399 road deaths in 2005 leave us the worst in Europe

boardy

TheBigLebowski wrote:

This seems like a simple question to me so maybe somebody can give me a simple answer. Why does the government allow cars to be imported that can do over 120 kmh when it is not legal to drive above 120 kmh on any road in the country? Obviously people will be able to tamper with the speed limiters, but they're very easy to spot, they're the ones breaking the speed limit. Being the law abiding person I am, it wouldn't bother me to have a speed limiter on my car.

There should not be a need for limiters. And I believe that it could be a safety issue as the extra speed may be required in unusual situations.

The Sweeper

The "wrong side of the road" thing is an overtaking problem. Ireland has a huge number of L-plate drivers because of the problems with testing and the test waiting lists. Most of those L-plate drivers drive around the place on their own on a regular basis, without a licensed driver in the car.

Qualified drivers seem to be afflicted with a moment of madness when stuck behind an L-plate driver - even if that driver is doing the speed limit and driving appropriately.

Ireland doesn't have much in terms of long, straight, wonderful roads. We have a lot of little winding weaving roads. People try to overtake in situations where they don't have a clear view of what's approaching, and often the person being overtaken doesn't have the driving skill to realise that it would help if they were to slow down and allow the arrogant overtaking pillock a chance to pull back in to the correct side of the road in front of them.

TheBigLebowski

Litcagral wrote:

It's not illegal to travel above 120kph on private roads! If it was illegal to import of cars that were capable of doing more than 120kph it would cause several problems. There is a great difference in power required to propel a 40kg driver at 120 kph downhill and that required to propel a similar car with five 100kg people in it uphill at the same speed. Similar problems regarding trailers, caravans etc. - car would get nowhere.

I don't know anybody who drives above 120kmh on private roads. Regarding the other arguments, the car would have the power to do 120kmh uphill but it's a speed limiter that controls your speed, likewise going downhill. In this day and age, it's a simple device.

TheBigLebowski

boardy wrote:

There should not be a need for limiters. And I believe that it could be a safety issue as the extra speed may be required in unusual situations.

I believe those "unusual" situations, which I would say are extremely rare, would be more than made up for by the number of cars, which would not be speeding past you, making the overall drive a lot safer i.e. the benefits far outweigh possibility of a disadvantage.

Litcagral

TheBigLebowski wrote:

I don't know anybody who drives above 120kmh on private roads. Regarding the other arguments, the car would have the power to do 120kmh uphill but it's a speed limiter that controls your speed, likewise going downhill. In this day and age, it's a simple device.

In your post you referred to cars that were not capable of travelling at 120kph. You didn't mention speed restricters - there's a huge difference. Speed restricters can easily be disconnected - pull out the fuse.

Re private roads- Mondello Park etc.

TheBigLebowski

It would be easy to make it difficult for people to modify their cars and I'd say most people wouldn't bother getting it done, (just like most people don't modify their cars to get more power even though it's very possible) making it a lot easier to crack down on people who do. Unlike now where a very high percentage are speeding.

Mondello park? Do you know people who drive their private cars (that they use on public roads) that also use them in Mondello?

Rovi

TheBigLebowski wrote:

Mondello park? Do you know people who drive their private cars (that they use on public roads) that also use them in Mondello?

Loads of people do it, at Track Days, and even sometimes in full-on motorsport events- http://www.mondello.ie/one.php?page=track_cars

Also, by default, every tarmac rally car is road legal. They have to be, as they use the public road when liaising between stages.

.

Dades

TheBigLebowski wrote:

I believe those "unusual" situations, which I would say are extremely rare, would be more than made up for by the number of cars, which would not be speeding past you, making the overall drive a lot safer i.e. the benefits far outweigh possibility of a disadvantage.

Limiting cars to 120kph would only people save speeding fines for the most part. Limiters are of no use if somebody is doing 110kph in a 50 or 80kph zone. Its all about how fast you are going relative to the speed limit of the road you are on.

People will still try to pass out drivers going 110kph - it'll just keep them that bit longer on the wrong side of the road.

Limiters for learners might be a good thing, but the practicalities involved make it difficult to implement or enforce.

jimbling

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

The "wrong side of the road" thing is an overtaking problem.

no, that was talking about people falling asleep - swerving for whatever reason etc etc....

the overtaking had an area in the stats all by itself - 9%.

Hobbes

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

Qualified drivers seem to be afflicted with a moment of madness when stuck behind an L-plate driver - even if that driver is doing the speed limit and driving appropriately.

