Old Gay wants to reduce limits again!

timmywex

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0418/roads.html

Byrne favours reduced urban speed limits
Saturday, 18 April 2009 13:29
The Chairman of the Road Safety Authority says he would favour a reduction in speed limits on roads in urban areas.

Gay Byrne was speaking after reports that authorities in Britain plan to introduce 20mph (32kp/h) limits in residential areas, in an effort to reduce road deaths.

Speaking on RTÉ's Marian Finucane Show, Mr Byrne said he believed most people were making an effort to improve their behaviour on the roads but some drivers would always ignore all warnings.

AdvertisementHe said the introduction of speed cameras was the only way to catch motorists who insisted on breaking speed limits, in the same way as an increased number of checkpoints has helped detect those who drive over the legal alcohol limit.

Well thats gonna be a scandal, i cant think of many places in urban settings where road deaths occur that reducing the speed limit to 30 would help.

Jonty

well if thats the case, I'm gonna have to take the horse to work:D

Eric Cartman

fúck off, im already forced to go at 60km/h on the last leg of my journey home , i dont need it reduced (its only 60 because of speedbumps)

Owen

Do we ever think on our own? The brits do it, then we do it ... reminds me of the Life of Brian 'We're all Individuals!' :rolleyes:

peasant

Having said that ...

They did that decades ago in Germany on side streets (not main roads) in housing estates and residential areas. 30 km/h per hour limit and all roads have equal priority. I seem to remember that it worked.

DrumSteve

i think the old codger has it in for cars....

Seth Brundle

In Gay Byrnes defence, it is very unlikely that he came up with this decision!
However, it may be more prudent to enforce existing limits before reducing them.

Dartz

the introduction of speed cameras was the only way to catch motorists who insisted on breaking speed limits

I disagree with this. Speed camera's will only catch speeders. They will not catch mobile phone users, sleepers, drunk-drivers, Polish drivers, untaxed and uninsured drivers, unsafe loads...etc.

Enforcement by human beings, not yellow boxes.

I have no problem with lower speed limits on residential roads. Now then, how do we legally define a residential road? the workability and respectability of this system depends on these limits being applied correctly.

Improper limits (Like that 30mph one coming out of Chapelizod on a road wide enough to be a Dual carriageway) engender an inherant disrespect for the speed limit as a whole, meaning a driver will be less likely to obey a limit where it might possibly make sense.

DrumSteve

Dartz wrote: »

I disagree with this. Speed camera's will only catch speeders. They will not catch mobile phone users, sleepers, drunk-drivers, Polish drivers, untaxed and uninsured drivers, unsafe loads...etc.

Enforcement by human beings, not yellow boxes.

I have no problem with lower speed limits on residential roads. Now then, how do we legally define a residential road? the workability and respectability of this system depends on these limits being applied correctly.

Improper limits (Like that 30mph one coming out of Chapelizod on a road wide enough to be a Dual carriageway) engender an inherant disrespect for the speed limit as a whole, meaning a driver will be less likely to obey a limit where it might possibly make sense.

quite true that road is pretty god damn wide. however i think if there was a realistic attitude about speed limits from the authorities in question there might be a bit more respect for the limits.

but43r

Dartz wrote: »

I disagree with this. Speed camera's will only catch speeders. They will not catch mobile phone users, sleepers, drunk-drivers, Polish drivers, untaxed and uninsured drivers, unsafe loads...etc.

Enforcement by human beings, not yellow boxes.

I have no problem with lower speed limits on residential roads. Now then, how do we legally define a residential road? the workability and respectability of this system depends on these limits being applied correctly.

Improper limits (Like that 30mph one coming out of Chapelizod on a road wide enough to be a Dual carriageway) engender an inherant disrespect for the speed limit as a whole, meaning a driver will be less likely to obey a limit where it might possibly make sense.

Are you suggesting that Polish drivers should not be allowed on a road??? :eek::eek::eek:

Heroditas

How many people were killed in residential areas last year? :rolleyes:

Would a drop in the speed limits have saved them?

mick.fr

Residential area fair enough. Driving 50Khm through kids playing is stupid anyway.

Now imposing 30Khm in city center is pretty dumb alright. You will see lots of taxi breaking down after 6 months. A car is meant to roll, not stay on 2-3 gear all day long.

Terrontress

but43r wrote: »

Are you suggesting that Polish drivers should not be allowed on a road??? :eek::eek::eek:

Not only that! He seems to be suggesting that being a Polish driver is illegal!

maidhc

ned78 wrote: »

reminds me of the Life of Brian 'We're all Individuals!' :rolleyes:

I'm not!

mick.fr

Dartz wrote: »

Speed camera's will only catch speeders. They will not catch Polish drivers...

ROFL what is that lol?
Oh man not even gonna comment on this...Your stupidity speaks for itself.

Terrontress

Terrontress wrote: »

Not only that! He seems to be suggesting that being a Polish driver is illegal!

lol

AugustusMaximus

Gay "I've been driving for years without passing a driving test" Byrne.

