Safety of Garda Driving

Occam

Following on from a previous thread, where talk of Garda driving standards was discussed I just thought it deserved a thread of its own.

Firstly I'd argue that the level of training provided, is inadequate. I think there is a perception that Gardaí who have completed the driving course, are well trained. I'd suggest that the course isn't long enough. Anyone know how this compares internationally ? The GRA noted that : "there is no specific driver training in relation to response calls where vehicles are often driven through traffic at high speeds." Anyone know if this is true? If so it sounds like the driver training course is pointless.

Secondly I'd suggest that the idea of allowing 2600 Gardaí to drive, under chiefs is absurd. It needs to be abolished asap.

Finally I'd argue that there is abuse of exemptions in the road traffic act given to members "in the course of duty". Some members are showing a very bad example to other drivers, the exemptions should only need to be exercised in exceptional circumstances. Also I'd like to see a situation where light\siren activation was recorded electronically in the car, and where use needed to be justified.

bravestar

Occam wrote: »

Following on from a previous thread, where talk of Garda driving standards was discussed I just thought it deserved a thread of its own.

Firstly I'd argue that the level of training provided, is inadequate. I think there is a perception that Gardaí who have completed the driving course, are well trained. I'd suggest that the course isn't long enough. Anyone know how this compares internationally ? The GRA noted that : "there is no specific driver training in relation to response calls where vehicles are often driven through traffic at high speeds." Anyone know if this is true? If so it sounds like the driver training course is pointless.

Secondly I'd suggest that the idea of allowing 2600 Gardaí to drive, under chiefs is absurd. It needs to be abolished asap.

Finally I'd argue that there is abuse of exemptions in the road traffic act given to members "in the course of duty". Some members are showing a very bad example to other drivers, the exemptions should only need to be exercised in exceptional circumstances. Also I'd like to see a situation where light\siren activation was recorded electronically in the car, and where use needed to be justified.

Firstly, Im not going to say what is or is not covered in the driving course. If it's not in the public domain already I have no intention of bringing it into it.

Secondly, if chiefs permission were to be abolished ASAP, then who will drive the cars? No doubt you would then be on complaining that it took the Gardai a ridiculous amount of time to respond to your call. I agree that it should be gotten rid of, but before that happens, enough drivers need to be trained!

Finally, could you expand on this abuse of road traffic exemptions? Why would you like to see a situation where light/siren activation is electronically recorded and it's use justified? Are you one of those people who see a Garda car pass at high speed with lights/sirens on and think they must just be going back to the station with their chips? :rolleyes:

maglite

I think the OP is on about cutting traffic Jams. There is a fella in Cork that does it regularly, and i number i suspect of doing it without cause. Paints a Bad image.

Occam

bravestar wrote: »

Firstly, Im not going to say what is or is not covered in the driving course. If it's not in the public domain already I have no intention of bringing it into it.

Well the GRA have put it in the public domain. I guess if they say there is no response training we will just have to take them at their word....

bravestar wrote: »

Secondly, if chiefs permission were to be abolished ASAP, then who will drive the cars? No doubt you would then be on complaining that it took the Gardai a ridiculous amount of time to respond to your call. I agree that it should be gotten rid of, but before that happens, enough drivers need to be trained!

Think you are misunderstanding my point. I'm proposing that the drivers are trained asap, so that chiefs can be abolished asap. This is what the inspectorate recommended, yet nothing seems to have been done.

bravestar wrote: »

Finally, could you expand on this abuse of road traffic exemptions?

Well to take a simple example.....the parking outside of some of the busy dublin city center stations. State cars on double yellows... double parked etc. While I accept that there is no alternative parking at the moment, its not a good image to portray to the public.

bravestar wrote: »

Why would you like to see a situation where light/siren activation is electronically recorded and it's use justified? Are you one of those people who see a Garda car pass at high speed with lights/sirens on and think they must just be going back to the station with their chips? :rolleyes:

Thats the whole point - if the cars had these systems joe public would know that they weren't going back with chips. Systems like this would help restore some confidence in the force.

kerry4sam

Occam wrote: »

Following on from a previous thread, where talk of Garda driving standards was discussed I just thought it deserved a thread of its own.

Firstly I'd argue that the level of training provided, is inadequate.

Secondly I'd suggest that the idea of allowing 2600 Gardaí to drive, under chiefs is absurd. It needs to be abolished asap.

Finally I'd argue that there is abuse of exemptions in the road traffic act given to members "in the course of duty". Some members are showing a very bad example to other drivers, the exemptions should only need to be exercised in exceptional circumstances. Also I'd like to see a situation where light\siren activation was recorded electronically in the car, and where use needed to be justified.

