Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Meanwhile on the Roads...

Options
11819202224

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,637 ✭✭✭traco


    What is going on at Burgh Quay and O'Connell Bridge?

    It's become a dangerous pinch point. The slip left onto D'Olier St is gone so traffic turning left is tight against straffic foing straight through. The lane beside the river seems closed. I shoul really take a proper look but I'm generally too bust trying to hold a road position with busses / taxis / cars on the back wheel crossing teh junction so I don't get pinched out. I suppose its connsistent as why not have more pinch points to match the Hapenny Bridge and Grattan Bridge.

    It was grand before but not nice at the moment.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,472 ✭✭✭Citizen  Six


    Slip lane being removed and right side, by the river, is going to be a two way cycle path.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,637 ✭✭✭traco


    Thanks for replying. Its hard to tell but it looks to be one way agaion once you cross the junction at the bridge and that the two way starts when cyclists crossing nrthside to southside turn left down Burgh Quay.

    Is there a web page with more details on the project? I'd be interested to have a look. My spin is Tara St Dart to Heuston in the morning and Heuston to Connolly in the evening. Just curious to see how many times the "new improved" layout will require crossing bus and traffic lanes on the southside versus the two times on the Northside.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,472 ✭✭✭Citizen  Six


    The two way section allows bikes coming from O'Connell bridge to turn left, and travel east bound.

    West bound bikes continue along the quays in a single lane, after the bridge.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,637 ✭✭✭traco


    If it goes the whole way to Heuston that would be great as the left side road surface conditions are terrible until you reach Victoria Quay.

    Not sure how they handle the junction then at Heuston as its not great and the cycle crossing lights don't seem to tie in with the pedestrian crossing lights 5m further on.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 139 ✭✭knockoutned


    Thought this comment from everyone’s favourite Judge was interesting. How can he decide what is intentional or inattention. This will certainly concentrate every defence’s approach going forward.

    ”Judge Nolan said dangerous driving can occur by mere inattention and the courts generally take a sympathetic view in those situations. He said courts typically punish intentional or reckless behaviour, and in this case, there had been reckless and intentional bad driving.”


    https://www.thejournal.ie/man-disqualified-from-driving-licence-restored-early-6426137-Jul2024/



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,704 ✭✭✭Paddigol


    I wonder why there's such carnage on the roads? I wonder?? Must be the slippery surfaces and dangerous bends and bridges that jump out of nowhere, and invisible ditches and telegraph poles. Not - definitely not - a complete apathy towards driver behaviour.

    "AH SHUR…"

    Spoofery dressed up as jurisprudence is a very dangerous thing. I'm sure he'll be among the hoards wringing their hands at the next tragedy on our roads.

    If I'm being honest, I don't think it'll ever change.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,553 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    you can be guaranteed that road traffic offences are one aspect of judging where the judges know they've been guilty of 'mere inattention' so are much more likely to be sympathetic about it.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 20,414 Mod ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Hold on. This lad with a driving ban, is now running a mobile valeting company? Who is doing the driving? I would wager he's ignored the ban several times already



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,704 ✭✭✭Paddigol


    It's a head scratcher alright. I see there are calls today for a dedicated air ambulance system for attending serious RTAs in Ireland now. Leaving aside the fact that this is yet another example of treating the injury with sticking plasters instead of tackling the causes, wo is going to pay for this permanent service?

    As a daily driver I'd have no issue with a new 'vehicle tax' to fund the costs of RTAs. It could be set each year based on the figures for the previous year.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,704 ✭✭✭Paddigol


    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/jul/05/hard-to-argue-against-mandatory-speed-limiters-come-to-the-eu-and-ni

    Hard to argue against… but you can be sure plenty of 'anti wokes' will give it a good go.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭JMcL


    …and of course it can all be turned off. What's the chances of the law being changed so that if some tosser does turn it off then commits mayhem they get the book thrown at them? Nolan and his fellow travellers would probably still find some way to let them off



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,704 ✭✭✭Paddigol


    Yeah, its a small first step when it would be so easy to just do the right thing from the off. But but but, the 'poor hard pressed motorists'.

    It'll make it a lot harder for them to criticise lack of hi viz/ helmets using the "if it would save just one life"/ "if it would make you even a tiny bit safer" why wouldn't you? line when they wring their hands at the new technology. And they can hardly lecture people to wear hi viz etc if they decide to decry the new laws as "nanny state gone mad".



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,827 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    Saw an unmarked Hyundai Tuscon pulling over a driver for mobile phone use on the N11 this morning near Leopardstown.

    I was on bus behind it, and he'd been hovering between bus lane and left hand traffic lane for a couple of km before that. Had been watching thinking it was a driver acting strangely until the blues lit up.

    Cars were stopped in traffic queuing at lights when he stopped the unmarked car beside her, turned on the lights, and got out pointed at her, gestured that she should pull over into the bus stop and made a mobile phone typing gesture at her.

    Certainly looked like he was out actively policing for mobile phone use as opposed to having happened upon her.



  • Registered Users Posts: 594 ✭✭✭ARX




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,844 ✭✭✭Mefistofelino


    It would be interesting to see if the increase in rates and the types of crashes that we are seeing here are being replicated across Europe. Purely in the realms of "anecdata" but I'm just back from travelling through several European countries and whether driving or cycling, I felt that there had been an increase in **** road behaviour. France, in particular, seems to have deteriorated.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,844 ✭✭✭Mefistofelino


    Some day, researchers will show that the biggest threat to road safety was not speed, drugs or phone use, but the court system.



