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

Road safety 'made worse by speed cameras'

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    I.S.T.
    Registered Users Posts: 893 ✭✭✭I.S.T.


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »
    The problem there is not that all speed limits are bad, it's that an inappropriate limit was set at a particular location on one road in the UK.

    This discussion goes nowhere until everyone agrees the reasons why do we have speed limits?.

    Perhaps 'IrishSpeedTraps' could make a stab at such a definition and once a consensus is reached, it could be put on their site?

    We are not against speed limits, and believe it or not, we are not against speed cameras. We are against speed cameras being placed in areas purely to make money or to increase detection rates as a PR exercise by the Guards and Government.


  • Options
    #63
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »
    We are not against speed limits, and believe it or not, we are not against speed cameras. We are against speed cameras being placed in areas purely to make money or to increase detection rates as a PR exercise by the Guards and Government.

    Like the speed camera in a 60KM/H area at the bottom of a steep hill on the way into Dublin.

    I don't know if it is still active but there are painted lines on the road so I presume it is. I'm rarely doing 60 when I hit it because the speed limit makes no sense for the area and I'll most likely get rammed up the arse if I do obey it so I'm usually doing about 75-80KM/H along the stretch along with the rest of the traffic and I've never seen anything close to an accident in the area.

    I've also never gotten a ticket for doing it.


  • Options
    #64
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    John_C wrote: »
    That road will now have a different category of traffic on it. A 100kph road would likely not have been safe for cyclists and pedestrians. Certainly crossing the road would be very difficult. With the bulk of the motor traffic removed, the remainder has to slow down to allow more people to make use of the road. That's a perfectly sensible piece of policy.

    That is nonsense, most former N roads are wide with 2m wide hard shoulders, these road are wide enough for all (now much reduced) traffic to safely continue at 100kmh.

    It's the volume of traffic that made these roads dangerous, not the speed!


  • Options
    #65
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    crocro wrote: »
    I would imagine that speed cameras would be more effective if they were all hidden and mobile so that they wouldn't register on satnav systems.
    That depends on how you define effective. If effective is how many fines they generate then hidden one would be best. If you define effective as reducing incidents on a particular stretch of road then heavily signposted camers would be more effective.
    Wicknight wrote: »
    Speed cameras catch you after you have been speeding. They won't stop you doing 100km in a housing estate or around a black spot. They can catch you doing this though and punish you for doing this.
    Punishment after the fact does is not how I would prefer to cut down casualties.
    Wicknight wrote: »
    The purpose should be to catch speeders in an effort to deter them from future speeding. You can do that anywhere, and in fact you should be doing that anywhere.
    But you can’t. If you have a problem with people speading on the back roads in Donegal a speed camera on the N11 is not going to help. The purpose of fixed cameras should be to shape driver behaviour by foring them to slow down in dangerous areas. A speed camera doing its job should not catch anyone.
    Wicknight wrote: »
    If a driver has no idea when or where they will be caught they should make more of an effort to stay with in the speed limit the entire time
    But they don’t though.
    Wicknight wrote: »
    They idea that they should only have to stay in the speed limit on certain bits of road is frankly ridiculous. Planting signposted speed cameras in certain places simply re-enforces this idea, that you only have to stay within the speed limit on this bit of road
    Which is why you still need coppers on the road. Use the fixed cameras in areas where accidents happen. Make them highly visible that way people will slow down for the dangerous bits.

    Then have mobile units for policing speeding on other roads as well as dangerous driving.
    Wicknight wrote:
    The drivers that speed on "safe" roads are the same drivers that speed on unsafe roads.
    Perhaps, but it is more of a problem on the unsafe roads. Punishing people for speeding on the M1 or the N11 does little to slow people down on the back roads of Donegal. And even if it did, it is likely that a lot of the accidents on the unsafe roads could happen within the legal speed limit.
    Wicknight wrote:
    More to the point a driver does not have the ability to assess on a rolling basis where it is ok to speed and where it isn't. That is exactly the attitude that speed cameras should be attempting to punish and deter, this "make it up as we go along" attitude a lot of Irish drivers have. In fact it is the whole point of speed limits in the first place.
    Well, it should be the point of speed limits, but it does not really work in reality. I would agree that a lot of drivers do not have the ability to assess the safe speed for a given situation. There are a number of variables, the road, weather, skill of the driver capability of the vehicle etc. In a lot of cases the legal limit does not give a useful indication of what the safe speed is. Drivers should be educated in how to make a proper assessment of what the appropriate speed is. I believe that in a lot of cases the appropriate speed would be less than the posted limit.

