Gardai Speed Traps 'Hiding in Ditches' -Caught Today.

E92

kippy wrote: »

Listen,
I aint disagreeing with you in the main, but the simple fact of the matter is that people dont use their eyes brains and ears as they should when in a car. If they did, I would suggest that our accident rates would be nil.
If limits were not in place in built up areas people would continue in general to go through them at excessive speed. You know that and I know that. To protect the people in these areas limits have to be put in place and enforced. End of. We all live by them, if we get caught breaking them we pay the fine and get the feck over it, maybe having learned a lesson, maybe not.
Kippy

Fair enough, I see where you're coming from, FWIW I'm not advocating no speed limits(bar on Motorways), or that we should raise every speed limit, rather that the whole "speeding is evil" has been blown completely out of proportion, and that we are losing the run of ourselves on the whole thing and missing the claimed mission of cutting road deaths.

What I'd like is people to use their common sense, clearly there's nothing wrong with going fast on a motorway with no traffic, but on the other hand only a fool would travel at the 120 km/h speed limit in fog even on a Motorway, yet the speeding is evil crowd claim that as long as you don't break a speed limit then everything is somehow magically ok.

I just thought I was dealing with a PC nut for a while, my apologies for assuming wrongly:)!

kippy

E92 wrote: »

Fair enough, I see where you're coming from, FWIW I'm not advocating no speed limits(bar on Motorways), or that we should raise every speed limit, rather that the whole "speeding is evil" has been blown completely out of proportion, and that we are losing the run of ourselves on the whole thing and missing the claimed mission of cutting road deaths.

What I'd like is people to use their common sense, clearly there's nothing wrong with going fast on a motorway with no traffic, but on the other hand only a fool would travel at the 120 km/h speed limit in fog even on a Motorway, yet the speeding is evil crowd claim that as long as you don't break a speed limit then everything is somehow magically ok.

I just thought I was dealing with a PC nut for a while, my apologies for assuming wrongly:)!

Agree,
The main problem being, not everyone has the same level of "Common Sense" ie, people do travel at 120 in fog on a motorway despite it being very obvious to some (hopefully the majority) that it is not safe to do so.
The speeding is evil crowd is broken up into a few different groups.
Sadly I am in one of the groups that believe that if a person can travel 80 in a 60 zone, that they are just as likely not to have the common sense in other areas of motoring as well.
I have little or NO time for those who break limits in residential areas.
In general we are on the same page I think.
Kippy

Run_to_da_hills

Did he remove his helmet when he was giving you the summonse?

fatboymsport

do half the cops in this country understand that the is more crime than speeding.

the are a ****ing joke out to get easy money time the tackled some of the major problems like all the scum walking the streets robbing and killing people

and leave the normal joe soap alone trying to get to work on time

ytareh

Yes he removed helmet....well it wasnt on in the first place he was 'based' in that spot ...he didnt chase after me just waved me over .In fairness he was perfectly polite and pleasant...

Esel

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Did he remove his helmet when he was giving you the summonse?

Tut, tut, tut.

ART6

As others on this thread have said, I think many speed limits in this country are too low to the extent that they are perceived as illogical and are too often ignored. It's also true that cars have improved out of all recognition in a few years but that people have not. But whatever anyone thinks about limits, the fact remains that they are intended for bad cars and bad drivers, not good drivers in new cars. Legislation for the lowest denominator;)

Johnny Utah

I don't like to see Gardai hiding in ditches, behind bus shelters, behind lamposts, etc. It's sneaky, it's antagonising and has little to do with road safety. These sort of speed checks are damaging relations between Gardai and the law-abiding community, who now hold them in contempt.

galwaytt

kippy wrote: »

Listen,
I aint disagreeing with you in the main, but the simple fact of the matter is that people dont use their eyes brains and ears as they should when in a car. If they did, I would suggest that our accident rates would be nil.

