8 New Mobile Speed Cameras in Crackdown

Marcus.Aurelius

From today's Irish Independent

GARDAI will have eight, new mobile speed cameras in operation on roads across Ireland this bank holiday weekend in one of the biggest-ever crackdowns on speeding and drink driving.
The move comes as gardai and the Road Safety Authority (RSA) warned drivers of the dangers of getting behind the wheel too early in the morning after a late night. So far this year, 238 people have been killed on Irish roads, including eight killed last weekend alone.
Assistant Commissioner Eddie Rock, head of the garda traffic bureau, said that substantial numbers of gardai will man speed checks and carry out random breath tests on drivers throughout the country.
He added: "Late nights and driving don't mix. You have to allow your body adequate time to recover. "Getting behind the wheel early the following morning after a late night makes no sense, whether drinking or not."
One-in-five fatal road accidents are directly caused by tiredness, and 105 Topaz service stations will give away 20,000 free cups of tea and coffee tomorrow to encourage drivers to take a break and stay awake.
Noel Brett, the RSA's chief executive, said the giveaway was timely as the bank holiday weekend is a high-risk period to travel on the roads.
"Those most at risk from driver fatigue are drivers who try to fight the effects of sleep when driving," he said.
"Tactics such as turning up the volume on the radio and opening the window do not work. If a driver drops off for just two seconds while travelling at a speed of 100kph the car will have travelled 55 metres."
Mr Brett added that if drivers were fighting the urge to sleep they should stop driving, have one or two cups of coffee and take a 15 minute nap. When they wake up, the coffee should have taken effect.
Topaz chief executive, Danny Murray, said drivers who presented their car keys to staff at the 105 company-owned service stations tomorrow would be given free tea or coffee.
Posters advertising the free beverages will be in place outside all participating petrol stations.

- Paul Melia

Sounds like more money-grabbing to me from the Asst Commissioner. When will the RSA stop targeting petty speeding and concentrate on driver training and proper incentives for drivers to stop and rest, i.e. proper stopping areas with facilities instead of overpriced and disinterested petrol stations?

craichoe

What is it with Ireland and their bloody crackdowns, could they not just do their job all the time like their supposed to.

I wonder if these crackdowns coincide with spars holidays

Marcus.Aurelius

Let's not descend into a garda bashing thread if possible. This is the sole work of the Asst Comm and that bunch of grannies in the RSA.



Talkin sh*te with the best of them!

E92

They're worried about people driving when they're tired.... so the solution to that is for speed scameras because they'll single handedly solve ALL the problems on our roads:rolleyes::rolleyes:.

Hmmm....

I.S.T.

Joker wrote: »

...this bank holiday weekend in one of the biggest-ever crackdowns on speeding and drink driving...

Deja Vu anyone?

Gran Hermano

~Well someone has to pay for all that new pepper spray on order.

ednwireland

this on the day that swindon council withdraw their funding for speed cameras because
"Councillors said new measures were needed as road deaths and injuries had begun to rise, but police said the cameras had helped to cut accidents"

obviously not the only measure that needs to be taken

Full article

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7685550.stm

mind you they are increasing the number of mobile cameras so maybe something done right here

TheNog

Guys, guys, guys. Why is that when there are operations specifically targeting speeding or drunk driving or seatbelts etc, that people are complaining it is a money making exercise? Simple answer - it isnt a money making exercise. These campaigns are announced at Bank Holidays to get the message across to people on the roads.
Most posters on Motors forum know that I am a Garda so the question is "Do you think I go to work to make money for the Government?"

Answer - I couldn't give a toss what money the government makes from the job I do


Do you think that I'm happy cos:

I arrested that drunk driver last March at 4am and he was three times the limit while driving through the middle of town when people were at the chipper after the niteclub

or

I arrested a fella last January at 9am cos he was driving past a primary school at 127kph when kids were being dropped off at school

or

I prosecuted a young fella for dangerous driving for overtaking 8 cars while through the middle of a village.

Again the answer is I couldn't give a toss what money the government makes from the three examples I gave above. TBH you would be hard pressed to find any Garda out there who is happily thinking to himself "I am gonna make some money for the government".

