Mobile speed checks

horrible island

Could you tell me was the Gatso van around the con colbert rd yesterday???

horrible island

Is there anyone who could tell me was there speed checks on colcolbert rd to cunningham rd yesterday? If so why, when there is 920 collision prone zones in the country and this one is one of the lesser ones.

KevR

horrible island wrote: »

Could you tell me was the Gatso van around the con colbert rd yesterday???

Yeah an unmarked Gatso Van there Eastbound yesterday at about 4:30pm when I passed.

Gatso Van further out on the Chapelizod Bypass on Wednesday morning at approximately 10:30am Westbound.

I'm not from the area but I would have my doubts that these locations are accident blackspots...

Victor

Because 30,000 people run the red light there every month becuase they are going too fast?

Everywhere and anywhere can get a speed check - its just that some will get more than others.

KevR

Yeah an unmarked Gatso Van there Eastbound yesterday at about 4:30pm when I passed.

Gatso Van further out on the Chapelizod Bypass on Wednesday morning at approximately 10:30am Westbound.

I'm not from the area but I would have my doubts that these locations are accident blackspots...

godtabh

KevR wrote: »

Yeah an unmarked Gatso Van there Eastbound yesterday at about 4:30pm when I passed.

Gatso Van further out on the Chapelizod Bypass on Wednesday morning at approximately 10:30am Westbound.

I'm not from the area but I would have my doubts that these locations are accident blackspots...

Just speeding blackspots

Redsoxfan

I also noticed a marked car sitting in the laneway around 100 metres before Texaco/The Foxhunter on the way to work and the way home yesterday.

horrible island

In reply to Victor

That figure of 30,000 is that an official figure? I use the road everyday I never see drivers running a red light there - funnily enough. As you mention running red lights I see it everyday at the junction of concolbert rd and the south circular rd - about 1000 yards further on. I also see cars wizzing past me way over the speed limit at this junction!!!!!
I also see at this strech of road - every other day - cars turning right here when they are not supposed to. So to say that there is something unique about where the Gatso van was yesterday is strange - to say the least.

Davy

Someone who works in the guards said to be that there is always more out towards the end of the month because they are meant to meet certain targets. Im presuming she wasn't making it up

horrible island

great country caching people going to and from work. they say not to be cynical about the gards.............

I thought government were the only ones able to look for revenue........

Sully

Davy wrote: »

Someone who works in the guards said to be that there is always more out towards the end of the month because they are meant to meet certain targets. Im presuming she wasn't making it up

My understanding is that there is no offical line but if your seeing to be not doing them or low number, expect a wrap across the knuckles.

Victor

horrible island wrote: »

That figure of 30,000 is that an official figure? I use the road everyday I never see drivers running a red light there - funnily enough. As you mention running red lights I see it everyday at the junction of concolbert rd and the south circular rd - about 1000 yards further on. I also see cars wizzing past me way over the speed limit at this junction!!!!!

Ah, I'm confusing my junctions then.

horrible island

Yeah heard something similar myself. Might as well set up an atm at the side of the road.

Just cant believe how bad this country is, its unique. No other western european country has such a blantant way of collecting road tax.

Are way Gatsos are deployed in Ireland - where they are not needed - only specic to Ireland or does other countries also use similar tactics. I know the UK has a lot of problems but at the very least they have proper signage and roads..............

Victor

Gatso posts moved from "What are they doing with the N4?" thread. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055339964&page=22

corktina

horrible island wrote: »

Yeah heard something similar myself. Might as well set up an atm at the side of the road.

Just cant believe how bad this country is, its unique. No other western european country has such a blantant way of collecting road tax.

Are way Gatsos are deployed in Ireland - where they are not needed - only specic to Ireland or does other countries also use similar tactics. I know the UK has a lot of problems but at the very least they have proper signage and roads..............

thats just nonsense...stick to the speed limits and you wont have a problem.

godtabh

corktina wrote: »

thats just nonsense...stick to the speed limits and you wont have a problem.

People find it difficult to grasp this for some reason

horrible island

In reply to Corktina

Yes I do but you miss the point. What is the POINT placing a mobile speed check in a place where there is virtually no problem?

I presume you drive, if so, does it not make your blood boil when you see this speed check about 1000 meters away from where it should be?

