[Davidth88]

GoSafe will be given a list every month of the locations where gardai want the units deployed. They will also be obliged to carry out surveys to find stretches of road where 85pc of vehicles drive above the speed limit. These areas will be added to the list of speed enforcement zones.

So hang on .... they check for places where 85% of people speed , then they clamp down in that area

If 85% of people are speeding , shouldn't the speed limit be reviewed as possibly too low ( assuming there isn't a nasty crash there every week ) . Or shouldn't they be looking at other things like , are the drivers AWARE of the speed limit in that area , or is it right after a change in the speed limit

Totally mad

[Eoin]

Originally Posted by Anan1

I'm confused! You want the 120km/h limit to be retained but not enforced?

I am saying that I would like meaningful enforcement. I agree that setting sensible limits is obviously the best thing to do in the long run, but that does not mean that enforcement has to be done in absurd locations in the meantime.

[Anan1]

Originally Posted by eoin

I am saying that I would like meaningful enforcement. I agree that setting sensible limits is obviously the best thing to do in the long run, but that does not mean that enforcement has to be done in absurd locations in the meantime.

That's true, but I don't like the idea of the Gardai choosing which laws to enforce either. The 120km/h limit on good motorway stretches is not fine with me.

[Eoin]

Originally Posted by Anan1

That's true, but I don't like the idea of the Gardai choosing which laws to enforce either. The 120km/h limit on good motorway stretches is not fine with me.

It's not really which laws though, it's just when & where. There should be an element of common sense in most of their decisions, I would have thought.

As an extreme example, I think that most people would agree that getting points for doing 121km/h in a 120 stretch would be unreasonable. It is technically breaking the speed limit, but it's not a good application of enforcement. Similarly, you wouldn't want to see a pedestrian being done for crossing an empty street just because they didn't have a green pedestrian light. You wouldn't really question the law, you would question their decision to enforce the law in that scenario.

[Anan1]

Originally Posted by eoin

It's not really which laws though, it's just when & where. There should be an element of common sense in most of their decisions, I would have thought.

As an extreme example, I think that most people would agree that getting points for doing 121km/h in a 120 stretch would be unreasonable. It is technically breaking the speed limit, but it's not a good application of enforcement. Similarly, you wouldn't want to see a pedestrian being done for crossing an empty street just because they didn't have a green pedestrian light. You wouldn't really question the law, you would question their decision to enforce the law in that scenario.

Ish. In your 121km/h example, the fact that the limit is too low brings the law into disrepute. This is both proven and reinforced by the widespread reluctance of Gardaí to enforce it, the result being that very few of us pay speed limits much heed until we smell a speed trap. If we had sensible limits then the Gardaí could enforce them and people could respect them in the knowledge that they really were for the greater good.

[Eoin]

But I think that the Gardai do enforce the speed limits in inappropriate locations.

In your 121km/h example, the fact that the limit is too low brings the law into disrepute

I just meant that being done for being 1 km/h over the limit would be a silly application of the law - whether it was 121, 131 or 141 etc.

[samih]

Has there been any indication of leeway? I'm thinking of something like 5 percent +3 km/h or similar before you're hit would be prudent. That would allow 34..35 km/h at 30 zone and 129 at motorway before you're nabbed.

In reality it will probably be 1 km/h over and we are doomed, but haven't seen it stated anywhere...

[dahamsta]

It can't be 1km over technically, because the indicated speed on speedometers is rarely - if ever - accurate. (Usually the other way as it happens, but that't neither here nor there.) There is an innaccuracy factor, but no-one will tell you what it is and you're wasting your time asking.

[Eric Cartman]

Originally Posted by old_aussie

Any where, Any time.

That's the advert for the new private speed cameras in Australia.

well over here it will be

Any Where that is a straight road with clear visibility that has a low accident rate , Any time. that the road is empty and thus very safe to speed but well take your money anyway

I will bet that the first sightings of these cameras will be on the m50, n4, n7, m1, m3 and m8

[Tigger]

on the n4 between longford and westport there is only one decent strech from charlestown to swinford
the rest of the n4 is lethal but this bit is wide and safe

the camera has been under the charlestown n17 n4 flyover for the last month
if its set at less than +7kmph
i woulkd reckon its catching 30 % of people passing and most are on their commute
are they gonna loose their lisences?

[squod]

So then, who sends me the fine? The guards or some crappy company?

[ulinbac]

Only think they should increase the limits on the motorway if we train a better quality if driver. There are around 250k learners on the road and loads are using the motorway (which they shouldn't). So more cameras are needed on the roads.


I would like to see a limit of 130/40km with a min limit of 90km on the motorway but its not safe in general and maybe extra cameras will get these drivers off the motorways and learn to respect the roads more as they are not qualified to drive on these roads.

I would prefer not to have these cameras on the motorway (a lot more cameras on the back roads) but it makes sense.

[Damien360]

A question for the gardai next.

Will the company be using the publicly available garda data on accident blackspots which seems outdated or picking their own locations. As the gardai will be using there own vans and data will this not double the cameras at the same locations.

A prime example: In the forensics lab, which I visit as part of my job, is a map of Ireland (very old map in tachometer room) with stickers showing accident blackspots around the country. It shows the N7 (where old lights were approaching Naas and around Kill) were as an accident blackspot (rightly so for the time), but this data appears to be in the current available info. The garda vans therefore target the N7 but there has not been a serious accident for a long time on that stretch.

There are other areas where the road has been fixed to reduce accidents after many deaths but the data is still preserved as having a dangerous location. This leads to people pointing those locations out as money generating schemes, which leads me back to the question....how will the location of the new camera vans be decided, garda intervention or company pin on a map ?

[Abraham]

Speedsters are in for some shock shortly when it comes to the 'switch-on' of these speed cameras. Initially, that is and then we will learn to live with it.
But what I'm wondering is will or could the same photo, if it showed the use of a Mobile Phone at the same time as the speeding be used to apply another fine and give additional penalty points for that offence ? I mean if there's a hand held up to the ear that's more than likely because there's a phone in the hand ? So more harassment there ?

[AugustusMinimus]

I'll never understand this country.

50% of the country might end up getting penalty points under this. Most of them would be jamming RTE phone lines trying to ring up Joe Duffy.

Yet none of them will ask their local politician to get rid of these money making devices.