Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

lying b*****ds

Options
124

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,451 ✭✭✭CharlieCroker


    thats a good point. Also, the fact that its a late '90s transit. Prob going on 10 years old, IMO too old to be a Garda vehicle.


  • Registered Users Posts: 656 ✭✭✭chickenhawk


    TheNog wrote: »
    I have a question that has not being asked yet on this thread. How do we know this is a Gatso van?
    thats a good point. Also, the fact that its a late '90s transit. Prob going on 10 years old, IMO too old to be a Garda vehicle.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=56778699&postcount=34

    I think your fellow guards on that thread agree it's a gatso Nog.


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,812 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    TheNog wrote: »
    I have a question that has not being asked yet on this thread. How do we know this is a Gatso van? We cannot see the back window, not can we see the registration number and above all if you look at how close the van is parked to the bus shelter it creates a very small window of opportunity to detect a cars speed and take a picture. The speed gun normally used to register a cars speed can take over several meters distance of that car e.g. a car could travel anywhere from 20 meters to 100 meters before the speed is detected, depending of how far away the car is from the Garda operating the speed check. Also afaik a speed check can only be done on vehicles coming straight at the gatso to detect the true speed.

    For all we know this van belongs to someone who lives in one of the houses in the background

    Only an observation
    There is obviously enough room for the talivan to see onto the road so that it can catch vehicles over the speed limit.
    Given this then it should be possible for motorists to identify the van, a relatively easy enough task! It just means that they won't have that much time to adjust their speed when they first see it!


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    kbannon wrote: »
    There is obviously enough room for the talivan to see onto the road so that it can catch vehicles over the speed limit.
    Given this then it should be possible for motorists to identify the van, a relatively easy enough task! It just means that they won't have that much time to adjust their speed when they first see it!

    I think The Nog has a point though. It would also cast doubt on the accuracy of the reading if it was not relatively head on (recent thread about LTI 20-20 giving false readings if misused?)


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,812 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    The talivan doesn't really target cars head on. They take a pic at an approximate 30degree angle towards the road and have a range IIRC of about 50m (which allows them to see across the road if needs be). Thats all they therefore need to be able to see.
    If you were to see the camera peeping out the back window then you would see it in action


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    AFAIK they have a range of a lot greater than 50m - up to 1km?
    It takes 50m (depending on speed) to get a reading - is that what you mean?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,531 ✭✭✭Fyr.Fytr


    Thos pics are ancient, they did the rounds on a speed trap alert site donkeys ago, get with the times fella


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,812 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    My 50m figure was based on info from a garda. Apparently the technology is similar to that inside a fixed camera unit. Anyhow, as the camera is pointing at an angle towards the road it doesn't really matter what the range.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    astraboy wrote: »
    Just off the top of my head:
    Traffic volume,
    Road design(width, surface, number of corners and how steep they are etc)
    Weather conditions(perhaps variable limits with electronic signs, the limit raising on a clear day, decreasing on a foggy/wet day?)
    Location(through the middle of the country, a town)
    Number of enterances/exits to the road, and ajoing access roads
    Road designation and main usage
    That's quite a relevant list, electronic signs could be quite efficient on bigger roads. Weather-varied limits are used in countries such as France and Sweden. For some roads, (not motorways), we need also to take account of the effect of pollution , noise and road-crossing nuisance on those who live along the route.

    The big excuse in this thread is that people ignore speed limits because they disagree with them but that they would obey limits if they thought they were going to be caught.

    Maybe a certification scheme with some kind of 'seal of approval' would help people voluntarily comply? A 'constant visible police presence', as suggested by some, would mean that more taxes would have to be raised.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,034 ✭✭✭astraboy


    TheNog wrote: »
    BUt the difference is that we still a much higher volume of traffic on the roads than decades ago.
    The better design of roads are being put into the new roads being built so in reality the majority of roads we have now are of the same design we have had for the last 20-40 yrs.



    +1.

    The same sort of drivers who are not trained properly when learning how to drive.




