Garda Speed Campaign Warning

SB2013

SeanW wrote: »

So you are just like IWH then. Thank you for answering my question.

Now let me answer yours: it's not people going 10-20kph over arbitrary speed limits on dual carriageways and motorways.

Interesting theory. Have you ever attended a traffic collision on a dual carraigeway? I've been at quite a few and those going 10-20 kph over the speed limit have often fared a lot worse than those going 10-20 kph under the speed limit.

opti0nal

SeanW wrote: »

it's not people going 10-20kph over arbitrary speed limits on dual carriageways and motorways.

The speed limits are not arbitrary, that's just one of the many lies speeders tell themselves to justify their law breaking behaviour.

You're being evasive: Who is responsible for almost all road deaths and injuries on the roads?

Hint: It's not cyclists.

SeanW

opti0nal wrote: »

You're being evasive: Who is responsible for almost all road deaths and injuries on the roads?

As I said, it's not people tipping over 18.5MPH on this dual carriageway.

Hint: It's not cyclists.

So cyclists should be allowed to break laws with impunity?

opti0nal

SeanW wrote: »

As I said, it's not people tipping over 18.5MPH on this dual carriageway.

So, who is responsible?

SeanW wrote: »

So cyclists should be allowed to break laws with impunity?

This is one of the ways drivers distract themselves from uncomfortable truths about the causes of death and injury on the roads.

SeanW

opti0nal wrote: »

So, who is responsible?

You seem to have all the answers, you tell me? :rolleyes:

This is one of the ways drivers distract themselves from uncomfortable truths about the causes of death and injury on the roads.

So, cyclists should be exempt from all road laws?

opti0nal

SeanW wrote: »

You seem to have all the answers, you tell me? :rolleyes:So, cyclists should be exempt from all road laws?

More evasion and distraction, I see.

If you don't know the answer, you should not be driving.

SeanW

opti0nal wrote: »

More evasion and distraction, I see.

Look whos talking!

SeanW wrote:

So, cyclists should be exempt from all road laws?

Should I take your non-answer as a yes?

opti0nal

SeanW wrote: »

Look whos talking!

It's typical of offender behaviour to deny responsibility for their own actions, to blame others and to create distractions from the core issues. This is why it is so difficult to get drivers to obey the law.

SeanW wrote: »

Should I take your non-answer as a yes?

No.

SeanW

opti0nal wrote: »

It's typical of offender behaviour to deny responsibility for their own actions, to blame others and to create distractions from the core issues.

Hey, I don't deny "lawbreaking" ... that N3 junction? I had to use it a couple of times some years back and had trouble staying at 60kph - while being overtaken by other motorists doing perhaps 30k more than me.

This is why it is so difficult to get drivers to obey the law.

And it is not possible, in any case, without exception, because the laws are messed up? I'm sure some people said the same thing about drinkers during the Prohibition era ...

No.

Then how should I take it? You're going on about lawbreaking motorists like they're Enemy #1, but as I see it like Iwannahurl and other motorist bashers, completely ignoring lawbreaking (often far more egregious) by other road users such as cyclists.

I also see IWH and others wanting ever more extreme laws and regulations to punish motorists for what seems to be the sake of it.

sdanseo

opti0nal wrote: »

Only law-breaking motorists which, in terms of speeding is about 78% of them.

Those that park legally, stay out of bus lanes, use indicators, stop for traffic signals, pass lawfully and who stay within speed limits are quite OK.

It's the ones who deliberately and constantly break safety laws that need to have their licences taken away.

No. It's those who continually drive in a manner which is unsafe who should be punished.

Breaking an unreasonable speed limit in condtions which are appropriate to a higher speed is not unsafe. There are almost identical stretches of road in this country with wildly varied speed limits.


As for cyclists, don't get me started. One of three things needs to happen with pedal cyclists:

1. They need to obey every rule of the road and have those rules enforced as harshly against them, if not moreso, than they are against drivers.

2. They need to be completely segregated from traffic in cycle lanes and prohibited from encroaching on regular roadway, ever.

3. They need to be completely banned from the road for their own safety.

The number of cyclists I've seen flout laws recently boggles the mind. Some go through red lights into busy junctions, others move out to overtake other cyclists without looking, yet more change lanes while rudely shoving their hand into traffic as if to say "I'm moving, go on I dare you to run me over".

Cycles should be outright BANNED from any road whose lanes are not wide enough for a motorist to safely overtake them without encoraching over the centreline. Now that's a safety issue.

opti0nal

SeanW wrote: »

.Then how should I take it? You're going on about lawbreaking motorists like they're Enemy #1, but as I see it like Iwannahurl and other motorist bashers, completely ignoring lawbreaking (often far more egregious) by other road users such as cyclists..

Whose behaviour kills and injures and endangers the most people? There's your public enemy #1.

senordingdong

sdeire wrote: »

Cycles should be outright BANNED from any road whose lanes are not wide enough for a motorist to safely overtake them without encoraching over the centreline. Now that's a safety issue.

+1 but keep in mind, according to the standard of the driving test, when you are overtaking a cyclist, you have to give them room to fall. Which in an instance like you described, would put you on the wrong side of the road.

