Survey van attacked and destroyed in Louth

bitemybanger

Van was on the Dundalk to Carrickmacross road. The van was attacked and destoroyed, the driver was unharmed.
The start of an uprising?
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/garda-commissioner-condemns-speed-van-arson-attack-483346.html

starbelgrade

bitemybanger wrote: »

The start of an uprising?

No - just some thugs acting the bollox.

Hardly the start of a 1916 style uprising.

bladespin

Such a shame

Joe10000

Terrible news :^\

endurodave

"traffic survey" so that's what their calling grabbing revenue nowadays.

FatherLen

wasnt there a thread for this already? think it got moved to motoring........

Lightshow

I believe the proper response here goes something like this...

G'wan de tooooown!!

What the hell was a gatso doing on this road anyway. I know the north east area like the back of my hand. I have no memory at all of any deaths or seroius injury on this road over the past 20 years.

1 less gatso = 1 less stealth tax on the people of Ireland. Having said that though, I don't condone vandalism of any kind and I'm glad that nobody was hurt.

BronsonTB

Can a mod update the title...was a survey van not gatso...

Biggins

Actions of intimating low brained idiots.
The public will have to fork out for the cost of replacing the van, equipment an other possible expenses (be it now the vans will have to be also have another Garda on duty when the vans are being used and/or higher insurance premiums which we too will be paying for).

jimthemental

Jesus, cut the tyres or smash the windows, bad enough but they lit this thing while there was a guy inside. Absolute cnuts.

Cookie_Monster

BronsonTB wrote: »

Can a mod update the title...was a survey van not gatso...

aww

Lightshow

jimthemental wrote: »

Jesus, cut the tyres or smash the windows, bad enough but they lit this thing while there was a guy inside. Absolute cnuts.

Holy f**k! They're a bit mad up that end of the country. Decades of troubles meaning the value of human life has been reduced to nothing in some people's minds.

I HATE speed cameras but this was a childish and dangerous turn of events.

drunkmonkey

I'm about to cry, those go safe vans are just trying to save lives

My bollix they are!

Mits

I'm glad nobody was hurt but I delighted somebody had the balls to act. That road is not dangerous and this was pure revenue generation.

I saw that van outside blaney and thought of fish in a barrell.

Grumpypants

Avoid stealth tax by driving properly

bitemybanger

FatherLen wrote: »

wasnt there a thread for this already? think it got moved to motoring........

It's not a motoring thread. It's a general discussion about your views an reactions on what happened to the poor little van ;-)

jester77

Wonder if they managed to snap a picture of the culprit!

ibarelycare

I can't believe people would even try to defend this act. Whether or not you agree with those vans, someone was just doing their job and could have been killed.

Complete and utter scumbags who did this.

ejmaztec

I already felt the need to mention this incident in the "Cold weather tips? How do you cope?" thread.:P

arybvtcw0eolkf

jimthemental wrote: »

Jesus, cut the tyres or smash the windows, bad enough but they lit this thing while there was a guy inside. Absolute cnuts.

There was only one guy in the van, get it right!.

jimthemental

jester77 wrote: »

Wonder if they managed to snap a picture of the culprit!

Oh that would just be poetic

jackiebaron

Jesus Fierce Gourd wrote: »

There was only one guy in the van, get it right!.

I don't read him stating that there was more than one in the van

MagicSean

It wasn't a speed camera van. It was there to monitor volumes of traffic.

jimthemental

jackiebaron wrote: »

I don't read him stating that there was more than one in the van

I think he means I mean the lad in the van was the cnut because of his job.

drunkmonkey

ibarelycare wrote: »

someone was just doing their job

Sitting in a van on a dangerous road is hardly what you'd call a job.

Biggins

k_mac wrote: »

It wasn't a speed camera van. It was there to monitor volumes of traffic.

Sadly, brainless gobscites don't bother to actually assess these things right before they go down a road of idiotic, thoroughly stupid actions!

Some family this Christmas morning coming could have been waking to a sad day with one parent less to be with their kids if things had turned out worse!

I don't find that funny for one second - and anyone that thinks that setting fire to a survey vehicle that has someone in it, is either right and/or hilarious, is wrong - and as for the persons that did it, I'd want nothing to do with them!

Run_to_da_hills

jimthemental wrote: »

Jesus, cut the tyres or smash the windows, bad enough but they lit this thing while there was a guy inside. Absolute cnuts.

I hope if they get caught they will be held for attempted murder.

Burkatron

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Sitting in a van on a dangerous road is hardly what you'd call a job.

