Penalty Pointless!!!

Bee

Excellent Article from the Sunday Business Post.
Penalty points system flaw undermines success claim

18/01/04 00:00

By Sean Mac Carthaigh
The government has admitted that no one has been tasked with obtaining crucial statistics on the drivers' penalty points system.

This means it has no accurate way to assess whether it is having any effect on road deaths.

Meanwhile, The Sunday Business Post has established that, while a massive 27 per cent of all penalty points are being imposed on Dublin drivers, just 13 per cent of road deaths occur in the capital.

This undermines the correlation between the dangerous driving that attracts penalty points and the fatal accidents the system is designed to curb.

Motorists report that a large proportion of speed traps and speed cameras are being set up on dual carriageways and motorways. However, figures from the National Roads Authority (NRA) show that a minuscule 0.3 per cent of fatal ac cidents oc cur on these roads. In fact, the vast bulk of road deaths - 86 per cent - happen on Ireland's single carriageway roads, which are much harder to police.

Furthermore, the statistics available show that the overwhelming focus on speed of both the penalty points system and the government's advertising campaigns may represent a massive waste of resources.

In 80 per cent of two-car accidents, excessive speed is not a feature. In fact, "crossing to the wrong side of the road" is by far the biggest factor.

And while the NRA compiles detailed accident data, a spokesman for the Minister for Transport, Seamus Brennan, admitted this weekend that there was no information about the ages of drivers who receive penalty points,on what roads they were driving, or at what time of day.

This means there is no way to measure the fairness or efficacy of the system.

"When the system is computerised, there should be a facility to access more data," the spokesman said

============end of article=============

All of the Speed Cameras in Ireland won't stop reckless driving. It's only another revenue raising device for a greedy Gov.

Bee

Bee

Motorists report that a large proportion of speed traps and speed cameras are being set up on dual carriageways and motorways. However, figures from the National Roads Authority (NRA) show that a minuscule 0.3 per cent of fatal accidents occur on these roads. In fact, the vast bulk of road deaths - 86 per cent - happen on Ireland's single carriageway roads, which are much harder to police.

There is so much idiotic wasting of police resources as they hang out with the laser guns on safe roads.

Unless they are forced to police suburban roads instead of safe motorways the whole penalty points system will be brought into dis-repute with no resulting drop in road deaths.

DCC have already destroyed their credibilty with dangerous road ramps/rabid anti motorist road designs etc.

I don't want to see a good idea "Penalty Points" going the same way.


Bee

ai ing

while a massive 27 per cent of all penalty points are being imposed on Dublin drivers,

Yeah but isnt that about the percentage of the population that is in dublin ?

In 80 per cent of two-car accidents, excessive speed is not a feature. In fact, "crossing to the wrong side of the road" is by far the biggest factor.

And why are these people crossing to the other side of the road. they are overtaking/speeding

Tommy Vercetti

Originally posted by ai ing
And why are these people crossing to the other side of the road. they are overtaking/speeding

No, they are driving dangerously.

jesus_thats_gre

Originally posted by Bee
Meanwhile, The Sunday Business Post has established that, while a massive 27 per cent of all penalty points are being imposed on Dublin drivers, just 13 per cent of road deaths occur in the capital.

The sole purpose of the Penalty Points scheme is not to just lower the number of road deaths though. Granted, this is the initial brief that they are operating under, but there is a bigger scope.

Victor

Bee (and others), can you make sure you provide a hyperlink for all articles.

Meanwhile, The Sunday Business Post has established that, while a massive 27 per cent of all penalty points are being imposed on Dublin drivers, just 13 per cent of road deaths occur in the capital.

A biased piece of journalism if I've ever seen one, typical of the SBP and just highlights the ability of journalists to only see one statisitic in an entire book.

Part of the problem is that the system hasn't been extended fully to account fo rdefective vehicle, dangerous driving etc. Dublin actually suffers one of the highest accident rates - it's just that they aren't fatal - it would be interesting to see how the percentages affect overall qulity of life. This follows a sustained campaign by the local authorities in the county to discourage traffic away from inappropriate roads, previously fatal accidents are now injury accidents. From 1997-2001 Dublin City **only** accounted for **all** of the deaths reductions in the entire **country**.