    NCT, ABS, airbags etc were designed to increase safety at present speed limits, not so we can increase our speed. Remember all our safety measures are not infallible so i

    The majority of roads have been seriously upgraded in the last 20 years, so you are talking crap. Look at many of the national secondary routes, surfaces and the width of the roads has seriously improved over the last 10 years, not to mind 20 or 25!

    If there is heavy traffic on a road you won't really have the opportunity to come near the speed limit anyway, my argument surrounds when traffic is free flowing, allowing opportunity to proceed at a decent pace, in a decent car, on a decent road.
    TheNog wrote: »
    If you were to crash at say 160kph into a tree no amount of electronics is going to save you.

    I did'nt know they allowed trees in the middle of motorways these days:rolleyes:
    I never suggested allowing people to do 100mph unless it was on suitable roads.

    The fact remains we are constrained to travel legally at speeds often too slow for the road design, driver experience or the vehicle we own, at speed limits designed decades ago and now are out of date and need upgrading to modern standards.

    Constant police presence would not require more taxes, just better application of resources we already have, and don't use correctly. At the end of the day a speed camera is designed to raise revenue and is no substitute for an experienced cop patrolling the road.

    I forgot however, that speeders are the main enemy, actual dangerous drivers, lane hoggers, joyriders and people in stolen cars are not a worry.:rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,332 ✭✭✭311


    The more guards are on the road the better for safety , hiding in bushes encourages people to speed imho.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    astraboy wrote: »
    The fact remains we are constrained to travel legally at speeds often too slow for the road design, driver experience or the vehicle we own, at speed limits designed decades ago and now are out of date and need upgrading to modern standards.

    I for one would be loath to share a motorway with a 160km/h speed limit with people that were never, ever taught (not even in theory) how to drive properly on a motorway.

    The speed difference between "experienced driver" A doing 160km/h in the right hand lane and old biddie B pulling out to overtake a lorry doing 81 km/h is just too big ...a recipe for desaster if you ask me.

    Never mind the road design ...until the time comes where all irish drivers are "designed" to cope with a 160km/h limit(or bloody well stay on the left if they can't), 120 km/h will do just fine, thank you very much.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    kbannon wrote: »
    My 50m figure was based on info from a garda. Apparently the technology is similar to that inside a fixed camera unit. Anyhow, as the camera is pointing at an angle towards the road it doesn't really matter what the range.

    Fair enough but aren't fixed cameras still based on radar wheras the mobile cameras are laser? They are two very different technologies.
    peasant wrote: »
    The speed difference between "experienced driver" A doing 160km/h in the right hand lane and old biddie B pulling out to overtake a lorry doing 81 km/h is just too big ...a recipe for desaster if you ask me.

    I agree with what you are saying about training but surely equivalent biddies exist on the German autobahns and regularly survive the experience.:confused:


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    SteveC wrote: »
    I agree with what you are saying about training but surely equivalent biddies exist on the German autobahns and regularly survive the experience.:confused:

    No, they don't (not for long anyway)

    People learn very quickly not to pull out without having made absolutely sure that there is nothing wooshing up from behind.

    Nothing teaches that lesson like the sound of screeching tyres and a change of underwear.

    Very, very few people need to be taught that way though ...because they learn not to do it during the course of their driving lessons which have to include motorway driving.

    Here, it would be carnage.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,730 ✭✭✭Type 17


    The big excuse in this thread is that people ignore speed limits because they disagree with them but that they would obey limits if they thought they were going to be caught.

    People ignore limits that they disagree with, but they usually disagree with them because they are too low - most people would obey speed limits without having to think about it if those limits were set at a speed that most drivers subconsciously set for themselves anyway. The level of compliance would be higher with more sensibly-set limits.

    The 85th percentile rule comes from the fact that when you survey all speeds used by drivers on a given road, the lowest accident rate comes from drivers in the 85th percentile (driving faster than 85% of other users, but slower than 15% of them). This is the safest speed for that road and it is also the speed that most drivers set for themselves (the top of the bell-curve). People who drive at speeds furthest from the 85th percentile are most dangerous (too fast or too slow for the conditions).