  • Registered Users Posts: 139 ✭✭knockoutned


    Well at least Nolan is bring consistent with his approach to inattention on the road, as he said in another ruing discussed above that courts generally take a sympathetic view



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,704 ✭✭✭Paddigol


    Nobody really wants to see these kind of drivers in what are already overcrowded jails. It's the decision not to disqualify him that gets me - the logic being that, shur he'll be hit with a huge premium anyway. Is it possible to miss the entire point of road safety any more than that??



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,806 ✭✭✭Large bottle small glass


    That's precisely who we should be jailing. Safety at pedestrian crossing need to be sacrosanct.

    It's nothing but luck that girl didn't suffer a brain injury or die.

    The fear of jail and huge fines for directors/business owners when their employees died in industry/construction was a game changer in driving down deaths in those sectors.

    It all was a factor in reducing drink driving which as bad as it is today was a much more normalised behaviour 20 years ago.

    Part of the criminal justice system has to provide deterrents and also say to victims "your life matters".



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,704 ✭✭✭Paddigol


    We're into a whole other discussion when we get into the merits/ demerits of custodial sentences, let alone who the precious few available prison spaces should be reserved for. And I'm not for a moment suggesting that I'd have shed a tear for him if he had been jailed - it would have been karma personified. But even just taking away his licence, saying "you are not fit to drive a vehicle", would have the same effect of jailing him in so far as he is off the road and physically cannot cause that kind of injury for the same period of time. It's such an easy sentence to reach - there's no cost to the exchequer, there's no fear of a violent criminal being left out of jail for lack of space, there's no hand wringing about his life being ruined and not being able to survive in prison… nobody reasonable would suggest that disqualification was an unfair sentence.

    But even that seems like too difficult a step for that judge to take.

    If people genuinely feared losing their licence for serious RT offences - and that penalty being enforced - I think it would have an immediate impact on driver behaviour.

    But of course; 1) we have a judiciary who seem reluctant to make a finding of dangerous driving and 2) we have a judiciary who think a fine is an appropriate penalty for people who routinely ignore the requirement for tax, insurance, NCT etc.

    Maybe by talking about jailing him or not I'm distracting from the real issue as far as I see it - I just cannot fathom how a judge could reach a conclusion that this individual's behaviour behind the wheel is good enough to justify him continuing to enjoy the right to drive a car. He's basically saying, "that was very naughty of you - now think about that when you drive home from Court today".



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,755 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    I just cannot fathom how a judge could reach a conclusion that this individual's behaviour behind the wheel is good enough to justify him continuing to enjoy the right to drive a car.

    What you wrote in bold above @Paddigol is partner the problem in this country. Being able to drive is actually a privilege but is treated by the courts as a right. A right that we seem to find very difficult to take from someone in any minute manner



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,806 ✭✭✭Large bottle small glass


    I spoke to a lot of weekly drink drivers who stopped drink driving for fear of jail; not fines, or driving suspensions the fear of jail.

    Scaffolding/demolition deaths weren't unusual events until directors of major firms realised that a workers death could mean loss of liberty. Agriculture deaths continue as its mostly farmers killing themselves or their family members

    I've been in a few of our prisons they are not pleasant places; they are a wonderful deterrent to regular people. It's terrifying and shameful. You are going to have to jail very few people; the message gets out pretty quickly.

    Huge fines linked to company turnover focus attention to.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,553 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Not that shocking? Some counties score so low on deaths annually that a simple statistical blip would easily take them over their annual death toll.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,860 ✭✭✭fat bloke


    Wrt Judge Nolan. I see on The Journal there that he's given another suspended sentence for child p0rnography possession with the judgement that the public shame is punishment enough and a custodial sentence would serve no purpose. The courts seem to take a similar view on road deaths caused by dangerous driving or inattention, that incarceration is not merited and that the guilt of having killed someone is prison enough.

    Also - there's a bizarre take on the investigation into that accident in which 4 teens were killed last year. Excessive speed was not considered a factor it states, and then goes on to say there was torrential rain and the car was travelling at 75kph in a 50kph zone.??! So 50% over the posted limit and clearly no account taken for the weather and road conditions.

    It's hard to see or follow the logic. :(



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,755 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    In terms of the incident where the car skidded off the road, surely this was in part to the dangerous rear tyres (on a RWD car)...

    the two rear tyres on Mr McSweeney’s eight-year-old BMW 4 Series had tread depths below the legal limit of 1.6mm with the wires on the left rear tyre exposed.

    Anyone who has driven a RWD car on ice or snow will understand the ease at which the car can spin when grip is gone.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,806 ✭✭✭Large bottle small glass


    The Clonmel tragedy was one where people including on this site were calling to know what happened immediately, sensitives of the families be damned.

    The likely factors as ever were pretty mundane (worn tyres and inappropriate speed for weather conditions).

    The deviation left onto kerb wasn't explained; it was either likely a steering input or loss of control due to standing water/worn tyres.

    What wasn't mentioned in reporting was the road drainage. A new footpath with kerb had been installed 5 years or so ago. This wouldn't have been ever an issue except for the heaviest of rainfall.

    It's about 300m from bend they rounded to Hillview tennis club, but its an almost level section of road, and unless road drainage outlets were optimal I'd expect some standing water given rainfall reported. Prior to new footpath water would have been were footpath now is.

    That's not a criticism of the road authority but it's the reason good tyres are essential and driving to conditions.

    Coroner's courts are pretty restrained by legislation and supreme court decisions in what they look at and what findings they can come to.

    Calling it a mountain road is a bit of false reporting. It is the road's name but the collision site is about 30m asl. It's a pretty civilised mountain road above collision location; moderate gradients, decent surface, good lane widths.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,446 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    Listening to the details, I was surprised at the main takeaway/ headline of the weather conditions. Well above posted speed limit, with illegal tyres, and it gets put down to the weather conditions? Awful tragedy for the families, but really nothing will be learned or change with that takeaway.



Advertisement