    I am not an advocate for the abolition of speed limits. I would not be again raising certain limits, on motorways for example, but I reckon I would probably reduce more limits than I would raise if I found myself in a position where I had the power to do so.
    Wicknight wrote:
    Speeders should be fined and fined and fined again until they get out of the attitude that it is acceptable to speed if they want to. It should not be acceptable, baring extreme circumstances, to speed anywhere in Ireland.
    I obviously disagree with this, but then I don’t think speeding in and of itself is necessarily dangerous. Don’t get me wrong, I strongly believe that the laws need to be adhered to. If you want to embark on a campaign of targeting speeding drivers on speeding roads then fine. At the end of the day they are breaking the law. But don’t dress that up as being all about safety, it might indirectly get dangerous drivers off the road but I would prefer to slow drivers down before the incident rather than punishing them afterwards when it might already be too late.

    MrP


  • Options
    #66
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Wicknight wrote: »

    The purpose should be to catch speeders in an effort to deter them from future speeding. You can do that anywhere, and in fact you should be doing that anywhere. If a driver has no idea when or where they will be caught they should make more of an effort to stay with in the speed limit the entire time

    The result of such a tactic is more likely a collapsed (well even more than it curretly is :rolleyes:) economy as a considerable number of average mororists are banned or the courts system would be completly overwhelmed.

    What it won't do is make ALL drivers comply with unrealistic speed limits.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    Deleted User wrote: »
    What it won't do is make ALL drivers comply with unrealistic speed limits.
    So instead we have a campaign of civil disobedience based on each motorist's personal opinion. That's a recipe for chaos.

    If we're going to get the authorites to revise 'unrealistic' speed limits, shouldn't we first agree why do we have speed limits?.


  • Options
    #68
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »
    , shouldn't we first agree why do we have speed limits?.

    I think all here agree that limits are required, but realistic ones based on road conditions, traffic volumes etc.

    Slapping unreatistic limits on a road just because it's an "R" and not an "N" just opens the system up to ridicule. Trying to demonise motorists who break such limits is really a "jobsworth" attitude, often with an anti-motorist slant.


  • Options
    #69
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I think all here agree that limits are required, but realistic ones based on road conditions, traffic volumes etc..
    To achieve agreement on realistic limits there needs to be a fairly precise definition of how a realistic limit should be arrived at. Then, once limits have been agreed, perhaps IrishSpeedTraps could publish the explanations/justifications for the various limits and help educate people about the reasons for the speed limits?

    But, think your definition of the basis for realistic limits needs more work, it's rather vague, what's in the 'etc.'?

    I suspect that most speed limits are actually correct and appropriate but people don't understand the reasoning behind them.


  • Options
    #70
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »


    I suspect that most speed limits are actually correct and appropriate but people don't understand the reasoning behind them.

    lol, speed limits aren't correct in a lot of places. Either too low or too fast even if they are correct in most places.

    Everyone can agree that housing estates and heavily populated areas with nothing stopping people from accessing the road need low limits.

    Rural roads need sensible limits depending on the corners on that road. They do this in America in at least some states. Even the ramps onto highways have speed limits defined for the speed the corner should be taken at.

    There is no point having a low limit on a long straight stretch and on the twisty bit as it makes people think there is something wrong with the system and they'll just disregard all speed limits they want to.


  • Options
    #71
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    thebman wrote: »
    lol, speed limits aren't correct in a lot of places. Either too low or too fast even if they are correct in most places..
    Perhaps what's needed is a web site listing the places where the limits are considered to be inappropriate and giving the reasons? People could make submissions & the results put to the relevant authorities. Where speed limits are justified, the reasons could be updated to the site. And then, maybe we can clear the smoke-screen being put up by the pro-speeders?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »
    Perhaps what's needed is a web site listing the places where the limits are considered to be inappropriate and giving the reasons? People could make submissions & the results put to the relevant authorities. Where speed limits are justified, the reasons could be updated to the site. And then, maybe we can clear the smoke-screen being put up by the pro-speeders?

