Fish In Barrel Speed Checks

kdevitt

Kermitt wrote:

so you class doing 125mph as good driving do you. I find it amusing that people can say they are a good driver becase they can drive fast. Of course you could do a lot of damage at legal speeds.. but you also have a lot more time to react. the point of this thread is the speed traps.. but it seems that some people want to flex their ego by boasting about their speeding. Not clever. I have had the misfortune of being in a car crash.. not speed related but a momentary lapse in concentration. it is not a pleasant experience. All it takes is a moment. and that moment passes a lot faster when you're driving like schumacher.

Kid - put your toys back in your pram. I've been in three non-fault car crashes, so I know just what they're like - and speed had no part to play in any of them, just crap driving (unless you want to say that had the cars been stationary we wouldn't have collided, but that would be pedantic). I'll be undergoing physical therapy on my back for the next year or so to try and repair the damage from the last one - which happened in a 30mph zone.

Nowhere has anyone said they're a good driver because they hit 100mph... but imo 100 on the M1 at 3 in the morning with no one around is less likely to result in an accident than doing 60 down a badly lit minor road at any time.

prospect

Okay guys this is deviating from the point.
I personally agree that, the speed limits are kept down, because you cannot account for the huge volume of crap drivers that share the road with you. And the faster you go, the less likely you are to be able to compensate for one of thier f**k ups.

But back to the op.
Our thoughts when this was originally discussed, was to develop a feasible, realistic plan, and submit it to the editorials of all the major nationals, and irish motoring magazines.
Suggestions like 'put all spped checks on back roads' are not going to work, because in all fairness, there needs to be a balance between effective enforcement/reduction of deaths and generation of revenue. Otherwise what'll pay for the checks? Maybe another 2% or 3% on income or road tax? I don't think so.

My plan was to get as many different viewpoints as possible. Also, the more people that look at a problem, the more possible it is to notice a 'loophole'. So please, keep to the point and keep those ideas, suggestions and observations coming.

Kermitt

kdevitt wrote:

Kid - put your toys back in your pram. .

mature

anyway... garda presence is definitely needed to discourage heavy right boots.

kermit_ie

I'd like to draw a distinction between this whippersnapper and my good self

Kermitt

kermit_ie wrote:

I'd like to draw a distinction between this whippersnapper and my good self

young but original!.. this is not a young bashing thread btw.. Just beacuse someone younger than 35 has an opinion on a serious issue does not mean they claim to know all.. just lending their opinion. If you don't like it, fair enough.. thats why its an opinion. Just goes to prove that the problem of speeding in this country is not confined to the 18-25 year old age group.. as those who have claimed their high speeds have lashed out at the youth.. Its very easy to push all blame over to a part responsible group

kdevitt

One thing that should be introduced on the major routes is the pending speed limit change signs - saw them in the UK and they're like the pending motorway exit signs. One at 300/200/100 metres telling you you're entering a lower speed limit. You'd have no complaints if a speed check is then placed as the new limit begins - as you've had plenty of notice whereas at the moment, a gatso just as the limit begins is seen as being quite cynical.

Kermitt

that seems a logical approach.. similar to the graduated drops in speed limits every 1/4 mile or so till the lowest i saw in France. Better than instant change alright. Especially if you dont know the area.

magpie

2 problems:

1) Speed limits on dual/triple carriageways unrealistically low in certain areas, which are then targeted by cops. In these areas you have 2 choices: either obey the speed limit and cause a slowly moving obstruction to everyone else and risk causing an accident, or follow the speed everyone else is doing and risk getting a ticket. Clearly a ludicrous situation.

2) No gradation of the offence of 'speeding'. Since getting a fine and 2 points for doing 43mph on the Naas Road my attitude is now 'f uck it, might as well get hung for a sheep as a lamb' since if I was doing Mach 2 I would still only get 2 points and a fine, much as I would get for going 5mph too fast. Also clearly ludicrous.