Imposter

Originally posted by Victor
From 1997-2001 Dublin City **only** accounted for **all** of the deaths reductions in the entire **country**.

While this statement can be backed by certain statistics does it take into account the nature of traffic in Dublin and how conjestion might also generate such a statistic? I think you can get statistics to show whatever you want within reason.

Victor

More "detailed" article.

http://www.thepost.ie/web/DocumentView/did-411670553-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper.asp

Penalty pointless
18/01/04 00:00
By Sean Mac Carthaigh

Hands up everyone who wants more death on the roads.

No one? Well, hands up all those who think that evil hot-rod drivers who risk killing our schoolchildren should be punished by being put off the road. That's unanimous.

Thank you for taking part in this important focus group. Your answers will be assumed to give a clear mandate to the government to permit a private company operate speed cameras across the state.

And in five years' time, when one-fifth of motorists have been banned from driving, to the enrichment of the speed camera operator but without any significant decrease in road deaths, it will be too late.

Already, just 15 months after penalty points were introduced, the government looks like the fellow trying to fill in the simplex clues on the crossaire crossword.

The most damning figures come from cross-referencing the Garda and Courts Service tallies for penalty points with the National Roads Authority's most recent Road Accident Facts report.

A massive 27 per cent of all penalty points were awarded to Dublin drivers. Given the presence of so many dangerous drivers, one would expect Dublin to have a similar share of fatal accidents.

It doesn't. Just 13 per cent of fatal accidents were in Dublin.

For anyone concerned about road safety, this is a startling revelation. It means that time, effort and resources are being misdirected.

It decouples the assumed correlation between the dangerous driving that attracts penalty points and the fatal accidents the system is designed curb.

It should mean it is time to go back to the drawing board. But there is worse to come. The vast bulk of penalty points are awarded for speeding. Thousands of people have been caught by speed cameras, or mobile Garda speed traps. The government's expensive road safety campaign revolves around the simple message that `speed kills'.

But according to the NRA, in 80 per cent of all fatal two vehicle collisions no one was speeding.

Even more astounding, a large proportion of speed traps and cameras are on dual carriageways and motorways. But according to the NRA, a minuscule 0.3 per cent of fatal accidents occur on these roads. Some 86 per cent of fatal crashes happen on single carriageway roads.

The problem for the government is that drivers are not stupid. They have a fair idea what is really causing accidents, because they often witness that sort of dangerous driving. The NRA knows too; it reports that when cars collide and people die, "improper overtaking" or "went to wrong side of road" was responsible far more than any other factor.

And so when a motorist in low-accident Dublin does 45 miles an hour on a dual carriageway where the speed limit is 40, and gets a heavy fine and two points on the licence, he or she is absolutely correct in considering that what has happened is unfair, and perfectly right to feel resentful.

In Australia, where some state governments have taken a similarly simplistic approach, the National Motorists' Association is already standing up for drivers.

Last year the organisation labelled the Queensland government's introduction of harsher speeding penalties and more fixed speed cameras "a cynical joke" and predicted a continued rise in the road toll until the focus shifted to the three most common fatality factors.

As in Ireland, speeding is reported as a factor in only one-fifth of crashes.

"The changes target only speed, yet several other factors claim far more lives. It cannot be a coincidence that the only one being targeted is the one that will make them loads of money," said spokesman Gavin Goeldner.

A similar view is emerging in Britain, where a police officer who helped set up the `greed camera' system last week accused Tony Blair's government of deliberately trying to make money from motorists rather than prevent road deaths.

Steve Walsh, a member of the team in the Association of Chief Police Officers that supervised the rollout of the cameras in Britain, said many were being placed where there was little risk of a crash, but a high chance of fining drivers.

In Ireland, gardai are under huge pressure to be seen to be doing something about road deaths. The force also sees itself as being seriously underresourced at the moment.

Local superintendents could devote the massive manpower required to trawl the single-carriageway roads of Ireland at the most dangerous times and days - between 9pm and 3am on Sundays and Mondays - filming the evidence of dangerous driving. We know from the figures that such an approach would put genuinely dangerous drivers off the road.

Or they can send a few men and women out to the straightest, safest stretch of dual carriageway in the area, at a more convenient time and day, and quickly nab dozens of speeders. We know from the figures that this is highly unlikely to have any effect on road deaths, but will appear very industrious indeed.

