Garda Speed Trap Alert - Quincentenial Bridge

deargas

I'm of the firm belief that if every road had a speed camera on it, like one of those averaging speed cameras, then the country would be up in arms campaigning for an increase across the board of speed limits.

It's a typical con. 98% of the traffic crosses the bridge doing 80-90kph, then some schmucks get caught with the wily speed camera afficianados, tallying up their numbers for the month, who go back to the barracks again for another few weeks until the next raid.

it's the typical culture that's saturated this country, throw up the shoulders and say; shure it's not affecting me.

schween

deargas wrote: »

I'm of the firm belief that if every road had a speed camera on it, like one of those averaging speed cameras, then the country would be up in arms campaigning for an increase across the board of speed limits.

It's a typical con. 98% of the traffic crosses the bridge doing 80-90kph, then some schmucks get caught with the wily speed camera afficianados, tallying up their numbers for the month, who go back to the barracks again for another few weeks until the next raid.

it's the typical culture that's saturated this country, throw up the shoulders and say; shure it's not affecting me.

You it the nail on the head.
That and the whole "what can we do" culture.

po0k

Dashboard camera + GPS tagging + button = civilian reporting with photographic and/or video evidence

We need driving re-education camps.

Mrs OBumble

po0k wrote: »

Dashboard camera + GPS tagging + button = civilian reporting with photographic and/or video evidence

We need driving re-education camps.

How about compulsory GPS + speed recording device (linked to the speedo) in every car. When you go to pay your motor tax, you gotta take the disk from the device with you, they put it into a machine in the office, calculate the fine for the times you were speeding and charge you the fine there and then? And it frees up guards to do more useful work too.

Yes, it's not fair that the owner has to pay for other drivers (so these fines coudn't be used for points against licences), but hell, it's not fair that some people who weren't driving dangerously are killed in crashes.

KevR

deargas wrote: »

I'm of the firm belief that if every road had a speed camera on it, like one of those averaging speed cameras, then the country would be up in arms campaigning for an increase across the board of speed limits.

It's a typical con. 98% of the traffic crosses the bridge doing 80-90kph, then some schmucks get caught with the wily speed camera afficianados, tallying up their numbers for the month, who go back to the barracks again for another few weeks until the next raid.

it's the typical culture that's saturated this country, throw up the shoulders and say; shure it's not affecting me.

If every car had some sort of GPS that wouldn't allow the car to go over the speed limit for the road that the car is on at any given time it wouldn't eliminate road accidents/deaths. It would reduce them a bit but, in my personal opinion, not even by a lot. The fact is many bad roads would still have the stupidly high speed limits they have now so people could still drive at a dangerous speed even though they wouldn't be breaking the limit. And, of course, people would still do stupid things, make mistakes, drive while drunk or on drugs and the same lethal roads will still be there (it's hardly coincidence that, despite there being many more cars on the road now, we've had the lowest road deaths since the 60s in this country in the same year we've replaced a lot of lethal N roads with brand new motorways which are many times safer).

Also, I think if they were to take away speed limits altogether I don't think there would be a huge increase in accidents/deaths. People wouldn't immediately driving at 220kmh on, for example, Circular Road and end up killing themselves. Most people don't get into the car with the intention of dying. If there were no speed limits most people would still drive at a sensible speed that they feel is safe and appropriate for that road. Of course there will be a small amount retards who wouldn't know what a safe speed is but do they obey the limit as it stands anyway.

I'm not sure how journeys are made on the bridge and our other 4 lane roads every day. I'm sure it must be at least 70,000 (if not a lot more). Of those 70,000 the vast majority disagree with the 50kmh speed limit. They think it's safe to go faster and that's exactly what they do. 70,000 x 365 = 25,550,000 journeys per year. Very few accidents on those roads considering the volume of traffic. They are safe roads, tens of thousands of people disagree with the speed limit the city council have decided upon for those roads and, frankly, they are fully vindicated in that accidents (specific to speed or otherwise) are few and far between.

Up until recently, I always drove at a speed I felt was appropriate for any given road. Sometimes that would mean I drove over the limit, sometimes I drove a lot under the limit. Thank god, I haven't ever been in an accident and I've never even had a near miss. That's was all on my own common sense and not what the city/county council or the gardai told me was safe. But now with all the speed checks I can't do that and I've become paranoid to the point where it distracts me about staying below the speed limit. I always loved driving but not really enjoying it as much these days.

detoxkid

No harm warning people- it makes people slow down which I think is the overall point anyway

flazio

What I reckon should happen is instead of fitting limiters to every car, limiters should be fitted to cars of drivers convicted of a driving offence. Give drivers the benefit of belief they are safe drivers and only punish them when they prove otherwise.

star.chaser

if your travelling too fast, they won't go after you