I cycle on my daily commute and have to say, the amount of near accidents caused by cyclists disgusts me.
In their defence, sometimes the roads we have to share aren't adequate for both motorists and cyclists but many of them seem to think they are entitled to carry on with impunity.

HurtLocker

opti0nal wrote: »

Whose behaviour kills and injures and endangers the most people? There's your public enemy #1.

Incompetent road users.


No doubt cars kill should we just ban them? Mainly through driver error. The standard of driving has improved. Young drivers do EDTs. The idea that old speed limits are still fit for propose makes zero sense.

You are right it's a limit not a guide or target. But we are good at driving. We don't want to go down the road of the states where speed limits are ridiculously low, and drivers are basically sh*te and pay no attention to their surroundings Nobody in Ireland, well maybe you, wants UK like enforcement. This limits are the same as when most cars had no NCT, no ABS, no theory test,no back seat-belts, drivers freely used phones, fully tinted windows were allowed, L-drivers were legally allowed on their own,and drink driving (to todays standard) was not rare at all. The punishment for speed was an on the spot fine.

Now with pretty meh enforcement of speed, road deaths have plummeted. Why? Not because of flimsy cameras that's positions are available online . No because most drivers have a bit of cop on when it comes to drink driving, phones, seat-belts, reckless speeding and general awareness of others and the consequences.

The day that the majority reaches the consensus that 100kph is the limit of safe driving on a road regardless of conditions is the day they drop them to 80kph. The first of which is unlikely.

Catching drivers for speed is a cop out. It's the cheapest most profitable way. A bit more focus on phone use, unfit drivers, seat-belts, more breathylizers and warning drivers in real time of dangerous road conditions. A bit more presence than holding a hairdryer or sitting in a gatso van would make the roads safer for everyone.

Speed can be a factor, inattention is the behaviour that kills regardless of speed.

SeanW

HurtLocker wrote: »

Incompetent road users.

QFT!

limits are the same as when most cars had no NCT, no ABS, no theory test,no back seat-belts, drivers freely used phones, fully tinted windows were allowed, L-drivers were legally allowed on their own,and drink driving (to todays standard) was not rare at all. The punishment for speed was an on the spot fine.

Actually many speed limits are lower.

1. Urban area limits now go further into the countryside, I've seen it both locally and nationally, evidence that signs were altered in the past few years.
2. Metrification of speed limits resulted in the speed limit of regional roads dropping from 96kph (60MPH) to 80kph (50MPH) ... why? Did all the R roads nationwide become 16kph less safe overnight?
3. Pursuant to this, when a new road (e.g. motorway) replaced an existing single carriagway, the speed limit on the old road fell from 100kph to 80kph. Again, did the road suddenly become 20kph less safe overnight?

Speed can be a factor, inattention is the behaviour that kills regardless of speed.

QFT, and again, inattention can come from any class of road user.

opti0nal

HurtLocker wrote: »

Catching drivers for speed is a cop out. It's the cheapest most profitable

How much profit? Back your statement up.

If drivers are caught for speeding it's because of one of these:

1: They don't know the speed limit because they failed to observe a road sign.

2: They're inattentive to the speedometer.

3: They deliberately break road-traffic laws when they feel like it.

In all of these cases they should get points and if they persist they should be put off the road.

Speeding is a symptom of bad driving that's easy to detect. Most probably, the drivers who speed, also break other traffic laws.

Using automated speed traps will hopefully free up resources to target the other problem behaviours you mention.

humbert

SeanW wrote: »

QFT!

1. Metrification of speed limits resulted in the speed limit of regional roads dropping from 96kph (60MPH) to 80kph (50MPH) ... why? Did all the R roads nationwide become 16kph less safe overnight?

Just on this point. Even 80kph is much too high on a larger number of our regional roads so I assume they took the opportunity to review the previous limit.

HurtLocker

opti0nal wrote: »

How much profit? Back your statement up.

really? Okay seeing as you decided to say speeders most probably break other laws (with zero back up). Backing up statements ain't your strong point. I'm not going finding links. I spoke to a guard who spoke of a van catching 2 a minute in cork. That's €160 a minute or nearly €10000 an hour.

opti0nal wrote: »

If drivers are caught for speeding it's because of one of these:

1: They don't know the speed limit because they failed to observe a road sign.

2: They're inattentive to the speedometer.

3: They deliberately break road-traffic laws when they feel like it.

In all of these cases they should get points and if they persist they should be put off the road.

Speeding is a symptom of bad driving that's easy to detect. Most probably, the drivers who speed, also break other traffic laws.

Using automated speed traps will hopefully free up resources to target the other problem behaviours you mention.

Thank Christ nobody thinks like you. That dribble coming from the RSA would throw the progress of the last 5 years down the toilet. Think whatever you want about the average motorists. How 78% break the limits so your point above would mean 80% of drivers should be off the road. You clearly have an anti motorist bias. As motorists speeding is a given here.

Responsible drivers and speeders are not mutually exclusive. The intersection between the groups is huge if not 100%. You'd be hard pressed to find a driver who hasn't broken the speed limit 6 times in the 3 years or simpler once in the last 6 months.

By the current system and what you're saying a person who goes 31 in a 30, once every six months should lose there licence, if they respect the letter of the law they should receive a ban. Thankfully that's not the case.

SeanW

opti0nal wrote: »

Back your statement up.
...
drivers who speed, also break other traffic laws (zero evidence)

Oh dear ... making wild statements with no backup while accusing other people of making statements with no backup ... that smacks of hypocrasy
:rolleyes:
But then again, considering that you are likely the spiritual descendent of cyclopath2001/Iwannahurl, I wouldn't expect consistency or reason from you.

If drivers are caught for speeding it's because of one of these:

1: They don't know the speed limit because they failed to observe a road sign.

2: They're inattentive to the speedometer.

3: They deliberately break road-traffic laws speed limits when they feel like it because the speed limit as set is not approprate to the conditions, e.g. road profile, traffic profile, visibility etc.

In all of these cases they should get points and if they persist they should be put off the road.

Speeding is a symptom of bad driving that's easy to detect. Speeding could be a symptom of bad driving, it could also be an indictment of the inappropriateness of the speed limit. Most probably, the drivers who speed, also break other traffic laws. I have no evidence to back this up, really, I'm just slinging mud and hoping it sticks because I don't have an actual argument. This while accusing other posters of making unbacked statements

FYP :rolleyes:

opti0nal

HurtLocker wrote: »

really? Okay seeing as you decided to say speeders most probably break other laws (with zero back up). Backing up statements ain't your strong point.

Anyone with driving experience and who knows the rules of the road would know this is true.

Just yesterday I was driving on the M1, I got passed by many drivers doing far more than just 1km/h over the limit. Some were speeding as they passed me on the inside slip/merging lane (illegal), they then cut across into the outside lane without inducating (illegal) and then illegally tailgated overs. In the city, many drivers fail to stop for amber lights because they're speeding. It's perfectly logical to assume that if someone has a mindset that they think they're above the law and can pick and choose which ones they'll obey, that speeding will just be one of the laws they'll break.

HurtLocker wrote: »

I'm not going finding links. I spoke to a guard who spoke of a van catching 2 a minute in cork. That's €160 a minute or nearly €10000 an hour.

How much net profit is made after operating costs? Link please.

HurtLocker wrote: »

You clearly have an anti motorist bias. As motorists speeding is a given here.

I have an anti-law-breaker bias. Not all drivers break the law.

HurtLocker wrote: »

Responsible drivers and speeders are not mutually exclusive.

That's messed up thinking. Putting people at risk by ignoring road safety laws is not responsible behaviour.

HurtLocker wrote: »

By the current system and what you're saying a person who goes 31 in a 30, /QUOTE]People who do 31 in a 30 zone are not being targeted.

I think penalties should be linked to the percentage by which the limit has been exceeded.

Shenshen

senordingdong wrote: »

Exactly, speeding isn't the cause, it's a factor.
The Germans have roads with no speed limits. So by Irish logic, there must be carnage on these roads every day, but there isn't. Why?

Mostly because those roads are so busy night and day, you'd be lucky if you managed to get up to 120 before a lorry pulls out in front of you.

Yes, Germany has some stretches of motorway without speed limit, Not very many, but they do exist.
However, Germany also has a seriously tough traffic corps, undercover cars with dashboard cams that will pull you over for overtaking unsafely (as in, without indicating), tailgating, flashing another car, all those things Irish drivers think are just minor misdemeanours.

They have static speed cameras which you may or may not notice and that will always catch speeders, unlike the 5 camera vans that the Irish guards have to shuffle about the country strategically. And, yes, in residential areas, the speed limit is 30 kph. And God have mercy on your soul should you break it.

You also have to learn driving in Germany with an approved instructor, and ONLY with an approved instructor. You are not allowed behind the wheel in any other car than an instructor's car, and with an instructor next to you until you actually fully passed your test. People complain about the cost of passing your test in Ireland... in Germany, it will set you back a minimum of €2000, if you don't need any lessons other than the bare minimum required.

And don't get me started on the state of the roads.

Stop comparing Germany with Ireland. It's not even apples and oranges, it's water melons and high-heeled shoes.

Shenshen

CruelCoin wrote: »

Yes it is.

If you drive just a little below the limit in your driving test, you get faulted for "not making progress".

Nonsense.

CruelCoin

sdeire wrote: »

Breaking an unreasonable speed limit in condtions which are appropriate to a higher speed is not unsafe. There are almost identical stretches of road in this country with wildly varied speed limits.

I'll add to this bit,

Why are there twisty, cliff-side roads in Kerry/Clare where the limit is 100kph, yet the regional road (used to be N-road but got delisted only due to arbitrary laws about it being near a newly opened motorway) road near me is at 80kph?

Flat straight road, 80kph
Cliffside nightmare, 100kph.

Makes perfect sense.

Needless to say i break that limit habitually, and proud of it.

CruelCoin

Shenshen wrote: »

Nonsense.

http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/ADI/Stage2Cat_B_C_D_EC_Marking_Sheet.pdf

Listed there under an entire shiny section.

While it does not list the figure, the rule is indeed in place.

If you dawdle like a granny at 50kph in a 80kph zone then that's "failure to make progress".

Like wise doing 15kph in a 30 zone is the same.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

senordingdong wrote: »

Exactly, speeding isn't the cause, it's a factor.
The Germans have roads with no speed limits. So by Irish logic, there must be carnage on these roads every day, but there isn't. Why?

That doesn't mean German drivers tear along these stretches wreklessly jst because they can.

Shenshen

CruelCoin wrote: »

http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/ADI/Stage2Cat_B_C_D_EC_Marking_Sheet.pdf

Listed there under an entire shiny section.

While it does not list the figure, the rule is indeed in place.

If you dawdle like a granny at 50kph in a 80kph zone then that's "failure to make progress".

Like wise doing 15kph in a 30 zone is the same.

"failure to make progress", as I was informed by the RSA on request before sitting my test, applies to speeds significantly under the speed limit without cause.

Their rule of thumb is between half to 2/3 of the actual speed limit.

So yes, 15kph in a 30kph zone would fall under this heading, "If you drive just a little below the limit in your driving test" does not.

The speed limit is the maximum permissible speed, not the target speed. You can do your entire test going a steady 10kph under the speed limit, and you will pass without problem.

Iwannahurl

CruelCoin wrote: »

http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/ADI/Stage2Cat_B_C_D_EC_Marking_Sheet.pdf

Listed there under an entire shiny section.

While it does not list the figure, the rule is indeed in place.

If you dawdle like a granny at 50kph in a 80kph zone then that's "failure to make progress".

Like wise doing 15kph in a 30 zone is the same.

Bullsh1t arguments like this one are regurgitated and rehashed on Boards constantly. The underlying motivation is always the same, imo: the bulsh1tters are simply scratching around for any excuse they can find to justify their desire to "proudly" drive as fast as they please whenever they feel like it.

Immaturity (see below), half-arsed ideology, resentment of speed limit enforcement, self-satisfied ignorance of evidence, selective and ill-informed use of official information (eg RSA literature) and a lot more muppetry besides are all part of the My Speed syndrome, in my experience.

The RSA marking sheet also includes the following section:

Speed – adjust speed to suit/on approach

Road conditions
Traffic conditions
Roundabouts
Cross junctions
Turning right
Turning left
Traffic controls
Speed limit

Of course we wouldn't want to focus too much attention on such things, or let reality spoil an opportunity for posting ignorant self-serving rants on Boards.

SeanW

opti0nal wrote: »

Anyone with driving experience and who knows the rules of the road would know this is true.

I have plenty of driving experience and I know it to be a total fabrication.

Just yesterday I was driving on the M1, I got passed by many drivers doing far more than just 1km/h over the limit. Some were speeding as they passed me on the inside slip/merging lane (illegal), they then cut across into the outside lane without inducating (illegal) and then illegally tailgated overs.

I used the M1 myself a couple of years back during the widening works (don't know if that is still going on) and I never noticed any lawbreaking save for breaking the 60kph limit in place at that time.

It's perfectly logical to assume that if someone has a mindset that they think they're above the law and can pick and choose which ones they'll obey, that speeding will just be one of the laws they'll break.

No it's not logical. And you have no evidence. Again, given specific references to the roads I showed above (the N3 over the M50 and the N85 T1DC in Ennis) please demonstrate:

1. That breaking THOSE limits by anything up to a factor of double has any negative consequences whatsoever.
2. That breaking THOSE limits is a clear precursor to breaking other road laws.

I have an anti-law-breaker bias. Not all drivers break the law.

No, you have an anti-motorist bias because you are only concerned with motorist lawbreaking, and at that beyond any level of reason or common sense.

That's messed up thinking. Putting people at risk by ignoring road safety laws is not responsible behaviour.

Again, please go back to the roads I mentioned above and demonstrate how breaking those arbitrary limits is "putting people at risk."

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Bullsh1t arguments
...
Of course we wouldn't want to ... let reality spoil an opportunity for posting ignorant self-serving rants on Boards.

Bullsh1t arguments and infantile agenda driven self-serving rants? None of us have a patch on you my friend! :cool:

Again, since it is your view that the law and public policy should be used as an instrument to bash motorists with (motorist hostile housing design, "walking speed" and 30kph speed limits, automatic fault laws, increased motoring taxes, among just a small sampling) one could hardly call you objective. But don't let that get in the way of an "ignorant self-serving rant on Boards."

CruelCoin

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Bullsh1t arguments like this one are regurgitated and rehashed on Boards constantly. The underlying motivation is always the same, imo: the bulsh1tters are simply scratching around for any excuse they can find to justify their desire to "proudly" drive as fast as they please whenever they feel like it.

Immaturity (see below), half-arsed ideology, resentment of speed limit enforcement, self-satisfied ignorance of evidence, selective and ill-informed use of official information (eg RSA literature) and a lot more muppetry besides are all part of the My Speed syndrome, in my experience.

The RSA marking sheet also includes the following section:

Speed – adjust speed to suit/on approach

Road conditions
Traffic conditions
Roundabouts
Cross junctions
Turning right
Turning left
Traffic controls
Speed limit

Of course we wouldn't want to focus too much attention on such things, or let reality spoil an opportunity for posting ignorant self-serving rants on Boards.

From an earlier post of mine:
Why are there twisty, cliff-side roads in Kerry/Clare where the limit is 100kph, yet the regional road (used to be N-road but got delisted only due to arbitrary laws about it being near a newly opened motorway) road near me is at 80kph?

Flat straight road, 80kph
Cliffside nightmare, 100kph.

That road currently at 80pkh is a better, wider, smoother road thatn the cliffside one, was at 100kph for a very long time and the only reason for it becoming 80kph was a new motorway opening up alongside it.

Did the road magically degrade overnight? No.
Is the road any less safe? No. If anything it is now safer due to the reduced traffic!

The speed got reduced due to arbitrary nanny state laws, and i ignore them as such.

You can complain all you like, I obey all laws bar the ridiculous.

CruelCoin

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

That doesn't mean German drivers tear along these stretches wreklessly jst because they can.

Er, yes they do.

You have only to be on one at nighttime to be pesistently blinded by the Porsche drivers flashing their "get the hell outta my way highbeams).

Despite this, still fewer road deaths per mile driven.

Greater speed in Germany has not resulted in more numerous deaths per mile driven.

sdanseo

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Bullsh1t arguments like this one are regurgitated and rehashed on Boards constantly. The underlying motivation is always the same, imo: the bulsh1tters are simply scratching around for any excuse they can find to justify their desire to "proudly" drive as fast as they please whenever they feel like it.

Clarification: I would like to drive as fast as I please whenever and wherever it is reasonable and safe to do so. Many speed limits defy my logic, and that is my argument.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Of course we wouldn't want to focus too much attention on such things, or let reality spoil an opportunity for posting ignorant self-serving rants on Boards.

You need to take a ladder and use it to clamber down from that high horse. There is a difference between those making a sensible argument and, to once again use my phrase from earlier, a moron throwing his Glanza round back road corners at 3am and 110km/h.

opti0nal

SeanW wrote: »

I used the M1 myself a couple of years back during the widening works (don't know if that is still going on) and I never noticed any lawbreaking save for breaking the 60kph limit in place at that time.

The works are ongoing and a legal 60kph limit is still in place. There are cones and machinery and workers. Many drivers ignore the limit there. They also ignore the 80kph limit south of those works and they overtake on the inside and don't indicate when changing lanes.

SeanW wrote: »

No it's not logical. And you have no evidence. Again, given specific references to the roads I showed above (the N3 over the M50 and the N85 T1DC in Ennis) please demonstrate:

1. That breaking THOSE limits by anything up to a factor of double has any negative consequences whatsoever.

If there is an accident, the extra speed will result in extra harm.

SeanW wrote: »

1. That breaking THOSE limits is a clear precursor to breaking other road laws.

As observed every day on the road. Deliberately breaking road traffic laws demonstrates an a lack of self-control and discipline. It's that simple.

SeanW wrote: »

No, you have an anti-motorist bias because you are only concerned with motorist lawbreaking, and at that beyond any level of reason or common sense.

I am concerned about needless death and injury.



Motorist law-breaking results in death and injury. It's a much more serious social problem than road traffic law-breaking by non-motorists.

SeanW wrote: »

Again, please go back to the roads I mentioned above and demonstrate how breaking those arbitrary limits is "putting people at risk."

Just because you don't understand the reasoning behind speed limits (or, more likely, refuse to accept them) does not make those limits wrong.

You might be a fantastically confident and competent driver, you might eventually qualify for the Nobel prize in driving. But if somebody else makes a mistake, it's your speed that will kill them.

pabloh999

How can sh*tty little roads all over the country have speed limits of 80/100 kmph?
And a huge 3/4 lane motorway(m1/m50) have the same 80/100kmph limit?

Speed limits in many areas are not about safety, and anyone who thinks they are is either naive or deluded.

SeanW

opti0nal wrote: »

The works are ongoing and a legal 60kph limit is still in place. There are cones and machinery and workers. Many drivers ignore the limit there. They also ignore the 80kph limit south of those works and they overtake on the inside and don't indicate when changing lanes.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I take lane discipline and indication/right of way rules quite seriously. And I don't frequently see those sort of things. Speed yes, the rest of it no.

If there is an accident, the extra speed will result in extra harm.

But if somebody else makes a mistake, it's your speed that will kill them.

That sounds like a case for 10kph speed limits nationwide? In case some drunk pedestrian wanders onto the motorway should those speed limits all be reduced to Iwannahurls "walking speed?" Why or why not?

You seem to believe the hype that "speed kills." Road use is risky for everyone, so there must be a balance between that risk and the utility of the road. Some speed limits reflect this balance well. Others are disproportionate. Like the roads I mentioned above being key examples.

I am concerned about needless death and injury.

You're concerned about "law-breaking" by only one class of road users, despite the fact that you admit other road users can be at fault. That's bias.

Just because you don't understand the reasoning behind speed limits (or, more likely, refuse to accept them) does not make those limits wrong.

B.S. Like any law, just because it's there doesn't necessarily mean its right: consider the Prohibition laws of the American 1920s, the same arguments you have come out with could have been made by a Temperance advocate at that time.

senordingdong

Shenshen wrote: »

Yes, Germany has some stretches of motorway without speed limit, Not very many, but they do exist.
However, Germany also has a seriously tough traffic corps, undercover cars with dashboard cams that will pull you over for overtaking unsafely (as in, without indicating), tailgating, flashing another car, all those things Irish drivers think are just minor misdemeanours.

They have static speed cameras which you may or may not notice and that will always catch speeders, unlike the 5 camera vans that the Irish guards have to shuffle about the country strategically. And, yes, in residential areas, the speed limit is 30 kph. And God have mercy on your soul should you break it.

You also have to learn driving in Germany with an approved instructor, and ONLY with an approved instructor. You are not allowed behind the wheel in any other car than an instructor's car, and with an instructor next to you until you actually fully passed your test. People complain about the cost of passing your test in Ireland... in Germany, it will set you back a minimum of €2000, if you don't need any lessons other than the bare minimum required.

And don't get me started on the state of the roads.

Stop comparing Germany with Ireland. It's not even apples and oranges, it's water melons and high-heeled shoes.

You've just affirmed my point.

Germany has a much higher standard of driving than Ireland.
And as a result they can offer higher speed limits in some instances.

Yest the Irish solution, is just lower the speed limit and vilify anyone that does not comply. That way, the govt. never has to take any affirmitive action, nor does it have to take any of the responsibility for the way things are on our roads.

Ireland has much lower standard of driving.
And as a result, can only offer lower speed limits.

opti0nal

SeanW wrote: »

I can't speak for anyone else, but I take lane discipline and indication/right of way rules quite seriously. And I don't frequently see those sort of things. Speed yes, the rest of it no.

You don't see people not indicating? You don't see people using handphones while driving? You don't see people blocking traffic when coming out of side roads? You don't see people failing to stop on amber when they should? You don't see illegal parking, people driving the wrong way around roundabouts? You don't see illegal overtaking? Your observational skills are quite poor.

SeanW wrote: »

IThat sounds like a case for 10kph speed limits nationwide?

Straw man argument.

SeanW wrote: »

You seem to believe the hype that "speed kills." Road use is risky for everyone, so there must be a balance between that risk and the utility of the road.

Including the innocent. You seem to be arguing that there is a acceptable level of collateral damage that should be accepted so that you can drive as fast as you want.

SeanW wrote: »

Some speed limits reflect this balance well. Others are disproportionate. Like the roads I mentioned above being key examples.

You seem to be arguing that all speed limits are wrong because some roads have speed limits you do not understand.

SeanW wrote: »

You're concerned about "law-breaking" by only one class of road users, despite the fact that you admit other road users can be at fault. That's bias.

I said I was concerned about needless death and injury. This comes almost exclusively from the actions of one class of road user.

SeanW wrote: »

B.S. Like any law, just because it's there doesn't necessarily mean its right: consider the Prohibition laws of the American 1920s, the same arguments you have come out with could have been made by a Temperance advocate at that time.

So this is the 1920's and your enjoyment of 'safe' speeding is being spoiled by a 'nanny' government?

Shenshen

senordingdong wrote: »

You've just affirmed my point.

Germany has a much higher standard of driving than Ireland.
And as a result they can offer higher speed limits in some instances.

Yest the Irish solution, is just lower the speed limit and vilify anyone that does not comply. That way, the govt. never has to take any affirmitive action, nor does it have to take any of the responsibility for the way things are on our roads.

Ireland has much lower standard of driving.
And as a result, can only offer lower speed limits.

I can't wait for the outcry when the government announces they're going to :

1) Spend billions improving infrastructure and will therefore raise taxes across the board, as well as introducing new ones, to match the German income tax level of around 45% (plus social charge)

2) Force every learner driver to take lessons with approved instructors, and ONLY with those instructors until they passed their test. The minimum number of lessons required will be around 30 - 40, plus theory lessons, plus first-aid course.

3) Force every driver currently on the roads to re-take their test under German conditions. And they will not allow to drive away from the test centre should they fail. They will be treated the same as learners.

4) Announce it will equip the traffic corps with state-of-the-art speed detection equipment, including thousands of stationary cameras, undercover cars with dashboard speed detecting equipment, as well as raise the number of staff significantly. Oh, and raise taxes again to pay for that, too.

Just so that a few people get one or two stretches of road where they can drive at whatever speed they want at 2am in the morning.

That's a vote-winner in this country for sure.

HurtLocker

opti0nal wrote: »

So this is the 1920's and your enjoyment of 'safe' speeding is being spoiled by a 'nanny' government?

Nope! Enforcement is next to nil compared to other countries. Punishment for doing 130 on a motorway is the same as 150, so once you speed there's no reason not to go the full hog. Using resources like trapster app and Cork garda checkpoints on twitter means if one really wants speed cameras can be a temporary nuisance not a full time worry. I don't think I've meet a camera I didn't expect in the last 6 months since I started using them.
But that being said Im rarely able to reach the limits due to the times I travel and traffic volumes. More proactive to make sure I don't get caught a bit above the limit through those black spots.

opti0nal

HurtLocker wrote: »

Nope! Enforcement is next to nil compared to other countries. Punishment for doing 130 on a motorway is the same as 150, so once you speed there's no reason not to go the full hog.

That's why I think there should be a scale of penalties depending on the percentage by which the limit was exceeded, starting with a fine and no points and leading to major points.

Thus 130 in a 120 zone would be less serious than 60 in a 50 zone.

How about a point for every 5% over the limit?

In the 130/120 that could give 2 points, and in the 60/50 it would yield 4.

Note that under existing law, if you're well over, you can be done for dangerous driving.

senordingdong

Shenshen wrote: »

I can't wait for the outcry when the government announces they're going to :

1) Spend billions improving infrastructure and will therefore raise taxes across the board, as well as introducing new ones, to match the German income tax level of around 45% (plus social charge)

2) Force every learner driver to take lessons with approved instructors, and ONLY with those instructors until they passed their test. The minimum number of lessons required will be around 30 - 40, plus theory lessons, plus first-aid course.

3) Force every driver currently on the roads to re-take their test under German conditions. And they will not allow to drive away from the test centre should they fail. They will be treated the same as learners.

4) Announce it will equip the traffic corps with state-of-the-art speed detection equipment, including thousands of stationary cameras, undercover cars with dashboard speed detecting equipment, as well as raise the number of staff significantly. Oh, and raise taxes again to pay for that, too.

Just so that a few people get one or two stretches of road where they can drive at whatever speed they want at 2am in the morning.

That's a vote-winner in this country for sure.

You can't wait? Don't worry. You don't have to wait.
I thought I was clear in my approximation of the governments stance that they will not make any serious endeavours to;
1)Improve infrastructure
2)Insist on a more rigorous, higher standard of driver training
3)Introduce mandatory re-testing and penalties for failing a test
4)Introduce a state of the art traffic corp.

Outcry from increased taxes!? Irrelevant. Nothing to do with this discussion.
Unless you're suggesting that a nations road safety agenda should only be as robust as it's tax revenue? Interesting.

Furthermore, I never suggested that I, or anyone else, was crying out for any stretch of road without a speed limit for any time period.
I drew a comparison of a country that demands a higher standard of driving and produces a higher calibre of driver and as a result, does not take the slow coach approach to safety.

Shenshen

senordingdong wrote: »

I drew a comparison of a country that demands a higher standard of driving and produces a higher calibre of driver and as a result, does not take the slow coach approach to safety.

It doesn't?
So you didn't know that in residential areas, the speed limit in Germany is 30kph rather than the 50kph here in Ireland?

senordingdong

Shenshen wrote: »

It doesn't?
So you didn't know that in residential areas, the speed limit in Germany is 30kph rather than the 50kph here in Ireland?

Yes, I did know that.
But I didn't draw a comparison with a residential area, did I?
No, I didn't. So that's irrelevant.

SeanW

opti0nal wrote: »

You don't see people not indicating? You don't see people using handphones while driving? You don't see people blocking traffic when coming out of side roads? You don't see people failing to stop on amber when they should? You don't see illegal parking, You don't see illegal overtaking? Your observational skills are quite poor.

Whoa sonny, I said I did not see these FREQUENTLY, the key word you missed. I do see some of this, but with nowhere near the regularity of breaking speed limits.

Snide comments and thinly veiled insults aside, I stand over what I said: speeding is a different case. I see (and do) "speeding" with far greater regularity than any of the stuff you posted, all of which I avoid.

Speed is not related to the other stuff.

people driving the wrong way around roundabouts?

WTF? I NEVER see this ... what kind of tip do you live in where this is common? Seriously!!

Straw man argument.

You raised it: motorists are responsible for everything bar the Black Death in your book and speed causes "unnecessary" deaths and injuries.

So why should we not have 10kph speed limits all over the country?

You seem to be arguing that all speed limits are wrong because some roads have speed limits you do not understand.

Oh I understand very well: they look good on paper for some reason but have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on what could be called safe, considerate driving.

I take road safety very seriously and always take road conditions, traffic profile, respect for other road users into consideration when deciding how to proceed, whether on foot or behind the wheel.

It may be that my opinions are influenced by the amount of off-peak driving that I do and the frequency with which I use under-utilised roads, but some speed limits either need to be raised or put on a variable speed limit regime.

Take for example the N3 overpass I mentioned above: 30kph (18.5MPH) which I used a couple of times some years back, in night time hours. The road was practically deserted. There weren't any cyclists, any pedestrians and feck all vehicles, on a grade separated dual carriageway.

So when I broke by a factor of two (while being overtaken by the two (only) other vehicles also using it) it was not because I "didn't understand" the limit, rather that I could clearly see that it had no bearing on safe driving and my breaking it threatened no-one.

So this is the 1920's and your enjoyment of 'safe' speeding is being spoiled by a 'nanny' government?

I thought I made my point very simply, even simple enough for you :rolleyes: but it seems I was wrong. Let me spell it out for you:
Laws exist and are repsected because they are worthy of the respect of a decent person. Laws against muder, rape, fraud have the respect of the majority because they represent common values of respect for the rights of others, and breaking them ALWAYS results in someone being a victim.

Victimless crime laws are another story, sometimes they make sense because they pre-empt something bad, e.g. drink-driving, some laws authorising anti-terrorist surveillance etc.
Speed law mostly fits in with "good" victimless crime law because many of the limits posted make sense.
But victimless crime laws can just as easily drift into the absurd. Prohibition laws of the American 1920s for example, and I would argue many of the victimless crime laws of today with drugs, firearms, gambling, prostitution etc.

By insisting that ALL speed limits regardless time, road, circumstance must be respected without any regard to common sense and enforced even if there's no benefit, you place yourself firmly in the position of politically driven advocate of stupid victimless crime law.

To quote your spiritual brother Iwannahurl

There is no such thing as safe speeding

This is clearly, absolutely false.

SB2013

SeanW wrote: »

Whoa sonny, I said I did not see these FREQUENTLY, the key word you missed. I do see some of this, but with nowhere near the regularity of breaking speed limits.

Snide comments and thinly veiled insults aside, I stand over what I said: speeding is a different case. I see (and do) "speeding" with far greater regularity than any of the stuff you posted, all of which I avoid.

Speed is not related to the other stuff.

WTF? I NEVER see this ... what kind of tip do you live in where this is common? Seriously!!

You raised it: motorists are responsible for everything bar the Black Death in your book and speed causes "unnecessary" deaths and injuries.

So why should we not have 10kph speed limits all over the country?

Oh I understand very well: they look good on paper for some reason but have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on what could be called safe, considerate driving.

I take road safety very seriously and always take road conditions, traffic profile, respect for other road users into consideration when deciding how to proceed, whether on foot or behind the wheel.

It may be that my opinions are influenced by the amount of off-peak driving that I do and the frequency with which I use under-utilised roads, but some speed limits either need to be raised or put on a variable speed limit regime.

Take for example the N3 overpass I mentioned above: 30kph (18.5MPH) which I used a couple of times some years back, in night time hours. The road was practically deserted. There weren't any cyclists, any pedestrians and feck all vehicles, on a grade separated dual carriageway.

So when I broke by a factor of two (while being overtaken by the two (only) other vehicles also using it) it was not because I "didn't understand" the limit, rather that I could clearly see that it had no bearing on safe driving and my breaking it threatened no-one.

I thought I made my point very simply, even simple enough for you :rolleyes: but it seems I was wrong. Let me spell it out for you:
Laws exist and are repsected because they are worthy of the respect of a decent person. Laws against muder, rape, fraud have the respect of the majority because they represent common values of respect for the rights of others, and breaking them ALWAYS results in someone being a victim.

Victimless crime laws are another story, sometimes they make sense because they pre-empt something bad, e.g. drink-driving, some laws authorising anti-terrorist surveillance etc.
Speed law mostly fits in with "good" victimless crime law because many of the limits posted make sense.
But victimless crime laws can just as easily drift into the absurd. Prohibition laws of the American 1920s for example, and I would argue many of the victimless crime laws of today with drugs, firearms, gambling, prostitution etc.

By insisting that ALL speed limits regardless time, road, circumstance must be respected without any regard to common sense and enforced even if there's no benefit, you place yourself firmly in the position of politically driven advocate of stupid victimless crime law.

To quote your spiritual brother Iwannahurl

This is clearly, absolutely false.

You're a very fortunate driver I think. All these years and you've never encountered any unexpected obstacle or hazard on the road.

SeanW

SB2013 wrote: »

You're a very fortunate driver I think. All these years and you've never encountered any unexpected obstacle or hazard on the road.

I do, but not with any regularity. Again, this may have to do with the amount of off-peak, under-used road driving that I do. But I seriously wonder what kind of ****hole opti0nal lives in if people going the wrong way around roundabouts is a common occurance around his/her area.

By far the most prolific lawbreaking that I have ever seen was when I lived in Dublin and especially Cork, by cyclists disregarding red lights and cycling on footpaths.

Only partially relevant though: according to Iwannahurl, opti0nal etc the way to solve problems with lawbreaking cyclists is to regulate motorists more. Suffice to say I disagree.

SB2013

SeanW wrote: »

I do, but not with any regularity. Again, this may have to do with the amount of off-peak, under-used road driving that I do.

And when you encounter these unexpected hazards how will you cope when travelling at much higher speeds?

SeanW

SB2013 wrote: »

And when you encounter these unexpected hazards how will you cope when travelling at much higher speeds?

Unexpected hazards are extremely rare, if not impossible, when a road has very good visibility and you can see any potential hazards (or lack thereof)

that's why we don't have 10MPH speed limits on motorways.

SB2013

SeanW wrote: »

Unexpected hazards are extremely rare, if not impossible, when a road has very good visibility and you can see any potential hazards (or lack thereof).

No they aren't. They are very common. That's why reaction speed and judgement is so important when driving. And the faster you are going the more unlikely you are to avoid the hazard and the harsher the result will be if you don't.

SeanW

SB2013 wrote: »

No they aren't. They are very common. That's why reaction speed and judgement is so important when driving.

From my experience they've been rare and easy to deal with.

And the faster you are going the more unlikely you are to avoid the hazard and the harsher the result will be if you don't.

So why not have a blanket 10kph speed limit nationwide?

roast

pabloh999 wrote: »

Speed vans parked on the quays, aungier st, all over the city centre enforcing 30kmph speed limit IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT!
Revenue raising effort, nothing more

Catching inconsiderate plonkers who are breaking the law is a bad thing now?
With making money as a byproduct being another negative...?


Wait... wut?

opti0nal

SeanW wrote: »

So why not have a blanket 10kph speed limit nationwide?

Because that's a straw-man argument.