agree

If limits were not in place in built up areas people would continue in general to go through them at excessive speed. You know that and I know that. To protect the people in these areas limits have to be put in place and enforced. End of. We all live by them, if we get caught breaking them we pay the fine and get the feck over it, maybe having learned a lesson, maybe not.
Kippy

Disagree. People speed in the main, due not to speed limits per se, but inappropriate speed limits. As mentioned Germany has a very wide range of limits, from 25kph to unlimited, but has an enviable safety record. We, don't. Constant, persistant nanny-statism, sees people breaking laws where they may otherwise not, because the law can indeed, be an ass.......and than diminution of natural, or sensible, justice, is what leads to it's denegration.

Nobody, but nobody, seeks, or supports, high urban limits. However, it is nonsense that, for example (as in the case of the N6 Bothar na dTreabh, between the junctions of the N84 and N17), that an urban ringroad, with no exits or entrances, with 4 lanes, should be classified at anything less than 100kph, let alone the ludicrous 50kph. I will challenge anyone to drive that road at the legal limit. If, for no other reason, the amount of abuse and general comment you'll get from the rest of the traffic, you being the one holding it up......
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=116315921720161541586.00043d3b75aa10bce82a6&ll=53.290206,-9.032736&spn=0.012724,0.027466&z=15

And your comment about the recently upgraded 100 -120 kph motorway is unfounded, too. A lot of motorways in Germany are 2-lane each way only.

And yes, as time goes by, we can and do, drive faster. That's evolution for you. Accident statistics from era's long before this, with poorer and slower vehicles, are much higher per capita, than now, so the link to speeding is completely erroneous.

I'd forgotten about that video link - what nobody has mentioned at all - in a motors forum ! - is why the car they used doesn't have ABS. Well I do - because an ABS equipped car would have deemed the situation null and void, and, let's face it, that wouldn't have suited the creators of the ad, now would it - imagine pulling up 10ft short of the child - gosh, what good would that serve !! ??

Mr. Presentable

Johnny Utah wrote: »

I don't like to see Gardai hiding in ditches, behind bus shelters, behind lamposts, etc. It's sneaky, it's antagonising and has little to do with road safety. These sort of speed checks are damaging relations between Gardai and the law-abiding community, who now hold them in contempt.

What, they should stand out in the road?

Mr. Presentable

E92 wrote: »

Why are only 4% of deaths in the UK as a result of speeding, and why do German autobahns without a speed limit have exactly the same fatality rate as those with a speed limit(and some are as low as 60 km/h btw) then? Why do the Japanese have 4 times the fatality rate on theor Motorways that the Germans do, even though theirs have a limit of only 100 km/h, and as JC showed us in Top Gear they are littered with speed cameras?

.

The answer to all of these is that an impact of 30kmh can be enough to kill a person.

When we say speeding we mean driving in excess of the imposed limit, right? When they say speed kills they mean the force of an impact greater than the resistance of the victim - you don't have to be in excess of the speed limit to kill someone, in fact I'd imagine that anything above 50kmh would kill most pedestrians.

So, the only thing excessive speed does is reduce your reaction distance - but that's probably enough.

AugustusMaximus

I have 2 points. Caught coming under the rail bridge which used to have the Cork Dry Gin sign at 11 at night.

The first thing the Garda said to me was that there was a lot of children in the area.

I was going to say "at 11 at night ?"

Tried to give me the guilt trip for doing 66 in a 50 zone.

E92

galwaytt wrote: »

I'd forgotten about that video link - what nobody has mentioned at all - in a motors forum ! - is why the car they used doesn't have ABS.

Mentioned by me in post #21;)!

MojoMaker

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

I have 2 points. Caught coming under the rail bridge which used to have the Cork Dry Gin sign at 11 at night.

The first thing the Garda said to me was that there was a lot of children in the area.

I was going to say "at 11 at night ?"

Tried to give me the guilt trip for doing 66 in a 50 zone.