    Setting the speed limits at the 85th percentile would mean that most drivers could drive at the fastest, most efficient, speed possible for the road and could concentrate on actually driving (because their own subconciously-set speed would be close to the set limit), rather than constantly having to watch their speed because the limit is lower than what feels natural for the conditions. The drivers who have poor driving skills (they perceive a higher speed to be appropriate, or just don't care) would be caught by enforcement.

    The reason that there is so much discontent about speed enforcement in Ireland is that, whereas speed limits should be set so that about 15% of drivers feel that they are too low (the poor driving skills group), in fact the speed limits on many Irish roads are set so low that the majority of drivers using them sub-consciously set their speed higher than the limit.

    The key problem is that too-low limits cause an increase in non-compliance and frustration, but they don't cause a corresponding increase in safety.


  • Registered Users Posts: 65,439 ✭✭✭✭unkel
    Chauffe, Marcel, chauffe!


    peasant wrote: »
    People learn very quickly not to pull out without having made absolutely sure that there is nothing wooshing up from behind.

    Indeed. People learn to estimate not just the distance the car is behind but also the speed it is doing

    The quicker the whole unbelievably stupid and dangerous learner driver system is binned and motorway driving is given the number 1 priority it deserves during driver education, the better


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    peasant wrote: »
    Nothing teaches that lesson like the sound of screeching tyres and a change of underwear.
    How does the law there see it though?
    Is it still the fault of the guy driving faster in the outside lane or is the biddie apportioned some blame?
    unkel wrote: »
    Indeed. People learn to estimate not just the distance the car is behind but also the speed it is doing

    I remember reading in an advanced driving book that a headlight flash from 500m away is more effective than a flash when you arrive behind them and have slowed down to their speed. The reason being, as you said, they become aware of the closing speed.


  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,812 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    SteveC wrote: »
    I remember reading in an advanced driving book that a headlight flash from 500m away is more effective than a flash when you arrive behind them and have slowed down to their speed. The reason being, as you said, they become aware of the closing speed.
    That would work in a country where the majority of drivers have a use for their mirrors! Unfortunately in Ireland...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,034 ✭✭✭astraboy


    unkel wrote: »
    Indeed. People learn to estimate not just the distance the car is behind but also the speed it is doing

    The quicker the whole unbelievably stupid and dangerous learner driver system is binned and motorway driving is given the number 1 priority it deserves during driver education, the better

    Well, and indeed, said!:) IMO driver education is the number 1 way to increase road safety, do you want a person saying "I'll drive at 100kph just cos its the speed limit" or, "I think I'd better slow down/maybe speed up a bit due to the current conditions"? Cops and warning signs and extensive rules only go so far, people need to be able to judge the road and other factors and know how to handle their car on siad roads. Through education we can ensure people are able to handle what they face out on the motorway or the backroads, and will be able to react accodingly. Treating people like silly little brainless lemmings(which is what patronisingly low speed limits do) only lulls them into a false sense of security, causing accidents. Driver training(and awareness on the motorways/roads, going back to Pheasants old biddies point) is the key to safer roads, not dracronian limits or excessive rules and to the letter enfrorcement(though they have their place)

    (sorry about the spelling, did this quickly!)


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    kbannon wrote: »
    That would work in a country where the majority of drivers have a use for their mirrors! Unfortunately in Ireland...
    True.

    /sighs.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,160 ✭✭✭TheNog


    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=56778699&postcount=34

    I think your fellow guards on that thread agree it's a gatso Nog.

    We believe it maybe a Gatso but no one can say for sure.
    kbannon wrote: »
    It just means that they won't have that much time to adjust their speed when they first see it!

    But if people did not speed then they would not have to adjust their speed.

    astraboy wrote: »
    The majority of roads have been seriously upgraded in the last 20 years, so you are talking crap. Look at many of the national secondary routes, surfaces and the width of the roads has seriously improved over the last 10 years, not to mind 20 or 25!