Again with regards to speeding - This thing I have heard over and over again "I was done for going a few kph over the limit" is pure and utter bollix. There is probably but a handful of guards who would do someone for just a few kph over the limit. Most guards allow 15-20kph allowance for drivers. Example in a 100kph zone, an allowance of 115-120kph, for a 50kph zone maybe a 60-65kph allowance. We are not trying to prosecute everyone for speeding but rather trying to catch those speeding excessively. These people are the ones taking the piss.

I have it said here time and time again, there is no one solution to our problems on the roads. Yes we have problems with speeding, drink driving, poor driving behaviour, cars in terrible conditions, tiredness etc. All of these problems are targeted all year around. If ye don't believe me then I can tell you that a usual weeked of Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights we get 4-5 drunk drivers each night between our district and the district beside us. So consider that it takes roughly 1 hour to process one drunk driver and with four cars operating in each district, that is not only an impressive amount of work but is also worrying that the message is not getting across to some people. Bear in mind that these four patrol cars are also needed for public order, another issue that is on the edge of being out of control.

Sorry for the rant but that's my view from the other side of the fence. This is the side of the fence that has seen

*one woman whose skin on her arm was ripped off in an accident

or

*two children (under the age of 7) injured in a collision ( 1 child had her spleen removed, the other had a broken arm ) and the pregnant mother began to bleed out after the ambulance left the scene. We drove the woman to the hospital ourselves leaving the scene and the gob****e of a 21 yr old who caused the collision because he was speeding excessively and lost control of his dads jeep.

TheNog

Steve

E92 wrote: »

They're worried about people driving when they're tired.... so the solution to that is for speed scameras because they'll single handedly solve ALL the problems on our roads:rolleyes::rolleyes:.

Hmmm....

Mayber they're special cameras that will detect a sleepy drunk driving below the speed limit..... oh wait, that mustn't be dangerous cos they're not speeding...

:rolleyes:

I'm all for having more policing on the roads - holiday weekend or not.
This, though, is just pathetic pandering to the gaybo brigade (and another stealth tax to boot).

Marcus.Aurelius

TheNog wrote: »

Again with regards to speeding - This thing I have heard over and over again "I was done for going a few kph over the limit" is pure and utter bollix. There is probably but a handful of guards who would do someone for just a few kph over the limit. Most guards allow 15-20kph allowance for drivers. Example in a 100kph zone, an allowance of 115-120kph, for a 50kph zone maybe a 60-65kph allowance. We are not trying to prosecute everyone for speeding but rather trying to catch those speeding excessively. These people are the ones taking the piss.

Be Fair, Traffic Corps in Waterford are notorious for issuing for less than 8kph over the limit. We've had numerous problems with their attitudes.

One thing is for sure, TheNog, speeding fatalities are not down to just speeding, but excessive speed. We are only hacking away at a very small part of the overall problem. As Gardaí we are supposed to be capable of discernment at the very least. In this regard, a bit of discernment would show you that driver training and proper road design are somewhat more effective at preventing road deaths than arbitrary speed limits (e.g. N4 dual carriageway vs. N72, one a fine DC with 80 kph, the other a godawful bog road with a limit of 100 kph).

Excessive speeders (not a fixed number over the speed limit) are the problem, as well as undertrained, selfish and overconfident drivers, which make up 95% of our driving population.

Steve

TheNog wrote: »

Guys, guys, guys. Why is that when there are operations specifically targeting speeding or drunk driving or seatbelts etc, that people are complaining it is a money making exercise?

Nog, I agree with your point of view on this. The issue I have is that article is spouting off on the dangers of drink and tiredness - and they are very real dangers, nobody disputes that.
The problem is that they are proposing to solve it using speed cameras.
That doesn't make sense and the only justification the government can possibly have is that it is financially justifiable because of the revenue stream.

It would be far more effective to put out 8 unmarked traffic units and pay them lots of overtime to work the holiday weekend and catch the muppets who are driving dangerously (without exceeding the limit) - this would save far more lives but unfortunately would not generate enough cash to pay for itself.

TheNog

Joker wrote: »

Be Fair, Traffic Corps in Waterford are notorious for issuing for less than 8kph over the limit. We've had numerous problems with their attitudes.