So next time you're driving through the same area you might, as a result of this penalty, change your driving habit and it may be at a time of day when children could be around etc etc.

So job done by officialdom, lesson learned by motorist (perhaps), unless you like collecting points? It's not a foolproof system, but present a motorist with the likely scenario of a period of absence away from motoring for continuing transgressions and you will probably slowly over time change attitudes and behaviours - one would assume that is the point of the whole exercise no?

Johnny Utah

nipplenuts wrote: »

What, they should stand out in the road?

Yeah, that would be fine. Maybe they could act as crash test dummies to show what a 35 mph impact is like :pac:

Sizzler

Chief--- wrote: »

*waiting for the "my car has abs brakes, that one doesnt" reply.

tbh

Esel

My understanding of ABS is that it is designed to help the driver retain control of the car under emergency braking, not to make the car stop quicker. In fact, it should be obvious that an ABS-assisted emergency stop on a dry, straight road will take longer than one without, as the brakes are being repeatedly released. Found this post, which describes the situation well, imo.

Everything I have ever read or seen first hand, indicates ABS increases stopping distance. In fact, stopping distance should be longer in an ABS car because ABS prevents locking up the tires.

The main point of ABS is to prevent you from losing control of the car, not to improve stoppind distance. In a non-ABS car, if you, for example, slam the brakes hard while in a turn, you lock up the front tires. Well the front tires dictate direction of the car, so you would lose directional control of the car. ABS prevents lock up, thus alowing you to steer while braking hard.

However is just a straight stop, ABS prevents locking up the tires, which increases stopping distance. Non-abs can lock the tires which will stop you far sooner.

Stopping distance is more dictated by the weight of the car, the weight balance of the car (front to back), the size of the tires and size of the brakes. A more balanced car, like a rear wheel drive, or mid-engine car, while stop quicker because more weight is distributed on all four wheels. A car with a lower center of gravity will stop quicker too. But ABS does not help here.

From http://forums.cnet.com/5208-7813_102-0.html?forumID=78&threadID=248459&messageID=2491066

kippy

galwaytt wrote: »

agree


Disagree. People speed in the main, due not to speed limits per se, but inappropriate speed limits. As mentioned Germany has a very wide range of limits, from 25kph to unlimited, but has an enviable safety record. We, don't. Constant, persistant nanny-statism, sees people breaking laws where they may otherwise not, because the law can indeed, be an ass.......and than diminution of natural, or sensible, justice, is what leads to it's denegration.

Nobody, but nobody, seeks, or supports, high urban limits. However, it is nonsense that, for example (as in the case of the N6 Bothar na dTreabh, between the junctions of the N84 and N17), that an urban ringroad, with no exits or entrances, with 4 lanes, should be classified at anything less than 100kph, let alone the ludicrous 50kph. I will challenge anyone to drive that road at the legal limit. If, for no other reason, the amount of abuse and general comment you'll get from the rest of the traffic, you being the one holding it up......
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=116315921720161541586.00043d3b75aa10bce82a6&ll=53.290206,-9.032736&spn=0.012724,0.027466&z=15

And your comment about the recently upgraded 100 -120 kph motorway is unfounded, too. A lot of motorways in Germany are 2-lane each way only.

And yes, as time goes by, we can and do, drive faster. That's evolution for you. Accident statistics from era's long before this, with poorer and slower vehicles, are much higher per capita, than now, so the link to speeding is completely erroneous.

I'd forgotten about that video link - what nobody has mentioned at all - in a motors forum ! - is why the car they used doesn't have ABS. Well I do - because an ABS equipped car would have deemed the situation null and void, and, let's face it, that wouldn't have suited the creators of the ad, now would it - imagine pulling up 10ft short of the child - gosh, what good would that serve !! ??

Sorry,
But I am going to have to pull you up on a few blatent untruths in your post.
1.The stretch of road you talk about in your post has one residential exit off it, near the roundabout at the N17 side and a large number (possibly 4) exits into fields. Now while the field exits may not be a huge factor, the one into the residential area is. While this is not justification for a reduced speed limit, the not insignificant bend in the road, the proximity of two lanes of traffic to each other and the history of at least one fatal accident on the road have led to the speed limit of 50kph on it.
2. We are indeed driving faster as time goes buy, as you can see from something you've alread stated yourself, the increase in limits on roads that are well fit to take the increases in limits. As better roads are built limits are increased ON THEM. However, just because cars are fit to go faster DOES NOT MEAN that we can go faster on all roads. To suggest so would be a complete untruth. The issue in this post is a gy breaking a limit in a residential area.
3.ABS-Well, thats already been addressed.
4 Finally as already has been mentioned, to suggest that its okay to break a law just because you believe it to be "an ass" is at best foolish and at worst totally irresponsible.

Kippy

gixerfixer

Just back in a few minutes and be warned there is a Garda on a motorbike hiding behind one of those JC decaux advertisment signs with a speed radar on the approach to the east link bridge (North bound) Very sneaky as you can not see his bike as it is hidden behind the sign and he has the speed radar stuck out the edge of the sign :mad:

galwaytt

kippy wrote: »

Sorry,
But I am going to have to pull you up on a few blatent untruths in your post.
1.The stretch of road you talk about in your post has one residential exit off it, near the roundabout at the N17 side and a large number (possibly 4) exits into fields. Now while the field exits may not be a huge factor, the one into the residential area is. While this is not justification for a reduced speed limit, the not insignificant bend in the road, the proximity of two lanes of traffic to each other and the history of at least one fatal accident on the road have led to the speed limit of 50kph on it.
2. We are indeed driving faster as time goes buy, as you can see from something you've alread stated yourself, the increase in limits on roads that are well fit to take the increases in limits. As better roads are built limits are increased ON THEM. However, just because cars are fit to go faster DOES NOT MEAN that we can go faster on all roads. To suggest so would be a complete untruth. The issue in this post is a gy breaking a limit in a residential area.
3.ABS-Well, thats already been addressed.
4 Finally as already has been mentioned, to suggest that its okay to break a law just because you believe it to be "an ass" is at best foolish and at worst totally irresponsible.

Kippy

1.
Now I'm going to tell you to go back and read that map again. I have - deliberately - put the markers upstream of the roundabout and downstream of the estate, with no entrances in between.
And there is only one agricultural gate on the road - that in itself does not warrant a 50kph limit. If it did, the entire N6 ,N17, N18, N4 would be 50kph roads. They are not. The radius in that road will cope with considerably in excess of not only the 100, but the 120 limit - and higher. The accident you are referring to was AFTER the 50kph limit was imposed, so I will either take it that the 50kph limit was a contributing factor to the accident, or, that the accident was not influenced by speed at all. Knowing as I do, the circumstances of the accident, I will go with the latter......... besides, again, if to impose a 50kph limit would do something for accident statistics, then the entire N17 would now be a 50kph road......

2.
Your argument is contradicted by your own first paragraph - we have an upper limit capable road with a 50kph limit. I am not aware, except for the recent M6 reclassification, of any new road being upgraded, limit wise. But there should be, regularly. And, once again, read what I said- nowhere did I advocate in increase in urban limits. What I said limits should be applied properly - imposing an urban limit in an inapplicable/unsuitable situation brings the law into disrepute.

3.
It was commented on, yes. But it is a fact that ABS reduces braking distances. ABS is merely an automated version of cadence braking, the acknowledged way by experts of stopping vehicles, safely in a shorter distance. Yes it also brings control........which brings shorter braking distances, by dint of more control..........

4.
For the third time - read. Show where I said it was o.k. to break the limit ? What I said, and I say again, correctly, is that there is no law that brings law disrepute quicker than a bad law.

Misinterpretation, or mis-reading of the facts is what's irresponsible.

galwaytt

E92 wrote: »

Mentioned by me in post #21;)!