I am just being curious here:
OP, is it that you yourself don't trust some members of A.G.S. and you are therefore questioning how they carry out their daily duties, in this instance their driving? If it is, maybe what should be questioned is the underlying reason in why you lack this trust in these members i.e. why you take issue with this. Can I ask what has happened for you to question the driving of every member who happen to be on chief's permission? Have you a complaint of sorts to make? I am not attacking you in any way OP, I'm just curious here and trying to learn where you're coming from.

bravestar

Occam wrote: »

Well the GRA have put it in the public domain. I guess if they say there is no response training we will just have to take them at their word....



Think you are misunderstanding my point. I'm proposing that the drivers are trained asap, so that chiefs can be abolished asap. This is what the inspectorate recommended, yet nothing seems to have been done.



Well to take a simple example.....the parking outside of some of the busy dublin city center stations. State cars on double yellows... double parked etc. While I accept that there is no alternative parking at the moment, its not a good image to portray to the public.


Thats the whole point - if the cars had these systems joe public would know that they weren't going back with chips. Systems like this would help restore some confidence in the force.

If the GRA have said that, then thats fine but I wont be discussing it for security reasons.

Indeed I did misunderstand your point on scrapping chief's, I agree 100% with you on that point.

While I agree that parking in the circumstances you mentioned does not portray a great image to the public, most members of the public have no idea what the job entails. The bad parking may be due to no other space available, a highly violent prisoner in the back and the need to get him into a cell quick before he spits more blood in the face of the Garda who is trying to restrain him in the back of the car.

There is another thread going at the moment on this forum where a man is shot in the leg in russia, another poster here (name escapes me) found this video quite disturbing. I didn't. For the simple reason I have been in this exact situation, without a gun, disarmed the person and arrested them, after having witness them inflict serious injuries on a member of the public. The reason I bring this up is to illustrait the point that most members of the public have no idea what our job entails. Im sure most members of AGS here have been in similar situations.

So before you pass judgement on the bad standard of parking, spare a thought for the Gardai that maybe, there is a bigger picture to be seen.

Also, it is not the Gardai driving the cars fault that whoever built the station did not allow for enough parking spaces.

Regarding the lights, People will think whatever they want, there are alot better ways to spend money improving AGS first before a system like this is put in place. Even if it was, people would think that we can fiddle it etc and would end up thinking exactly what they want to.

To be honest, Joe public's perception of why my lights/sirens are on is the least of my concerns when I'm rushing to an armed robbery. Im more worried about the junction up ahead, that car that isnt pulling over and if I do catch the fella for the robbery is he gonna start blasting before I can get within reaching distance of him.

Occam

kerry4sam wrote: »

I am just being curious here:
OP, is it that you yourself don't trust some members of A.G.S. and you are therefore questioning how they carry out their daily duties, in this instance their driving? If it is, maybe what should be questioned is the underlying reason in why you lack this trust in these members i.e. why you take issue with this. Can I ask what has happened for you to question the driving of every member who happen to be on chief's permission? Have you a complaint of sorts to make? I am not attacking you in any way OP, I'm just curious here and trying to learn where you're coming from.

Ok.... think you're having a bit of an Oprah moment. Proposing improving garda driving training and standards is hardly "questioning how they carry out their daily duties".

kerry4sam

Occam wrote: »

Ok.... think you're having a bit of an Oprah moment. Proposing improving garda driving training and standards is hardly "questioning how they carry out their daily duties".

I would ask you not demean my question, thank you. I asked an honest question so I could understand where you yourself are coming from when you question A.G.S. members who drive on Chief's permission. I didn't realise you would be uncomfortable answering what to me was a straightforward question.

Occam

bravestar wrote: »

The bad parking may be due to no other space available, a highly violent prisoner in the back and the need to get him into a cell quick before he spits more blood in the face of the Garda who is trying to restrain him in the back of the car.

Yep, and as I said I've no problem with the circumstances you mention, which I would regard as meriting use of the exemptions. But to give an example, for the last 30 years there has been double and triple parking outside pearse st. station. Its done as a matter of routine.

bravestar wrote: »

The reason I bring this up is to illustrait the point that most members of the public have no idea what our job entails. Im sure most members of AGS here have been in similar situations.

Its a tough job, I agree, but poor levels of training only make it harder. Also I don't see why the difficulty of the job should be an excuse for low standards.

bravestar wrote: »

So before you pass judgement on the bad standard of parking, spare a thought for the Gardai that maybe, there is a bigger picture to be seen. Also, it is not the Gardai driving the cars fault that whoever built the station did not allow for enough parking spaces.

Agreed. But at the end of the day it looks very unprofessional, and seems like double standards to joe public.

bravestar wrote: »

To be honest, Joe public's perception of why my lights/sirens are on is the least of my concerns when I'm rushing to an armed robbery. Im more worried about the junction up ahead, that car that isnt pulling over and if I do catch the fella for the robbery is he gonna start blasting before I can get within reaching distance of him.

Thats fair enough, but there is a bigger issue, that needs to be addressed by people at the top of the organisation.