One thing is for sure, TheNog, speeding fatalities are not down to just speeding, but excessive speed. We are only hacking away at a very small part of the overall problem. As Gardaí we are supposed to be capable of discernment at the very least. In this regard, a bit of discernment would show you that driver training and proper road design are somewhat more effective at preventing road deaths than arbitrary speed limits (e.g. N4 dual carriageway vs. N72, one a fine DC with 80 kph, the other a godawful bog road with a limit of 100 kph).

Excessive speeders (not a fixed number over the speed limit) are the problem, as well as undertrained, selfish and overconfident drivers, which make up 95% of our driving population.

I agree with ye and I said it in my post that it is those who speed excessively are the ones that we target. If the TC in Waterford are doing people for 8kph over the limit then I say WFT???? Unless of course there is a particular reason behind it such as outside a school at opening/closing times etc. then there is no need to prevent the free flow of traffic.

But here is the real question - What has driver behaviour/driving got to do with the Gardai? Absolutley nothing. We don't train people how to drive but we do explain to people what they did wrong (usually) so its not our fault that people are speeding or getting drunk and driving home. We only come into play when those people are caught and thats when we hear the moaning of how its so unfair.

Its the same for the posted speed limits, again nothing to do with the Gardai - that;s the council's job to ensure a safe and responsible speed limit on their roads. We only enforce the speed limit by using common sense

Marcus.Aurelius

TheNog wrote: »

Its the same for the posted speed limits, again nothing to do with the Gardai - that;s the council's job to ensure a safe and responsible speed limit on their roads. We only enforce the speed limit by using common sense

I appreciate the sentiment! From my second post you can see that we are not here to debate the influence of the ordinary member.

I just think its unfair, considering the taxes the middle class motorists pay, and yet they have such rubbish roads and braindead officials with authority over speed limits and road safety.

PS. If we wanted the Garda budget augmented with fines, the Minister for JELR should have jumped up the drunk driving fines, and introduced some nasty fines for not keeping left on a motorway/DC, trucks in the overtaking lanes or failing to let another driver pass you when you've buckets of hard shoulder, something like €500. We'd catch loads, they'd be too scared to do it then, and we call it a success. Not to mention the beneficial effect of better manners on the pigs we call drivers!

TheNog

SteveC wrote: »

Nog, I agree with your point of view on this. The issue I have is that article is spouting off on the dangers of drink and tiredness - and they are very real dangers, nobody disputes that.
The problem is that they are proposing to solve it using speed cameras.
That doesn't make sense and the only justification the government can possibly have is that it is financially justifiable because of the revenue stream.

It would be far more effective to put out 8 unmarked traffic units and pay them lots of overtime to work the holiday weekend and catch the muppets who are driving dangerously (without exceeding the limit) - this would save far more lives but unfortunately would not generate enough cash to pay for itself.

But we have little or no unmarked cars these days and do know why?? Cause public perception survey stated that they didn't see Gardai on the roads often enough. Correction put in place was more marked patrol cars and we all know that people change their behaviour when they see a patrol car.

Just can't bloody win in this situation.

There is one solution that is being used right now but not enough people are doing it. That is for a person to report a case of bad driving and go all the way with it to court. The guards cannot be everywhere but the public certainly can and are.

Anyway when these vans were brought into service management said that 80% of the time these vans would target accident black spots and other areas 20% of the time. I say fair enough do it but don't have the limiter set exactly to the speed limit.

As I said in my first post have an allowance. Most guards across the country do this because it is in the interest of fairness to all. Again it is those who speed excessively that we need to target with these vans and hand held lasers. Anyone who is caught way over the limit should be made part with their cash.

TheNog

Joker wrote: »

I appreciate the sentiment! From my second post you can see that we are not here to debate the influence of the ordinary member.

But why shouldn't discuss the influence of ordinary members when it is the discretion or opinion of the ordinary member in deciding whether to initiate a prosecution.

Anyway if people have a problem with the attitude of TC in Waterford, why dont they complain to GSOC? They have shoulder numbers and its not that big of a deal to make a complaint. Would the problem be sorted out if enough complaints were made?

Joker wrote: »

I just think its unfair, considering the taxes the middle class motorists pay, and yet they have such rubbish roads and braindead officials with authority over speed limits and road safety.