    I'd reckon that I am on this earth a few years longer than you so from my recollection the N3, N4, N6 and N7 were not upgraded for years as you have said. Ok understanding that there is now the M4 and the M7 but the old roads are pretty much the same for the last 20-25 yrs. The only upgrades I can think of were the removal of the accident black spots on these roads.
    These are the national routes. The secondary routes have not been upgraded at all.
    See I'm not talking crap.
    astraboy wrote: »
    If there is heavy traffic on a road you won't really have the opportunity to come near the speed limit anyway, my argument surrounds when traffic is free flowing, allowing opportunity to proceed at a decent pace, in a decent car, on a decent road.

    See I agree with you. I would like traffic to flow but it just cannot happen. We have 2 million cars on 90,000km of road in this country.

    astraboy wrote: »
    I did'nt know they allowed trees in the middle of motorways these days:rolleyes:
    I never suggested allowing people to do 100mph unless it was on suitable roads.

    Do you feel better after that smart little comment? Does it make you feel like a big fella?:)

    If you didn't guess it already the 100mph I had in my post was an example only. You know a what if? Shall I post in simplier English for you? Anyway moving on.

    astraboy wrote: »
    The fact remains we are constrained to travel legally at speeds often too slow for the road design, driver experience or the vehicle we own, at speed limits designed decades ago and now are out of date and need upgrading to modern standards.

    TO break it down:

    road design: I am not an expert in road design so I cannot comment. Are you an expert?
    driver experience: if the speed limit should be set by driver experience then what speed should StevieC drive at? Do you know if SteveC is a good driver, what about me? That's right, I cannot tell if you or SteveC are good drivers. I am a good driver but I bet if you asked who is a bad driver, no one will put up their hands.
    Vehicles: Can you honestly say that all vehicles on the road actually roadworthy? No you cannot and don;t even try going down the road with the NCT crap. The NCT is valid for two years but as far as I am concerned the disc only tells me the car was roadworthy when the disc was given to the owner and not a day more.
    astraboy wrote: »
    Constant police presence would not require more taxes, just better application of resources we already have, and don't use correctly. At the end of the day a speed camera is designed to raise revenue and is no substitute for an experienced cop patrolling the road.

    Constant police presence would not require more taxes?????? Are you for real.
    The Traffic Corp are increasing to 1200 from 800 fair enough but do you think the Gardai are going to be still recruiting 1200 new people annually with this recession. Keep in mind we have already seen a reduction in overtime and in Operation Anvil. We still have a radio system that is older than me and we have patrol cars with 1.4L engines!!!!!!!

    At this moment in time I am investigating three drugs files, two dangerous driving files, four public order incidents(one incident needs statements), a bomb scare, two assaults, two thefts, four burglaries, I also have six speeders, two for no tax and one person for speeding and not having L plates or a full licenced driver. The traffic ones mentioned are going to court so summons have to be served and I have to go to court to give evidence.

    When do I get the time to search out dangerous drivers? whenever I can and if I am nearby. Me thinks you think you have a good idea of what our job entails but you do not.

    astraboy wrote: »
    I forgot however, that speeders are the main enemy, actual dangerous drivers, lane hoggers, joyriders and people in stolen cars are not a worry.:rolleyes:

    Ah another piece of sarcasm that is misguided. You really have no idea. Instead of thinking up smarmy little comments to make why don;t you ask me some questions about my job and what I do when investigating a traffic accident to a dangerous driving incident. You might actually understand the level of work put into a prosecuting file.
    311 wrote: »
    The more guards are on the road the better for safety , hiding in bushes encourages people to speed imho.

    :confused::confused:
    Type 17 wrote: »
    People ignore limits that they disagree with, but they usually disagree with them because they are too low - most people would obey speed limits without having to think about it if those limits were set at a speed that most drivers subconsciously set for themselves anyway. The level of compliance would be higher with more sensibly-set limits.

    The 85th percentile rule comes from the fact that when you survey all speeds used by drivers on a given road, the lowest accident rate comes from drivers in the 85th percentile (driving faster than 85% of other users, but slower than 15% of them). This is the safest speed for that road and it is also the speed that most drivers set for themselves (the top of the bell-curve). People who drive at speeds furthest from the 85th percentile are most dangerous (too fast or too slow for the conditions).

