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

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

Road Traffic Bill 2009.

  • 31-10-2009 7:15pm
    #1
    PanhardPL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 511 ✭✭✭


    In the 2009 Bill there are 67 pages and lots of small print that may have escaped readers.
    In the case of a motorist being stopped for speeding, it is not necessary for the Gardai to prove, that the electronic or other apparatus was accurate or in good working order. Surely this has to be wrong if something like a vehicle GPS unit shows a different speed.


Comments

  • #2
    trad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,696 ✭✭✭trad


    That has always been the case.


  • #3
    dudara
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,518 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    They're closing out a loophole in the law.


  • #4
    junkyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,575 ✭✭✭junkyard


    Nanny state tbh and getting worse by the day. But then the majority of people support this by voting yes to the Lisbon treaty.


  • #5
    Hooch
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,957 ✭✭✭Hooch


    PanhardPL wrote: »
    In the 2009 Bill there are 67 pages and lots of small print that may have escaped readers.
    In the case of a motorist being stopped for speeding, it is not necessary for the Gardai to prove, that the electronic or other apparatus was accurate or in good working order. Surely this has to be wrong if something like a vehicle GPS unit shows a different speed.

    As trad said thats always been there.

    As for GPS it is not a calibrated or certified speed measurement. The reason is it is owned by the U.S. Dept of Defence and can be changed (to give wrong readings in times of war etc) OTT I know, but thats the cold hard truth.


  • #6
    peasant
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    nice guy always wrote: »
    As trad said thats always been there.

    As for GPS it is not a calibrated or certified speed measurement. The reason is it is owned by the U.S. Dept of Defence and can be changed (to give wrong readings in times of war etc) OTT I know, but thats the cold hard truth.

    Like a hand-held hairdryer is accurate now :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    JHMEG
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,686 ✭✭✭JHMEG


    junkyard wrote: »
    Nanny state tbh and getting worse by the day. But then the majority of people support this by voting yes to the Lisbon treaty.
    This is the work of Noel Dempsey...


  • #8
    Adam Selene
    Closed Accounts Posts: 74 ✭✭Adam Selene


    How do they propose adding points to a foreign license. Strikes me as bullcrap.


  • #9
    Sully
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sully


    junkyard wrote: »
    Nanny state tbh and getting worse by the day. But then the majority of people support this by voting yes to the Lisbon treaty.

    1) It was a common get out clause by people caught for speeding. Now that loophole is now closed. About time.
    2) Eh no, nothing at all (not even a tiny bit) to do with Lisbon. At all....


  • #10
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,536 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    junkyard wrote: »
    Nanny state tbh and getting worse by the day. But then the majority of people support this by voting yes to the Lisbon treaty.

    I love nonsense comments like this from people that clearly don't understand anything about Lisbon yet say people should vote against it.

    This has NOTHING to do with Lisbon, well no I lie this has as much to do with Lisbon as me being thirsty after a long run...

    ...makes just as much sense :rolleyes:

    Anyway, about time this is happening, loopholes need to be closed


  • #11
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71,186 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Cabaal wrote: »
    Anyway, about time this is happening, loopholes need to be closed

    I don't see how removing the requirement to prove someone is actually guilty - e.g. that the speed reading is accurate - can be seen as closing a loophole! Removing ones right to justice, yes.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    trad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,696 ✭✭✭trad


    I think the OP's point should be read as in it is up to the defendant to prove that the speed detection device was not working correctly.


  • #13
    CrowdedHouse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,908 ✭✭✭CrowdedHouse


    Anything useful in it like credit card style driving licences ?

    Seven Worlds will Collide



  • #14
    Marlow
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,555 ✭✭✭✭Marlow


    Adam Selene wrote: »
    How do they propose adding points to a foreign license. Strikes me as bullcrap.

    Well, I haven't read the bill, but the way they do it now, is to record the foreigners license number, origin and home address and keep the points in a database. Similar to points, that are given to people, that have no license.

    Should you at a later point obtain an irish license, the points end up on that.

    /M


  • #15
    Adam Selene
    Closed Accounts Posts: 74 ✭✭Adam Selene


    Have you seen some of the absolute bollocks on this website

    [url] http://www.drinkdriving.ie/ [/url]
    • 92 lives were saved in the first 12 months following the introduction of Mandatory Alcohol Testing (MAT) on 21st July 2006.
    So, there were 92 less deaths on the road in 2006/7.......

    There is no way to statistically corellate these facts, utter bullcrap.

    I am fullly for lowering the drink driving limit but some of the other stuff in that bill is worrying and it disturbs me that they are using propoganda to sell it.


Advertisement