Sorry, didn't spot it - kudos to you on that. Or, Great Minds Think Alike

Esel

galwaytt wrote: »

3.
It was commented on, yes. But it is a fact that ABS reduces braking distances. ABS is merely an automated version of cadence braking, the acknowledged way by experts of stopping vehicles, safely in a shorter distance. Yes it also brings control........which brings shorter braking distances, by dint of more control..........

No, it is not a fact - such a simple, unqualified statement is a misconception. Cadence braking (of which ABS is an automated version) enhances braking control, it does not per se reduce stopping distance. Granted, it may do so in certain circumstances, but not in those that pertained in the ad posted in this thread. It is quite simply misleading to make such a statement.

Yakult

Well done Garda. Its how they should catch people speeding instead of standing halfway on the road with a highly visable jacket given the driver time to slow down.

lightening

R_H_C_P wrote: »

Well done Garda. Its how they should catch people speeding instead of standing halfway on the road with a highly visable jacket given the driver time to slow down.

Is this yours?

Seth Brundle

ytareh wrote: »

6 So I now have two points on my licence ,so what ?

No you don't. You will receive your points some time after you have paid your fine!

galwaytt

esel wrote: »

No, it is not a fact - such a simple, unqualified statement is a misconception. Cadence braking (of which ABS is an automated version) enhances braking control, it does not per se reduce stopping distance. Granted, it may do so in certain circumstances, but not in those that pertained in the ad posted in this thread. It is quite simply misleading to make such a statement.

Sorry, but I believe you're wrong. In respect of the video, it clearly shows the wheel as locked. In that case, the tyre has been forced to exceed it's grip on the road, and you are now a passenger to inertia. If the wheel was released - by either cadence or ABS - the tyre would grip again, and you would de-facto have grip to reduce the inertia of the vehicle, by transferring that energy into heat at the contact patch, with the resultant loss fo speed... Unlike the Law of the Land, Laws of Physics must be obeyed...:D

I think the main point is, that the ad, no more than many other campaigns, relies on shock and terror, rather than education, and that, imho, is counter productive. Far better to 'bring' people with you, than trying to beat them into submission - more carrot, less stick.

Yakult

lightening wrote: »

Is this yours?

What? So you would rather a guard visible a mile off so you can slow down to the speed limit and once you pass him go back to your speeding ways?:rolleyes:

kippy

galwaytt wrote: »

1.
Now I'm going to tell you to go back and read that map again. I have - deliberately - put the markers upstream of the roundabout and downstream of the estate, with no entrances in between.
And there is only one agricultural gate on the road - that in itself does not warrant a 50kph limit. If it did, the entire N6 ,N17, N18, N4 would be 50kph roads. They are not. The radius in that road will cope with considerably in excess of not only the 100, but the 120 limit - and higher. The accident you are referring to was AFTER the 50kph limit was imposed, so I will either take it that the 50kph limit was a contributing factor to the accident, or, that the accident was not influenced by speed at all. Knowing as I do, the circumstances of the accident, I will go with the latter......... besides, again, if to impose a 50kph limit would do something for accident statistics, then the entire N17 would now be a 50kph road......

2.
Your argument is contradicted by your own first paragraph - we have an upper limit capable road with a 50kph limit. I am not aware, except for the recent M6 reclassification, of any new road being upgraded, limit wise. But there should be, regularly. And, once again, read what I said- nowhere did I advocate in increase in urban limits. What I said limits should be applied properly - imposing an urban limit in an inapplicable/unsuitable situation brings the law into disrepute.

3.
It was commented on, yes. But it is a fact that ABS reduces braking distances. ABS is merely an automated version of cadence braking, the acknowledged way by experts of stopping vehicles, safely in a shorter distance. Yes it also brings control........which brings shorter braking distances, by dint of more control..........

