Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Speed camera rollout

Comments

  • #2
    WHITE_P
    Closed Accounts Posts: 619 ✭✭✭WHITE_P


    There's two near Navan, one the Dublin side and another on the Kells side, both of which have been burnt in the last two years. (there not private one's).

    Power to the people.


  • #3
    Niall1234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 425 ✭✭Niall1234


    Interesting.

    Surely if enough cameras are destroyed then the company running this get quick scheme will actually make a loss.

    Might have to get the lads from the Tuf Tuf Club over to give lessons.


  • #4
    WHITE_P
    Closed Accounts Posts: 619 ✭✭✭WHITE_P


    Trouble is I read in Autoexpress that those clever clogs that make these things have developed one's that are vandal / fire proof.


  • #5
    Niall1234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 425 ✭✭Niall1234


    What about spray painting over the lens ?

    Not that I am encouraging any of these actions btw. :D


  • #6
    WHITE_P
    Closed Accounts Posts: 619 ✭✭✭WHITE_P


    Niall1234 wrote: »
    What about spray painting over the lens ?

    Not that I am encouraging any of these actions btw. :D

    Appearently that won't work either, some kind of special coating on the lens / cover. Read about it in autoexpress a few months ago.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    mik_da_man
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 9,982 ✭✭✭mik_da_man


    Lets see them stand up to a belt of a JCB :D


  • #8
    D_murph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 773 ✭✭✭D_murph


    mik_da_man wrote: »
    Lets see them stand up to a belt of a JCB :D


    we have a winner :D


  • #9
    Atomic Pineapple
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,272 ✭✭✭✭Atomic Pineapple


    just block the line of sight of the lense with something, there was a traffic cone stuck in front of one on the collon ardee road (n2) it was there for ages! :D


  • #10
    Steve
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,584 ✭✭✭✭Steve


    mik_da_man wrote: »
    Lets see them stand up to a belt of a JCB :D
    That's the funniest thing I've read in ages:D:D
    I'll certainly drink to that!


  • #11
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 41,240 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    WHITE_P wrote: »
    Trouble is I read in Autoexpress that those clever clogs that make these things have developed one's that are vandal / fire proof.
    Whatever about fire proof, everything is vandalise-able!


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    WHITE_P
    Closed Accounts Posts: 619 ✭✭✭WHITE_P


    kbannon wrote: »
    Whatever about fire proof, everything is vandalise-able!

    Is vandalise-able a word?

    You are probably right (I hope thats not the voice of experience talking), only joking !!!

    However here's a link to the article in AutoExpress, see the Peek IDEE.

    http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/217461/speed_camera_gallery.html


  • #13
    WHITE_P
    Closed Accounts Posts: 619 ✭✭✭WHITE_P


    draffodx wrote: »
    just block the line of sight of the lense with something, there was a traffic cone stuck in front of one on the collon ardee road (n2) it was there for ages! :D

    that made me laugh every time I passed it. Brilliant :D


  • #14
    Noelie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 999 ✭✭✭Noelie


    what will happen when road deaths don't fall after the roll out of these camera's, will they deciede they need to put more up?


  • #15
    Marcus.Aurelius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭Marcus.Aurelius


    Safety cameras were scrapped. There is no press release on the Dept of Justice webpage.

    Minister Lenihan said only a few weeks ago that the plans were being shelved due to costs. Where did these people get their info?


  • #16
    Steve
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,584 ✭✭✭✭Steve


    maoleary wrote: »
    Safety cameras were scrapped. There is no press release on the Dept of Justice webpage.

    Minister Lenihan said only a few weeks ago that the plans were being shelved due to costs. Where did these people get their info?
    it was un-scrapped last Tuesday.

    http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/motors/2008/0227/1203619480467.html


  • #17
    Marcus.Aurelius
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭Marcus.Aurelius


    stevec wrote: »
    it was un-scrapped last Tuesday.

    http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/motors/2008/0227/1203619480467.html

    Ah b*llox :mad:

    f**king Fianna Fail-ures


  • #18
    Steve
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,584 ✭✭✭✭Steve


    I've just read that article again:
    ...tender estimates that put annual costs closer to €25 million per annum.
    ...estimated that the revenue accruing to the Exchequer from speed cameras will be about €70 million.

    That means it will cost the motorist €100m in total.

    Given roughly 2m motorists here, they expect to get €50 per motorist anually.


  • #19
    pburns
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,423 ✭✭✭pburns


    'Tis a sad day...:(

    We need some type of MacGyver-like vigilante who can make a bomb out of a bottle of Domestos and a stick of chewing gum...;)


  • #20
    Wossack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,044 ✭✭✭Wossack


    we'll get a dedicated Irish section of:

    http://www.speedcam.co.uk/gatso2.htm

    soon enough I'd say


  • #21
    Charlie 22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 130 ✭✭Charlie 22


    The best way to kill them i hear is to drill a 10mm hole and fill them with expanding builders foam it should destroy the inner workings of them not that i would know anything at all about it.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    cashmni1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 629 ✭✭✭cashmni1


    Charlie 22 wrote: »
    The best way to kill them i hear is to drill a 10mm hole and fill them with expanding builders foam it should destroy the inner workings of them not that i would know anything at all about it.
    Yeah, I was wondering what they meant on PistonHeads when he said " I must get more expanding foam".
    Brilliant....I think we should nominate a new word to the dictionary....Vandalise-able


  • #23
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 41,240 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    stevec wrote: »
    I've just read that article again:

    ...tender estimates that put annual costs closer to €25 million per annum.
    ...estimated that the revenue accruing to the Exchequer from speed cameras will be about €70 million.

    That means it will cost the motorist €100m in total.

    Given roughly 2m motorists here, they expect to get €50 per motorist anually.
    It will cost the motorist €70m annually. The government then face a cost of €25 which will be taken out of that €70m - its not added onto the €70m.


  • #24
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 41,240 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    tsk tsk - shocking behaviour!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dq_uCsTiKE


  • #25
    Steve
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,584 ✭✭✭✭Steve


    kbannon wrote: »
    It will cost the motorist €70m annually. The government then face a cost of €25 which will be taken out of that €70m - its not added onto the €70m.
    Way I read it was revenue to the gov. would be 75m, IMO that would be after they paid running costs.
    Doesn't matter how its phrased, seemingly revenue is more important than saving lives.


  • #26
    D_murph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 773 ✭✭✭D_murph


    kbannon wrote: »
    tsk tsk - shocking behaviour!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dq_uCsTiKE

    i agree, they might not have done the scamera any good but i doubt they killed it off either unfortunately because these things are pretty tough.

    need more tyres :D


  • #27
    bman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 590 ✭✭✭bman


    Charlie 22 wrote: »
    The best way to kill them i hear is to drill a 10mm hole and fill them with expanding builders foam it should destroy the inner workings of them not that i would know anything at all about it.

    Sounds like a good idea! Probably cheaper, more effective and easier to do than using a burning tire (more environmentally friendly too ;)).


  • #28
    D_murph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 773 ✭✭✭D_murph


    bman wrote: »
    Sounds like a good idea! Probably cheaper, more effective and easier to do than using a burning tire (more environmentally friendly too ;)).

    and safer too :D

    lets not forget, these things are all about safety :rolleyes:


Advertisement