    Setting the speed limits at the 85th percentile would mean that most drivers could drive at the fastest, most efficient, speed possible for the road and could concentrate on actually driving (because their own subconciously-set speed would be close to the set limit), rather than constantly having to watch their speed because the limit is lower than what feels natural for the conditions. The drivers who have poor driving skills (they perceive a higher speed to be appropriate, or just don't care) would be caught by enforcement.

    The reason that there is so much discontent about speed enforcement in Ireland is that, whereas speed limits should be set so that about 15% of drivers feel that they are too low (the poor driving skills group), in fact the speed limits on many Irish roads are set so low that the majority of drivers using them sub-consciously set their speed higher than the limit.

    The key problem is that too-low limits cause an increase in non-compliance and frustration, but they don't cause a corresponding increase in safety.

    Astraboy is that you??
    kbannon wrote: »
    That would work in a country where the majority of drivers have a use for their mirrors! Unfortunately in Ireland...

    mirrors are used to look at themselves, or the kids or there new hair style etc etc
    astraboy wrote: »
    Well, and indeed, said!:) IMO driver education is the number 1 way to increase road safety, do you want a person saying "I'll drive at 100kph just cos its the speed limit" or, "I think I'd better slow down/maybe speed up a bit due to the current conditions"? Cops and warning signs and extensive rules only go so far, people need to be able to judge the road and other factors and know how to handle their car on siad roads. Through education we can ensure people are able to handle what they face out on the motorway or the backroads, and will be able to react accodingly. Treating people like silly little brainless lemmings(which is what patronisingly low speed limits do) only lulls them into a false sense of security, causing accidents. Driver training(and awareness on the motorways/roads, going back to Pheasants old biddies point) is the key to safer roads, not dracronian limits or excessive rules and to the letter enfrorcement(though they have their place)

    Agreed driver education is the way forward but allowing people to set their own speed is just crazy. Who said this" We believe space is infinite but we do know human stupidity is infinite"? It is so true. Even I make mistakes and bad decisions and I am driving 15yrs averaging about 50,000 miles annually in my own car not including what I do in a patrol car. Personally I would like to see all full licenced drivers re-tested every 5 yrs. If they fail they lose their licence. Provisional/Learner Permit drivers should be taught basic skills off road before progressing onto a higher skill level (on road driving) and then do the test. Fail the test then no more driving until you can pass the test. Also L drivers should be limited to say 1L cars only or have some restriction on their speed.
    Any driver who is being investigated for dangerous driving or if they cause are serious collision, immediate suspension from driving until they are either cleared by a court or local Superintendent.
    Sounds severe I know but it is the only way I can see for people to be properly trained in driving.


    Apologise to all for the long post


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,160 ✭✭✭TheNog


    wow its about half a page. Is that a boards record?


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    TheNog wrote: »
    driver experience: if the speed limit should be set by driver experience then what speed should StevieC drive at? Do you know if SteveC is a good driver, what about me? That's right, I cannot tell if you or SteveC are good drivers. I am a good driver but I bet if you asked who is a bad driver, no one will put up their hands.

    I'll be the first to put my hand up and say I don't know everything there is to know about driving. What are you having a go at me for?:confused::confused:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,034 ✭✭✭astraboy


    TheNog wrote: »
    We believe it maybe a Gatso but no one can say for sure.



    But if people did not speed then they would not have to adjust their speed.




    I'd reckon that I am on this earth a few years longer than you so from my recollection the N3, N4, N6 and N7 were not upgraded for years as you have said. Ok understanding that there is now the M4 and the M7 but the old roads are pretty much the same for the last 20-25 yrs. The only upgrades I can think of were the removal of the accident black spots on these roads.
    These are the national routes. The secondary routes have not been upgraded at all.
    See I'm not talking crap.



    See I agree with you. I would like traffic to flow but it just cannot happen. We have 2 million cars on 90,000km of road in this country.




    Do you feel better after that smart little comment? Does it make you feel like a big fella?:)

    If you didn't guess it already the 100mph I had in my post was an example only. You know a what if? Shall I post in simplier English for you? Anyway moving on.