Tell that to the people queueing up at the post office collecting the scratcher on a weekly basis!

Mozoltov!

k_mac wrote: »

It wasn't a speed camera van. It was there to monitor volumes of traffic.

Just gets better. Retarded scumbags who can't tell the difference between a Gatso and a survey van.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Sitting in a van on a dangerous road is hardly what you'd call a job.

Don't quote me on this now Ted but, I think, that yes, wait, what's that, yes, it is in fact a form of employment therefore, it is also called a job.

Zulu

some poor fellow trying to earn a crust, in a poxy job, getting paid feic all, in a poxy recession, has a petrol bomb thrown into the van he's sitting in on a freezing night?

And some people think that's funny/a good idea/a novelty??

Fucking scumbags. It take a fucking scumbag to do that to another person, & it take another scumbag to condone them.

As another person said - I hope they're caught and tried for manslaughter attempted murder.

De Hipster

Zulu wrote: »

As another person said - I hope they're caught and tried for manslaughter.

Eh someone died?!

Manslaughter charges would need for them to go back and finish the job...actually that would then be classed as murder with the addition of planning and actual intent.

Zulu

De Hipster wrote: »

Eh someone died?!.

Good point! Attempted murder.

cul-2008

Biggins wrote: »

Actions of intimating low brained idiots.
The public will have to fork out for the cost of replacing the van, equipment an other possible expenses (be it now the vans will have to be also have another Garda on duty when the vans are being used and/or higher insurance premiums which we too will be paying for).

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't see how the public will have to fork out any money to replace the van as it is owned by GoSafe, a private consortium, and not AGS?

On another note, trying to kill someone for earning a wage is pathetic on all levels. If you get caught, just suck it up like everyone else.

De Hipster

My understanding was that the Gardaí designated the locations of these GoSafe vans, why in that case was the van situated at a non Accident Black spot conducting a traffic volume survey at 5am?

Not in any way condoning the actions of the person/people who set fire to the van...but 15 vans for the purposes of road safety not effectively deployed to carry out the duties for which they were engaged.

Biggins

cul-2008 wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't see how the public will have to fork out any money to replace the van as it is owned by GoSafe, a private consortium, and not AGS?

In a number of ways.

If the insurance premiums are increased for a private company, where does a person think those increased charges alone are going to be passed onto?
The state as it requests their further services!
Who is going to end up paying possibly for the medical bills for anyone injured and/or for the need of a Garda presence at times?

Dannyboy83

cul-2008 wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't see how the public will have to fork out any money to replace the van as it is owned by GoSafe, a private consortium, and not AGS?

On another note, trying to kill someone for earning a wage is pathetic on all levels. If you get caught, just suck it up like everyone else.

[cough]

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68965652&postcount=1
http://www.peoplesrepublicofcork.com/~peoplesr/forums//showpost.php?p=3490461&postcount=6

Xavier McCauliffe, the well known Kerry Businessman who was prosecuted for crashing his helicopter resulting in the death of a young female passenger is the man behind this company. He owned Spectra Photo in Listowel, and sees this as a replacement revenue stream now that everyone is gone digital and photo processing is extinct. He is also a committed Fianna Fáil supporter.

The contract was awarded by the department of justice which is headed up by Fianna Fáil minister, Dermot Aherne.

[/cough]

==
Stop talking down the economy. Soft Landing any minute now.

DamoDLK

Contrary to other posts - The Dundalk Carrickmacross road is a very bad and potentially dangerous road, anybody that actually knows the road - knows this to be true.

MagicSean

De Hipster wrote: »

My understanding was that the Gardaí designated the locations of these GoSafe vans, why in that case was the van situated at a non Accident Black spot conducting a traffic volume survey at 5am?

Not in any way condoning the actions of the person/people who set fire to the van...but 15 vans for the purposes of road safety not effectively deployed to carry out the duties for which they were engaged.

It wasn't a gosafe speed van. It shocks me how people cant comprehend this.

Lando Griffin

Zulu wrote: »

Good point! Attempted murder.

Or even attempted manslaughter.

DarkJager

k_mac wrote: »

It wasn't a gosafe speed van. It shocks me how people cant comprehend this.

The RTE news says it was.

Garda Commissioner Fachtna Murphy has condemned the arson attack on a GoSafe van

Biggins

Originally Posted by Zulu
Good point! Attempted murder.

Lando Griffin wrote: »

Or even attempted manslaughter.

Not 100% sure which one is applicable but roughly...