All this leads me to suspect that those responsible for traffic law in Ireland are in fact meths-drinking tramps with no grasp of reality.

peasant

magpie wrote:

2 problems:

1) Speed limits on dual/triple carriageways unrealistically low in certain areas, which are then targeted by cops. In these areas you have 2 choices: either obey the speed limit and cause a slowly moving obstruction to everyone else and risk causing an accident, or follow the speed everyone else is doing and risk getting a ticket. Clearly a ludicrous situation.

2) No gradation of the offence of 'speeding'. Since getting a fine and 2 points for doing 43mph on the Naas Road my attitude is now 'f uck it, might as well get hung for a sheep as a lamb' since if I was doing Mach 2 I would still only get 2 points and a fine, much as I would get for going 5mph too fast. Also clearly ludicrous.

agree with the above and would add some more points

3) speed limits on country roads are unrelistically high. We all know the picture of the grass covered boreen with the 80 km/h sign. But even worse, every single black spot on an Irish N road now has a 100 km/h sign right in front of it ...even though 100 km/h is clearly way to fast a speed for that spot

4) Unless speed limits realistically reflect the condition and danger potential of any given stretch of road, people will have to make their own judgement about what constitutes an appropriate speed limit. So why have speed limits at all ...to high in some places ...ridiculously low in others.

bbability

I just can't understand how anyone can say that points save lives. If they spent the money educating people from a young age rather than the mules making money for bertie by hiding on off-ramps of motorways, bridges, hard-shoulders and the latest one I've seen is hiding behind a tree on the way through the new ballymun road :

Speeding is one thing but driving dangerously is another. Only yesterday I nearly witnessed something which is bound to happen quite soon on the M1. Some muppet was driving in the Overtaking lane (that's the right lane for anyone that doesn't know) at 80km. A line of cars had formed behind this camper van waiting for it to move into the driving lane (left hand side lane). To cut the long story short someone got impatient, went up the inside of all of us only that the camper van was moving in. He then drove into the hard shoulder to avoid hitting the van. Nothing to do with speed just pure crap driving. And not a sign of a mule for the length of the M1 I might add yesterday.

Seth Brundle

bbability wrote:

Speeding is one thing but driving dangerously is another. Only yesterday I nearly witnessed something which is bound to happen quite soon on the M1. Some muppet was driving in the Overtaking lane (that's the right lane for anyone that doesn't know) at 80km. A line of cars had formed behind this camper van waiting for it to move into the driving lane (left hand side lane). To cut the long story short someone got impatient, went up the inside of all of us only that the camper van was moving in. He then drove into the hard shoulder to avoid hitting the van. Nothing to do with speed just pure crap driving. And not a sign of a mule for the length of the M1 I might add yesterday.

I would place blame on the camper van not the impatient car driver.
The camper van should have been in the correct lane but nonetheless, if they are switching lanes then they should observe what is around them and not just move over!

stratos

I am little bit surprised at the reaction to some of this. What do you guys wanna be law obeying drones ( which i am mostly) or way out cats (which I am occasionley). we gotta live a little. Once everyone is clear of the area you gotta take risks. If it's got 3 lanes and it's empty, give the boot plenty!!!!!

mike65

kbannon wrote:

I would place blame on the camper van not the impatient car driver.
The camper van should have been in the correct lane but nonetheless, if they are switching lanes then they should observe what is around them and not just move over!

Are you blaming the camper van driver for pulling over into a lane (which he had the right to occupy) or for being slow in the outside lane? The impatient driver should have bided his time rather than risk a crash.

Mike.

Kazujo

Speed is a not the major factor when it comes to road deaths in Ireland. It is simply bad / idiotic / dnagerous driving. People do not respect their cars or the roads as much as they need to. The invincible boy racer attitude on the back road is as bad as the business men in there top end merc's and beemers belting down the M1 every morning at 80-90Mph.

There are not many countries that you can get behind the wheel of a car and drive along without doing any formal training or testing (I don't hold the theory test in any real regard in terms of driving, it is revenue generation at it's best and takes some of the focus away from test ques as if people fail the theory that's one less person applying for the test.)

It's not enough for the Gard's to clamp down every bank holiday weekend they need to be consistant.

In terms of policing the back roads it's a nice idea but would you really stand on a back road at night with a speed camera? And there is no room for a van to park on most of them and stationary cameras are inaffective as people just figure out where they are and slow down.