    You've been volunteered! ;)


  • Options
    #73
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You've been volunteered! ;)
    Perhaps IrishSpeedTraps would be interested in hosting this kind of information? I think to achieve his stated objectives he needs to establish:

    1: Why do we have speed limits?
    2: How do we determine them?
    3: On which roads exactly are the limits out of line with the line with '2'?

    Until then, the site will not avoid the perception that it is merely a facility for people who want to avoid detection for breaking the law while driving.


  • Options
    #74
    I.S.T.
    Registered Users Posts: 893 ✭✭✭I.S.T.


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »
    Perhaps IrishSpeedTraps would be interested in hosting this kind of information? I think to achieve his stated objectives he needs to establish:

    1: Why do we have speed limits?
    2: How do we determine them?
    3: On which roads exactly are the limits out of line with the line with '2'?

    Until then, the site will not avoid the perception that it is merely a facility for people who want to avoid detection for breaking the law while driving.

    What stated objectives are you talking about? I never stated our objective is to point out inaccurate speed limits throughout the country. If you are so bothered about this then why don't you set up your own website?


  • Options
    #75
    NewDubliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,615 ✭✭✭NewDubliner


    IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »
    What stated objectives are you talking about?
    From what I've read here, you've been very circumspect if not downright disingenuous about what your site is really about.


  • Options
    #76
    crocro
    Closed Accounts Posts: 301 ✭✭crocro


    IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »
    We are not against speed limits, and believe it or not, we are not against speed cameras. We are against speed cameras being placed in areas purely to make money or to increase detection rates as a PR exercise by the Guards and Government.
    What do you make of the claim by the gardai that...
    garda web site wrote:
    An Garda Síochána, in conjunction with the National Roads Authority, have completed an extensive analysis of the collision history on the road network where speed was a contributory factor. Sections of road have been identified where a significant proportion of accidents occurred whereby, in the opinion of the investigating Garda, a safe speed was exceeded.

    Based on this analysis, a list of Speed Enforcement Zones has been developed with the aim of providing information to motorists in order to raise awareness of speeding in these zones. An Garda Síochána will utilize these zones in order to direct speed enforcement activity in a proportionate and targeted manner.


    http://www.garda.ie/sez/Default.aspx


  • Options
    #77
    Tragedy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,057 ✭✭✭Tragedy


    crocro wrote: »
    What do you make of the claim by the gardai that...




    http://www.garda.ie/sez/Default.aspx
    Looking at the local roads listed(D16/D12/D8ish), any of the ones I recognise have low speed limits and never have accidents.

    In particular http://maps.google.com/staticmap?size=512x512&maptype=mobile&markers=53.291389,-6.330000|53.296111,-6.309167&key=ABQIAAAAbQmKg-c5hwUq4ic6o2HzYxRrpBDRlvEqbVbxuqqdWcizN2GoiRQuYqSjlQLYlXswkho2hJcySqOMqg&sensor=true is a seperated dual carriageway with a speed limit of only 60km/hr and a very well known location for having a guard with a hairdryer behind the bus shelter catching people doing 70.

    It isn't an accident hotspot, not by anyones book.

    http://maps.google.com/staticmap?size=512x512&maptype=mobile&markers=53.312222,-6.299167|53.319444,-6.290556&key=ABQIAAAAbQmKg-c5hwUq4ic6o2HzYxRrpBDRlvEqbVbxuqqdWcizN2GoiRQuYqSjlQLYlXswkho2hJcySqOMqg&sensor=true < Never seen anyone speeding on that road, again no accidents.