Manslaughter is something that happens in the heat of the moment or in a semi-state of madness, etc - but not really planned in advance.

Murder or it attempt is something that is more so planned in advance.

If someone chucked a petrol bomb it might be argued that it there was a clear previous intention (to the actual act) to doing the deed (gathering and preparation of substances/equipment used) - so it could be a charge of attempted murder in the first or second degree.

...However I could be wrong and lets be honest, the chances of the culprit(s) being caught and found is sadly unlikely.

MagicSean

DarkJager wrote: »

The RTE news says it was.

Ah well if RTE says so it must be true. The van was owned by GoSafe but was not a speed van.

cul-2008

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

[cough]

[/cough]

==
Stop talking down the economy. Soft Landing any minute now.

Somehow I think the IMF won't be up for handing 70k to a Kerry man to replace one of his privately owned vans. The days when supporting Fianna Fáil worked in your favour are slowly diminishing, and because your best buds with Joe Soap in the Dáil means feck all to the boys at the EU & the IMF.

I.S.T.

De Hipster wrote: »

My understanding was that the Gardaí designated the locations of these GoSafe vans, why in that case was the van situated at a non Accident Black spot conducting a traffic volume survey at 5am?

Not in any way condoning the actions of the person/people who set fire to the van...but 15 vans for the purposes of road safety not effectively deployed to carry out the duties for which they were engaged.

Some of the vans are used to monitor speed levels on roads which are not in the list of locations where the speed traps will be. If there is a high percentage of people speeding on that stretch of road then it will be added to the list. It looks like this van was one of the ones monitoring speed levels. Although why was it was there at 5am?? Surely the most effective way to monitor is later in the day when the traffic volumes are high.

De Hipster

k_mac wrote: »

It wasn't a gosafe speed van. It shocks me how people cant comprehend this.

Media coverage implies it was...

Garda Commissioner Fachtna Murphy has condemned the arson attack on a GoSafe van.

"GoSafe van personnel are out on our roads day and night working with An Garda Siochana to reduce speed-related collisions and stop the needless loss of lives on our roads.

The Garda Commissioner Fachtna Murphy has condemned this morning’s arson attack on a mobile speed van in Co Louth.

The van was owned by GoSafe, the private consortium which is contracted to run the mobile speed camera network in Ireland.

MagicSean

"a speed camera survey van"

From RTE news. First paragraph.

cul-2008

Biggins wrote: »

In a number of ways.

If the insurance premiums are increased for a private company, where does a person think those increased charges alone are going to be passed onto?
The state as it requests their further services!
Who is going to end up paying possibly for the medical bills for anyone injured and/or for the need of a Garda presence at times?

In all fairness I referred to the fact that you said we would be liable to pay for the van, which isn't true. An extra few thousand on on insurance premium will no doubt be added to the upcoming invoice addressed to the state, an increase which is something you'd want to be very brave to try and charge given the gross earnings GoSafe are earning from this scheme - especially with the EU and the IMF on the scene.

It could also be viewed as a risk one takes, which must be absorbed from the companies profits.

You can get into the nitty gritty of what if's etc, but in my opinion it's creating an unnecessary negative attitude towards an already negatively viewed GoSafe.

petes

What the fcuks a gatso!

Zulu

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

[cough]

[/cough]

==
Stop talking down the economy. Soft Landing any minute now.

Whats the point of your post Dannyboy83? Are you suggesting that because the company owner is a Fianna Fail supporter it somehow excuses someone else to throw a petrol bomb into a van that a person is sat in??

No? Then what's your point? Why obfuscate the issue or the actions of a dirty scumbag?

bladespin

Was only a matter of time, more will go the same way.

Flesh Gorden

k_mac wrote: »

It wasn't a speed camera van. It was there to monitor volumes of traffic.

Wrong, below from the garda site

On a phased basis, GoSafe will provide 6,000 enforcement hours and 1,475 survey hours per month across the country.

For the 6,000 enforcement hours, the cameras will operate from vans which will be marked with high visibility reflective material and will display a saf€ty cam€ra symbol. Images of the vans are available on the right hand side of this page.

The survey hours will be conducted from unmarked vans, in order to accurately observe and record the speeds at which vehicles are currently travelling, for survey purposes only.

In other words, they're seeking out new future locations by doing speed surveys now, nothing to do with traffic volumes

per year it works out around 3611 fines per van per year to break even on €65m over 5 years

so expect to see them more on motorways and other duel carriageways instead of blackspots

besides parking up a van on the hard shoulder is more dangerous then any speeding