Any public objections to this will be met with the standard shrill response of the road safety lobby: Speed kills, anyone who questions this is irresponsible, and the penalty points are working because road deaths are falling.

In reality, The Sunday Business Post has learned that no one has been tasked with compiling vital information about penalty points that would allow the system to be tweaked.

For example, no one knows what time of day penalty points are awarded and on what types of road; no one has bothered to compile even the most basic demographics about who receives them.

Road deaths have been dropping for more than a decade now. According to the OECD, road fatalities in Ireland fell by 13 per cent between 1990 and 2000.

Ireland is now about average in the European Union table of road deaths per capita, and as our roads get better and cars get safer, the rate will continue to fall. Statistically, it's likely that if the government abolished VRT, allowing people to afford newer cars, it would have a greater impact on road fatalities than the penalty points and the speed cameras.

Of course, removing some or all Vat for cars with both front and side airbags would be likely to have a dramatic downward effect on road deaths. But tax is sacred, lives are another matter.



Unfair and possibly unconstitutional

The government faces three serious legal problems with its speed cameras and penalty points system:

* The `two points if you don't contest, four points in court' structure is probably unconstitutional. The state may be deliberately undermining citizens' right to vindicate their rights in the courts.

* Most drivers would prefer to admit guilt, even to an offence they are not sure they committed, rather than risk double the points and ten times the fine in court. This puts a garda in the position of judge and jury - a dangerous break with our legal tradition.

* The punishment is non-graded; in other words a motorist gets two points whether doing 45mph or 90mph in a 40mph zone. This leads to a grave risk of disproportionate punishment, and is therefore an unfair and possible unconstitutional structure.



Smile - you're on garda camera!

Fewer than 1 per cent o fatal accidents happen of dual carriageways and motorways, yet many of these roads are now plagued with speed cameras. Motorists suspect that gardai know this, but are deliberately choosing straight, safe stretches of road because it is easier for them to catch drivers speeding.

Some examples:

* Belfield Bridge, Dublin. The speed limit on the Stillorgan dual carriageway drops to a ridiculous 40 mph. Cars gather momentum as they go through the underpass, and gardai clock them as they emerge.

* Lucan bypass: A fixed GATSO speed camera installed opposite Spa Hotel on N4. Speed limit on dual carriageway is 40mph. The trap is located at the bottom of the slope on the westbound carriageway exiting Dublin.

* Kilmacanogue to Glen of the Downs: Motorists are forced to crawl along at 40mph. Daring to exceed this limit carries risk of speed rap and penalty points.

* Cork City: Dual carriageway (speed limit is 60mph) from Bishopstown roundabout heading towards Sarsfield roundabout. Coming upon Sarsfield roundabout one turns a bend and the speed limit drops from 60mph to 30mph and the gardai are frequently there with a speed gun. Worse still you may even get a few penalty points.

Have you a even worse example? We'd like to hear about it. Email to: greedcam@sbpost.ie

Victor

My critique.

---

Short version. Journalist manipulates statistics into lies to make advertising money for his paper.

---

Long version

http://www.thepost.ie/web/DocumentView/did-529799263-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper.hasp

Penalty points system flaw undermines success claim
18/01/04 00:00
By Sean Mac Carthaigh

The government has admitted that no one has been tasked with obtaining crucial statistics on the drivers' penalty points system.

While the government and the justice system has been slow to implement the system, obtaining detailed statistics on the points system itself is not the first priority. Statistics on accidents, while not conclusive, indicate generally fewer accidents and less severe accidents - in particular in the periods after the initial advertising and implementation of the system in late 2002 and again with the expansion of the system in the summer of 2003 (seatbelts, etc.).

Meanwhile, The Sunday Business Post has established that, while a massive 27 per cent of all penalty points are being imposed on Dublin drivers, just 13 per cent of road deaths occur in the capital.

While the author has not stated how these figures are calculated, I presume they are from the summary figures published by the DoT on a monthly basis for penalty points and from the NRA's "Road Accident Facts Ireland 2002" (most up to date available to the public). These do indicate about 27% of penalty points are being incurred by Dublin drivers / vehicles and 13 per cent of road deaths (in 2002) occurred in Dublin. Correlating road deaths and origin of vehicle / driver may be erroneous as drivers drive and indeed die both inside and outside their home counties and place of registration may not necessarily relate to place of usual use of the vehicle. It would appear both traffic calming and enforcement have made an impact in Dublin - this is to be congratulated, not derided .