Another stupid ****ing idea from a guy who is completely out of his depth for the position he is holding. Copy and pasting what the Brits are thinking about is pathetic.

Why don't we just drop the speed limit for the entire road network to 10kph and be done with it. Its heading that way anyways.

Random

I think they need to stop grouping all categorys of road together etc in terms of speed. There's a lot of roads out there with 80KPH limits that should be 50KPH and numerous places with 60KPH that should be 100KPH.

Let's fix what we have first with the system we have before we start taking out these extreme measures.

Dartz

mick.fr wrote: »

ROFL what is that lol?
Oh man not even gonna comment on this...Your stupidity speaks for itself.

Jesus Christ man, have a sense of humour :rolleyes:

donvito99

Dartz wrote: »

Polish drivers

kazul

mick.fr wrote: »

Now imposing 30Khm in city center is pretty dumb alright. You will see lots of taxi breaking down after 6 months. A car is meant to roll, not stay on 2-3 gear all day long.

Hi Mick, me again. Care to elaborate on this point? How will a 30 km/h limit cause taxis to break down after 6 months?

"Roll" = coast or drive?

My "taxi" is well suited a low speed limit bein' an auto 'nall. Mild touch on the throttle and I'm at 30 km/h no bother at all.
Maybe I didn't read the BMW blogs about cars being designed to be in a specific gear all day long to avoid breakdowns :rolleyes:

mle1324

haha ,he must be taken the p**s:
if anything speed limets should be brought up 15kph extra on some roads

Johnboy Mac

Byrne, a prick! Tired of listening to him spouting about 'speeding' like some sort of mantra. What his qualifications are for being chairman of the RSA is I've no idea - it's proves we don't take motoring seriously enough in this country, so I'll dismiss anything that he says with pleasure.

When someone from the RSA, the AA or Dept. of Transport takes on the real dangers of poor driving they'll have my attention and possible support.

Johnboy Mac

peasant wrote: »

Having said that ...

They did that decades ago in Germany on side streets (not main roads) in housing estates and residential areas. 30 km/h per hour limit and all roads have equal priority. I seem to remember that it worked.

Sure it worked, it was Germany were things tend to be done correctly ie roads are generally driven well by users, the roads are generally good quality and more importantly the majority of Germans drive better than us lot! It's a bit like compairing apples to oranges.

Outkast_IRE

Ah guys relax there is a simple logical explanation to this ,
as we all know Gay Byrne is now very very old , like all old people he now drives slower. (Logical)
Hes tired of other drivers up his hole when hes goin slower than the limit so to solve this hes lowering the limit for everybody. Simple as told ya there was a explanation:D

Plug

timmywex wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0418/roads.html




Well thats gonna be a scandal, i cant think of many places in urban settings where road deaths occur that reducing the speed limit to 30 would help.

Theres going to be even more deaths:D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dnf6ib823vM

Fishtits

Guess you lot don't like him then...

Road deaths are falling, something is being done right?

"Do we ever think on our own? The brits do it, then we do it ..."

I travel through said jurisdiction regularly and enjoy the higher speed limits through country towns, ie 40 rather than 30, far more sensible.

Until the piss & vinegar brigade stop topping themselves and their passengers in single vehicle accidents this clamp down will continue.

Go figure...

Hagar

Gay Byrne "Speeding fines, there's one for everyone in the audience".

Cuddlesworth

Fishtits wrote: »

Guess you lot don't like him then...

Road deaths are falling, something is being done right?

"Do we ever think on our own? The brits do it, then we do it ..."

I travel through said jurisdiction regularly and enjoy the higher speed limits through country towns, ie 40 rather than 30, far more sensible.

Until the piss & vinegar brigade stop topping themselves and their passengers in single vehicle accidents this clamp down will continue.

Go figure...

Human Error is a factor they are not going to wipe out. A bad driver is still a bad driver at low speeds.

challengemaster

Or....how about saying its your own fault if you walk out infront of a car...I think people won't be as quick to walk onto the roads to be hit. Speed limits don't have to change and the roads are a bit more safe.

ShooterSF

Didn't they run an ad saying hit me at 30 and 9 out of 10 times I'll live. Hit me at 40 and 9 times out of 10 Ill die. It's the limit for a reason.

Gallus

Oh great more "speeding" propaganda...
When will this country learn?

L1011

ShooterSF wrote: »

Didn't they run an ad saying hit me at 30 and 9 out of 10 times I'll live. Hit me at 40 and 9 times out of 10 Ill die. It's the limit for a reason.

boards.ie's motors forum favourite unproven statistic. There has never been any research to back up that figure, just lots of GB's standard, appallingly badly made road safety ads.

ShooterSF

MYOB wrote: »

boards.ie's motors forum favourite unproven statistic. There has never been any research to back up that figure, just lots of GB's standard, appallingly badly made road safety ads.

It's even more redundant now surely if they want to change a limit "established" due to this statistic! :pac:

seanyfitz07

i saw the headline and thought they were being increased, old Gay should just go back to his house up in howth and stay there!

