Traffic Blues - Cork

Deleted User wrote: »

Some of the lines from the series still have me laughing.

Garda: You're only starting out on the road now. You've no wing mirror, you're driving a car that has smoke billowing from the bonnet. Look at that... that's not ideal! You've no driving license with you, you've no L plates up, you've no fully qualified driver with you... You're not getting off to the best start!

You couldn't write it.

The funniest part came just after that quote, when that particularly self-righteous Garda decided to let him drive off in the rustbucket he'd spent the previous five minutes lecturing about! Nonsense!

One thing that occured to me was how isolated country and even city units can be.

The chase up in Drogheda could only summon an immigration jeep early on and only really was assisted by one other unit for the entireity of the chase.

The chase in South Dublin took a while to be flooded with patrol cars (as it was when the vehicle crashed at the bridge).

Just goes to show how isolated patrols/beat Gardaí can be and is the most compelling argument for more comprehensive facilities and equipment, and also for current numbers to be maintained.

Because this series is shaping up to be more extreme (:cool:), the genuine and highly explicit excitement/adrenalin fueled commentary of the garda in the Louth pursuit is a good example, I think the public (I will certainly) will be more appreciative of the risks that Gardaí face in the most seemingly mediocre situations while maintaining complete professionalism throughout.

Keep up the good work.

flazio wrote: »

I've gotta ask though, about the lad who got 4 points and disqualified for 2 years.
Erm wouldn't the points have expired by then?

No penalty points are on your licence for 3 years. And his more than likely only come into effect after the disqualification

480905 wrote: »

There was a part in that programme where a person is stopped doing 140 in a Discovery. He commenced a lecture on speeding to the driver... Why do Gardai take it upon themselves to feel they can lecture people about the speed they drive? The driver is quite capable of making decisions about their driving and can live with the consequences when and if something happens. They choose to drive in this fashion, no amount of lecturing from anybody is going to change that. Let them answer in court for their actions.

Because ensuring road safety is a major part of the job, it's not all just summonses, charges and chases. Gardai do this in an often vein attempt to get people to change their driving habits, so that their foolish decisions don't wind up costing other motorists their lives.

It is a Garda's responsibility to ensure the safety all road users, they do this by explaining to motorists who are poor drivers, in as blunt a way as possible why their actions are putting other road users in danger.

480905 wrote: »

There was a part in that programme where a person is stopped doing 140 in a Discovery. He commenced a lecture on speeding to the driver... Why do Gardai take it upon themselves to feel they can lecture people about the speed they drive? The driver is quite capable of making decisions about their driving and can live with the consequences when and if something happens. They choose to drive in this fashion, no amount of lecturing from anybody is going to change that. Let them answer in court for their actions.

Are you for real? Honestly, what made you write that? If/when something happens and they kill a car full of people... so many scenario's it's not worth getting into. I genuinely hope you do not mean that statement.

I actually tend to agree with 480905.

I don't think police should get into pointing out/criticising poor or illegal driving to people they stop.

FPN is the consequence and that's all police are mandated to do. Personally I would not be inclined to engage with a copper waving the finger and shaking the head at me.

Providing and guidance and advice on crime prevention is different from lecturing. In a speed stop situation it is quite right for a copper to point out the speed limit and the alleged speed he/she says the motorist was doing.

To stray into questioning the reason for the speeding, consequence of speeding in general, questioning the mentality of the motorist or criticising the speed alleged is not providing guidance and advice in the true sense of the words.

That kind of thing only serves to get peoples backs up.

480905 wrote: »

There's no need to be pedantic about things. She wasn't on a 30 kph limit doing 140 is my point. Nobody reading this hasn't passed a speed limit on a motorway or any some such carriageway.

I wasn't being pedantic, I was correcting a point you made that was wrong. She was still going almost 40k over the limit on a road with a whole load of exits.

The chances of an accident were high and she was putting the lives of her children at risk. When the member saw the kids he got pissed off and rightly so.
Putting kids in danger like that is despicable.

480905 wrote: »

Putting kids in danger like that is despicable, IF she was driving a 1.2 litre car (capable of 80 at a stretch) and hairing along the "motorway" or "national road" at 140km. Then LOCK HER UP......