Also not sure if you know the area I am talking about? Its a bit trite saying oh stick to the speed limit, as I said I do, yet can you also tell me why there is a 80KM speed limit on probably one of the best stretches of road in the country (please note I always observe this) this then reduces to 60KM in a matter of 100 yards (again I always observe this, eventhough the sign is twice the size of an A4 page). THIS IS THE STRETCH OF ROAD I AM TALKING ABOUT.....

corktina

i dont miss your point at all...the point really is your post was nonsense....go on to any equivalent UK site or probably in any country and you will see the same rants. The limit is there, right or wrong, if you break it it costs you.

I dont know the road you refer to, maybe there is a reason for the limit you havent noticed . The 80 k sign is to slow you down gradually fro the 60 k limit ahead I would think.

horrible island

just to say again its not about speed (speed is a serious issue) its all about right time right place.

Speed could be tackled with consistent enforcement. Just to drive this home (excuse the pun) there is a fixed speed camera at the "dangerous" junction I am talking about though ..... wait for it, yes, its turned off.

As for saying its nonsence yes totally I aggree with you but as I said I drive this road everyday and I can confidently say that virtually every road user exceeds the speed limit, really the N4 Con Colbert Road is a disaster and putting a mobile speed trap in the wrong place without consistent enforcment adds insut to injury..

horrible island

corktina wrote: »

thats just nonsense...stick to the speed limits and you wont have a problem.

There you go again.

You really have to forgive me but your reply - without knowing the facts - is confused to say the least.

cyclopath2001

horrible island wrote: »

If so why, when there is 920 collision prone zones in the country and this one is one of the lesser ones.

Because people are afraid of being detected for speeding there?

horrible island

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Because people are afraid of being detected for speeding there?

How do you mean?

corktina

horrible island wrote: »

There you go again.

You really have to forgive me but your reply - without knowing the facts - is confused to say the least.

im sorry to have confused you.

KevR

corktina wrote: »

thats just nonsense...stick to the speed limits and you wont have a problem.

kearnsr wrote: »

People find it difficult to grasp this for some reason

corktina wrote: »

i dont miss your point at all...the point really is your post was nonsense....go on to any equivalent UK site or probably in any country and you will see the same rants. The limit is there, right or wrong, if you break it it costs you.

I dont know the road you refer to, maybe there is a reason for the limit you havent noticed . The 80 k sign is to slow you down gradually fro the 60 k limit ahead I would think.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Because people are afraid of being detected for speeding there?

I think some people have a tendancy to be very dismissive of anyone who feels aggrieved about getting a speeding fine where it might be a genuine case of a speed limit being too low.

Why are there wrong speed limits at all? There shouldn't be wrong speed limits, simple as that. Some speed limits need to be raised and some need to be lowered. As long as speed limits are wrong, you will have people feeling hard done by about getting fines.
So if people complaining about fines on roads where there are wrong low limits bothers you, why don't you write to local councils where the speed limit is wrong and request that it be changed, rather than continually put people down when they complain? Also, write to local councils where limits are too high and then we won't have any situations where people can legally kill themselves.

There's no need for some people to act holier than thou as if they've never crept over the limit. Everyone has at some stage or another. Just because you haven't been unlucky enough to have been caught doesn't mean you to haven't 'exceeded a speed limit and broken the law' and doesn't give you the right to dismiss people (as though they are thick and can't understand that if you go over the limit you will get fined) when they give a perfectly valid suggestion as to where a speed trap might be better alternatively located or if a speed limit at a certain should be higher.

horrible island

apology not needed. Though if you want a good laugh drive the stretch of road from the Chapelizod bypass (approx 2KM long) all the way to Concolbert Rd (at 80KM) to Cunnyngham Rd (at 60KM).

The stepdown from 80KM to 60KM is instantaneous, the traffic lights are approx 150 meters beyond the 60KM sign. Note the stretch from Chapelizod bypass to Cunnyngham Rd is probably one of the best and safest in the country.

gurramok

That place is notorious for speedtraps, my other half got caught there a couple of years ago with 2 points added to licence
Same for the Foxhunter at Lucan, the Navan Rd, the Finglas rd at the village under the bridge, the M1 between the tunnel and the M50, Stillorgan rd, Ballymun Rd etc, these traps are so predictable.

