Traffic Corps Program on RTE

Mr. Presentable

Bendihorse wrote: »

I realise that so even though i didn't consider myself to be comitting a serious breach of the law i took it on the chin. He asked me was i on the phone, i said no, which i wasn't. I was straight up and told him i had looked at it to which he replied 'the offence is for holding the device in my hand.' Which i was and admitted to, albeit for about 3 seconds. No contest.

I don't doubt for a moment that you just picked up the phone for a couple of seconds. But I bet that's what everyone who's caught says. I'm just glad to know that there's some enforcement of the regulation - I thought there was none.

keefg

Bendihorse wrote: »

They mashed two clips together, there was a girl in a car on a flip phone texting away to her hearts content with the (had to be) blatently obvious cop cruiser beside her. That was not me. I was shown in a Santa Fe in the next clip, with the guard speaking to me.

Ahh...that explains a lot then. When you said you were on the show next week as the person on the phone I thought that was you with the flip phone. Didn't realise second clip of guards talking (to you) was of a different car.

ceoltoir

It's funny how any mention of the words 'Garda' and 'Traffic' really gets people going!

We have absolutely no respect for the law here in Ireland or for the people who enforce it. Getting one up on the Gardaí is seen as great craic, an achievement to be proud of. Just think of those people who get caught speeding or drink driving and who argue their case all the way to the High Court. Why can't they behave like grown-up men or women and just admit their guilt.

Our behaviour on the roads is just appalling; our attitude to speed limits is a joke. Nobody pays any heed to them. We seem to think we can do anything we like on the roads.

All I can say is that if the programme makes people aware of what the Gardaí have to put up with on a daily basis then it might lead to better behaviour all round.

Bendihorse

nipplenuts wrote: »

I don't doubt for a moment that you just picked up the phone for a couple of seconds. But I bet that's what everyone who's caught says. I'm just glad to know that there's some enforcement of the regulation - I thought there was none.

Like i said, the manner in which they pulled me over left me with the distinct impression that it was all in aid of the camera. He did not stop me in the normal manner.

I twigged the cruiser coming up behind me from half a mile back, (had just passed a slip road and knew he might have seen me with phone in hand). Watched him in the mirror as he came up behind me, i thought 'sh1t' then he dropped way back, definatly over a mile and around a bend so i couldn't see him. I was sure i was away with it next think he came up behind me at speed with lights and siren blaring and pulled me over. Why do that if it wasn't for the benefit of the camera?

I asked him at the time 'whats the story with the camera', he replied 'they are just filming what we do'... Wonder if they will edit that bit out

The mobile phone laws are strictly enforced imo, its just hard to catch everyone doing it.

jmck87

TheNog wrote: »

Again folks Gardai can only act within the powers given within the law.

Amen to that!

Tell that to the Gardai that pull over young lads and pull their car apart looking for drugs. Or does a motorist's age arise reasonable suspicion???

Most Gardai are sound decent people (like the lads on the TV show). Its the system they're put into that is based on revenue collection.

ceoltoir

The 'revenue collection' argument is such a lame one. Two sure ways of avoiding it are: 1). Obey speed limits and the other rules of the road. 2). Don't park where it's illegal to do so. Simple really.

Jip

Being discussed on Jooooooe Duffy now. Duffy is an awful idiot making idiotic comments regarding the English police. Apparently you become arrogant when you get a tatoo.

TheNog

keefg wrote: »

Every year hundreds of people are still being killed or seriously injured on the roads. According to the many news reports, a high % of these accidents happen at night and on what would be considered "back" roads.

And yet....where do I see cash registers, sorry, speed checks set up? On the main duel carriage ways (N4/N7/N11 etc) between 8-9 am and 6-7 pm

Doing speed checks on back roads are not always possible. To set up a speed check we have to do a risk assessment of the area taking into consideration safety of ourselves and road users. We would also need to have a safe place to pull over motorists. So for us to stop a speeding car/van/truck we would need at least 250m of straight road to
a)get a lock with the speed gun
b) walk onto the road to stop the car/van/truck
c) to give that car/van/truck time to stop as safely as possible

catching commuters doing 5-10kph over the limit on their way to/from work. And you're telling me it's not about revenue?? Now who's living on another planet?

Ah here up until now I thought you had a decent and intelligent arguemnt till you said that. This 5-10kph over the limit is just a ridiculous thing to say.

Hooch

TheNog wrote: »

Doing speed checks on back roads are not always possible. To set up a speed check we have to do a risk assessment of the area taking into consideration safety of ourselves and road users. We would also need to have a safe place to pull over motorists. So for us to stop a speeding car/van/truck we would need at least 250m of straight road to
a)get a lock with the speed gun
b) walk onto the road to stop the car/van/truck
c) to give that car/van/truck time to stop as safely as possible



Ah here up until now I thought you had a decent and intelligent arguemnt till you said that. This 5-10kph over the limit is just a ridiculous thing to say.

+1 well said

keefg

TheNog wrote: »

Doing speed checks on back roads are not always possible. To set up a speed check we have to do a risk assessment of the area taking into consideration safety of ourselves and road users. We would also need to have a safe place to pull over motorists. So for us to stop a speeding car/van/truck we would need at least 250m of straight road to
a)get a lock with the speed gun
c) to give that car/van/truck time to stop as safely as possible

Some very valid points there but there are plenty of long straight single lane roads all over this country where checkpoints could be set up.

I see dozens of cars on these roads every week driving like morons, tailgating, reckless overtaking but very few check points.

TheNog wrote: »

b) walk onto the road to stop the car/van/truck

This is not always a requirement though is it? There are plenty of speed check point both here & and all over the UK where the officer would drive after a speeder or dangerous driver after witnessing the incident and pull them over at the first opportunity.

TheNog wrote: »

Ah here up until now I thought you had a decent and intelligent arguemnt till you said that.

You seem to be taking my comments personally when they are directed at the way the Traffic Corps is run and the poor legislation the guys on the ground have to work with to get the job done.

For example, why can't the Customs dept look after yellow plate VRT dodgers and road tax evaders? Surely this would free up the Traffic Corps (and probably more localised Gardai) to get on with some "real" police work?

Unless of course you consider collecting money on behalf of the revenue commissioner to be real police work but I'm pretty sure that not what all those men & women at Templemore had in mind when they signed up for AGS.

TheNog wrote: »

This 5-10kph over the limit is just a ridiculous thing to say.

I wish that were the case but sadly it isn't. My neighbour was ticketed for doing 106kpm on his way home from work on the N7 at Rathcoole.

He wasn't cutting in or out of traffic, he wasn't tailgating or driving erratically and endangering anyone's life.....just sat in the middle lane on his way home from work. And I would bet that he's not the only person to be ticketed for such a minor infraction.

And yet I see more speed traps on the N7 in one week than I do on any single lane roads (where they are needed) in a year.......and people try to convince me it's not about generating easy revenue :rolleyes:.

Oh....and to all those Holier Than Thou saints who will be on posting about how he shouldn't have been going over 100 kph and that they would never do the same....don't bother, save your bull for someone else.

I don't pretend to be a perfect driver but after 19 years behind the wheel I do consider myself experienced. And I just think that this show (after all, this is what this thread is about) just illustrates that our Traffic Corps could be put to better use and should be given the legislation they need to do the job properly.

pa990

maybe i'm wrong... but i thought that the N7 near Rathcoole was a lot less than 120.

its 80 or 100 .... isnt it.. or am i wrong

keefg

pa990 wrote: »

maybe i'm wrong... but i thought that the N7 near Rathcoole was a lot less than 120.

its 80 or 100 .... isnt it.. or am i wrong

Yep, sorry my mistake, it was 106 kph in a 100 zone. I knew he was 6kph over the limit but just got the stretch of road wrong.

Mr. Presentable

keefg wrote: »

I wish that were the case but sadly it isn't. My neighbour was ticketed for doing 106kpm on his way home from work on the N7 at Rathcoole.

.

Nice edit :rolleyes: That was 126 a mo ago!

keefg

nipplenuts wrote: »

Nice edit :rolleyes: That was 126 a mo ago!

Like I said in my last post I made an error there but he was just 6kph over.

pa990

@keefg

what you're offering is anecdotal / hearsay evidence.

Any of these story's about someone being ticketed for being just over the speed limit it always a friend of a friend.

I have yet to see anyone get a ticket for being slightly over the limit

keefg

pa990 wrote: »

@keefg

what you're offering is anecdotal / hearsay evidence.

Any of these story's about someone being ticketed for being just over the speed limit it always a friend of a friend.

I have yet to see anyone get a ticket for being slightly over the limit

Perfectly valid point.

All I'm doing is voicing my opinion of the show and how I think the resources of the Traffic Corps could be put to better use.

Whether anyone agrees or disagrees is irrelevant, it's just a discussion forum.

flazio

TheNog wrote: »

Doing speed checks on back roads are not always possible. To set up a speed check we have to do a risk assessment of the area taking into consideration safety of ourselves and road users. We would also need to have a safe place to pull over motorists. So for us to stop a speeding car/van/truck we would need at least 250m of straight road to
a)get a lock with the speed gun
b) walk onto the road to stop the car/van/truck
c) to give that car/van/truck time to stop as safely as possible

And oddly enough people will probably say that speed checks in locations that fit those requirements are revenue collecting exercises.
Perhaps a two location op, the speed gn in the actual safe space, another guard in a safer spot down the road to pull in anyone that s/he hears on the radio from the radar operator

pa990

flazio wrote: »

And oddly enough people will probably say that speed checks in locations that fit those requirements are revenue collecting exercises.
Perhaps a two location op, the speed gn in the actual safe space, another guard in a safer spot down the road to pull in anyone that s/he hears on the radio from the radar operator

and what if the driver wants to see the reading in the gun ??

And what if the Guard down the road pulls in the wrong car ?

What if the ticket is contested on court.. the Guard that stopped the car, is not the one that took the speed reading, nor was present when the reading was taken.

Radio's can get busy at times, and you could be waiting for 20 or 30 sec to get your message in..
also.. what if another speed check is going on on the same time, and they are using the same freq/ch no. , wouldn't it be confusing when someone says.. pull in that blue BMW.

etc etc
Your suggestion, may not be as practical as if first seemed

keefg

pa990 wrote: »

and what if the driver wants to see the reading in the gun ??

And what if the Guard down the road pulls in the wrong car ?

What if the ticket is contested on court.. the Guard that stopped the car, is not the one that took the spped reading, nor was present when the reading was taken.

Your suggestion, may not be as practical as if first seemed

This method works perfectly well in the UK so no real reason it can't work her with proper planning and co-ordination.

Gary ITR

keefg wrote: »

Like I said in my last post I made an error there but he was just 6kph over.

Unless your neighbour was pulled for a combination of things \i highly doubt that.

I don't doubt you but I fear your neighbour may be telling porkies

pa990

keefg wrote: »

This method works perfectly well in the UK so no real reason it can't work her with proper planning and co-ordination.

1 real reason why is wont work here..
The Legal System..


that procedure of conducting a speed check, ,creates far too many loopholes. Lots of opportunities to cast doubt on the validity of the ticket

keefg

Onkle wrote: »

Unless your neighbour was pulled for a combination of things \i highly doubt that.

I don't doubt you but I fear your neighbour may be telling porkies

You may well be correct but I had no reason to doubt him when he told me so I can only go on that.

Who know's? Maybe he was driving like a loony whilst rolling a joint and getting a BJ from a Brazilian ladyboy named Marcus

keefg

pa990 wrote: »

1 real reason why is wont work here..
The Legal System..


that procedure of conducting a speed check, , allows for too many loopholes. Lots of opportunities to cast doubt on the validity of the ticket

I'm not a lawyer so I'll take your word for it, but surely any legislation can be changed if it's all in the name of road safety?

pa990

keefg wrote: »

I'm not a lawyer so I'll take your word for it, but surely any legislation can be changed if it's all in the name of road safety?

Many Years ago, they decided that they would pop up Gatso's all over the place in the name of Road Safety..

That has yet to happen.. Things move slow in this country (except for some traffic )

polyfusion

flazio wrote:

Perhaps a two location op, the speed gn in the actual safe space, another guard in a safer spot down the road to pull in anyone that s/he hears on the radio from the radar operator

I've never understood why they can't carry out operations like this; I've certainally never seen them tackling this scenario. All counters are flimsy at best. I drive on lots of different types of road, and these are the roads where I've encountered the worst type of driving, and seems are most likely to end up in deaths (going off ditches/into trees).

Anyone have any statistics on which type of roads have highest percentage of fatalities? I'm sure it's been done to death in here already.

keefg

polyfusion wrote: »

I've never understood why they can't carry out operations like this;

Me neither, hopefully The Nog will join us soon and explain why it can or can't be done. Or what changes could be made to make it work.

HL

I haven't seen the program yet but I reckon it's part of a broader strategy by RTE to replace as much of it's expensive programming with cheap reality TV like this as possible. Considering the state of the finances over at Montrose it's perfectly understandable, but the state of some of the crap they'll be putting on the air will be hilarious. I saw on ad on RTE for a new program about the ppl hired by local authorities to look through fly-tipped rubbish for bills and bank statements with which to track down and charge offenders, gripping stuff indeed. Seeing as this is just the beginning of RTE's cost-cutting it's safe to assume that the bottom of this barrel isn't anywhere close to being scraped yet.

TheNog

flazio wrote: »

Perhaps a two location op, the speed gn in the actual safe space, another guard in a safer spot down the road to pull in anyone that s/he hears on the radio from the radar operator

Cant be done here. First off it is best practice to show the driver the speed they were doing and secondly I have seen one speeding case being thrown out cos the guard who stopped the car was not the guard who detected the speed.

keefg

TheNog wrote: »

I have seen one speeding case being thrown out cos the guard who stopped the car was not the guard who detected the speed.

Handy to know :D

monument

Stekelly wrote: »

Plus, to the layman, who the program is aimed at afterall, none of the things are properly explained and only looks like the Gards are letting people off with little or no punishment.

Indeed, that's evident from this thread. The problem there lays with the programme makes.

Just as with how they start out with the voice over saying the traffic core was set up as Irish roads are getting more dangerous -- which is simply not true, Irish roads are safer than 10 years ago.

ironclaw wrote: »

And the radio chatter "Lads... Rubber neckers..." Just so amateurish. No polish of the UK and any other modern police force.

Such rubber neckers add to traffic tailbacks massivly, they are a problem.

ironclaw wrote: »

The usual Irish "Jesus, ya seen that.. Pah (Hand movement).. Thats what your up against... Jeezz"

You could not possibly be talking about where there was no movement out of a car even with sirens blaring and lights flashing in a Garda jeep behind them, could you?

Because the garda's reaction there seamed like a reserved reaction to me.

Buffman wrote: »

The lad's responding to the M50 accident also seemed to take the slowest route possible. It looked like they were around the Conyngham Road/South Circular junction when they got the call, but proceeded through Chapelizod instead of shooting up the N4 dual carrageway.

In all fairness turning back where they were they could of hit a lot of traffic going back and crossing over Islandbridge.