Remember the McAuliffe truck stunk ...

Saab Ed · 26-09-2013 10:16pm #1

It didn't just go away. Prison time seems unlikely and in fairness would seem a bit harsh, nobody was actually hurt. Big aul fine though might sort it.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/truckers-could-face-jail-for-youtube-charity-stunt-1.1541541

BMJD · 26-09-2013 10:25pm

Fair enough it was a really, really stupid thing to do but they were well intentioned:

Their solicitor Padraig O’Connell said they had carried out the enterprise on Sunday morning of October 14th 2012 for the Share a Dream, the ill children’s charity, and Pieta House, the suicide charity, but admitted it could have been better organised.

and I'm sure the guys involved have learned their lesson but prison is OTT considering the scum that are roaming the streets every night. They have probably lost their jobs already.

He rejected a suggestion from Mr O’Connell that there were no consequences. In fact, Judge O’Connor said the “frightful example “ to young men who viewed it on You Tube and decided to immitate it might have terrible consequences.

Oh please, are a few young fellas really going to fire up their artics and copy this? There are zillions of videos on youtube featuring some of the afforementioned scum stealing, joyriding and burning peoples' cars already. Do something about that, your honour.

colm_mcm · 26-09-2013 10:27pm

This wasn't the only stunt they pulled though. They were going the wrong way around roundabouts etc IIRC

challengemaster · 26-09-2013 10:35pm

One of many McAuliffe trucking's "well intentioned" stunts that put the public at risk. Well intentioned doesn't cut it tbh.

This is where the precedent gets set.

All they (and everyone else in the country) will learn if they don't get properly prosecuted, is that dangerous driving is grand as long as "you've learned your lesson and won't do it again" from a slap on the wrist.

Considering the amount of CPC training, and the potential damage of 3-a-breast truck rolling road block, it should be viewed as much worse than normal dangerous driving, and rightly so.

Throw the book at the stupid cúnts.

And I'm severely disappointed to hear the company is being let off.

vicwatson · 26-09-2013 10:46pm

colm_mcm wrote: »

This wasn't the only stunt they pulled though. They were going the wrong way around roundabouts etc IIRC

And reversing up a road was another with cars having to swerve to avoid the truck.

This is blatant dangerous driving. I would throw the book at them big time. They were thick enough to put all the law breaking videos on youtube !! :rolleyes:

vicwatson · 26-09-2013 10:49pm

Remember this one

vicwatson · 26-09-2013 10:53pm

Or these

And how the hell are you supposed to get on to the roundabout ?

unkel · 26-09-2013 11:52pm

vicwatson wrote: »

Remember this one

Never mind all the other stuff.

Parking on the driving lane of a motorway...

Partly hidden by a bridge...

By a professional driver...

Deserves a conviction of dangerous driving and a lenghty ban - say 5 years. If I were the judge, I'd hand down a suspended jail sentence too. Sorry if that makes the lad lose his job, but that was utter madness

mickdw · 26-09-2013 11:56pm

unkel wrote: »

Never mind all the other stuff.

Parking on the driving lane of a motorway...

Partly hidden by a bridge...

By a professional driver...

Deserves a conviction of dangerous driving and a lenghty ban - say 5 years. If I were the judge, I'd hand down a suspended jail sentence too. Sorry if that makes the lad lose his job, but that was utter madness

Agree completely. 2 distracting trucks overhead too to make it even worse.

ratracer · 27-09-2013 12:02am

If ever there was a case of small man syndrome on the roads, these clips prove it out. What a shower of Muppets. I'd agree with the judge here, and surely the company has some liability for the actions of its 'drivers'.

CiniO · 27-09-2013 12:15am

unkel wrote: »

Never mind all the other stuff.

Parking on the driving lane of a motorway...

Partly hidden by a bridge...

By a professional driver...

Deserves a conviction of dangerous driving and a lenghty ban - say 5 years. If I were the judge, I'd hand down a suspended jail sentence too. Sorry if that makes the lad lose his job, but that was utter madness

With all respect it doesn't look like motorway.

Surely parking there was illegal, but I see more dangerous parking nearly every day.

MadsL · 27-09-2013 12:18am

BMJD wrote: »

They have probably lost their jobs already.

Given the owner of the company appears to have been involved in encouraging and filming this that's a serious injustice.

He should lose his Road Transport Operator haulage license. I sincerely hope that happens.

JohnBoy26 · 27-09-2013 2:08am

MadsL wrote: »

Given the owner of the company appears to have been involved in encouraging and filming this that's a serious injustice.

He should lose his Road Transport Operator haulage license. I sincerely hope that happens.