Johnboy Mac

seanyfitz07 wrote: »

i saw the headline and thought they were being increased, old Gay should just go back to his house up in howth and stay there!

Didn't you know old Gaybo moved to D4, I presume because it was easier to get into town and to Donnybrook to meet his old buddy's of similar mentality.

I actually suspect he's not able to drive!

Mr. Frost

Dartz wrote: »

I disagree with this. Speed camera's will only catch speeders. They will not catch mobile phone users, sleepers, drunk-drivers, Polish drivers...

I just hope you've the decency not to drive in other countries yourself so. :rolleyes:

cyclopath2001

MYOB wrote: »

boards.ie's motors forum favourite unproven statistic. There has never been any research to back up that figure, just lots of GB's standard, appallingly badly made road safety ads.

Never say never.

Pedestrian fatality risk as a function of car impact speed

Nevertheless, a strong dependence on impact speed is found, with the fatality risk at 50 km/h being more than twice as high as the risk at 40 km/h and more than five times higher than the risk at 30 km/h. Our findings should have important implications for the development of pedestrian accident countermeasures worldwide. In particular, the scope of future pedestrian safety policies and research should be broadened to include accidents with impact speeds exceeding 50 km/h.

So far, the usual suspects have either thrown their toys out of the pram, deliberately misunderstood the reasons why speeding is socially undesirable or mouthed off their disdain for people older than themselves.

But at least, we're making progress: the 'man walking with red flag in front of cars' myth has not been trotted out, that's some progress.

L1011

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Never say never.

Pedestrian fatality risk as a function of car impact speed

That study doesn't cover the difference between 30 and 40mph - as I said, there hasn't been any research and the statistic is nothing but made up.

mondeo

These cameras will probably not be going up for a long time to come...Recession comes first speed cameras later I would assume?

cyclopath2001

MYOB wrote: »

That study doesn't cover the difference between 30 and 40mph - as I said, there hasn't been any research and the statistic is nothing but made up.

You're right it's in kilometres, totally irrelevant.

maidhc

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You're right it's in kilometres, totally irrelevant.

I'm not going to pay to read the entire study (which appears to deal with speeds below 30mph-50km/h), but I thought this quote from the abstract was interesting:

Our results show far lower fatality risks than generally reported in the traffic safety literature.

Koloman

Heroditas wrote: »

How many people were killed in residential areas last year? :rolleyes:

Would a drop in the speed limits have saved them?

Well, even if it saves one life then it is worth it.

Guy:Incognito

Dartz wrote: »

I disagree with this. Speed camera's will only catch speeders. They will not catch mobile phone users, sleepers, drunk-drivers, Polish drivers, untaxed and uninsured drivers, unsafe loads...etc.

Enforcement by human beings, not yellow boxes.
.

Why bother paying humans to enforce a very black and white issue that can be done with a camera? As you point out, the other things (including those illegal polish people) cant be done by cameras, which means a gards time has to be divided between different types of checks and enforcment. Why not take one of these out and increase the amount of time that can be used to enforce the others.

If anything, more things should be doen remotely and without the need for a Gard to be there costing money and man hours (bus lane cameras being 1)

L1011

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You're right it's in kilometres, totally irrelevant.

And doesn't reach the speeds we're talking about. 40mph is 64m/h, not the 50 that study reaches.

So yes, its totally irrelevant to the discussion.

Fishtits

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Human Error is a factor they are not going to wipe out. A bad driver is still a bad driver at low speeds.

This is what driver training should be all about.

The current regime is focussed on carrying out tasks in order to be granted a license, nothing other than lip service about responsibility.

You just need to prove you can operate a vehicle safely.

How about changing the whole system to re-focus on accepting responsibility for our driving? higher speed limits would eventually be possible as an off shoot of this.

The current system is set on containing the lowest common denominator, ie the idiot driver, that scrapes a pass.

It suits a road network that's substandard and many drivers that just want to get from A to B.

We need to make gaining a driving license more responsibility orientated IMHO.

Fighting Irish

I say get knocked over "deal with it" and if you knock down someone and its your fault then its €50000 and 10 year ban, same goes for people who cause more than one car crash


No point protecting the stupid, theres only one way they'll learn

ShooterSF

Koloman wrote: »

Well, even if it saves one life then it is worth it.

And where do we stop? Sure lets just abandon cars and walk and cycle everywhere. Road deaths would plummet then.

AugustusMaximus

Koloman wrote: »

Well, even if it saves one life then it is worth it.

You see, this statement is just not true.

if we reduced speed limits to 10kph I'm sure no one would die. And sure, it would all be worth it.

cyclopath2001

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

if we reduced speed limits to 10kph I'm sure no one would die. And sure, it would all be worth it.

Not sure if this is 'toys out of the pram' or borderline 'man with red flag'. Always interesting to see how speed-lobbyists try to confine the parameters to lethal/non-lethal driving.

myob wrote:

And doesn't reach the speeds we're talking about. 40mph is 64m/h, not the 50 that study reaches.

I suppose then, that the risk of death or injury is less at 64kph than at 50?