Occam

kerry4sam wrote: »

I would ask you not demean my question, thank you. I asked an honest question so I could understand where you yourself are coming from when you question A.G.S. members who drive on Chief's permission. I didn't realise you would be uncomfortable answering what to me was a straightforward question.

Hang on a second. I talk about the very poor levels of training, and you wonder what is the underlying reason in why I lack this trust in these members? What has it got to do with trust?

In any case to answer your question, the reason I dont trust Garda members driving on Chiefs is that they are not trained to a standard which would be expected for a modern, professional police force. I agree with the inspectorate that said drivers on Chiefs represent a "serious safety issue for police officers and the public" which must be addressed urgently. Happy?

Zambia

Is there actually some epidemic of Garda Crashs justifying the huge expenditure involved in training everyone(or the 2500) in the force to this standard?

Most Garda Crashes I heard of where a result of Joy riding smashs where the offender was ramming the Garda Vehicle.

I doubt any Garda serving would refuse further Vehicle training or pursuit training .I have no need for pursuit training but if offered I would sign up.

2500 Officers in a course for example 4 days at 8 hours a day all having to be replaced by other AGS members to cover their shifts hence x2. Some if not all on overtime. Then add on the cost of the training in staff hired to perform it and vehicles made avialible to be used on it.

Lets address the parking on double yellows, to combat that in one case you need a car park outside trinity in the centre of Dublin. Even in todays depressed property market thats going cost you a lot.

In an ideal world yes all AGS would be trained to the highest level of driving, but in reality I dont see it working like that.

Occam

Occam wrote: »

Yep, and as I said I've no problem with the circumstances you mention, which I would regard as meriting use of the exemptions. But to give an example, for the last 30 years there has been double and triple parking outside pearse st. station. Its done as a matter of routine.

Do you realise how many people work in Pearse St. Station? You are aware that it is a District and Divisional HQ? The parking down there is very efficient considering the amount of vehicles around. And they do not obstruct traffic. In fact the only vehicles allowed to pass through this section of Pearse St. are taxis and buses.

And to my knowledge, Pearse St. is the only city centre station that does not have it's own car park.

Zambia232 wrote: »

Most Garda Crashes I heard of where a result of Joy riding smashs where the offender was ramming the Garda Vehicle.

I doubt any Garda serving would refuse further Vehicle training or pursuit training .I have no need for pursuit training but if offered I would sign up.

2500 Officers in a course for example 4 days at 8 hours a day all having to be replaced by other AGS members to cover their shifts hence x2. Some if not all on overtime. Then add on the cost of the training in staff hired to perform it and vehicles made avialible to be used on it.

In fairness you will never hear about the material damage accidents. More courses are needed but considering how many members need to do the course the only way to do it is to increase the number of instructors. Every course available is filled. And members are not replaced on OT. It's up to the rest of the unit to take up the slack.

Mr. Presentable

The OP looks like an agendaist post. It may not be, but it sure reads like one.

Double parking at Pearse st (for example) cannot be fixed by training. Misuse of lights cannot be fixed by training. Why do these things put you out? What do you care if someone is bringing chips back to the station?

It would obviously be wonderful to have a more highly trained corps, but when will you accept it is trained enough? At what standard? Do you actually know what the current training entails?

Occam

Zambia232 wrote: »

Is there actually some epidemic of Garda Crashs justifying the huge expenditure involved in training everyone(or the 2500) in the force to this standard?

I believe there were over 500 collisions involving gardaí last year, over half at which the gardaí were at least partially at fault. There have also been some members of the public killed by gardaí on response calls.

I'd ask you, how can we justify the risks of having poorly trained drivers.

Zambia232 wrote: »

Most Garda Crashes I heard of where a result of Joy riding smashs where the offender was ramming the Garda Vehicle.

Just not true.

Zambia232 wrote: »

2500 Officers in a course for example 4 days at 8 hours a day all having to be replaced by other AGS members to cover their shifts hence x2. Some if not all on overtime. Then add on the cost of the training in staff hired to perform it and vehicles made avialible to be used on it.

Hang on, *all* garda training is expensive. I doubt I'd hear you saying that tazers shouln't be brought in because the training would take too many members out of stations.

Zambia232 wrote: »

Lets address the parking on double yellows, to combat that in one case you need a car park outside trinity in the centre of Dublin.

Simply not true. Loads of possible solutions to this. Why would a car park need to be right outside the station? Why does the station with no parking need to be the divisional hq? Hundreds of thousands of people work in dublin city center, they all seem to find a way to get to work without double and triple parking.

foreign wrote: »

Do you realise how many people work in Pearse St. Station? You are aware that it is a District and Divisional HQ? The parking down there is very efficient considering the amount of vehicles around. And they do not obstruct traffic.

Agreed, but its double standards. One rule for the Guards and another for everyone else.

To be honest I'm ver suprised at the reaction I'm getting, especially from what seem to be members. I would have thought most members would like to have proper parking at pearse st. Maybe not.

foreign wrote: »

More courses are needed but considering how many members need to do the course the only way to do it is to increase the number of instructors. Every course available is filled.