Yes we have taxes, yes we have bad roads and brain dead officials but what can we do about it? Blame the guards and the RSA? Why?

Joker wrote: »

PS. If we wanted the Garda budget augmented with fines, the Minister for JELR should have jumped up the drunk driving fines, and introduced some nasty fines for not keeping left on a motorway/DC, trucks in the overtaking lanes or failing to let another driver pass you when you've buckets of hard shoulder, something like €500. We'd catch loads, they'd be too scared to do it then, and we call it a success. Not to mention the beneficial effect of better manners on the pigs we call drivers!

The fines for drunk driving in Ireland are one of the highest I have seen. Maybe you could point to other countries with higher fines and penalties.

Wherever the money goes from these fines I couldn't tell ye but does it matter? One person three times over the limit pays out 2-3 grand should stop that person from drink driving again.

E92

TheNog wrote: »

As I said in my first post have an allowance. Most guards across the country do this because it is in the interest of fairness to all. Again it is those who speed excessively that we need to target with these vans and hand held lasers. Anyone who is caught way over the limit should be made part with their cash.

A lot of the reason why people say(including me) that these things are money making rackets is because you *never* see speed enforcement on the bad back roads, instead almost always on the main roads, and especially on motorways/dual carriageways.

If the Guards/RSA etc are as concerned about road safety as you and they say, then why is all the speed enforcement on the safest roads in the country?

I mean whenever the Government opens a new Dual Carriageway/Motorway they'll usually say in the press blurb about it something along the lines of "Governemnt studies show that DCs/Motorways cut fatalities by a factor of 7.5(or 10 depending on who writes it) compared to the road it replaces".

I would argue that the speed limit on Motorways/DCs is too low anyway, as they have a design speed of 160 km/h yet they only have a speed limit of 100 or 120 km/h.

Does anyone remember when we changed to km and the motorway speed limit was raised by 8 km/h and they said that there would be more deaths on them?

Of course that never happened, because motorways are so safe and have no trouble handling much higher speeds than the speed limit allows.

Indeed we have one of the lowest fatality rates on our motorways of anywhere in Europe.

So why do we need speed enforcement on them?

Why isn't there speed enforcement on back country roads?

Because there are so few people that drive on them and it is very difficult to break the speed limit on some back roads it means nobody would be caught and therefore no money would be made.

At the end of the day the Governement has to make money somehow, and speed scameras are a perfect device to enable them to do so, all in the guise of "road safety".

Modern cars are infinitely safer than what the speed limits were designed for and the RSA, Governement are basing speed limits on what cars were capable of doing 30 or 40 years ago; modern cars are capable of stopping much faster(for example the RSA says that at 80 km/h a car will take 40 m to stop in the dry, when in fact most cars can pull up from 100 km/h in less than that, typically about 38 m or so), so there really is no justification for low speed limts and the constant mantra for "slowing down".

I would be in favour of the Guards being more visible, but most of all I want to see ALL rules of the road being enforced, not just the speed limits; people break traffic lights, turn left in a going right lane etc, but this is all OK, once you're under the speed limit you can do what you like it seems:rolleyes:.

cashmni1

@ TheNOG "But we have little or no unmarked cars these days and do know why?? Cause public perception survey stated that they didn't see Gardai on the roads often enough. Correction put in place was more marked patrol cars and we all know that people change their behaviour when they see a patrol car.

Just can't bloody win in this situation."

I agree with you here, but I still think visability is the best way forward. A patrol car slows traffic down, end of. Slower traffic, less accidents.
Result....No?
I know some people will throw out the anchor when they see a high viz car or jeep without looking in the mirror, but they are bad drivers anyway and will do stupid things also. No matter what you do.
Difficult situation for a law enforcer to please everyone. Infact, when dealing with the public, I think it cannot be done.
I don't think anyone here has accused the Guards of collecting revenue for the government, speficially, but people are sh*te sick of the likes of Gabo the knob Jockey and his followers making revenue for the state on a Bank Holiday weekend. 4 points on a bank holiday - I ask you.
The problem will always remain until people are trained correctly and there is a decent raod infastructure.
No, its not your job to train other people how to drive safely. Its your bosses job. The Government. They also have a responsability to the people of Ireland, not to be ripping them off in taxes and revenue collection.