    TO break it down:

    road design: I am not an expert in road design so I cannot comment. Are you an expert?
    driver experience: if the speed limit should be set by driver experience then what speed should StevieC drive at? Do you know if SteveC is a good driver, what about me? That's right, I cannot tell if you or SteveC are good drivers. I am a good driver but I bet if you asked who is a bad driver, no one will put up their hands.
    Vehicles: Can you honestly say that all vehicles on the road actually roadworthy? No you cannot and don;t even try going down the road with the NCT crap. The NCT is valid for two years but as far as I am concerned the disc only tells me the car was roadworthy when the disc was given to the owner and not a day more.



    Constant police presence would not require more taxes?????? Are you for real.
    The Traffic Corp are increasing to 1200 from 800 fair enough but do you think the Gardai are going to be still recruiting 1200 new people annually with this recession. Keep in mind we have already seen a reduction in overtime and in Operation Anvil. We still have a radio system that is older than me and we have patrol cars with 1.4L engines!!!!!!!

    At this moment in time I am investigating three drugs files, two dangerous driving files, four public order incidents(one incident needs statements), a bomb scare, two assaults, two thefts, four burglaries, I also have six speeders, two for no tax and one person for speeding and not having L plates or a full licenced driver. The traffic ones mentioned are going to court so summons have to be served and I have to go to court to give evidence.

    When do I get the time to search out dangerous drivers? whenever I can and if I am nearby. Me thinks you think you have a good idea of what our job entails but you do not.




    Ah another piece of sarcasm that is misguided. You really have no idea. Instead of thinking up smarmy little comments to make why don;t you ask me some questions about my job and what I do when investigating a traffic accident to a dangerous driving incident. You might actually understand the level of work put into a prosecuting file.



    :confused::confused:



    Astraboy is that you??



    mirrors are used to look at themselves, or the kids or there new hair style etc etc



    Agreed driver education is the way forward but allowing people to set their own speed is just crazy. Who said this" We believe space is infinite but we do know human stupidity is infinite"? It is so true. Even I make mistakes and bad decisions and I am driving 15yrs averaging about 50,000 miles annually in my own car not including what I do in a patrol car. Personally I would like to see all full licenced drivers re-tested every 5 yrs. If they fail they lose their licence. Provisional/Learner Permit drivers should be taught basic skills off road before progressing onto a higher skill level (on road driving) and then do the test. Fail the test then no more driving until you can pass the test. Also L drivers should be limited to say 1L cars only or have some restriction on their speed.
    Any driver who is being investigated for dangerous driving or if they cause are serious collision, immediate suspension from driving until they are either cleared by a court or local Superintendent.
    Sounds severe I know but it is the only way I can see for people to be properly trained in driving.


    Apologise to all for the long post

    I've made my points so I'd only be repeating myself, but here are some additions from your comments:
    Clearly you have'nt travelled many secondary routes in the south of the country, Cork and kerry have had the upgrading(widening and better surfacing) of many many roads I travel, not to mention the ones I dont. Sticking to the few N roads you travel is a misguided judgement, and to say roads have not been upgraded in my lifetime(I'm 23) is a plain stupid statement. My dad works with the NRA and he's always telling me about ongoing upgrading projects. This also gives me a little info on road design, though I would claim to be nothing more then an educated amateur in that case.

    Look at road surfaces and width in th 80's compared to today on many roads, they HAVE indeed been worked on for the better.

    You seem to think I have some serious interest in your job, I don't frankly, but the cops hiding behind bushes COULD instead be out patrolling the roads catching drivers that actually cause accidents, not those 10kph over the limit which MAY not be dangerous(depending on the many constraints, cops can still use descretion right???) That is my main point. There are many guarda resources being misused, I'm sure you are more privy to this then me, but reallocation of resources could free them up for patrols. I agree that funding for proper equipment, digital radio setup, decent patrol cars and training facilities would be great for the guards.