    http://maps.google.com/staticmap?size=512x512&maptype=mobile&markers=53.330000,-6.298056|53.319444,-6.290556&key=ABQIAAAAbQmKg-c5hwUq4ic6o2HzYxRrpBDRlvEqbVbxuqqdWcizN2GoiRQuYqSjlQLYlXswkho2hJcySqOMqg&sensor=true < same

    http://maps.google.com/staticmap?size=512x512&maptype=mobile&markers=53.294444,-6.280833|53.271667,-6.244167&key=ABQIAAAAbQmKg-c5hwUq4ic6o2HzYxRrpBDRlvEqbVbxuqqdWcizN2GoiRQuYqSjlQLYlXswkho2hJcySqOMqg&sensor=true < lights every 2 minutes, no-one speeds, no accidents

    http://maps.google.com/staticmap?size=512x512&maptype=mobile&markers=53.293611,-6.308611|53.297778,-6.285278&key=ABQIAAAAbQmKg-c5hwUq4ic6o2HzYxRrpBDRlvEqbVbxuqqdWcizN2GoiRQuYqSjlQLYlXswkho2hJcySqOMqg&sensor=true < same

    I call bollocks to be honest.


  • Options
    #78
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    Tragedy wrote: »
    Looking at the local roads listed(D16/D12/D8ish), any of the ones I recognise have low speed limits and never have accidents.
    Then, it's a good idea to take measures to keep it that way.
    IrishSpeedTraps wrote:
    If you are so bothered about this then why don't you set up your own website?
    I'm not at all bothered by speed limits that some people think are too low.
    IrishSpeedTraps wrote:
    What stated objectives are you talking about? I never stated our objective is to point out inaccurate speed limits throughout the country.
    Since your site is so ambiguous about its objectives, it's only possible to infer the objectives based on what is said there and here.

    Would it be correct to say that you agree with the concept of speed limits but disagree with motorists being fined for breaking them?


  • Options
    #79
    I.S.T.
    Registered Users Posts: 893 ✭✭✭I.S.T.


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »
    Then, it's a good idea to take measures to keep it that way.

    I'm not at all bothered by speed limits that some people think are too low.

    Since your site is so ambiguous about its objectives, it's only possible to infer the objectives based on what is said there and here.

    Would it be correct to say that you agree with the concept of speed limits but disagree with motorists being fined for breaking them?
    That would be incorrect. I have already explained our stance in an earlier post
    IrishspeedTraps wrote:
    We are not against speed limits, and believe it or not, we are not against speed cameras. We are against speed cameras being placed in areas purely to make money or to increase detection rates as a PR exercise by the Guards and Government.


  • Options
    #80
    I.S.T.
    Registered Users Posts: 893 ✭✭✭I.S.T.


    crocro wrote: »
    What do you make of the claim by the gardai that...
    garda web site wrote:
    An Garda Síochána, in conjunction with the National Roads Authority, have completed an extensive analysis of the collision history on the road network where speed was a contributory factor. Sections of road have been identified where a significant proportion of accidents occurred whereby, in the opinion of the investigating Garda, a safe speed was exceeded.

    Based on this analysis, a list of Speed Enforcement Zones has been developed with the aim of providing information to motorists in order to raise awareness of speeding in these zones. An Garda Síochána will utilize these zones in order to direct speed enforcement activity in a proportionate and targeted manner.


    http://www.garda.ie/sez/Default.aspx

    Why then are they always outside the coca cola factory on the Naas Road which is not in their Speed Enforcement Zones? I believe these Speed Enforcement Zones are just a PR exercise. Why don't they release the stats of the accident rate before they target a specific area and the accident rate after they have been in the area for some time. Where is the evidence that they are improving road safety with their speed traps?


  • Options
    #81
    Ham'nd'egger
    Registered Users Posts: 3,025 ✭✭✭Ham'nd'egger


    IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »
    Why then are they always outside the coca cola factory on the Naas Road which is not in their Speed Enforcement Zones? I believe these Speed Enforcement Zones are just a PR exercise. Why don't they release the stats of the accident rate before they target a specific area and the accident rate after they have been in the area for some time. Where is the evidence that they are improving road safety with their speed traps?

    Presumably because it's illegal to speed on this stretch of road :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    crocro
    Closed Accounts Posts: 301 ✭✭crocro


    IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »
    Why then are they always outside the coca cola factory on the Naas Road which is not in their Speed Enforcement Zones? I believe these Speed Enforcement Zones are just a PR exercise. Why don't they release the stats of the accident rate before they target a specific area and the accident rate after they have been in the area for some time. Where is the evidence that they are improving road safety with their speed traps?
    Garda PR conspiracy. I thought so.