Marcus.Aurelius

TheNog wrote: »

But why shouldn't discuss the influence of ordinary members when it is the discretion or opinion of the ordinary member in deciding whether to initiate a prosecution.

Anyway if people have a problem with the attitude of TC in Waterford, why dont they complain to GSOC? They have shoulder numbers and its not that big of a deal to make a complaint. Would the problem be sorted out if enough complaints were made?

Yes we have taxes, yes we have bad roads and brain dead officials but what can we do about it? Blame the guards and the RSA? Why?.

1. Because ordinary members do not dictate policy, and policy is under discussion, not enforcement as such.

2. People are not well-informed outside of their own area.

3. Nobody is blaming the guards, this thread is to lay the blame where it rightly rests, with the govt and the RSA, as well as the higher officers at HQ.

Steve

E92 wrote: »

I would be in favour of the Guards being more visible, but most of all I want to see ALL rules of the road being enforced, not just the speed limits; people break traffic lights, turn left in a going right lane etc, but this is all OK, once you're under the speed limit you can do what you like it seems:rolleyes:.

The problem is, as theNog said, people don't do these things when there is a marked car present. Everyone is suddenly on their best behaviour those that are not are Darwin award candidates anyway.

More unmarked cars would certainly have an impact on this behaviour (provided they were being seen to stop people - if even just for a bolloking for bad/stupid driving).

I'm totally against covert speed enforcement using unmanned / unattended cameras though - it's not the same thing as an unmarked Guard who can tell the difference between someone briefly exceeding the limit while overtaking and someone being a twat while not exceeding it.

Who's going to get caught by the camera? the drunk weaving all over the road or the guy who overtakes him and exceeds the limit briefly to get away from danger?

Marcus.Aurelius

I think we should be like the Aussies and the Brits with dedicated, signposted speed cameras if we are truly only doing this to change behaviour.

E92

SteveC wrote: »

I'm totally against covert speed enforcement using unmanned / unattended cameras though - it's not the same thing as an unmarked Guard who can tell the difference between someone briefly exceeding the limit while overtaking and someone being a twat while not exceeding it.

+1. I'm against scameras for that very reason. I'm also against speed limit enforcement on the safest roads on the country where deaths are extremely low.

I *do* want to see the Guards out enforcing speed limits at black spots, outside schools, bad back roads etc, not on the main good quality roads that they are only enforcing presently.

The new motorways and dual carriageways are going to save a helluva lot more lives than any speed scameras ever will.

We desperately need to see some sort of compulsory basic training before drivers start driving.

I really don't know how some people are fit to hold a licence, and I think drivers should be made to sit the driving test every 2 or 3 years, everyone knows that people learn to drive properly for the test and then once they've past it they don't bother any more. If people were forced to sit the test every couple of years then this would force people to maintain a somewhat decent standard of driving. Not for nothing are the best drivers at roundabouts those on L-plates, because they know they have to do it right or else they can fail the test.

I have to say I'm impressed with what's going on in the UK at the moment, one council has gotten rid of them, while another 6 or 7 are proposing to do the same thing.

Third_Echelon

Interesting discussion alright... No doubt on the news next Monday or Tuesday we will have heard of 20 deaths on our roads over the weekend due to speeding or drink driving. We all know it happens every bank holiday weekend...

Putting speed cameras or speed traps on our major motorways and dual carriage ways is pretty pointless. In my experience, most accidents I have seen are indeed on the back country roads. Some of the lunatics I've seen making ridiculous over-taking manoeuvres passing 4 and 5 cars and making it just by the skin of their teeth is shocking!!!

I live and work in Dublin, so most of my daily motoring is M50 or the major N roads, N7, N81, N4/M4 etc, which are all good big roads. The only things I ever see on those roads are fender-benders, low speed rear-ending collisions...

If I travel to my parents house in Meath I encounter a lot more back roads etc. Some of the things as I mentioned above scare me to be honest. I'm a confident enough driver so it doesn't affect my journey that much, but I can clearly see how our road deaths are so high!

For me, the Garda do a thankless jobs on our roads. It is their superior's policies about where to police (i.e. more country roads) that needs to change...