Foinse, me ould flower, 140km in a LR Discovery on a motorway or National Road that has a limit 20 or 40 km less ?? Come on..... In a Micra, lock her up and take her kids off her , by all means..
A example of the Nanny state gone mad.

Land Rovers aren't as safe as you make them out to be, because they're so tall they tend to roll at high speeds:

This one rolled on a highway in South Africa, both driver and passenger were seriously injured.




This one rolled and the driver was killed, luckily he was the only one in the car at the time:



And this last one is the one that really proves my point, this one drove into a parked car at 80mph, which translates to 128kph. 12kph less than the lady who was in Traffic Blues.


Do you really think children aged 2 or 3 could walk away from these crashes? because I don't.

480905 wrote: »

People need to be responsible for their own actions. And they need to realise it's NOT the Government's fault, It's not the Gardai's fault , it's not ANYBODY ELSE'S fault but their own , if , they decide to drive outside of the capability of the vehicle they are driving....

Yes I agree that people need to take responsibility for their own actions, you're 100% correct in saying that it's not the Gardai or the Governments fault if they crash, however, I believe you will find that I never said it was.

What I did say is, AGS have a responsibility to other road users to ensure their safety, and to ensure that the roads are a safe place to travel. If that means a bollocking at the side of the road for a motorist driving like an idiot then so be it. We just want to avoid the above examples happening on our roads. If I hurt some persons feelings by giving them a bollocking, then I really don't care, so long as they get the message and SLOW DOWN!!!!!!

Contrary to what the RSA adverts tell us, it's not just young male drivers who are responsible for crashes and road deaths in this country.

I think the M50 should have Variable Speed Limits (VSL). 100kmh is too low when there is little traffic, for example the middle of the night (Note: the M50 has street lights and cat's eyes) - in my opinion, the M50 should be 120kmh off-peak.

When traffic on the M50 is exceptionally heavy during some rush hour periods, 100kmh is probably too much. The limit could be reduced to 80kmh to make traffic flow more smoothly.

VSL could be also used to slow traffic if there accident up ahead or if there is very bad weather.

I think 140kmh is too much for the M50:

• The lanes are narrower than other motorways so there is less margin for error.
• Sightlines not good enough in places to travel safely at such a speed (constantly).
• Closely spaced junctions.
• Bad lane discipline (big problem on 3+ lane motorways and dual carriageways).
• The M50 is not going to be totally empty at any stage day or night - you'll always have other people to consider/contend with. It's a lot different to some stretches of rural motorway which are practically empty off-peak.

mikemac wrote: »

Noob question alert!

I'm enjoying this series, it's very well edited and put together

In both weeks when someone was arrested the garda put their hand on their shoulder and they state what they have to say
It's very deliberate and looks like they were trained to do it to hold their shoulder

Is it something they've been told and trained for whenever making an arrest?
And is there some reason behind it?
At night and it's just a driver and a garda at the side of the road, well of course it's the driver being arrested.

Maybe it's different in a crowd in town and you need to arrest a few troublemakers and bystanders are getting involved, is that the reason behind it?

Generslly you will touch the person you're arresting, kind of symbolising to them that you're taking them into your custody. Personally i take hold of the persons wrist so i can be handcuffing them while giving them the caution and explaining the reason for arrest.

Also there's no need to quote full legislation, (only done in drink driving cases because they're so heavily contested) generally explaining the arrest in laymans terms is sufficient.

donvito99 wrote: »

pssh...n00b...:p

Donvito 99 you are ' the man'.

Yep another good episode tonight,i taught the biker would have got a ban or at least a few more points and a higher fine considering the state his bike was in as well.
How can someone going 10 kph over get 2 points and somebody doing 70 kph over the limit get the same points where is the justice in that.

The guy who braked heavily in the Jack Lynch tunnel is a complete dope. The second car had nowhere to go and was hit by the Ambulance!

Mister Jingles wrote: »

One of my all time favourite cars is the S60 , especially the T5 which is the workhorse of the UK traffic cops.

Funny thing about that clip is when the camera is zoomed in on the speedometer it's actually a Mondeo.

Both have green backlighting. The dashboard was deffo a Volvo.