No that probably won't happen and unlike you I hope it doesn't.

while the actions of the company and those involved where inexcusable and should be dealt with, taking away their licence is the wrong way to go about it imo as it could mean the loss of jobs for innocent people working for this company who had nothing to do with this. That is something we don't need in these though times.

JohnBoy26 · 27-09-2013 2:10am

CiniO wrote: »

With all respect it doesn't look like motorway.

Surely parking there was illegal, but I see more dangerous parking nearly every day.

indeed that road is a dual carriage way.

Dr Turk Turkelton · 27-09-2013 2:20am

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

indeed that road is a dual carriage way.

Ah well sure as long as its "only" a dual carriageway-grand so carry on.

JohnBoy26 · 27-09-2013 2:32am

Cuchulainn1. wrote: »

Ah well sure as long as its "only" a dual carriageway-grand so carry on.

I don't know who you are quoting as there is no "only" in my post and nor did I say or imply it was "grand" because it was a dual carriageway. It's dangerous on any road. As I have travelled on that road before I was only making the point that cinio was correct in that it wasn't a motorway like others tought it was.

Perhaps you should read posts more carefully in future before posting smart a$$ comments like the above.

MadsL · 27-09-2013 5:03am

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

[/B]
No that probably won't happen and unlike you I hope it doesn't.

while the actions of the company and those involved where inexcusable and should be dealt with, taking away their licence is the wrong way to go about it imo as it could mean the loss of jobs for innocent people working for this company who had nothing to do with this. That is something we don't need in these though times.

It is pretty clear that the company owners encouraged this behaviour - just look at the company's website and the wedding shenanigans. Not fit to hold the licence.

Mycroft H · 27-09-2013 7:50am

MadsL wrote: »

It is pretty clear that the company owners encouraged this behaviour - just look at the company's website and the wedding shenanigans. Not fit to hold the licence.

It made sense for Nolan transport to loose their licence when they and their driver were proved negligent in not securing a steel load to a flat bed trailer which killed 2 innocent people when it came loose round a corner.

Instead they were fined a paltry 1 million euro and were let carry on. Seems we put a 500k price on life these days.

So when McAuliffe get a slap on the wrist effectively, I'm not surprised.

unkel · 27-09-2013 9:37am

CiniO wrote: »

With all respect it doesn't look like motorway.

Eh yeah. There's no hard shoulder to speak off, the lanes are narrower and there is barely any space in the centre reservation either

Which all makes it a lot worse than a motorway (except that most drivers might drive a tiny bit slower)

keithclancy · 27-09-2013 10:48am

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

[/B]
No that probably won't happen and unlike you I hope it doesn't.

while the actions of the company and those involved where inexcusable and should be dealt with, taking away their licence is the wrong way to go about it imo as it could mean the loss of jobs for innocent people working for this company who had nothing to do with this. That is something we don't need in these though times.

Sorry, but even if the company didn't advocate this, it was still on youtube and there were multiple incidents.

So either:
The boss was OK about it.
Or he did nothing about it.

One is as bad as the other and company should lose their license.

cjt156 · 27-09-2013 11:15am

Its ludicrous to imagine that the company didn't organise this series of stunts to their own ends.
Are we supposed to believe that the drivers got together to pull this off on their own initiative, without the knowledge of management?

"Here lads, let's all go out and film ourselves repeatedly driving dangerously in the company vehicles; stick it up on that youtuber ting. Be gas altogether."

MadsL · 27-09-2013 2:24pm

cjt156 wrote: »

Its ludicrous to imagine that the company didn't organise this series of stunts to their own ends.
Are we supposed to believe that the drivers got together to pull this off on their own initiative, without the knowledge of management?

"Here lads, let's all go out and film ourselves repeatedly driving dangerously in the company vehicles; stick it up on that youtuber ting. Be gas altogether."

https://www.facebook.com/pages/McAuliffe-Trucking-Company/299820356776

http://www.mcauliffetrucking.com/wedding.html

No shame really.

tin79 · 27-09-2013 3:02pm

CiniO wrote: »

With all respect it doesn't look like motorway.

Surely parking there was illegal, but I see more dangerous parking nearly every day.

Oh please. You see more dangerous parking than a truck being stopped under a bridge, on a dual carriageway, in the driving lane, with no hard shoulder, hazards not even on, with two further trucks parked overhead to add the distraction factor almost every day?

On what planet do you see this?

That video is one of the most idiotic parking examples I have even seen.

January · 27-09-2013 5:21pm

keithclancy wrote: »

Sorry, but even if the company didn't advocate this, it was still on youtube and there were multiple incidents.

So either:
The boss was OK about it.
Or he did nothing about it.

One is as bad as the other and company should lose their license.