TheNog

E92 wrote: »

A lot of the reason why people say(including me) that these things are money making rackets is because you *never* see speed enforcement on the bad back roads, instead almost always on the main roads, and especially on motorways/dual carriageways.

You see you answered your concerns above. There are speed checks done on country roads but only where it is safe to do so for drivers and for gardai. If anyone thinks for a minute that I'm going to put my safety at risk to stop and talk to a driver whether it be on a motorway or a bog road, I say I will in my ****e.

There are few spots on country roads where it would be safe to do a speed check and bear in mind the criteria that is needed is a straight stretch of at least 300m in length for me to get their speed, get out onto the road and stop them. But what has a country road plenty of? Bends

E92 wrote: »

If the Guards/RSA etc are as concerned about road safety as you and they say, then why is all the speed enforcement on the safest roads in the country?

Prevention is better than detection. Yes they motorways and D/Cs are the safest and we want to keep them that way. Don't you think that British motorways were the safest roads when they were built? I'm only guessing here but the British police forces ignored the motorways for road safety and then they began to have pile ups. If I remember the worst pile-up involved 300 vehicles.
If guards ignored the motorways and D/Cs and the above happened, what do ye think would be the first question? Thats right, why weren't the guards policing them. Again the guards are in the wrong.

E92 wrote: »

I mean whenever the Government opens a new Dual Carriageway/Motorway they'll usually say in the press blurb about it something along the lines of "Governemnt studies show that DCs/Motorways cut fatalities by a factor of 7.5(or 10 depending on who writes it) compared to the road it replaces".

I would argue that the speed limit on Motorways/DCs is too low anyway, as they have a design speed of 160 km/h yet they only have a speed limit of 100 or 120 km/h.

Does anyone remember when we changed to km and the motorway speed limit was raised by 8 km/h and they said that there would be more deaths on them?

Of course that never happened, because motorways are so safe and have no trouble handling much higher speeds than the speed limit allows.

Indeed we have one of the lowest fatality rates on our motorways of anywhere in Europe.

Fully agree with ye and so lets keep an eye on these regardless and hold onto that safety record.

E92 wrote: »

So why do we need speed enforcement on them?

as above

E92 wrote: »

Why isn't there speed enforcement on back country roads?

again cos most country roads are not safe enough to do a speed check. No point in guards trying to cut fatalities on these roads if the guard gets himself killed in the process.

E92 wrote: »

Because there are so few people that drive on them and it is very difficult to break the speed limit on some back roads it means nobody would be caught and therefore no money would be made.

See your wrong there. Government do not tell us where to operate speed checks. We choose ourselvs according to complaints from driver, what we have seen ourselves and collisions that happen on the roads within our districts.

E92 wrote: »

At the end of the day the Governement has to make money somehow, and speed scameras are a perfect device to enable them to do so, all in the guise of "road safety".

If the limit on the vans were increased by say 10-15% over the posted limit, would you think the same? In my view anyone doing over 120kph on a 100kph is taking the piss and needs to be done.

E92 wrote: »

Modern cars are infinitely safer than what the speed limits were designed for and the RSA, Governement are basing speed limits on what cars were capable of doing 30 or 40 years ago; modern cars are capable of stopping much faster(for example the RSA says that at 80 km/h a car will take 40 m to stop in the dry, when in fact most cars can pull up from 100 km/h in less than that, typically about 38 m or so), so there really is no justification for low speed limts and the constant mantra for "slowing down".

Yes cars are safer but cars do not drive themselves. We still have pretty much the same driver testing we did 30/40 years ago. The most advanced and safest car will only be used to the best ability of the driver. You only have to take a look at the amount of threads in the Motor forum about bad drivers. You have posted in most of them yourself.

E92 wrote: »

I would be in favour of the Guards being more visible, but most of all I want to see ALL rules of the road being enforced, not just the speed limits; people break traffic lights, turn left in a going right lane etc, but this is all OK, once you're under the speed limit you can do what you like it seems:rolleyes:.

Again we have a severe shortage of unmarked cars and I already said that when people see a marked car they adjust their driving behaviour when the see us. You know that and so do we.

TheNog

E92 wrote: »

We desperately need to see some sort of compulsory basic training before drivers start driving.