This undermines the correlation between the dangerous driving that attracts penalty points and the fatal accidents the system is designed to curb.

This is where the author goes astray. According to the 2002 census, Dublin has 28.7% (1,123,000/3,917,000) of the country's population. According to the NRA report 26.2% (485,000/1,850,000) of vehicles are registered in Dublin and a similar 26.2% of fatal & injury accidents (combined) occurred in Dublin, 26.9% (1,689/6,279) of injury accidents, 23.0% (2,113/9,206) of injuries and less seriously, 27.8% (4,988/17,915) of material damage accidents occurred in Dublin.

Less obvious from the NRA figures is that in the major urban areas, injuries have as great if not greater overall impact on quality of life. For every road death in Dublin City in 2002, there were 64 injuries. Garda figures would indicate that in the city, on average, road deaths cost €21m, while injury accidents cost €32m. This is not to demean road deaths, but to recognise that many more people are scarred, mentally and physically, often on a long term basis from injuries.

I agree approximately 13% of fatal accidents and road deaths occurred in Dublin, but I suggest this low figure is largely due to (a) traffic calming measures implemented by the local authorities in Dublin (b) generally lower speed limits in Dublin (two thirds of Dublin's roads are in the city council area and generally do not have speed limits above 40mph) (c) higher public transport usage in Dublin (public transport is several orders of magnitude safer than car travel with 40 bus users injured (no deaths) in 2002 compared to 19 dead and 988 injured car users) (d) some element of congestion. These factors combine to create generally safer traffic travelling at lower speeds than elsewhere in the country.

From 1997 (a notably bad year for road deaths in the city and the start of the ‘The Road to Safety' programme) to 2001 (the year before penalty points), the Dublin City Council area recorded a reduction in the number of deaths from 53 to 14. This reduction of 39 deaths accounted for 64% of the reduction in the entire state over that period (from 472 to 411).

The author completely fails to note that speed will often change a minor accident into a more serious one (refer table). Indeed, speed also converts "near misses" into accidents increasing the overall accident rate.

Vehicle Impact Speed and Pedestrian Injury Severity

Impact 	Proportion of Pedestrians 	
Speed	Killed 	Injured	Uninjured
MPH	%	%	%
20	5	65	30
30	45	50	5
40	85	15	0

UK Department of Transport Traffic Advisory Leaflet 7/93 (TAU, 1993)

Motorists report that a large proportion of speed traps and speed cameras are being set up on dual carriageways and motorways.

Indeed they do, however the author seems to have failed to make enquiries to the Garda as to whether this is true, anecdotal or as I suspect, somewhere in between. The author should note that dual carriageways and motorways also carry the largest amounts of traffic and fails to explain how "a large proportion" is calculated - by road length, by vehicle km, by number of checkpoints, by total hours of checkpoints and so on.

However, figures from the National Roads Authority (NRA) show that a minuscule 0.3 per cent of fatal accidents occur on these roads.

This is where the author is blatantly wrong. In 2002, a minimum of 3.5% (12/346) of fatal accidents and a minimum of 6.2% (391/6,279) of injury accidents occurred on dual carriageways and motorways. These figures are minimums as the road type is listed as "Other/Unknown" (multi-carriageway roads, slip roads, interchanges, junctions, etc. and unrecorded) for 6.9% of fatal and injury accidents. However, dual carriageways and motorways account for perhaps 0.3%(300/90,000km) of the road network.

In fact, the vast bulk of road deaths - 86 per cent - happen on Ireland's single carriageway roads, which are much harder to police.

While I don't know where this figure comes from, the figure is a minimum of 90.2%(312/346) of fatal accidents (not necessarily deaths, that figure isn't published, but may be available). Again the 6.9% for "Other/Unknown" needs to be added. And the return, not just in fines or in ticket quotas, but in fewer and less severe accidents, will be higher on busier roads.

Furthermore, the statistics available show that the overwhelming focus on speed of both the penalty points system and the government's advertising campaigns may represent a massive waste of resources.