    The premise of the thread is like a quote from Homer Simpson
    "Seatbelts, pff!" "They kill more people than they save"


  • Options
    #83
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    crocro wrote: »
    Garda PR conspiracy. I thought so.

    The premise of the thread is like a quote from Homer Simpson
    "Seatbelts, pff!" "They kill more people than they save"

    lol they should have to release statistics that back up the claim that the speed traps make people drive safely everywhere. That is only logical.

    Since you like the simpsons, I'll refer to the episode with the bear patrol where Homer says "Not a bear in site, the bear patrol must be working like a charm". Lisa argues that this isn't necessarily the case and says by that logic this rock keeps tigers away. Homer wants to know how it works and Lisa replies, "it doesn't, its just a stupid rock" to which Homer replies, "Lisa I will buy your rock".

    Honestly to assume their working because the government says so when it generates revenue from them is not sound logic.


  • Options
    #84
    Tragedy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,057 ✭✭✭Tragedy


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »
    Then, it's a good idea to take measures to keep it that way.
    That's the most stupid statement on a thread full of stupid statements.


  • Options
    #85
    I.S.T.
    Registered Users Posts: 893 ✭✭✭I.S.T.


    crocro wrote: »
    Garda PR conspiracy. I thought so.

    The premise of the thread is like a quote from Homer Simpson
    "Seatbelts, pff!" "They kill more people than they save"

    So why not release any detailed speed detection figures? If they've nothing to hide what is the problem?


  • Options
    #86
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »
    That would be incorrect. I have already explained our stance in an earlier post
    And for which you have produced no evidence whatever. There is no 'revenue-raising' conspiracy. This fiction is just an argument invented by so-called 'petrol-heads' who can't accept that the good old days of virtual detection-free speeding are over.

    It's illegal to break the speed limit, the Gardai are doing their duty in detecting and fining those who do. Your arguments are no more than a smokescreen to try and give a veneer of respectability to a site which primarily serves as a resource for people who want to know where they can break the law with a low-risk of detection.


  • Options
    #87
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    crocro wrote: »
    What do you make of the claim by the gardai that...




    http://www.garda.ie/sez/Default.aspx
    [quote=}garda web site[/B] in the opinion of the investigating Garda, a safe speed was exceeded. [/quote] Why does it say "safe speed was exceeded?" Why does it not say the "speed limit" was exceeded? This wording kind of makes it sound like the speed limit was not broken, but that the speed was not appropriate... How would a camera detect when a driver was driving at a speed that is not safe, but is within the limit?



    Hamndegger wrote: »
    Presumably because it's illegal to speed on this stretch of road :)
    I would presume it is illegal to speed on all stretches of road. I would further assume that speed detection in areas where it is actually dangerous would be more effective than areas that have little or no accidents.

    MrP


  • Options
    #88
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    MrPudding wrote: »

    I would presume it is illegal to speed on all stretches of road. I would further assume that speed detection in areas where it is actually dangerous would be more effective than areas that have little or no accidents.

    MrP

    Got it in one! :) forget this nonsense of just picking easy roads to provide good stats.


  • Options
    #89
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Got it in one! :) forget this nonsense of just picking easy roads to provide good stats.
    Indeed, let's detect law-breaking on all roads and not just some. GPS-monitoring anyone?

    In the meantime, I see nothing wrong with fining/prosecuting people who deliberately break the law, wherever it happens.


  • Options
    #90
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    thebman wrote: »
    Honestly to assume their working because the government says so when it generates revenue from them is not sound logic.

    if it is indeed the intention to generate revenue, it is not for "them" it is for us.Far better that law-breakers who get caught pay tax instead of the law-obeyers isnt it?

    My view? stick to the limits and if you cant and get caught, you are a criminal and have nothing to complain about...they didnt get me yet obviously.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »

    In the meantime, I see nothing wrong with fining/prosecuting people who deliberately break the law, wherever it happens.

    Good idea. It would be nice to see all those law breaking cyclists getting what they deserve.



    MrP


Advertisement