4.
For the third time - read. Show where I said it was o.k. to break the limit ? What I said, and I say again, correctly, is that there is no law that brings law disrepute quicker than a bad law.

Misinterpretation, or mis-reading of the facts is what's irresponsible.

Whatever you reckon yourself. Being Frank, I didnt actually look at the map as I am well aware of that section of road. There was a serious accident on that road before the limit was brought down as well......
There are sections of road, Gort to Loughrea for example, as well as multiple others, where I believe the speed limit to be way to high so I generally drive that bit slower on that road, driving to the conditions etc.......
Facts of the matter, there are lots of laws/regulations out there that I dont particuliarly agree with myself, it doesnt give me the right to break them. The same should be said for you.
Not everyone on the road has as much "common sense", good driving ability or highy safe ped friendly cars as the majority of the people who disagree with my stance do in this forum.
Frankly, I'd rather a blanket 50K be in place in residential areas that keeps us all in check rather than advising drivers to "make up their own minds".
In Germany the quality of the best roads are up to that, even if there are some idiots who drive on them.
A car is a lethal weapon in the wrong hands and strict laws should and need to be in force to deal with these situations.
I for one am glad that the gardai are out enforcing limits. I'd like to see them enforce them more in accident blackspots but the fact that they are at all makes the road a safer place for all of us.
Ideally I'd like only sensible drivers on the road who can make the correct decisions based on the driving conditions, who all drive cars built to the latest safety specifications however this is simply a Nirvana which can never exist.

Kippy

galwaytt

kippy wrote: »

Whatever you reckon yourself. Being Frank, I didnt actually look at the map

I'm glad you agree with me.

There are sections of road, Gort to Loughrea for example, as well as multiple others, where I believe the speed limit to be way to high so I generally drive that bit slower on that road, driving to the conditions etc.......

nothing wrong with that, in principle. No one should ever drive above their abilities. By the same token though, it's important that people realise that if even that is too much, they remove themselves from the equation. I'm talking yellow-line hoggers, and 50kph drivers on 100kph roads, etc.

Facts of the matter, there are lots of laws/regulations out there that I dont particuliarly agree with myself, it doesnt give me the right to break them. The same should be said for you.

Once again, show me where I said anything of the sort. Indeed, I said the exact opposite.

Not everyone on the road has as much "common sense", good driving ability or highy safe ped friendly cars as the majority of the people who disagree with my stance do in this forum.

There is no such thing as a pedestrian friendly 1 tonne vehicle, no matter what it's made of. I remember standing at the side of the road in Newcastle, Galway, many many years ago, and seeing my 8 yr old brother run out into the path of a green Fiat. To this day I remember it as clear as day, the circumstances - even the name of the driver.

Frankly, I'd rather a blanket 50K be in place in residential areas that keeps us all in check rather than advising drivers to "make up their own minds".

show me where in Ireland there is an urban area without an urban limit. Nowhere, is the answer, so what are you on about...?

In Germany the quality of the best roads are up to that, even if there are some idiots who drive on them.

If their ability exceeds yours, that does not make them an idiot. It'd make you an idiot if you were trying to keep up.

A car is a lethal weapon in the wrong hands and strict laws should and need to be in force to deal with these situations.

Correction: a car is a lethal weapon in ANYONE's hands, and there are already laws to deal with them.....

I for one am glad that the gardai are out enforcing limits. I'd like to see them enforce them more in accident blackspots but the fact that they are at all makes the road a safer place for all of us.

No disagreement from me on that.

Ideally I'd like only sensible drivers on the road who can make the correct decisions based on the driving conditions, who all drive cars built to the latest safety specifications however this is simply a Nirvana which can never exist.

Indeed. But who gets to decide on a) who's sensible, because none of the existing agencies work, and b) who's going to finance all those new cars for us?? Not if John Gormley has anything to do with it, that's for sure !!:D

Fighting Irish

Glad the OP got caught


But i do have to say most limits in this country are total balls