Do the Gardai have any intuition to put speedtraps elsewhere where there is regular dangerous speeding?
We all know roads where regular speeding takes place and you'd be lucky to see a garda around!

horrible island

KevR wrote: »

I think some people have a tendancy to be very dismissive of anyone who feels aggrieved about getting a speeding fine where it might be a genuine case of a speed limit being too low.

Why are there wrong speed limits at all? There shouldn't be wrong speed limits, simple as that. Some speed limits need to be raised and some need to be lowered. As long as speed limits are wrong, you will have people feeling hard done by about getting fines.
So if people complaining about fines on roads where there are wrong low limits bothers you, why don't you write to local councils where the speed limit is wrong and request that it be changed, rather than continually put people down when they complain? Also, write to local councils where limits are too high and then we won't have any situations where people can legally kill themselves.

There's no need for some people to act holier than thou as if they've never crept over the limit. Everyone has at some stage or another. Just because you haven't been unlucky enough to have been caught doesn't mean you to haven't 'exceeded a speed limit and broken the law' and doesn't give you the right to dismiss people (as though they are thick and can't understand that if you go over the limit you will get fined) when they give a perfectly valid suggestion as to where a speed trap might be better alternatively located or if a speed limit at a certain should be higher.

KevR

Thanks for that.

I'm genuinely glad there is at least one other observant individual left on this Island - please dont take that as patronism. Thanks for actually taking the time to understand and not dismiss out of hand, in my opinion a perfectly valid point. To dismiss this without getting the basic facts right really is worrying.

I disaggree with excessive speed as much as the next person but to be so inconsiderate really is not surprising, with the course this country took in the last two decades.

Really at the end of the day councils and committies dont change things its down to individuals.

Some of the replies to this thread are testament to me why this country is back to front and upside down; its due to individuals who dismiss a perfectly valid suggestions which may - only may mind - go some way to improve things.

I genuinely cant believe some of the replies to this thread. I have driven all over Ireland, the UK, the States and many parts of Europe and I have never experienced the level of bare faced ignorance which is now commonplace on the roads of this counrty - especially Dublin. (It seems that bullying is a weird art form).

It has been repeated again here by certain individuals. No wonder the country is the way it is.

Ignorance is not only a pastime on this windswept island now, it seems to be a rite of passage.

If a considered and genuine observation can't be taken on board and discussed rationaly then I think that says it all.

The speed check I was talking about was not only in the wrong place, it was also in a dangerous place. It was so positioned that it could'nt be seen by motorists until they were virtually beside it. This would have the effect of making the driver jam on their brakes, no matter if they were exceeding the speed limit or not.

I really thought I did'nt have to mention this, I mistakenly thought, that some individuals could read between the lines. Obviously not. Commonsence has left a long time ago seemingly.

At the thought of labouring the POINT too much but for those who have difficulty understanding what I am saying, my gripe is not, repeat not, speed but the way it is managed and dealth in this juristiction. If an individual cant make an observation about this, without running risk of been classed as an outcast then there is no hope for this small country.

Genuinely I have talked to numerous people from different countries who cant make head nor tail of the transport network in ths state. If it cant be discussed then switch the lights out when you leave.

horrible island

gurramok wrote: »

That place is notorious for speedtraps, my other half got caught there a couple of years ago with 2 points added to licence
Same for the Foxhunter at Lucan, the Navan Rd, the Finglas rd at the village under the bridge, the M1 between the tunnel and the M50, Stillorgan rd, Ballymun Rd etc, these traps are so predictable.

Do the Gardai have any intuition to put speedtraps elsewhere where there is regular dangerous speeding?
We all know roads where regular speeding takes place and you'd be lucky to see a garda around!

gurramok

To answer your question I dont think they do. Why dont they consistently enforce?

gurramok

Because they don't have the resources to do it so they resort to their usual haunts on the main national roads to get their targets.

horrible island

gurramok wrote: »

Because they don't have the resources to do it so they resort to their usual haunts on the main national roads to get their targets.

Maybe so but they had the resources to buy 8 new Gatsos last sept. Why not buy more static cameras and put them in the blackspots. If there serious?

gurramok

The economy(public finances) have deteriorated seriously since Sept when they were bought.

Garda overtime has reduced since then hence less surveillance on the roads. Funnily enough, i have not seen a drink-drive checkpoint in nearly a year now on my regular route cross city, i used to come across them so frequent, it just sends out the wrong message now.(same for speeders)

cyclopath2001

KevR wrote: »

give a perfectly valid suggestion as to where a speed trap might be better alternatively located or if a speed limit at a certain should be higher.

Any place is a suitable place for a speed trap. It's the fear of getting caught and not some deeply-felt concern for the welfare of others that keeps most drivers under the speed limit.

horrible island

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Any place is a suitable place for a speed trap. It's the fear of getting caught and not some deeply-felt concern for the welfare of others that keeps most drivers under the speed limit.

Yes good point any place is a good place - in a perfect world - but I would think starting with accident blackspots would be the best place? If resources are limited then surely this would be a good starting point?

Gurramok yeah again your right but the economy was heading down the wrong road from 2001 and even a man on a galloping horse could see it was going to hit a wall when the interest rates went up in Dec 2005?

Also Cyclopath what do you mean when you say a concern for others, does not keep drivers under the speed limit do you drive in Dublin? If you do it must be a different Dublin because the standard of driving in this city is appaling. How can you honestly say that the fear of getting caught would/could be a deciding factor for anyone in this city keeping below the speed limit. If it was then there would be far less of it around. Whatever happened to commonsense?

cyclopath2001

horrible island wrote: »

Yes good point any place is a good place - in a perfect world - but I would think starting with accident blackspots would be the best place? If resources are limited then surely this would be a good starting point?

The idea is to detect people who break road-traffic laws and disqualify them from driving if they do it often enough. Doesn't matter where they're detected as long as they're detected.

horrible island wrote: »

Whatever happened to commonsense?

Drivers are motivated by self-interest. It's only human.

godtabh

horrible island wrote: »

Yes I do but you miss the point. What is the POINT placing a mobile speed check in a place where there is virtually no problem?

Enforcing the law. A new concept to some

Ham'nd'egger

Maybe I am getting the wrong place in my head but if we are talking about the junction of the Con Colbert Road, and the South Circular Road just beyond Heuston Station, we have two bus lanes in and out, cycle lanes, pedestrians crossing the road and a rather odd semi roundabout that sends traffic from the west towards the SCR.

• Con Colbert Road has a 60KM limit from the end of the 80KMH limited Chapelizod by pass; this road has a 24/7 bus lane along it until the SCR junction whereby traffic merges and a filter lane turning left forms. The by pass is notorious for speeding, especially heading into town.
• At the SCR end, there is a dangerous crossing point on the SCR where pedestrians would be likely to be around the Royal Hospital, the Hilton Hotel and Kilmainham Jail; there is also the gate to a school and residential unit for St. John of God's and a lot of apartments in the immediate area.
• Just before the traffic lights, the limit reverts to 50KMH, the conventional urban speed limit.
• At the Conyngham Road end of the SCR there is a large humpback bridge across the Liffey which is one lane each way.

Assuming I have the right junction, there isn't really any rational reason to increase the speed limits here on this basis and there is a need for traffic management to be better enforced, be it as a occasional measure or otherwise.

horrible island

Hamndegger wrote: »

Maybe I am getting the wrong place in my head but if we are talking about the junction of the Con Colbert Road, and the South Circular Road just beyond Heuston Station, we have two bus lanes in and out, cycle lanes, pedestrians crossing the road and a rather odd semi roundabout that sends traffic from the west towards the SCR.

• Con Colbert Road has a 60KM limit from the end of the 80KMH limited Chapelizod by pass; this road has a 24/7 bus lane along it until the SCR junction whereby traffic merges and a filter lane turning left forms. The by pass is notorious for speeding, especially heading into town.
• At the SCR end, there is a dangerous crossing point on the SCR where pedestrians would be likely to be around the Royal Hospital, the Hilton Hotel and Kilmainham Jail; there is also the gate to a school and residential unit for St. John of God's and a lot of apartments in the immediate area.

Just before the traffic lights, the limit reverts to 50KMH, the conventional urban speed limit.

• At the Conyngham Road end of the SCR there is a large humpback bridge across the Liffey which is one lane each way.

Assuming I have the right junction, there isn't really any rational reason to increase the speed limits here on this basis and there is a need for traffic management to be better enforced, be it as a occasional measure or otherwise.

NO NO NO PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO READ MY POSTS.........

Look I didnt come on here to be bullied. You are right with your discription of the environs. My concern IS setting up a mobile speed camera just after the lights (at about 100 meters from a drop down from 80KM to
60KM) over 1000 meters - or more - in my opinion from where it is needed - There is a fixed camera at the junction of Con Colbert road and South Circular rd SWITCHED OFF. Surely that is a valid point?? Surely after all you described can relate to that?

The stretch of road at 80KM is a perfectly good stretch of road for about 2KM. Now maybe you are right maybe it should be kept at this speed but for other posters to attack my right to say different is unneccessary!

horrible island

kearnsr wrote: »

Enforcing the law. A new concept to some

You prove my point

cyclopath2001

horrible island wrote: »

My concern IS setting up a mobile speed camera just after the lights (at about 100 meters from a drop down from 80KM to
60KM) over 1000 meters - or more - in my opinion from where it is needed - There is a fixed camera at the junction of Con Colbert road and South Circular rd SWITCHED OFF. Surely that is a valid point?? Surely after all you described can relate to that?

This makes a strong argument for the one that's off to be switched on. But it does not make an argument for the mobile camera not to be operated, especially if drivers are not respecting the limit at that point.

Ham'nd'egger

horrible island wrote: »

NO NO NO PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO READ MY POSTS.........

Look I didnt come on here to be bullied. You are right with your discription of the environs. My concern IS setting up a mobile speed camera just after the lights (at about 100 meters from a drop down from 80KM to
60KM) over 1000 meters - or more - in my opinion from where it is needed - There is a fixed camera at the junction of Con Colbert road and South Circular rd SWITCHED OFF. Surely that is a valid point?? Surely after all you described can relate to that?

The stretch of road at 80KM is a perfectly good stretch of road for about 2KM. Now maybe you are right maybe it should be kept at this speed but for other posters to attack my right to say different is unneccessary!

Lets compromise and have two speed checks:)

godtabh

horrible island wrote: »

There is a fixed camera at the junction of Con Colbert road and South Circular rd SWITCHED OFF. Surely that is a valid point?? Surely after all you described can relate to that?

That was used as far as I can remember to pick up people breaking the lights. Dont think it was ever a speed camera

horrible island wrote: »

You prove my point

What was your point?

KevR

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

The idea is to detect people who break road-traffic laws and disqualify them from driving if they do it often enough. Doesn't matter where they're detected as long as they're detected.

Sounds a bit like the aim is to disqualify as many people as possible. Don't know if that's what you meant or if you just put your point across wrong..

But the idea/aim of a penalty points system is actually to deter people from commiting road traffic offences in the first place through fear of disqualification. Ideally everyone would adhere to all road traffic laws and nobody would ever get any penalty points/disqualified.

Get the point, not the points - RSA, Gardai.


RE the bit in red: It matters a lot. People who break the limit on dangerous rural roads might never drive into Dublin (which is where the vast majority of speed checks/cameras are) so there's a good chance they will never get detected. I don't honestly don't think Gatso Vans hidden in bushes on Dublin Dual Carriageways is the best deployment of resources in terms of detering the most dangerous speeders and saving lives, but it is the best way of generating revenue.

Before you say anything about me only putting up this point for me selfishly not wanting to get caught speeding - I rarely drive into Dublin, I drive over 150km per day on rural roads (outside towns and cities), I see ridiculous driving and speeding on these roads everyday but it's an extreme rarity to see any Garda presence. I have seen more speed checks on the N4 in Dublin last Wednesday and Thursday than I have seen on the N6 between Oranmore and Athlone in the last 2 months! And I obey speed limits (even the ones I don't agree with!) so I have nothing to worry about.

cyclopath2001

KevR wrote: »

Sounds a bit like the aim is to disqualify as many people as possible. Don't know if that's what you meant or if you just put your point across wrong..

The hope would be that after a few detections, people would modify their behaviour and not reach the point of disqualification.

KevR wrote: »

RE the bit in red: It matters a lot. People who break the limit on dangerous rural roads might never drive into Dublin (which is where the vast majority of speed checks/cameras are) so there's a good chance they will never get detected.

It's more difficult to mount a conventional fixed camera on these roads, other means will need to be devised.

KevR wrote: »

I don't honestly don't think Gatso Vans hidden in bushes on Dublin Dual Carriageways is the best deployment of resources in terms of detering the most dangerous speeders and saving lives,

What is a 'less dangerous speeder'? Are you seriously suggesting not policing these roads?

KevR

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

What is a 'less dangerous speeder'? Are you seriously suggesting not policing these roads?

Someone doing 5kmh over the limit on a Dual Carriageway in Dublin is a lot less dangerous speeder than someone doing 20kmh over the limit on a dangerous country road which arguably has too high a speed limit to begin with.

I would have thought that would have been fairly obvious, didn't think I'd need to explain that.

The Gardai say their aim is to use prioritised enforcement based on their analysis of collision history on stretches of road where the investigating officer thinks the accident was caused by excessive speed.

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=1368
http://www.garda.ie/sez/Default.aspx
http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0520/roadsafety.html

In my opinion, where resources are limited I think the Gardai should strive more than ever to make their 'mission statement' reality and prioritise the most dangerous roads where there are high accident/death rates. I'm not saying they shouldn't enforce traffic laws on the N4 in Dublin but I don't think it should be a priority.

I'm interested to know why you think the N4 Dual Carriageway should be priority over other roads?

veryangryman

KevR wrote: »

Someone doing 5kmh over the limit on a Dual Carriageway in Dublin is a lot less dangerous speeder than someone doing 20kmh over the limit on a dangerous country road which arguably has too high a speed limit to begin with.

I would have thought that would have been fairly obvious, didn't think I'd need to explain that.

The Gardai say their aim is to use prioritised enforcement based on their analysis of collision history on stretches of road where the investigating officer thinks the accident was caused by excessive speed.

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=1368
http://www.garda.ie/sez/Default.aspx
http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0520/roadsafety.html

In my opinion, where resources are limited I think the Gardai should strive more than ever to make their 'mission statement' reality and prioritise the most dangerous roads where there are high accident/death rates. I'm not saying they shouldn't enforce traffic laws on the N4 in Dublin but I don't think it should be a priority.

I'm interested to know why you think the N4 Dual Carriageway should be priority over other roads?

All boils down to practicality. Harder to generate the cash on country roads

cyclopath2001

KevR wrote: »

Someone doing 5kmh over the limit on a Dual Carriageway in Dublin is a lot less dangerous speeder than someone doing 20kmh over the limit on a dangerous country road which arguably has too high a speed limit to begin with....I would have thought that would have been fairly obvious, didn't think I'd need to explain that.

The speeds being travelled at on the main roads are higher and the margin of error is less.

KevR wrote: »

I'm interested to know why you think the N4 Dual Carriageway should be priority over other roads?

There's a lot of law-breaking there. There'd be even more if people thought they wouldn't get caught.

SeanW

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

The speeds being travelled at on the main roads are higher and the margin of error is less.

The speed limit on the N4 dual carriageway in Dublin County is 80kph. Which is the same as the R roads and single lane country roads. Are you seriously suggesting that "speeding" at 85kph on the N4 in Dublin is the same (or worse) as driving 100kph on a narrow, single country road?

There's a lot of law-breaking there. There'd be even more if people thought they wouldn't get caught.

So, plenty of fish in the barrel for the Guards. Doesn't do squat for road safety though, the evidence is crystal clear that Motorways and Dual Carriageways are the safest roads in the State.

So your suggesting that it's OK for the guards to just do speed checks on dual carriageways is a bit like sayings it's OK for the guards to bust someone for smoking cannibis or selling pirate CDs while completely ignoring a big knife fight across the street where someone is getting murdered.

Oh and BTW I want people to obey the law too - but I equally and inseparbly I want laws only that are needed, are fair and that make sense. Unlike you, I don't have a vendetta against anyone.
Given your profile of posts on this forum I could (almost) imagine that if the RSA were to introduce a rule tomorrow saying that nobody can drive a car on Saturday unless they're a guy named Larry and wearing a chicken suit, you would probably not only support it, but demand that the government place surveillance cameras in everyones car to catch out those lawbreaking scumbags named Harry who could only find a clown outfit.

cyclopath2001

SeanW wrote: »

The speed limit on the N4 dual carriageway in Dublin County is 80kph. Which is the same as the R roads and single lane country roads. Are you seriously suggesting that "speeding" at 85kph on the N4 in Dublin is the same (or worse) as driving 100kph on a narrow, single country road?

Speeding penalties apply to measured speeds regardless of hazard. Dangerous driving charges are a separate matter.

SeanW wrote: »

So, plenty of fish in the barrel for the Guards. Doesn't do squat for road safety though,

You might like to think so, but they inhibit speeding and raise some awareness of the safety issues. The accumulated points eventually lead to one less law-breaker on the roads, either through disqualification or a mature choice between one's job and some speed thrills.

SeanW wrote: »

So your suggesting that it's OK for the guards to just do speed checks on dual carriageways

No I did not. Are you saying: 'no speed traps on main roads until there are speed traps on all small roads'?

SeanW wrote: »

Given your profile of posts on this forum I could (almost) imagine that if the RSA were to introduce a rule tomorrow saying that nobody can drive a car on Saturday unless they're a guy named Larry and wearing a chicken suit, you would probably not only support it, but demand that the government place surveillance cameras in everyones car to catch out those lawbreaking scumbags named Harry who could only find a clown outfit.

When facts run out, get personal. Why not also add a man walking in front with a red flag?

Seriously, if effective GPS tracking were proposed, it would get my vote. It would be far more effective than the hit&miss of speed traps with drivers slowing down for them before reverting to habitual law-breaking behaviour. It would help shift insurance costs onto people with demonstrable risky behaviour and enable a pay-as-you-go payment plan.

fischer

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Seriously, if effective GPS tracking were proposed, it would get my vote. It would be far more effective than the hit&miss of speed traps with drivers slowing down for them before reverting to habitual law-breaking behaviour. It would help shift insurance costs onto people with demonstrable risky behaviour and enable a pay-as-you-go payment plan.

Hey Cyclo - I presume the same applies for cyclists that might cycle the wrong way on a one way street? Or break a red light? Or cycle drunk?

Without number plates or third party insurance, its impossible to protect compliant road users from people that are clearly unsuitable to share the public highways.

Can you offer any suggestions on how you (clearly a commited and, I expect, law abiding cyclist) and I (a professionally trained HGV driver with no accidents or motoring infringements ever) can be protected from people with no compunction about breaching the law?

Mandatory testing prior to the issue of a cycle permit? RFID tracking that could be measured at major junctions? Linked in with CCTV so that offenders could be removed for all our sakes?

Would appreciate your suggestions.

Fischer.

cyclopath2001

fischer wrote: »

Hey Cyclo - I presume the same applies for cyclists that might cycle the wrong way on a one way street? Or break a red light? Or cycle drunk?.....

We're discussing how best to regulate speeding?

General opinion is that there are not enough checks and they're not in all the places they need to be.

I've suggested a way that would be more fair and effective, do you have any suggestions?

Davidth88

I am a motorist , and a pedestrian.

I am torn by the speeding debate. As a motorist I admit I do speed on open dual carrageways like the N4, or the N7. I would possibly be doing 110/115 on the 100 section, or on the Limerick bypass , I would also do 110/120.

However driving around towns/estates I am often under the limit ( estates I am often at 30kph or less not 50 ).

It irritates me to see garda speed checks in places where speeding by 10 /20 kph is relatively safe , for example the Limerick bypass is a motorway std road. Indeed were they not clocking on sections of HQDC the day before they were redesignated ? So a speed that was ' dangerous ' one day was legal and ' safe ' the next.

I see speeding around the busy streets in my town everyday , with people doing totally stupid speeds on streets where there are schools etc . I have asked my local politicians to ask the police for MORE speed checks , but I have NEVER seen one**. Yet at the same time I see these vans parked up at safe places on dualcarrgeways.

** correction I saw them ONCE on a Sunday morning on possibly one of the safest piece of road where there are never any pedestrians and it's almost impossible to speed ( it's a 60kph zone ).

The problem people have is the perception that Garda go for ' numbers ' rather than actually clamping down on people who are reckless.

I also have a problem with the practise of hiding behind bushes/signs etc, if you are going to do speed checks they should be highly visable . What's the point in getting punished for something you did maybe 2 months ago ( and you didn't know you were caught ) , and in the mean time you have carried on speeding or whatever.

The Garda need to STOP the speeding cars at the time , speak to the drivers . Who know's that speeding car may also contain a drunk driver , or be unsafe for the road. A stern talking to by an officer of the law at the time would have a much stronger effect than recv a ticket through the post.