2 check points in 2 minutes.

Voodoomelon

I was staying on Eyre Square at the weekend and I don't think i've ever seen so many Gardai in one area in my entire life.

Every 3 or 4 minutes a Garda car would drive by and there was a mobile command unit right in the centre and foot patrols everywhere. It looked fantastic.

Stainless_Steel

slimjimmc wrote: »

Dear o dear o dear. I think you're living in some sort of utopian fantasy world.

First of all, do not confuse your right to life (i.e. not to be killed) with any imagined right to do what you like. You do not have the right to live as you want to live without the interference of any external authority. So long as you are a resident of this State the manner in which you live your life is subject to the laws of this state. If you are convicted of breaking those laws your lifestyle wlll most definitely be interfered with. The same system is applied the world over.

Secondly, your right to travel freely is also subject to adhering to the laws of the land and to any and all restrictions applied for the common good.

Thirdly, (you didn't mention or imply this but I will) you have no right to drive. It is a privilege granted by the State, again subject to certain laws and regulations.

I'm actually not joking when I say this - that post nearly made me get sick.

Is the above outlook on life shared by many people this day and age? Its very very scary....

For anyone that can actually think outside the box - you only need one law - harm nobody. Please think about it.

mikeystipey

What annoys me is when there is an escape route for a potential drink driver coming up to a check point. Usually they will put checkpoints where it would be hard to do a u-turn or take a side road, but a few weeks ago was driving down Terenure Road East in Dublin after dark and the traffic was backed up a few hundreds yards because of the check point. This would leave ample time for a drink driver with any brains to pull in to a private driveway or car park and simply walk out and collect their car a few hours later. p.s. Was my 5th time going through a check point and my 5th time being one of the ones randomly stopped. Wouldn't be because I'm a 29-year old male would it? :rolleyes:

SV

mikeystipey wrote: »

Wouldn't be because I'm a 29-year old male would it? :rolleyes:

I doubt that has much to do with it.
I'm a 22 year old male(just) driving a modified car and I rarely get stopped at checkpoints for breathalyzing or anything.

Drummerboy08

500 people! I never realised that there were that many stupid people in this country!

happymondays

nice guy always wrote: »

+1 and how anyone can disagree with mandatory alcohol checkpoints when we see incidents like this on the tv is beyond me. Its grand for drivers to wake up the next morning and see it on the TV or papers and think "O isnt that awful"

Next time spare a thought for the fire crew who had to cut them out, the ambulance crew that had to treat them, the Doctor who had to pronunce a young life dead.....and the Garda who has to knock on a mothers/fathers/wife/husbands door at that hour of the morning and tell them a loved one is dead. (believe me....its the hardest thing I do in the job, and it NEVER gets easier....ever)

hold on a second, it didnt say anywhere in that report about it being a drink driving related accident. is everyone just persuming the driver was drunk??

has anyone acutally got the breakdown figures for achol related deaths vs speed vs sucide vs accident

Hooch

happymondays wrote: »

hold on a second, it didnt say anywhere in that report about it being a drink driving related accident. is everyone just persuming the driver was drunk??

has anyone acutally got the breakdown figures for achol related deaths vs speed vs sucide vs accident

Yes the driver was drunk and yes it was announced on radio and local paper

Drummerboy08

nice guy always wrote: »

Yes the driver was drunk and yes it was announced on radio and local paper

I thought he was arrested for Dangerour Driving, not Drink Driving? Maybe I got that wrong though. Either way, he's still a cnut.

alexmcred

What punishment can that guy expect to face?

Hooch

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

I thought he was arrested for Dangerour Driving, not Drink Driving? Maybe I got that wrong though. Either way, he's still a cnut.

With an arrest for Dangerous driving a specimen can be taken and subsequent prosecution for both can be taken if over the limit

Hooch

alexmcred wrote: »

What punishment can that guy expect to face?

Up to 5 years imprisonment

alexmcred

nice guy always wrote: »

Up to 5 years imprisonment

:eek: no where near long enough can he not be charged with manslaughter? 5 years for killing two people and seriously injuring two others is shocking:mad:

Hooch

alexmcred wrote: »

:eek: no where near long enough can he not be charged with manslaughter? 5 years for killing two people and seriously injuring two others is shocking:mad:

Afraid not. We dont have vehicular homicide or manslaughter.

If there is no motive then its dangerous driving causing death. Section 53 (2) RTA 1961-06.

I had faith in this legislation.....until the second hung jury in Limerick last week.....but thats another thread for another day.....

happymondays

nice guy always wrote: »

Yes the driver was drunk and yes it was announced on radio and local paper

im from cork and i didnt hear anything on the local news about the driver being drunk. also a scan all news reports online mentions noting about it either.
i see hes been released now also although a file is been prepared for the DPP. im not claiming he wasnt drunk but ive yet to see anywhere it says he was or is suspected of being. i would think speed is a lot bigger killer than drink.

CharlieCroker

happymondays wrote: »

im from cork and i didnt hear anything on the local news about the driver being drunk. also a scan all news reports online mentions noting about it either.
i see hes been released now also although a file is been prepared for the DPP. im not claiming he wasnt drunk but ive yet to see anywhere it says he was or is suspected of being. i would think speed is a lot bigger killer than drink.

I love the way people say that "Speed Kill"!!!

Speed alone does not kill. Its inappropriate speed that kills, when factors such as traffic, weather and so on are taken into consideration.

I was stationed in the district in question in cork for a while and I know that stretch of road well. It's wide, well surfaced in the dry and is a 100km/h, going down to a 60km/h towards the town.

Bee

nice guy always wrote: »

Yes yes of course....if it was in a hollywood film it must be true:rolleyes:




How are checkpoints restricting your travel?? If you have nothing to hide??

Road deaths are down a hell of a lot. And whether people here care to agree or not I really dont care, but the reduction is due to more Traffic Corps members, more speed checks, better legislation, penalty points and mandatory alcohol checkpoints.

Its a combination of breaches of the RTA that make up a fatal collision.......its a combination of inforcement of that same act that reduces the incidence of fatal collisions

What nonsense!

Reduced road deaths are in the majority of cases down to better roads e.g. motorways etc. The removal of accident blackspots by having them engineered out of the roads.

The other major item is, that cars have actually become more affordable with greater safety features built into them e.g. a.b.s. airbags etc resulting in less deaths in accidents.

You must be aware that any area in Ireland that has had "blackspots" bypassed has seen a near total reduction in road deaths in the various locations. If you don't believe me you should know where to look to find the stats

Speed checks as operated by the Gardai per se, are and continue to be, revenue generators because they are mainly sited to generate revenue and for the unprofessional "Traffic Corps" to reach their targets. Leather clad chaps holding their tools whilst hiding behind bushes on safe roads do not and will not increase road safety. All it does is continue to generate contempt for the Gardai.

Breath tests are the one genuine item that has perhaps prevented some fatal accidents.

Of course if the Gardai are to have any credibility on alcohol testing they should park their cars outside of any local pub and test the customers as they open their car doors but of course that would be politically unacceptable.
Ok firstly 60 kmph zones are not just thrown up for the hell of it. There must be a reason. Councils and the NRA must have a reason. IE it may be entering a built up area, school zone, road works etc.

A ridiculous amount if 60kph zones are thrown up for the hell of it in numerous areas and in many cases are totally unjustified, again it's down to political interference rather than road safety.

You don't believe me?

Well how about political interference in the opposite direction? The extremely dangerous siting by Dublin city council of the JC DEAUX signs on footpaths that block visibility of traffic lights, distract drivers etc was highlighted by the NRA and what happened? Dublin city council installed them anyway!.

If the Gardai are to have any credibility they need to be informed and controlled by the public as to where they site justifiable Speed traps, where they have breath tests and not to be run as a personal club by the Gardai for the Gardai.

Now how can you say speed detection is not making anyone safer, pisses people off and tarnishes AGS?? I regularly do speed check on what the motorists I stop shout back is the "safest in the country".......I just turn and point at the headstone behind me......that generally shuts people up. Just because you cant see a danger doesnt mean there is no danger.

I would suggest that if you are really truthful and believe in what you say in your posts you should open your eyes and see how the Gardai and the unprofessional "Traffic Corps" need to be controlled and advised by the public as to where and when traffic policing is to be carried out rather than in the contemptible way it is currently done.

congo_90

Didn't see one checkpoint all weekend and was doing a lot of driving up and down the country.
The ironic debate is people complain about being stopped at checkpoints but in the same breath will say the gards are not out and enforcing laws!

I don't mind being stopped. Its usually a look at the discs and a glance at me followed by a wave on anyways.

Roanmore

Ian Beale wrote: »

That's a good one, the recession has brought down car crash fatalities:rolleyes: QUOTE]

He has a point here (the only thing he said that made sense). I drive Waterford to Cork every day (for the last 3 years) and I have noticed that the amount of trucks on the road has dropped dramatically which has made my journey a lot safer and I'm sure that is replicated on roads all over the country.
What I have seen a rise in with these trucks is the amount of them travelling over 100 km/h nevermind 80 km / h and even worse trucks overtaking cars and trucks and it takes them ages to do it. It's frightening at times to see some of he manouvres.

Tragedy

TheNog wrote: »

Checkpoints are not for catching speeders. Checkpoints are for tax, insurance, driving licence and to curb the movements of criminals.

Apologies, I used checkpoints to signify checkpoints and speedtraps to keep it simpler when replying.

If you look through several threads of this type you will find why locations are chosen for speed checks and why some locations are not suitable.

Why are:
The new M7 SRR
M50 outside the roadworks
N7 naas road
M7 Naas - Portlaoise

being chosen?

Why is the hill outside borris in ossory that's perfectly straight for a few km's chosen?

I understand why speedtraps can't be thrown up on boreens, but in all fairness - there's an awful lot of road between Motorways and country boreens where people speed stupidly.

In fact, they choose those roads because they know you're too busy in the same old places.