Yea never understood that. I've seen a taxi driver overtake me on a tight country inside bend at over the speed limit.

often the person being overtaken doesn't have the driving skill to realise that it would help if they were to slow down and allow the arrogant overtaking pillock a chance to pull back in to the correct side of the road in front of them.

Yea they teach this in driving lessons (if people bothered to take them) but at least from my parents driving the "Irish approach" was accelerate so as to "stop the cute hor from getting one up on me".

MrPudding

The Atheist wrote:

Limiting cars to 120kph would only people save speeding fines for the most part. Limiters are of no use if somebody is doing 110kph in a 50 or 80kph zone. Its all about how fast you are going relative to the speed limit of the road you are on.

I do not agree with the use of limiters but from a technological point of view the implementation, should the desire to do so exsist, would not be difficult.

It is currently possible to get GPS systems for cars that display the speed limit for the road or section of road the car in currently in. It would not be a great leap of technology to connect this to a variable limiter that could limit the car's speed depending on the limit in force at the car's location.

The Atheist wrote:

People will still try to pass out drivers going 110kph - it'll just keep them that bit longer on the wrong side of the road.

A very valid point. Even with a limiter there will still be people wanting to overtake.

The Atheist wrote:

Limiters for learners might be a good thing, but the practicalities involved make it difficult to implement or enforce.

Again, I think that if there was the will it would not be that difficult. NI and Australia both have a period after the test is passed where the driver is limited in certain ways. It might be acceptable to introduce a system like this here but back it up with variable limiters for the first year.

How about voluntary limiters for young drivers in exchange for massive insurance discounts? Of course there would need to be huge penalties for circumventing the device.

MrP

MrPudding

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

and often the person being overtaken doesn't have the driving skill to realise that it would help if they were to slow down and allow the arrogant overtaking pillock a chance to pull back in to the correct side of the road in front of them.

Yeah, I only we had some method of passing information like this to the learner drivers. Could we not set up some kind of knowledge transfer where people that know how to drive "teach" people that don't know how to drive before they are let loose on the roads?

Again, me with my dreams of an ideal society.

MrP

Dades

MrPudding wrote:

Could we not set up some kind of knowledge transfer where people that know how to drive "teach" people that don't know how to drive before they are let loose on the roads?

Aren't they called driving instructors?!

Sleepy

The problem there is that there's actually no-one calling them driving instructors but themselves. Surely such an important job should actually require some type of licence to drive, never mind a special "instruction licence"?

The whole driving instruction industry is completely unregulated. Does that make sense to anyone else because it sure as hell doesn't make sense to me...

Dades

I guess the theory is that you will not pass the driving test unless you are competent enough. And people seem to have enough difficulty with passing that as it is. (Some people are not born to drive).

Would regulating driving instruction make any difference? For a start do you even need official instruction to sit your test, or can your uncle/brother/mother not just teach you to drive?

boardy

The Atheist wrote:

For a start do you even need official instruction to sit your test, or can your uncle/brother/mother not just teach you to drive?

Maybe, that's the problem - bad habits being passed on by the fathers and mothers. How many fathers and mothers (who got their license years ago) know which is the correct lane for the second exit on a roundabout?

nlgbbbblth

It would help if the newspapers published the facts about individual accidents.

Last month: A fatal accident in the Leinster area. Three deaths. Witness travelling in car in the opposite direction sees the vehicle in question coming towards them at excessive speed. Within one minute the vehicle had crashed and the witness was first on the scene. Gardai and ambulance called.

Alcohol was also a factor - several people had seen the driver drinking in a local pub.

Newspaper reports make no mention of the speeding or the drinking.

If they did, it might deter other people from doing the same.

MrPudding

nlgbbbblth wrote:

It would help if the newspapers published the facts about individual accidents.

Last month: A fatal accident in the Leinster area. Three deaths. Witness travelling in car in the opposite direction sees the vehicle in question coming towards them at excessive speed. Within one minute the vehicle had crashed and the witness was first on the scene. Gardai and ambulance called.

Alcohol was also a factor - several people had seen the driver drinking in a local pub.

Newspaper reports make no mention of the speeding or the drinking.

If they did, it might deter other people from doing the same.

I think there may be an issue here that they may not be able to report allegations or potential causes before the facts are known or proven in a court of law or inquest.

This has been brought up before. I for one would like to see newspaper stories along the lines of:

"Remember that crash in whereever last year where a car was on the wrong side of the road and wiped out a family on there way home from choir practice? Well, the inquest finished today and the driver Joe Bloggs from where ever was pissed at the time of the accident.

No charges will be brought against him for the murder of the family as he also, thankfully, died in the crash. On a positive note, he had not yet had a chance to breed."

MrP