While this is possible, this point is pure unsubstantiated hypothesis on the author's part. Not only do his figures not stack up, he seems not to understand the most basis precepts of the cause and effect of accidents. It is quite clear that the penalty points and the accompanying advertising campaigns have effected some change, which has resulted in fewer deaths and injuries.

The reduction in the number of deaths when penalty points were introduced was immediate and marked (see graph). While this returned to "normal" (but unacceptable) by summer 2003, it again dipped when list of items attracting penalty points was expanded.

In 80 per cent of two-car accidents, excessive speed is not a feature. In fact, "crossing to the wrong side of the road" is by far the biggest factor.

This figure is short sighted as it excludes single vehicle (with pedestrian), single vehicle only and multiple vehicle accidents. In addition to "crossing to the wrong side of the road" (while overtaking at speed?), "drove through stop yield" and "improper overtaking" are all indicating that speed and or excessive zeal to get to the destination quicker was likely to be a factor.

And while the NRA compiles detailed accident data, a spokesman for the Minister for Transport, Seamus Brennan, admitted this weekend that there was no information about the ages of drivers who receive penalty points, on what roads they were driving, or at what time of day. This means there is no way to measure the fairness or efficacy of the system.

Since when did fairness depend on age? A driver who committed an offence is a driver who committed an offence, age is irrelevant. Is the author suggesting say younger drivers should receive a "discount" on points to account for their inexperience?

cont./...

Victor

http://www.thepost.ie/web/DocumentView/did-411670553-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper.asp

Penalty pointless

And in five years' time, when one-fifth of motorists have been banned from driving, to the enrichment of the speed camera operator but without any significant decrease in road deaths, it will be too late.

I imagine that if there is no significant decrease in road deaths in that period that the system would be reviewed. In the UK, with the introduction of widespread cameras, despite an increased number of vehicles and more, longer journeys, the number of deaths did not increase. Banning one fifth, or any other proportion of drivers will have the effect of not only removing the worst drivers from the system, but also reduce congestion and improve productivity. Being a business paper, I am sure that these are two points the SBP should look forward to, not deride. Indeed as a business paper, it is odd that they fail to appreciate the need for an camera operator to make a profit - they will not be a charity.

For anyone concerned about road safety, this is a startling revelation. It means that time, effort and resources are being misdirected.

Not necessarily, the author is picking only one of many criteria for the allocation of resources. And after a year, it would appear that, yes penalty points and other measures have worked in Dublin, but they may not have worked in other parts of the country. While overall there was a reduction in deaths in 2002, concentrated in the last two month (after penalty points were introduced) many, mostly western and border counties saw an increase in deaths. As soon as comprehensive figures are available for 2003, yes decisions should be made on reallocating resources.

It decouples the assumed correlation between the dangerous driving that attracts penalty points and the fatal accidents the system is designed curb.

I don't think anyone thinks dangerous driving doesn't cause accidents.

It should mean it is time to go back to the drawing board. But there is worse to come. The vast bulk of penalty points are awarded for speeding. Thousands of people have been caught by speed cameras, or mobile Garda speed traps.

The vast bulk of penalty points **were** awarded for speeding, simply because speeding was the first thing to be targeted. Speeding has received points for 15 months, seat belts for 5 months.

The government's expensive road safety campaign revolves around the simple message that 'speed kills'.

It does, see above regarding severity of accidents.

But according to the NRA, in 80 per cent of all fatal two vehicle collisions no one was speeding.

This is misleading as (a) the NRA report didn't say that, it said speeding (only) was the **main** factor in 20% of accidents (b) the author again excludes a huge proportion of accidents.

The problem for the government is that drivers are not stupid. They have a fair idea what is really causing accidents, because they often witness that sort of dangerous driving. The NRA knows too; it reports that when cars collide and people die, "improper overtaking" or "went to wrong side of road" was responsible far more than any other factor.

Again the author is putting words in the NRA's mouth "improper overtaking" is listed as a lesser factor than excessive speed. See above also.