But surely there is a reason why the speed is reduced in that area. Im sure if you think about it, the council would not spend money on signs, road markings etc for absolutely nothing. There has to be a reason for it.

Excuse me, it's local councils. Are you seriously arguing they always act in logical ways and in the best interests of everyone?
Near where I live there were three roads that were 60km/h standing out from the usual 50km/h - with no changes to these roads, or facilities/exits/estates around it, and after years being at this speed - the signs were changed overnight.

A week later there was a Guard with a speedgun on one of them.

I feel protected.

nice guy always wrote: »

Road deaths are down a hell of a lot. And whether people here care to agree or not I really dont care, but the reduction is due to more Traffic Corps members,

Ask most people on boards and none of them will have had seen Traffic Corps around.

more speed checks

Only slow people down in well known speed check blackspots and to be honest, with the way people jam on the brakes whenever they seem them, even though they're already under the limit - probably cause more near misses than they prevent.

better legislation

Legislation for what?

penalty points

Is there any evidence in statistics showing the introduction of penalty points had any significant impact?

and mandatory alcohol checkpoints.

Any firsthand experience I have, most drink drivers are still drink driving.

Its a combination of breaches of the RTA that make up a fatal collision.......its a combination of inforcement of that same act that reduces the incidence of fatal collisions

Empirical evidence is that

1)Better vehicles
2)Better roads
3)Better driver education and training

have the biggest impact on collisions.

Funnily enough, theres only one of those things AGS can help with, and I've never heard of them doing that.
Traffic Corps should be out there driving watching for stupid and bad motorists and educating them, not doing speed checks with a hairdryer.

Ever seen Road Wars? Yes, like that.

Drove home from Dublin Port today with my family in the back, was almost crashed into(literally inches) three times by idiot drivers who have no ideas of the rules of the road, how to use indicators or lanes. That's a hell of a lot more dangerous than someone doing 133km/h on the M7.

Ok firstly 60 kmph zones are not just thrown up for the hell of it. There must be a reason. Councils and the NRA must have a reason. IE it may be entering a built up area, school zone, road works etc.

There's a turn off for a concrete plant which seems to be closed. There's also about three more on the N69 where it stays 100km/r despite the plants.

Now how can you say speed detection is not making anyone safer, pisses people off and tarnishes AGS??

How do speed checks make anyone safer? There's a reason the RSA and AGS' statistics on speed related deaths/accidents doesn't use the speed limit as the base mark, it's because inappropriate speed kills - not going over the speed limit and if they based their accident stats purely on illegal speeding - they wouldn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to arguing "Speed Kills"

Seeing AGS in the same old spot shooting fish in a barrel in areas which are some of the safest to drive in in Ireland, doesn't make a single person think to themselves "These people are doing a good job making us safer".

I regularly do speed check on what the motorists I stop shout back is the "safest in the country".......I just turn and point at the headstone behind me......that generally shuts people up. Just because you cant see a danger doesnt mean there is no danger.

Why are you doing speed checks in a graveyard?

Does it have etched on the stone "This person died by a driver doing over the legal speed limit"?

Elsewise, you're doing the same old schtick and using emotion to cover lack of hard evidence.

PS: Not seen many headstones on Motorways

Helen G

I read that 500 poeple were caught at weekend drink driving - your life must be turned upside down:(

rucksack

Garda clampdown on 'boy racers'

http://www.nationalist.ie/the/Garda-clampdown-on-boy-racers.5773461.jp

TestTransmission

rucksack wrote: »

Garda clampdown on 'boy racers'

http://www.nationalist.ie/the/Garda-clampdown-on-boy-racers.5773461.jp

And?

TheNog

Bee wrote: »

I would suggest that if you are really truthful and believe in what you say in your posts you should open your eyes and see how the Gardai and the unprofessional "Traffic Corps" need to be controlled and advised by the public as to where and when traffic policing is to be carried out rather than in the contemptible way it is currently done.

Would you believe that many of the speed checks we carry out are as a result of people who live in the area after making compliants to us about drivers possibly exceeding speeding. The majority of speed checks in my district are done this way along with some of our usual places where collisions are happening.

Tragedy wrote: »

Why are:
The new M7 SRR
M50 outside the roadworks
N7 naas road
M7 Naas - Portlaoise

being chosen?

Why is the hill outside borris in ossory that's perfectly straight for a few km's chosen?

I understand why speedtraps can't be thrown up on boreens, but in all fairness - there's an awful lot of road between Motorways and country boreens where people speed stupidly.

The reason is in the other thread you and me were debating on. The one about the 200kph on the M7

Tragedy

TheNog wrote: »

The reason is in the other thread you and me were debating on. The one about the 200kph on the M7

Motorways are statistically the safest roads to drive on.

In the other thread, it was three cases in exactly three months(isn't it an awful waste of manpower to have daily speedtraps catching people doing 135-140 on the M7 and 110+ on the N7 to Naas just to catch one person a month? Good thing for fines!).

The most consistent dangerous driving I see is still on rural N/R roads. People doing 160+ isn't unusual for me to see. I can assure you, they don't have daily speedtraps.