    You say traffic "cannot flow", I'm sorry but have you ever even left Dublin?? Traffic flows a a decent pace down here in Cork, in fact once you leave the city there are many examples of fine roads with a decent flow of traffic for many hours of the day. You can in fact often safetly travel at, and maybe even exceed the speed limit!(WOW, SHOCK HOROR!) These same roads have limits far too low for reguar driving conditions, case in point the Balingcolligh bypass, which is of motorway standard yet with only a 100kph limit(with cop on bridge on a reguar basis too, shooting fish in a barrel)

    If we had a decent system of driver training we would not even have to discuss the many idiots on the roads, they would either be trained to drive properly or not have licenses. Look at(the ever repeated) example of Germany, where they manage to have similar accident rates on Autobans with speed limits as those without.

    And finally, yes I do enjoy a good scartisitc comment, but you bought it on yourself. Feel free to respond in kind, or the the comment properly rather then just brush it off.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,730 ✭✭✭Type 17


    TheNog wrote: »
    Astraboy is that you??

    No, it's me. Age 39, passed test in 1992, have driven all over Ireland for work, and have driven in UK, USA, France, Spain, Netherlands, Germany Austria & Italy for pleasure - it's not a pleasure driving in Ireland :rolleyes:

    Summary of the 3 E's of road safety in the Irish context:
    Better driver Education would lead to a raising of the overall driving standards in Ireland, leading to a change in attitudes about driving, leading to demands for better Engineering (including properly-chosen speed limits) and more realistic Enforcement (focussing on overall driving standards instead of just exceeding an arbitrarily-set limit).

    Start with education, and the rest will follow - as I once saw on a bumper sticker "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance".


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,160 ✭✭✭TheNog


    SteveC wrote: »
    I'll be the first to put my hand up and say I don't know everything there is to know about driving. What are you having a go at me for?:confused::confused:

    Sorry I wasnt having a go at you but just using you, me and Astraboy as an good example only. Your name was the first to come to mind. I was only highlighting the fact that Astraboy was saying that people should be allowed to set there own speed without prosecution but I was trying to say that not everyones driving skill is the same. If you had 5 people in front of you that you didnt know, would you be able to pick out the good drivers and the bad drivers. I couldnt. That was my point.

    Again sorry sometimes I find it hard to get what Im thinking put in a post.

    astraboy wrote: »
    I've made my points so I'd only be repeating myself, but here are some additions from your comments:
    Clearly you have'nt travelled many secondary routes in the south of the country, Cork and kerry have had the upgrading(widening and better surfacing) of many many roads I travel, not to mention the ones I dont. Sticking to the few N roads you travel is a misguided judgement, and to say roads have not been upgraded in my lifetime(I'm 23) is a plain stupid statement. My dad works with the NRA and he's always telling me about ongoing upgrading projects. This also gives me a little info on road design, though I would claim to be nothing more then an educated amateur in that case.

    Look at road surfaces and width in th 80's compared to today on many roads, they HAVE indeed been worked on for the better.

    Agreed I havent travelled the roads down south many times that is why I used the N3, N4, N6 and N7 as examples cos this roads I have travelled many times over the last 25yrs and none had any serious upgrades. As I have already said I realise the N4 and N7 have now been replaced the M4 and M7.
    astraboy wrote: »
    You seem to think I have some serious interest in your job, I don't frankly, but the cops hiding behind bushes COULD instead be out patrolling the roads catching drivers that actually cause accidents, not those 10kph over the limit which MAY not be dangerous(depending on the many constraints, cops can still use descretion right???) That is my main point. There are many guarda resources being misused, I'm sure you are more privy to this then me, but reallocation of resources could free them up for patrols. I agree that funding for proper equipment, digital radio setup, decent patrol cars and training facilities would be great for the guards.

