If anything, this

Cionád wrote: »

Many Primary roads in Ireland have long periods of white lines, junctions etc, it's not always so easy to overtake, especially if your car is not very powerful. British roads are generally far better than their Irish equivalents anyway.

makes a stronger case for speed averaging
- better roads make for safer overtaking
- white lines are there for a reason on straights, usually because there's a T or + junction (and if you'd ever witnessed the mess an overtaking car at 100 k/h makes when broadsiding an OAP/biddy who doesn't check L/R before setting off, you'd be in full agreement)

(PS and FYI: the "It doesn't take a f*cking genius" comment was a throwaway remark directed at 'The Establishment' who decides what the Gards should be doing with their time/how law enforcement and road safety €s should be spent).

javaboy

ambro25 wrote: »

I wasn't having a go at you and if you thought my post condescending, then I apologise. That said, as you understand speed averaging, then I still don't understand your own argument about "being stuck behind a tractor/dawdler".

(PS and FYI: the "It doesn't take a f*cking genius" comment was a throwaway remark directed at 'The Establishment' who decides what the Gards should be doing with their time/how law enforcement and road safety €s should be spent).

He is making the point that you can travel 2km at 30km/h stuck behind a tractor and 1km at 120km/h after overtaking. The average speed over that 3km stretch would be 40km/h. In fact I'm sure there are eejits out there who would deliberately pass the first camera, park up for a few minutes and then put the foot to the floor for thrills.

Cionád

ambro25 wrote: »

I wasn't having a go at you and if you thought my post condescending, then I apologise. That said, as you understand speed averaging, then I still don't understand your own argument about "being stuck behind a tractor/dawdler".

Sorry if i missunderstood ,

What I mean is that I would be hard pressed to find a stretch of road where you could break the average speed limit in Ireland in my experience. For example if you were driving to Limerick from Dublin, I would say once the motorway ends at Portlaise, the chances of you maintaining an average speed at or above the average speed limit would be extremely slim between any town.
A lot of people drive slowly (maybe 20km/h below the limit), which you might overtake but you might also meet this dawdler after they have already built up a backlog of (any number of) cars. I would say not many people would risk taking them all in one, or if they took their time doing so they would still 'lose' a few km/h on average.

I suppose that maybe the odd Sunday morning at 4am you'd catch some folk breaking the average speed if there was no traffic.

ambro25

You're both contemplating an extreme example. I'm not disagreeing with it (it is of course logical), but I suggest that the extreme examples to which you refer would constitute an infinitesimal portion of drivers, compared to the vast majority on whom this measure would have an effect (oh yeah, and not to forget: speed averaging cams in the UK double up as Gastos).

Ask yourself this: would you do it (spend 2 kms at 30 kms then 1 km at 120) ? Or would you spend 2 kms at 30 kms then 1 km at 80 or 100 or whatever is the limit in place

javaboy

ambro25 wrote: »

You're both contemplating an extreme example. I'm not disagreeing with it (it is of course logical), but I suggest that the extreme examples to which you refer would constitute an infinitesimal portion of drivers, compared to the vast majority on whom this measure would have an effect (oh yeah, and not to forget: speed averaging cams in the UK double up as Gastos).

Ask yourself this: would you do it (spend 2 kms at 30 kms then 1 km at 120) ? Or would you spend 2 kms at 30 kms then 1 km at 80 or 100 or whatever is the limit in place

I would say it's not too rare or an extreme example for somebody to be stuck behind a slow moving vehicle for a long time and then when they finally get by, they go a little faster to make up for the time lost.

As to your question about me. No I wouldn't go 120 on the last kilometre but then I don't speed anyway so it's not relevant. I'm sure there are lots of people who would and the average speed cameras wouldn't catch them.

peasant

Is ebay having a sale on hair-splitters again?

javaboy

peasant wrote: »

Is ebay having a sale on hair-splitters again?

I dunno check this out: http://boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=346


Fair enough point taken. Ambro wasn't peddling averaging cameras as the one-size-fits-all solution in fairness. I'm going to withdraw from this debate because it's a sunny day outside.

Thrain

greatgoal wrote: »

surely by telling the other driver to slow down you were upholding the law?

I agree, you could have been warning him of a pedestrian walking on his side of the road, a slow moving vehicle, a crash, or nothing, maybe just telling him to slow down! Surely if a little double flash slows a driver down you are keeping the roads a little safer? Bent indeed good sir...

ART6

"What are you on about Guard? I thought the other guy was a mate of mine and I was just saying 'Hello' " Officious little Guard?

miju

You never know who your flashing on the other side of the road and they could be perfectly law abiding on the other hand you could be preventing the Garda from discovering things such as this , this or more recently this €27,000 worth of cocaine and ecstasy.

People should wise the **** up on these things. That one flash could of warned those dealers who could have avoided them and somewhere down the line (pardon the pun) someone ends up dead from overdosing on that coke.

astraboy

miju wrote: »

You never know who your flashing on the other side of the road and they could be perfectly law abiding on the other hand you could be preventing the Garda from discovering things such as this , this or more recently this €27,000 worth of cocaine and ecstasy.

People should wise the **** up on these things. That one flash could of warned those dealers who could have avoided them and somewhere down the line (pardon the pun) someone ends up dead from overdosing on that coke.

A very "Wont someone think of the children" approach. Anyway, if its a speed check the cops will only be interested in handing out tickets, they don't search the boot of every car they give a ticket to.

L1011

astraboy wrote: »

or even the odd proper speed check on a dangerous stretch of road(not that I've ever seen any, they are all on nice safe roads). Until then, I'll ruin the Gov's cashpoints as often as I can.

Slight problem there is the way the speed checks are done here - they can't do them on a dangerous road as they can't pull you over safely to show you the speed gun / get your licence details! And the Gatso Van doesn't fit in the bushes very well (really needs one of the 'GARDA ONLY' ramps like the newer motorways have, or a gate, or a hard shoulder, whatever). So they're left with nice, straight, generally safe stretches of road to get their quota on...

L1011

esel wrote: »

It may be a 'long straight, straight line', but there was probably a junction with a minor road to your right. Ninety nine percent of the time, the continuous line is there for a very good reason. It's not the driver's business to guess the other one per cent.

We could use the UK (or is just Northern Ireland - I've only ever done motorway driving in Britain) system of shorter breaks in the line for situations like this. Shows that you're *allowed* overtake but that there are still potential dangers. In NI is usually used near junctions, through junctions on duallers, and on very wide radius bends where down here we'd either use a solid/dashed combo or solid...

The shorter breaks also serve as a nice general warning that theres "problems ahead", although NIs far better road signage usually has you well warned in advance.