And so when a motorist in low-accident Dublin

Dublin has an accident rate of 1.84 accidents per 1,000 population, the country as a whole has a rate of 1.76. Dublin city has a rate of 2.34.

does 45 miles an hour on a dual carriageway where the speed limit is 40,

They would be breaking the law.

and gets a heavy fine

€80 is hardly a "heavy" fine. Fines for some offences can reach €10m.

and two points on the licence, he or she is absolutely correct in considering that what has happened is unfair, and perfectly right to feel resentful.

All assumptions wrong = conclusion wrong.

"The changes target only speed, yet several other factors claim far more lives. It cannot be a coincidence that the only one being targeted is the one that will make them loads of money," said spokesman Gavin Goeldner.

Will make who "loads of money"? Traffic fines, by themselves, are a loss making activity. The social and financial rewards comes in reduced accidents.

In Ireland, gardai are under huge pressure to be seen to be doing something about road deaths.

And rightly so.

The force also sees itself as being seriously underresourced at the moment.

Because, in part, of inertia and inefficiency.

Local superintendents could devote the massive manpower required to trawl the single-carriageway roads of Ireland at the most dangerous times and days - between 9pm and 3am on Sundays and Mondays

9pm Monday is not a particularly dangerous hour. Resources would be much better spent between 9pm Friday and 4am Monday morning.

filming the evidence of dangerous driving.

This is suggesting speeding is not dangerous driving, which is obviously wrong. Filming is not necessarily needed - the activity merely needs to be witnessed. Hopefully the increased power to stop motorists for breathalysing and other measures will have and effect here. The public also has a role to play in reporting instances of dangerous driving to the Garda.

For example, no one knows what time of day penalty points are awarded and on what types of road; no one has bothered to compile even the most basic demographics about who receives them.

Because they are currently working on a paper system, that is being transferred over to a computer system.

Road deaths have been dropping for more than a decade now.

Actually, if the author bothered to check, they have been dropping since 1972, with the occasional blip and are at their lowest since 1964.

According to the OECD, road fatalities in Ireland fell by 13 per cent between 1990 and 2000.

He could have just checked the NRA or Garda figures.

Ireland is now about average in the European Union table of road deaths per capita, and as our roads get better and cars get safer, the rate will continue to fall.

Not necessarily. As motorists become less afraid of being injured, they take more risks. Attitude, not safety features is the critical factor. Take the doors off a car, fit a spike to the steering wheel and put some nitro glycerine in the boot and you will have very few road traffic accidents.

Statistically, it's likely that if the government abolished VRT, allowing people to afford newer cars, it would have a greater impact on road fatalities than the penalty points and the speed cameras.

"Statistically" - but using what statistics?

The government faces three serious legal problems with its speed cameras and penalty points system:

* The `two points if you don't contest, four points in court' structure is probably unconstitutional. The state may be deliberately undermining citizens' right to vindicate their rights in the courts.

Perhaps it is. However there is a longstanding legal precedent of lesser punishment for early confession and saving Garda and court time. Think of speeding as a large fine and four points. The system is rewarding you with a smaller fine and fewer points for not clogging up the court system.

* Most drivers would prefer to admit guilt, even to an offence they are not sure they committed, rather than risk double the points and ten times the fine in court. This puts a garda in the position of judge and jury - a dangerous break with our legal tradition.

Hardly. Most people will have some idea as to whether the committed an offence of not (even if they were oblivious / negligent at the time). Photographs of the offence are available on request.

* The punishment is non-graded; in other words a motorist gets two points whether doing 45mph or 90mph in a 40mph zone. This leads to a grave risk of disproportionate punishment, and is therefore an unfair and possible unconstitutional structure.

Perhaps the system can be tweaked, but I imagine you will also face a dangerous driving charge (mandatory court appearance with up to 5 points) doing 90mph in a 40mph zone. This redresses the concept of disproportionate punishment.

Some examples:
* Belfield Bridge, Dublin. ...

Momentum gathered on the downhill is lost on the uphill. The 40 mph limit is in place as the road quickly merges with a bus lane and a cycle lane.

* Kilmacanogue to Glen of the Downs: ...

Road works incomplete, temporary speed restriction.

* Cork City: Dual carriageway (speed limit is 60mph) from Bishopstown roundabout heading towards Sarsfield roundabout.

Is the author advocating approaching a busy roundabout, beyond a bend, at 60mph?

Of course, removing some or all VAT for cars with both front and side airbags would be likely to have a dramatic downward effect on road deaths. But tax is sacred, lives are another matter.