I really don't know how some people are fit to hold a licence, and I think drivers should be made to sit the driving test every 2 or 3 years, everyone knows that people learn to drive properly for the test and then once they've past it they don't bother any more. If people were forced to sit the test every couple of years then this would force people to maintain a somewhat decent standard of driving. Not for nothing are the best drivers at roundabouts those on L-plates, because they know they have to do it right or else they can fail the test.

absolutely, 100% agreed.

Every full licenced driver should be made to re sit a driving test in order to keep their licence every 5 years. Fail the test then no licence and insurance is invalidated or cancelled at the test centre by the tester.

Unfortunately this would be a long term plan but could be achieved over something like 7-8 years.

E92

TheNog wrote: »

If the limit on the vans were increased by say 10-15% over the posted limit, would you think the same? In my view anyone doing over 120kph on a 100kph is taking the piss and needs to be done.

If somebody is doing 120 or 130 or even 140 on a HQDC(which are identical to motorways design wise without the restrictions) I see abolutely nothing wrong with it, as these roads have a design speed of 160 km/h.

On a single carriageway, or on the older DCs then yes I agree that going over 120 is taking the piss. But someone could be doing 110 without even realising it, as legally car speedos are allowed to either underread or overread the true speed by 10%.

TheNog wrote: »

Yes cars are safer but cars do not drive themselves. We still have pretty much the same driver testing we did 30/40 years ago. The most advanced and safest car will only be used to the best ability of the driver. You only have to take a look at the amount of threads in the Motor forum about bad drivers. You have posted in most of them yourself.

Yeah but that's my point. Cars can stop faster now than ever before, and modern cars have airbags and all sorts of technology there should anyone end up in the unfortunate situation of being in an accident.


I'm glad you mentioned bad driving, because that's *real* problem, and almost all of the time that has nothing to do with speeding.

Somebody could do 100 km/h on a soaking wet motorway; but because they're under the speed limit it's OK, I think they should be done for bad driving because obviously that's too fast.

We need to move away from the obession of "slowing down" for slowing down's sake and for people to drive at a speed that is appropriate for the conditions, the car you're driving etc. If that speed is above the speed limit and your car is capable of it then I see no reason why not to break it. Equally if it is too dangerous to drive at the speed limit then you sohuldn't do so; driving in fog for example you certainly should not be driving at the limit, but if you're on an empty motorway you're not going to harm anyone by breaking the law.

whiterebel

Joker wrote: »

I appreciate the sentiment! From my second post you can see that we are not here to debate the influence of the ordinary member.

I just think its unfair, considering the taxes the middle class motorists pay, and yet they have such rubbish roads and braindead officials with authority over speed limits and road safety.

PS. If we wanted the Garda budget augmented with fines, the Minister for JELR should have jumped up the drunk driving fines, and introduced some nasty fines for not keeping left on a motorway/DC, trucks in the overtaking lanes or failing to let another driver pass you when you've buckets of hard shoulder, something like €500. We'd catch loads, they'd be too scared to do it then, and we call it a success. Not to mention the beneficial effect of better manners on the pigs we call drivers!

Isn't that illegal, driving on a hard shoulder?

Marcus.Aurelius

whiterebel wrote: »

Isn't that illegal, driving on a hard shoulder?

You may use it for a short period (provided it is safe to do so) to allow another vehicle to overtake you on a single carriageway.

You might be stopped and given out too if you did it across a junction or around a bend or something. If you do it right, we won't stop you. It is illegal to occupy the hard shoulder on a DC/motorway except in emergencies, and you should not drive in it.

Zith

Joker wrote: »

From today's Irish Independent

snip
...One-in-five fatal road accidents are directly caused by tiredness...
snip

How are speed cameras going to address that? :rolleyes:

/Zith

TheNog

E92 wrote: »

If somebody is doing 120 or 130 or even 140 on a HQDC(which are identical to motorways design wise without the restrictions) I see abolutely nothing wrong with it, as these roads have a design speed of 160 km/h.

On a single carriageway, or on the older DCs then yes I agree that going over 120 is taking the piss. But someone could be doing 110 without even realising it, as legally car speedos are allowed to either underread or overread the true speed by 10%.

100% agreed. I drive on occasion on motorways and I will admit to do break the speed limit. I also break the limit when I drive on country roads and national routes too. I do this all within reason and with conditions attached. Conditions which I would slow down would be things like the amount of traffic on the road, weather conditions, junctions, schools etc.