But its not the only way to it. Many other police services use contracted companies to provide some level of training.

nipplenuts wrote: »

Double parking at Pearse st (for example) cannot be fixed by training. Misuse of lights cannot be fixed by training. Why do these things put you out?

Read my original post. I gave parking as an example of what I see as abuse of exemptions given to Gardai in the Road traffic act.

nipplenuts wrote: »

What do you care if someone is bringing chips back to the station?

If untrained drivers are driving dangerously its a risk to the public. As a member of the public I have every right to be concerned.

nipplenuts wrote: »

It would obviously be wonderful to have a more highly trained corps, but when will you accept it is trained enough? At what standard? Do you actually know what the current training entails?

Well I don't think its unreasonable to expect Garda drivers to have at least passed the basic driving course. I really am baffled at the response I'm getting - I really thought everyone agreed that more training was needed.

pvt.joker

Occam wrote: »

Hundreds of thousands of people work in dublin city center, they all seem to find a way to get to work without double and triple parking.

Do these hundreds of thousands of people work shifts, outside times when public transport is not available (6am?)
Im sure the guards in Pearse street like nothing better than triple parking, and coming out at 6am having finished a shift having to move 5 or 6 cars just so they can get their own car out. Yeah lets blame them. :rolleyes:

Occam

pvt.joker wrote: »

Do these hundreds of thousands of people work shifts, outside times when public transport is not available (6am?)
Im sure the guards in Pearse street like nothing better than triple parking, and coming out at 6am having finished a shift having to move 5 or 6 cars just so they can get their own car out. Yeah lets blame them. :rolleyes:

But ..... I'm agreeing with you - I'm saying that they shouldn't have to come out and move cars, because there shouldn't be cars double or triple parked.

Lots of other people work in shifts. No double or triple parking outside any of the hospitals or fire stations. Look at the Mater hospital for example, who use spaces in marlborough st.

Occam

Occam wrote: »

I believe there were over 500 collisions involving gardaí last year, over half at which the gardaí were at least partially at fault. There have also been some members of the public killed by gardaí on response calls.

Simply not true. Loads of possible solutions to this. Why would a car park need to be right outside the station? Why does the station with no parking need to be the divisional hq? Hundreds of thousands of people work in dublin city center, they all seem to find a way to get to work without double and triple parking.

To be honest I'm ver suprised at the reaction I'm getting, especially from what seem to be members. I would have thought most members would like to have proper parking at pearse st. Maybe not.

But its not the only way to it. Many other police services use contracted companies to provide some level of training.

Read my original post. I gave parking as an example of what I see as abuse of exemptions given to Gardai in the Road traffic act.

If untrained drivers are driving dangerously its a risk to the public. As a member of the public I have every right to be concerned.

Well I don't think its unreasonable to expect Garda drivers to have at least passed the basic driving course. I really am baffled at the response I'm getting - I really thought everyone agreed that more training was needed.

I've already mentioned about the "minor" crashes that gardai are involved in. I have yet to see a car returning the station for grub on blue lights. If a driver has an accident while driving on blues on of the first questions that will be asked is where were you going? If it is not a response call expect to be in the sh1t.

And no member would ever turn down driver training.

Finally, if you ever see a garda car that you believe to be driving dangerously than report it.

Occam

Occam wrote: »

Lots of other people work in shifts. No double or triple parking outside any of the hospitals or fire stations. Look at the Mater hospital for example, who use spaces in marlborough st.

Which I am sure are arranged by the Hospital management and paid for by the staff. Also, nurses and doctors don't have to leave their shifts in the hospital to go to court or go to posts where you need to carry all of your equipment.

Trojan911

OP,

I can't speak for the level of driver training AGS officers are given, but I do agree that this "Chiefs Permission" is not acceptable at all. So does
Kathleen O'Toole.

It is basically giving officers, with a full license and not necessarily the experience of high speed driving, permission to speed around the roads.

One must not point the finger of blame on the day to day officers who patrol the beat/streets as they do not have control over the finances, however, I believe they have the option not to respond at high speed.

I blame the Government for the lack of funds to pay for more driving courses and have a minimum number of officers per team to perform the duties of high speed or immediate response calls.

Here is a quote from the Status Report as of 30 June, 2009 on the Implementation of the Recommendations of the Fourth Report of the Garda Inspectorate –“Roads Policing Review and Recommendations”. Note the last line in the reply. Again, down to money.

4.10 wrote:

The Inspectorate recommends that the Garda Síochána urgently develop a comprehensive driver training programme and do away with the current practice of driving on ‘Chief’s Permission.’ If necessary, to expedite this recommendation, a vendor should be contracted to provide this training. Those currently driving on ‘Chief’s Permission’ should attend an abbreviated but effective driver training course.

A (Reply)
A review is being undertaken to identify the best possible approach to providing police driver instruction with the twin aims of eliminating 'Chief's Permission,' and training Gardaí for effective and safe performance of standard police driving duties, including emergency response. The review will take into account current financial and other constraints.


4th Quarter 2009 for completion of review.
Assistant Commissioner Strategy, Training and Professional Standards

As for double and triple parking, well, that's an issue for the local authoriy to deal with if they are private vehicles. Parking tickets normally resolve this.

Occam

foreign wrote: »

Which I am sure are arranged by the Hospital management and paid for by the staff. Also, nurses and doctors don't have to leave their shifts in the hospital to go to court or go to posts where you need to carry all of your equipment.

Nope, not true. The Mater went to tender for the 250 car spaces. Indeed they even ran a shuttle bus from the car park to the hospital.

If the HSE can organise it, surely AGS could manage it, if they wanted to. However sounds like the rank and file aren't really bothered about the example they are showing ...

willit

Occam wrote: »

However sounds like the rank and file aren't really bothered about the example they are showing ...

Are they breaking the law or are they exempt from the law governing parking in this situation?

If the law is being broken then they are setting a bad example but if not then what bad example are they setting?

Also, if the Gardai are breaking the law here then why don't the traffic wardens take daily trips around this area, they'd make a fortune for the government purse in parking fines.:eek::p Again though, if no law is being broken here then there is no bad example so I would advise that you start getting away from this example.

Trojan911

Trojan911 wrote: »

One must not point the finger of blame on the day to day officers who patrol the beat/streets as they do not have control over the finances, however, I believe they have the option not to respond at high speed.

I blame the Government for the lack of funds to pay for more driving courses and have a minimum number of officers per team to perform the duties of high speed or immediate response calls.

Trojan, as a former officer, you should be aware that not all calls are responded to using high speed. You should also be aware that drivers, trained or otherwise, would not be driving at high speed unless it was safe to do so. (Traffic levels, condition of the road, weather, pedestrian levels, etc).

At the end of the day whoever is driving is responsible for their actions when driving and choose their style and the consequences of their actions. I believe that on the driving courses that the aim is not about driving at high speed.
Maybe someone on here who is a confirmed member and has the courses can confirm that?

Trojan911

foreign wrote: »

Trojan, as a former officer, you should be aware that not all calls are responded to using high speed. You should also be aware that drivers, trained or otherwise, would not be driving at high speed unless it was safe to do so. (Traffic levels, condition of the road, weather, pedestrian levels, etc).

Not quite sure where you are coming from here. I am discussing "Chiefs Permission", where drivers have no prior specialised driver training, but can take out a car and respond to a call with speed. I don't agree with that. A person should undertake some form of an advanced driving course.

At the end of the day it protects the officer and the public.

foreign wrote: »

At the end of the day whoever is driving is responsible for their actions when driving and choose their style and the consequences of their actions.

Correct, no dispute there. That goes for all drivers, public and police.

Turner

Occam wrote: »

Firstly I'd argue that the level of training provided, is inadequate. I think there is a perception that Gardaí who have completed the driving course, are well trained. I'd suggest that the course isn't long enough. Anyone know how this compares internationally ? The GRA noted that : "there is no specific driver training in relation to response calls where vehicles are often driven through traffic at high speeds."

The Gardai who have completed and passed the driving course are extremely well trained. As for comparison, it is the same system of car control and roadcraft that the Uk police and many other police forces around the world use.

It doesnt matter what call you are going to, you are trained to forget about what is going on at the call and drive to the level you were trained.

Occam wrote: »

Secondly I'd suggest that the idea of allowing 2600 Gardaí to drive, under chiefs is absurd. It needs to be abolished asap.

It is absurd and dangerous. Gardai are risking their lives and members of the publics lives driving untrained. If they refused to drive without adequate training im afraid alot of Garda Stations would close every day, and i mean in the hundereds.

Occam wrote: »

Finally I'd argue that there is abuse of exemptions in the road traffic act given to members "in the course of duty". Some members are showing a very bad example to other drivers, the exemptions should only need to be exercised in exceptional circumstances. Also I'd like to see a situation where light\siren activation was recorded electronically in the car, and where use needed to be justified.

About Gardai parking outside Garda stations, in Pearse street there are official Garda vehicle signs on the roadway where Gardai park and double park. If they are on duty they are exempt from parking regulations. Where would you like them to park response patrol cars... 2 miles down the road in an underground car park??

Lights and sirens are an aid to a Garda drvier, asbsolutley no standing in law regarding these. They can use them (they decide what call merits them) to notify other drivers they require a passage thtough traffic.

Trust me I have never met any Garda driver who would "blue light" it with a bag of chips in the boot. Its not a case of "ohhh great i can blue light it to this call, lets drive like a lunatic"

Any ES driver will know that driving with blue lights is stressful and dangerous as you are relying on other drivers to react accordingly.

deadwood

Chief--- wrote: »

Trust me I have never met any Garda driver who would "blue light" it with a bag of chips in the boot.

Agreed.

That's what the bus lanes are for.;)

Turner

deadwood wrote: »

Agreed.

That's what the bus lanes are for.;)

True

45mins break in 8 hours isnt a long time!

daithip

Chief--- wrote: »

If they refused to drive without adequate training im afraid alot of Garda Stations would close every day, and i mean in the hundereds.

Have to agree with Chief here, unfortunately due to limited availability of driver training courses, chief supts permission is necessary, especially outside the DMR. Most country stations are relying heavily on untrained drivers to perform the day to day driving. Withdrawing this permission would leave cars parked up for days on end and sub stations basically just opening their doors with Gardai sitting inside unable to repond to calls. I can't talk for the DMR but the last drivng course offered to anyone on the regular units where I'm stationed was almost two years ago and I believe most country stations are the same!!:( Most of those I know on Chief's would jump at the chance to be trained but unfortunately the courses aren't there.

Turner

And as for training all the 2,600 untrained drivers. Not a chance.

The Garda budget is going to be cut in december, not increased.

The same level or less even of training Gardai up to Standard Car Course will continue.

Trojan911

Chief--- wrote: »

And as for training all the 2,600 untrained drivers. Not a chance.

Why not have two or three officers per team trained up?

I'm looking at the way the Met did it when I was in (some may have changed since).

1) Basic course: To respond to calls or use vehicle in normal mode using marked or unmarked veh's up to 1.4cc

2) IRV/Van course: To respond to calls in normal mode or with the use of Blues 'n' Two's allowing driver to exceed speed limit. Engine size up to 1.4cc (not sure on the van engine size as can't remember).

3) Advanced course: Normally for Traff/Pol, Q car, ARV etc. Engine size 2Ltr or above.

We always had approx two-three IRV/Van drivers on each team.

(The basic drivers were not allowed to drive the IRV's unless they were ferrying from A-B, no blues 'n' twos allowed. And irrespective of 1) 2) or 3) all drivers were open to prosecution should their driving be deemed reckless or dangerous etc)

Leo Demidov

In a perfect world with no budgetary issues, I presume that all gardai could undertake advanced driver training during initial training. If this had to be brought in five or so years ago then a large proportion of serving members would be trained.

When some of the serving members here are at the top of the garda pyramid in twenty years, when we have budget surplus again, they might implement this worthy notion. That or make it a pre-requisite for employment that you would undertake the training at your own expense, along the lines of the ambulance service. Dont see too many jumping for that idea.

daithip

Trojan911 wrote: »

Why not have two or three officers per team trained up?

I'm looking at the way the Met did it when I was in (some may have changed since).

1) Basic course: To respond to calls or use vehicle in normal mode using marked or unmarked veh's up to 1.4cc

2) IRV/Van course: To respond to calls in normal mode or with the use of Blues 'n' Two's allowing driver to exceed speed limit. Engine size up to 1.4cc (not sure on the van engine size as can't remember).

3) Advanced course: Normally for Traff/Pol, Q car, ARV etc. Engine size 2Ltr or above.

We always had approx two-three IRV/Van drivers on each team.

(The basic drivers were not allowed to drive the IRV's unless they were ferrying from A-B, no blues 'n' twos allowed. And irrespective of 1) 2) or 3) all drivers were open to prosecution should their driving be deemed reckless or dangerous etc)

Chief's Permission use to be restricted to 1600cc or less. Due to the existing Garda fleet it obviously won't revert back to it.

donvito99

Occam wrote: »

Nope, not true. The Mater went to tender for the 250 car spaces. Indeed they even ran a shuttle bus from the car park to the hospital.

If the HSE can organise it, surely AGS could manage it, if they wanted to. However sounds like the rank and file aren't really bothered about the example they are showing ...

I'd rather Tax payers money went to front line services like proper equipment and training rather than a shuttle bus runing to a car park with a handful of Gardaí every 8 hours.

mcguiver

What could be a very good thread or could be a bad one.

Chiefs needs to go, anyone driving on it will only realise this when they have had a collission. I look forward to the day when every car has cameras on board, keeps the driver in check and great evidence for all the terrile stuff we see everyday on the roads.

Courses need to be revised and revisited... look at our european counterparts.
Shuffle steering for instance, developed in early 1900's for heavy machinery and no power steering.

Each Garda spends approx 9 months living in Templemore, plenty of time for some basic training.

And then there's the vehicles, suitability, roadworthyness, butchered electrics for lights/sirens/radios... wouldnt be accepted anywhere else.

I do agree that official cars parked illegally looks terrible, take the Richmond court, parking illegally while prosecuting traffic offenders!

Not blaming the Gardai involved, but quite simply parking needs to be provided at these locations.
Would we build a fire station without parking for the fire engines??

amen

I have yet to see a car returning the station for grub on blue lights.

stuck in traffic last year in Dec(3 mile tail back). Thought it was an accident 2 squad cars, 2 motor bike garda flow down the road on the wrong side lights flashing etc.