No, car user deaths would stay the same as people would engage in more risky behaviour, thinking they are "safe, while pedestrian and other road user deaths would increase.

These two points would appear to follow the general gist of SBP commentary on transport - cars good, public transport bad. Obviously public transport doesn't pay them enough in advertising, while they often have several motoring pages and / or a motoring supplement. Further, putting people of the road would reduce the number of cars sold. This rant is about reducing car taxation so car dealers can increase their margins and spend more on advertising. The SBP is willing to let people die so they can line their own pockets.

Capt'n Midnight

Just a reminder on speeding fines
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1759791.stm

Anssi Vanjoki, 44, has been ordered to pay a fine of 116,000 euros after being caught breaking the speed limit on his Harley Davidson motorbike in the capital, Helsinki, in October last year.
Mr Vanjoki is a Harley Davidson enthusiast
Police say he was driving at 75 km/h (47 mph) in a 50km/h (31 mph) zone.

In Finland, traffic fines are proportionate to the latest available data on an offender's income.

Victor

Graph

BrianD3

Lucan bypass: A fixed GATSO speed camera installed opposite Spa Hotel on N4. Speed limit on dual carriageway is 40mph. The trap is located at the bottom of the slope on the westbound carriageway exiting Dublin.

Wrong on two counts:
a) the camera is on the eastbound carriageway
b) the limit is 50 mph

When they can't even get basic facts like this correct, you have to wonder about the accuracy of the rest of the article.

BrianD3

TomF

Victor has certainly posted an excellent analysis of how statistics can be misused or even ignored and I say "Well-done!"

robbie1876

Seconded! Some great points, Victor, makes you realise how easily most people will scan through the article and take everything in as gospel.

Lord Nikon

Originally posted by BrianD3
Wrong on two counts:
a) the camera is on the eastbound carriageway
b) the limit is 50 mph

When they can't even get basic facts like this correct, you have to wonder about the accuracy of the rest of the article.

BrianD3

It's also entering Dublin.

One question I would like to ask, When was the last time you saw an accident on a Motorway, or on the Lucan ByPass.

HOW could you possibly speed on the M50 during the day.

Andrew Duffy

The last time I saw an accident on a motorway was in the UK last month. In heavy traffic. There were certainly injuries, if not deaths.

Good response. WRT the trap on the Lucan bypass, it is located about 300 yards before an entirely blind on-slip beyond the crest of a hill. To compound it, pedestrians regularly cross the bypass (as they are legally allowed do) to reach the hotel, and cross it again while it's dark and they are drunk to get home. The trap is well signposted, and causes people to slow down. Mission accomplished?

robbie1876

When was the last time you saw an accident on a Motorway

As a slight aside, somebody told me recently that the M50 is the safest motorway in Europe, on a deaths by journey numbers basis. I tried searching for this information, but couldn't find anything.

Is there a particular reason why this road is so safe? People will say its because of traffic on it etc, but the M25 in London has the same problem with traffic, and apparantly there is more deaths per journey over there.

sparkite

just like everything else in ireland ppl manage to f*** everything up.
sign

Victor

Originally posted by robbie1876
As a slight aside, somebody told me recently that the M50 is the safest motorway in Europe, on a deaths by journey numbers basis. I tried searching for this information, but couldn't find anything.

It is certainly the safest major road in Ireland on a vehicle km basis (save some shorter national routes that didn't record any accidents in the year).

Again "deaths by journey numbers basis" is probably misleading statistically as you can only do a short journey on the M50 (I imagine the M25 is 3-4 times longer, The M1, M4 & M6 in the UK are each several hundred km long). The usual criteria as to whether a road is safe or not are deaths & injuries / vehicle km and a second more complicated formula that compares like with like - motorway -v- motorway, four lane -v- four lane, two lane -v- two lane.

It's all very well to say there were say 10 accidents on a busy motorway and only 3 on the parallel main road - however is the motorway is carry 10 times the traffic, then by this criteria the main road is much more dangerous. The NRA have a report on the website about it comparing non-urban national routes. Some sections like the Cork-Macroom road, while an excellent road (2 wide lanes, 2 hard shoulders, straight, few junctions / entrances), still has as many accidents as many poorer roads.