I would hazard a guess that you would do this as well and do you know why? Cos you and me have an interest in good driving and in cars (you would know more than me but I do have a certain amount of knowledge in cars). The problem is not everyone driving on the roads has that interest that you and I share and therefore would be more susceptible to causing problems on the road because they may not have the ability to forsee possible scenarios or obstacles.

E92 wrote: »

Yeah but that's my point. Cars can stop faster now than ever before, and modern cars have airbags and all sorts of technology there should anyone end up in the unfortunate situation of being in an accident.

Yeah I know cars can stop in shorter distances and have better safety features inside and out but my point is if the driver is a bad driver these safety features will work to a certain degree but not to its fullest. Thats because bad driving goes hand in hand with driver inattention or driver inability to gauge their speed with road conditions etc. The cause of all collisions in this country.

E92 wrote: »

I'm glad you mentioned bad driving, because that's *real* problem, and almost all of the time that has nothing to do with speeding.

Not entirely true. You see I have 2 school going kids and I realised pretty quickly the amount of drivers speeding by the school at opening and closing time. One day I did a speed check outside of a country school. It wasn;t in a village and there was little or no houses around. Within 20 minutes I caught three drivers doing 70kph+ passed the school which was in a 50KPH zone. Everyone of the drivers were female and they all had their kids in the cars with them, going to school.
I will admit afaik there never was an accident there but it just goes to show, that there are drivers out there who either don't give a crap, are too wrapped up in there own little world or think that their own life is more important and they need to get to where they are going quickly.

E92 wrote: »

Somebody could do 100 km/h on a soaking wet motorway; but because they're under the speed limit it's OK, I think they should be done for bad driving because obviously that's too fast.

We need to move away from the obession of "slowing down" for slowing down's sake and for people to drive at a speed that is appropriate for the conditions, the car you're driving etc. If that speed is above the speed limit and your car is capable of it then I see no reason why not to break it. Equally if it is too dangerous to drive at the speed limit then you sohuldn't do so; driving in fog for example you certainly should not be driving at the limit, but if you're on an empty motorway you're not going to harm anyone by breaking the law.

If we conducted a survey which rated drivers behaviour on Irish roads and demonstrated that survey on a scale of 1 to 10, I can guarantee we would have alot of drivers on both end of the scale with highest number of drivers in the middle. That I believe is why the limit on a motorway is set at 40kph less than it was designed for. I would prefer to see a speed limit set to cater for the worst and average driver rather a speed that is set for the best drivers out there. I wouldn't feel very safe knowing that the very bad drivers could travel at 160kph even if it was on a motorway where they don;t use indicators, mirrors etc. It would be carnage.

So we both agree the limits are set lower than our driving capabilites we may not agree with them but that is the limit deemed suitable for good, bad and ****e drivers to obey. One day I'm sure I will be caught speeding, I will pay the fine and take the points cos I know I broke the limit.

Marcus.Aurelius

Just noticed thread here by a moron who's been getting away with no tax, no NCT, no insurance and a first provisional.

It just goes to show that we are never fully removed from the idiot element in driving. She's exactly the type of person we should be hunting down. Click here for thread.

EDIT: Thanks TheNog for for giving your opinions here, nice to see more drivers with an interest in real driving skill.

TJJP

TheNog wrote: »

The fines for drunk driving in Ireland are one of the highest I have seen. Maybe you could point to other countries with higher fines and penalties.

OT, but just out of interest, driving while intoxicated in Japan which has a zero mg/l limit will get you the following:

The Driver and a person who provided the Driver with a vehicle shall be subject to:
Imprisonment with mandatory labour not exceeding five years or a fine not exceeding 1,000,000yen (€8,000)
A person who provided the Driver with alcohol and a person who was riding as a passenger in a vehicle operated by the Driver shall be subject to:
Imprisonment with mandatory labour not exceeding three years or a fine not exceeding 500,000yen (€4,000)

Interesting to note that the penalty for companions encourages social responsibility. People are more likely to interject if they see someone heading for the car when they are wasted.

http://www.keishicho.metro.tokyo.jp/foreign/traffic/nodriving.html