    You have just backed up my point. You know little of policing in Ireland and as you have said you dont seem to want to know but you believe that you know enough knowledge to think that resources are being misused. How can you make that assumption? cos thats what it is.
    I have invited you to ask me or other gardai on boards, questions in areas that you are interested in such as road traffic. Do you want a better understanding of it? or are you going to continue moaning that you cannot drive faster on the road.
    astraboy wrote: »
    You say traffic "cannot flow", I'm sorry but have you ever even left Dublin?? Traffic flows a a decent pace down here in Cork, in fact once you leave the city there are many examples of fine roads with a decent flow of traffic for many hours of the day. You can in fact often safetly travel at, and maybe even exceed the speed limit!(WOW, SHOCK HOROR!) These same roads have limits far too low for reguar driving conditions, case in point the Balingcolligh bypass, which is of motorway standard yet with only a 100kph limit(with cop on bridge on a reguar basis too, shooting fish in a barrel)

    And finally, yes I do enjoy a good scartisitc comment, but you bought it on yourself. Feel free to respond in kind, or the the comment properly rather then just brush it off.

    I was born the middle of the country and lived there most of my life. I did live in Dublin for about 8 yrs but that was 10 yrs ago. I rarely go to Dublin simply cos of the traffic. I like you and everyone else hate being stuck in slow moving traffic.
    As far as breaking the speed limit, I do it at times but not excessively i.e. at 5-10-15kph over the limit. This is still considered safe by many guards I know who operate speed checks so we use discretion for people who do that speed. However I do know there are guards who do not accept that and will prosecute people who exceed the limit and if I am ever caught by those gardai then I will hold my hands up and accept it. They are using their discretion just the same as I use mine.
    For me sarcasm is good when used in a funny way but not when used in an attempt to ridicule a person or in an attempt to cover up a very weak point that will not stand up to debate.
    Type 17 wrote: »
    No, it's me. Age 39, passed test in 1992, have driven all over Ireland for work, and have driven in UK, USA, France, Spain, Netherlands, Germany Austria & Italy for pleasure - it's not a pleasure driving in Ireland :rolleyes:

    Summary of the 3 E's of road safety in the Irish context:
    Better driver Education would lead to a raising of the overall driving standards in Ireland, leading to a change in attitudes about driving, leading to demands for better Engineering (including properly-chosen speed limits) and more realistic Enforcement (focussing on overall driving standards instead of just exceeding an arbitrarily-set limit).

    Start with education, and the rest will follow - as I once saw on a bumper sticker "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance".

    + 1

    I agree with you totally. The 3 Es you have set out are a must but it would take time to implement and a hell of a lot of money. If it saves lives then I say bring it on.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    TheNog wrote: »
    Sorry I wasnt having a go at you but just using you, me and Astraboy as an good example only.
    No worries Nog, it was a bit confusing though.:)


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,730 ✭✭✭Type 17


    TheNog wrote: »
    The 3 Es you have set out are a must but it would take time to implement and a hell of a lot of money. If it saves lives then I say bring it on.

    The three E's are essential, but it must begin with Education - if we (people who care about driving and want to see things get better) push for better (higher) speed limits, we'll get written off as boy-racers who want to go fast without getting caught, and if we push for more sensible enforcement, the same thing will happen ("you're just a boy racer who doesn't want to get caught"). Education is the only thing that will change these attitudes.

    Until the majority of motorists and their public representatives (mostly drivers themselves) have their attitudes to driving and road safety changed by education, nothing will change on any front and driving in Ireland will continue to be a frustrating experience. The problem is that education currently consists of a driving test mostly designed in the 1960's, and even then, most people think that their driver-education ends with their passing of it, when in fact that is when it begins...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    Type 17 wrote: »
    The three E's are essential, but it must begin with Education

    There's nothing wrong with a bit of education, especially if it's in decency, respect for others and some humility.

    Human nature being what it is, how do you educate people to do things they couldn't be arsed with?

    Call be a skeptic, but the antics I see on the road are not the product of stupidity or lack of skill.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    There's nothing wrong with a bit of education, especially if it's in decency, respect for others and some humility.
    .
    All fine virtues, no doubt ...
    ...however not very relevant to driving skills.

    reading the road
    predicting the behaviour of others
    judging speed (yours and others)
    spacial awareness and a sense for the dimensions of your car
    gauging distances

    and a lot more things I can't think of at the moment that are essential for good driving can be (and have been) learned by the most uncooth, egocentric and jumped up assholes ...surprisingly :D


Advertisement