About 30 mins later after progressing very slowly with along with all the other traffice turned out to be road works.
Pulled in to my destination (a restaurant) and there were the two squad cars and bikes and 7 Garda sitting down having lunch.

Turner

amen wrote: »

stuck in traffic last year in Dec(3 mile tail back). Thought it was an accident 2 squad cars, 2 motor bike garda flow down the road on the wrong side lights flashing etc.

About 30 mins later after progressing very slowly with along with all the other traffice turned out to be road works.
Pulled in to my destination (a restaurant) and there were the two squad cars and bikes and 7 Garda sitting down having lunch.

Might you have missed the ambulance Escort/member of the publics private car escort/robbery/burglary/suicide/infant death/mental patient attacking people/bank robbery/shots fired/traveller fight/panic alarm/Traffic Pursuit/Garda assistance call/explosives call/riot...the list goes on....

....they attended in the meantime

No because you were stuck in traffic and also you did not have a Garda radio in your possession to actually find out what was going on in the area beside roadworks.

Were they eating food!!

Oh my God do Gardai actually eat!!!!

I thought they did all their eating in Templemore to last them for their 30 years service.

Chief---

Chief--- wrote: »

I thought they did all their eating in Templemore to last them for their 30 years service.

You mean I wasn't supposed to do that!

Seriously though, They could have been on a call or practicing an escort. Use every chance that you can. As you said, it took you half an hour to get to the restaurant, they could have done ten calls in that time.

Zambia

Occam wrote: »

I believe there were over 500 collisions involving gardaí last year, over half at which the gardaí were at least partially at fault. There have also been some members of the public killed by gardaí on response calls.

Thats 250 collisions where an AGS member may be at fault, when you take the size of the fleet that's not bad. Large fleets that spend estimated 20 hours on the road per day are going to be in smashes its a fact of life.

Occam wrote: »

I'd ask you, how can we justify the risks of having poorly trained drivers.

Hang on they all where trained to the Driving licence standard. In a lot of cases this is what they need. If they are poorly trained then the whole driving populace is. No one is trying to Justify it simple fact is the old AGS wallet is looking a bit threadbare.

Occam wrote: »

Just not true.

I said what I had heard about was this type of crash. You have not proved different.

Occam wrote: »

Hang on, *all* garda training is expensive. I doubt I'd hear you saying that tazers shouln't be brought in because the training would take too many members out of stations.

I never said training should not be brought in I said it was unaffordable at present.

Occam wrote: »

Simply not true. Loads of possible solutions to this. Why would a car park need to be right outside the station? Why does the station with no parking need to be the divisional hq? Hundreds of thousands of people work in dublin city center, they all seem to find a way to get to work without double and triple parking.

I was refering to the AGS vehicles that litter the streets. I agree private vehicles breaking road traffic rules deserve ticket. I once saw a Marked Police Cage truck in Sydney get a parking ticket for being in a loading zone to long. I asked the Copper why that happened he said the parkies are told no exceptions. The cop simply declares what he was doing and the ticket is voided at the station.

coach23

Trojan911 wrote: »

Why not have two or three officers per team trained up?

I'm looking at the way the Met did it when I was in (some may have changed since).

1) Basic course: To respond to calls or use vehicle in normal mode using marked or unmarked veh's up to 1.4cc

2) IRV/Van course: To respond to calls in normal mode or with the use of Blues 'n' Two's allowing driver to exceed speed limit. Engine size up to 1.4cc (not sure on the van engine size as can't remember).

3) Advanced course: Normally for Traff/Pol, Q car, ARV etc. Engine size 2Ltr or above.

We always had approx two-three IRV/Van drivers on each team.

(The basic drivers were not allowed to drive the IRV's unless they were ferrying from A-B, no blues 'n' twos allowed. And irrespective of 1) 2) or 3) all drivers were open to prosecution should their driving be deemed reckless or dangerous etc)

it's usually only 2/3 drivers per UNIT including chiefs, we are crying out for courses the members are itching to get trained but the courses arent there do you not think we'd do the course if it was offered

coach23

Occam wrote: »

But ..... I'm agreeing with you - I'm saying that they shouldn't have to come out and move cars, because there shouldn't be cars double or triple parked.

Lots of other people work in shifts. No double or triple parking outside any of the hospitals or fire stations. Look at the Mater hospital for example, who use spaces in marlborough st.

we park inside the spaces provided in pearse st. when they are available when they arent we pay for parking the clampers have clamped many a car of gardai as they are working there are spaces where you can reverse into the curb and then there is space to park across the tops of these cars. the BUS LANE thats in existence is for access and busses only that staff of trinity college social welfare and pearse st garda station only. taxis are not allowed unless they are carrying a fare (though this is always overlooked by us, as is most of the public that break the law and use the BUS LANE here it's only one lane with parking on one side and bus stops on the other

honestly do you think we like parking like this having our cars destroyed as they are moved back and forth

other shifts generally start/ while public transport is available as they are longer in duration than ours 12/15 hours to our 8 (means getting the weeks working hours done in less days and thats better if you ask me)

we all agree that chiefs should go BUT if it went now the force would grind to a halt. and if you wanted all drivers on chiefs not to drive with blues on think again we do it to get to victims asap you would if you heard your colleague screaming for help or listened to some of the calls we get let alone deal with them when we get there

Trojan911

coach23 wrote: »

do you not think we'd do the course if it was offered

I'd say a fella would be nuts to pass it up if it was offered .

Get as many courses for free under the belt was my motto. They are useful outside the job as well.

Anto123

Originally Posted by Zambia232

Hang on they all where trained to the Driving licence standard.

I came across this thread after reading this article in the paper today: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1117/1224258982641.html

It seems they aren't all trained to the Driving licence standard, which is scandalous.

Vikings

Though in that case he was driving his own private car. Hardly scandalous that somebody out there drives their car without a license, many people unknowingly do it every day - no matter the profession. It isn't excusable but it sure as hell happens.

Anto123

I'm not sure about the "unknowingly" - his provisional was 3 years out of date and he had never passed a test!

Anyway, it was this bit that I found scandalous:

Under current legislation, there is no requirement for a garda to hold a driver’s licence while driving a “mechanically propelled vehicle” in the course of his or her duties, the inquest was told.
.....
The Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission made a number of recommendations following its investigation into Ms Barr’s death.
They included a review by the Garda of the practice of allowing members of the force to drive either Garda or private vehicles on duty while not holding a current driving licence ...

I imagine this came about to allow unlicensed Gards to drive in the case of an emergency, but that's a different thing to what seems to be happening.

Anto123

Anto123 wrote: »

I'm not sure about the "unknowingly" - his provisional was 3 years out of date and he had never passed a test!

Anyway, it was this bit that I found scandalous:

I imagine this came about to allow unlicensed Gards to drive in the case of an emergency, but that's a different thing to what seems to be happening.

Or possibly to do with the fact you don't need a licence to do one of the driving courses.

I would be very suprised if there was anybody driving in the job, on duty, who did not hold a licence.

Turner

There is no legal requirement to hold a licence. However you can only drive on duty if you have one.

And yes you need a full clean licence to undergo a car course.

You do not need a full motorcycle licence to do the Garda Motorcycle Course, however when you pass it (and it is very tough) you are entitled to add Category A to your full driving car licence.

Zambia

It would be simple enough to make a Full driving licence an entry requirement don't bother applying if you dont have one.

AGS should know by now they have a huge selection pool of candidates. they should have them upskill themselves before even applying. Beats having to train them later.

Anto123

Originally Posted by foreign
I would be very suprised if there was anybody driving in the job, on duty, who did not hold a licence.

Originally Posted by Chief---
There is no legal requirement to hold a licence. However you can only drive on duty if you have one.

The guy in the article was on duty when he killed the woman.

I'm guessing from your guys' reactions that this is very much the exception to the rule?

I agree with you Zambia - making a full license an entry requirement would be an easy way to close this loophole, and would save training down the line.

Turner

Any person driving a patrol car on duty has to have a full licence.

The law says otherwise, but trust me you are only allowed drive after your full clean licence has been checked out.

Leo Demidov

Chief--- wrote: »

Any person driving a patrol car on duty has to have a full licence.

The law says otherwise, but trust me you are only allowed drive after your full clean licence has been checked out.

Just a query, does the licence have to be "clean" or is there a certain tolerance.

Zambia

My reading of the article was he was on Duty , driving to court in his own personnal vehicle.

However if he had no licence he must have driven said vehicle to work. I doubt its a unfair assumption if he owned a vehicle he was driving it. Driving a vehicle without a valid licence for this amount of time. Is a blatant disregard for basic law.

Cases like these create the impression that Garda are allowed live by another set of laws. As harsh as it sounds I would have taken his job for this offence. Never mind the fact that he hit someone.

Shield

Zambia232 wrote: »

My reading of the article was he was on Duty , driving to court in his own personnal vehicle.

However if he had no licence he must have driven said vehicle to work. I doubt its a unfair assumption if he owned a vehicle he was driving it. Driving a vehicle without a valid licence for this amount of time. Is a blatant disregard for basic law.

Cases like these create the impression that Garda are allowed live by another set of laws. As harsh as it sounds I would have taken his job for this offence. Never mind the fact that he hit someone.

How is it a blatant disregard for basic law when the article clearly states he was on duty, and: "Under current legislation, there is no requirement for a garda to hold a driver’s licence while driving a “mechanically propelled vehicle” in the course of his or her duties, the inquest was told."

He drove in a bus lane which he's also entitled to do as he was on duty.

Never minding the fact that he hit someone, why on earth would you have his job in this instance for acting within the law?