The gard's need some kind of un manned temporary stationary camera that can be moved around so you will never know where it will be. This might act atleast as some form of deterant, but is no substitute for proper driver/rider training and education.

And a note to end the rant: Why do the governement allow cars that have a top speed of over 80Mph? There is no reason for any vehicle apart for a Garda vehicle (with SPECIALLY trained driver) to be on the roads anyway. Why let some joe sope or boy racer have the option of a car that tops out at 165Mph on the M50 at 4 in the morning?

Victor

ciarsd wrote:

this really annoys me no end...N11, N4 at liffey valley, St.John's Road etc etc

These spots are well known, yet people continue to be caught. Why?

ciarsd wrote:

It is a fact that most of our accidents and more importantly & sadly our fatal accidents occur on NON-motorway/primary routes and NOT during the daytime during the week.

You are talkin shíte now. You aren't comparing like with like.

40% of accidents occur on 5% of roads (national roads), so yes 60% of accidents occur on 95% of roads (non-national roads), but where do you think resources can be best spent?

Most accidents happen during the week - 69.1% of fatal and injury accidents occur Monday to Friday. 30.9% at the weekend.This is down to there being more days in the week than in the weekend.

Most accidents happen during the day - 56.7% of fatal and injury accidents occur between 6am and 6pm (unadjusted for differing amount of daylight). 30.9% at the weekend. 43.3% at night. This is down to higher traffic levels during the day.

This is happening more so on our 'back roads' and secondary routes (rat runs as I like to call them) later at night or very early in the hours of the morning.

What constitutes a back road?

Kermitt wrote:

If the Gardaí had big signs up saying SPEED CHECK AHEAD, we'd all slow down..and speed back up once past.

I'm not actually sure everyone would slow down. :rolleyes:

Victor

Macy wrote:

I mean is the N11 at Belfield more dangerous than through all the lights by Stillorgan? Or are they simply less visible when they're hiding around the dip?

The road surface there is designed for 50km/h.

Turner

bbability wrote:

I just can't understand how anyone can say that points save lives.

Check the stats..Points were introduced in 2002. That is the only year since 1966 that road deaths were under 400 in a year.

376 to be exact,
339 in 2003 ( the lowest ever in 40 years)
and 379 in 2004.

So i think it is fair to say that yes they do have an effect on the amount of people being killed on the roads.

Kazujo

They did have an effect but that effect seems to be wearing off

Capt'n Midnight

Yesterday on the Lucan road, 80Kph zone beside Liffey valley heading out of the city. There are three lanes AND a bus lane and there was this guy doing 40mph on the nail in the outside lane.

Seth Brundle

mike65 wrote:

Are you blaming the camper van driver for pulling over into a lane (which he had the right to occupy) or for being slow in the outside lane? The impatient driver should have bided his time rather than risk a crash.

Mike.

Yes! My interpretation of the event was that the impatient driver was undertaking the slow traffic and was approaching the camper van when the camper van tried to pull over in front of the car. The camper van driver should have been observing their mirrors and would have been aware that faster traffic was approaching and they shouldn't move in front of them.

You suggest that the impatient driver should have bided their time. For how long? Sometimes there are situations where a driver is oblivious to all around them and they may not move over for seeral miles if not longer.

DubTony

kbannon wrote:

The camper van should have been in the correct lane but nonetheless, if they are switching lanes then they should observe what is around them and not just move over!

George Hook's American friend on the radio on Friday revealed that Florida and Colorado have both introduced a new law to do with driving in the passing (overtaking) lane.

While the yanks seem to be allowed to pass in any lane, the proper lane for overtaking is the outside or left lane. It seems Florida and Colorado are the first states to introduce a law that will prosecute drivers who are "driving slower than the car behind them" while in the passing lane. So if you're out there and there's a guy on your ass, you're screwed (ooops). This is irrespective of what speed you're doing. So in a 55 zone where you're doing 65 and there's somebody on your bumper, and you've got room to pull in, you'll be done for obstructing passing traffic. I bet they'll do a better job of enforcing that one than the Gardai do.