The videos were removed pretty quick sharpish by the company but someone (me... and one or two other posters) had already copied them and re-uploaded. They also tried to bully me, both here and on Youtube, into taking the videos down by threatening me with the Gardai because I was in breach of "copyright laws" even though they claimed at first that they didn't upload the videos.

stoneill · 27-09-2013 5:40pm

tin79 wrote: »

Oh please. You see more dangerous parking than a truck being stopped under a bridge, on a dual carriageway, in the driving lane, with no hard shoulder, hazards not even on, with two further trucks parked overhead to add the distraction factor almost every day?

On what planet do you see this?

That video is one of the most idiotic parking examples I have even seen.

I agree with CiniO - as bad as this parking is, I have witnessed much worse on N4, the M50, the N3, the N11. Cars parked half on hard shoulder and half on lane 1 to change inside tyre, vans parked facing the wrong way, trucks pulled in side by side to "chat", even a car stopped on the outside lane of the N4 just past Kinnegad.

If that video is one of the most idiotic examples that you have ever seen, you haven't witnessed much of what goes on the roads of Ireland.

power pants · 27-09-2013 5:48pm

wasn't it the daughter of the firm that uploaded them in the first place?

MadsL · 27-09-2013 5:49pm

stoneill wrote: »

I agree with CiniO - as bad as this parking is, I have witnessed much worse on N4, the M50, the N3, the N11. Cars parked half on hard shoulder and half on lane 1 to change inside tyre, vans parked facing the wrong way, trucks pulled in side by side to "chat", even a car stopped on the outside lane of the N4 just past Kinnegad.

If that video is one of the most idiotic examples that you have ever seen, you haven't witnessed much of what goes on the roads of Ireland.

You know there is more to it than that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNkcnEcm3go

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u26P76dFF7Y

Yawns · 27-09-2013 5:55pm

think I still have them videos on my youtube account.

Disappointing to hear the company is being let off considering 1 of the directors is a director in both companies and he was on boards giving one poor story after another, trying to deny it happened etc.

CiniO · 27-09-2013 6:26pm

tin79 wrote: »

Oh please. You see more dangerous parking than a truck being stopped under a bridge, on a dual carriageway, in the driving lane, with no hard shoulder, hazards not even on, with two further trucks parked overhead to add the distraction factor almost every day?

On what planet do you see this?

That video is one of the most idiotic parking examples I have even seen.

Truck stopped in driving lane of dual carriageway where 100km/h limit applies.
On straight stretch so it can be seen by drivers approaching, so everyone should have enough time change lane in theory.
I'm not saying this parking is not dangerous.
I'm saying that it's not bad comparing to what I see often.
Example:
This is road with the same speed limit of 100km/h. Difference is that when travelling at 100km/h you can't break in time to avoid parked just behind blind bend.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TN1sKliyz8

IMHO that's way more dangerous.

MadsL · 27-09-2013 6:35pm

CiniO wrote: »

Truck stopped in driving lane of dual carriageway where 100km/h limit applies.
On straight stretch so it can be seen by drivers approaching, so everyone should have enough time change lane in theory.
I'm not saying this parking is not dangerous.
I'm saying that it's not bad comparing to what I see often.
Example:
This is road with the same speed limit of 100km/h. Difference is that when travelling at 100km/h you can't break in time to avoid parked just behind blind bend.

IMHO that's way more dangerous.

The dangerous part is the not moving bit with no hazards on.

You are approaching at 100 kph expecting the truck to be doing 80 kph. So effectively closing in on it at 20 kph - you check your mirror - and back to the truck which has now 'moved' toward you at five times the rate you expected. Oh crap, you are closing on a stationary object at 100 kph, and there is someone in the outside lane.

Straight sections create optical effects like that.

CiniO · 27-09-2013 6:44pm

MadsL wrote: »

The dangerous part is the not moving bit with no hazards on.

You are approaching at 100 kph expecting the truck to be doing 80 kph. So effectively closing in on it at 20 kph - you check your mirror - and back to the truck which has now 'moved' toward you at five times the rate you expected. Oh crap, you are closing on a stationary object at 100 kph, and there is someone in the outside lane.

Straight sections create optical effects like that.

Sorry but I tend to disagree.
Judging speed and distance of other vehicles is one of the most basic skills which people should learn on drivers training.

You can't assume that truck in front of you is doing 80km/h when it's actually parked. I know that bridge creating shadows and extra trucks on top of the bridge can be distracting, but even though there must be something wrong with driver who can see obstruction in form of parked truck in front of him while he is doing 100km/h and is not able to stop in time or even better change lane.

Remember the McAuliffe truck stunk ...

Comments