Capt'n Midnight

DubTony wrote:

While the yanks seem to be allowed to pass in any lane, the proper lane for overtaking is the outside or left lane.

my understanding was that on a Freeway you were Free to choose lanes and speeds.

In the UK they've prosecuted drivers over the speed limit for obstruction because they were in the way of someone even faster, so not that strange.

Macy

Victor wrote:

The road surface there is designed for 50km/h.

So the legal limit, which is 60kph, isn't safe for the road surface?

Edit - realised after this could be a typo, so don't mean to pedantic if it is. If it isn't it's a joke, and even if the surface is suitable for 60kph only it's a disgrace (and someone should tell the cops/ambulances that fly down there).

Corben Dallas

They should bring in a law like that Tommorrow Dubtony.

If the guards spent more time pulling over Caravan drivin guy(or cars doint it) who do 100kph in a 120 zone in the outside (overtaking) lane with an empty lane on the inside and have a quiet word in their shell as to why they should be drivin inthe inside lane. Just a word and if they get verbal/ignorant then €80 straight off 'idiot' fine.

Guards should spend less time on bus lane duty and Fish in a barrel speed check time and more time arresting real criminals/scumbags.

ciarsd

Victor wrote:

These spots are well known, yet people continue to be caught. Why?

You are talkin shíte now. You aren't comparing like with like.

40% of accidents occur on 5% of roads (national roads), so yes 60% of accidents occur on 95% of roads (non-national roads), but where do you think resources can be best spent?

Most accidents happen during the week - 69.1% of fatal and injury accidents occur Monday to Friday. 30.9% at the weekend.This is down to there being more days in the week than in the weekend.

Most accidents happen during the day - 56.7% of fatal and injury accidents occur between 6am and 6pm (unadjusted for differing amount of daylight). 30.9% at the weekend. 43.3% at night. This is down to higher traffic levels during the day.

What constitutes a back road?

I'm not actually sure everyone would slow down. :rolleyes:

listen victor, this is a subject very close to home so dont go telling me im talking ****e... :rolleyes:
you can labour on the facts, do all sorts of comparisons but still there are waaaaaay too many people loosing lives on our roads.
the way the garda go about it in my example (N4, Johns road etc etc) is hardly the most productive way, but on the flip side they are only doing whats asked of them (especially when we hear of quota's and score-sheets for stations)

blastman

I'd just like to say two things.

Hidden speed traps are there to generate revenue, visible speed traps are there make people reduce speed and improve road safety. If someone goes past a guard hidden behind a tree at 10kph over the limit and doesn't know anything about it until two weeks later when a letter drops through their door, how is that improving road safety now?

Absolute numbers when quoting road deaths are irrelevant. e.g.

"Check the stats..Points were introduced in 2002. That is the only year since 1966 that road deaths were under 400 in a year.

376 to be exact,
339 in 2003 ( the lowest ever in 40 years)
and 379 in 2004."

How many more cars were there on the road in 2002 than there were in 1966? I'm not saying we should become complacent about road deaths, we shouldn't. But a little perspective would go a long way, too.

magpie

The road surface there is designed for 50km/h.

:rolleyes:

Victor

Macy wrote:

So the legal limit, which is 60kph, isn't safe for the road surface?

Maybe it is 60, but you understand the point. It is designed as an urban road surface, not a high speed one.

Corben Dallas wrote:

Guards should spend less time on bus lane duty and Fish in a barrel speed check time and more time arresting real criminals/scumbags.

How many people do "real criminals/scumbags" kill per year compared to road traffic incidents? 20, 30?

DubTony

Victor wrote:

How many people do "real criminals/scumbags" kill per year compared to road traffic incidents? 20, 30?

As opposed to us car driving scumbags

Macy

Victor wrote:

Maybe it is 60, but you understand the point. It is designed as an urban road surface, not a high speed one.

Hmmmm, remain to be convinced of that. If it was the case they could just come out with that when they're questioned rather than the usual bull they come out with. And again, they should tell the cops from Donnybrook and the Ambulances going to Vincents it's such a poor road surface :rolleyes: