Are there any "low profile" Garda cars? (no lightbars)?

Hey all,


Was just mooching about online, and I came across a few images of lightbar-less Police cars and such, and I noticed that I never seen a lightbar-less, but marked, Garda car.













Do they exist?

msg11

There are a few marked small van's with no lightbar ..

Rescue117

They are known in the US as "flat-tops".

donvito99

Here ya go...

gardatrafficop

Above picture looks like Patricks day in Clonmel Co Tipp.

donvito99

donvito99 wrote: »

Here ya go...

Is that real? Or edited? Looks to be a slight haziness above the car, so I'm not sure.



If real, though, then that's pretty cool. I've seen such before and think it looks pretty unique. I'm surprised they aren't more common about the place.

Irish_polizei

Rescue117 wrote: »

They are known in the US as "flat-tops".

No I think there "slick tops" but thats neither here nor there :pac:...we'll not fall out over it :P

donvito99 wrote: »

Here ya go...

And no... as KKV said thats photo-shopped....it defeats the purpose of having a marked car anyway.... what ever notion they have in the US of having marked slick tops beats me....

Terrontress

A large factor in not marking a vehicle is the cost.

How much do the blues and siren cost compared to the markings?

I'd imagine that the blues are less expensive and can be salvaged easily from a spent car. Reflective markings need to be tailored to a specific vehicle whereas single type lightbars can be used on numerous vehicles.

So the chances are that you'd see an unmarked car with blues before you would see a marked car with no blues.

eroo

Irish_polizei wrote: »

And no... as KKV said thats photo-shopped....it defeats the purpose of having a marked car anyway.... what ever notion they have in the US of having marked slick tops beats me....

+1

I think it just looks like the cars are unfinished!

Delancey

Well done for spotting that was photoshopped KKV - dunno how some people spot it a mile off , me - I'm just gullible

Irish_polizei

Irish_polizei wrote: »

what ever notion they have in the US of having marked slick tops beats me....

Whilst I obviously don't know the reasoning, I would assume that the theory behind them is that when you stop and look at the car, it is clearly a Police car and there's no doubting that whatsoever, but if you're driving and it's amidst a sea of cars travelling on a road, it would be fairly disguised, as there is no lightbar popping up above the height of other cars.


If you're driving along and they wave you over to the side of the road, you'll know they're genuine, whereas with an unmarked car, there can sometimes be iffy circumstances when people might not feel safe stopping (I believe there was a thread on here recently about someone who didn't stop for what he believes could have been an unmarked car).


And ye're all correct, they're not called Low Profile cars at all. That name was just stuck on my head when making the thread. I believe "low profile" is a clear/transparent lightbar? I'm not the best with the terminology.

Hooch

Irish_polizei wrote: »

.it defeats the purpose of having a marked car anyway.... what ever notion they have in the US of having marked slick tops beats me....

I disagree.......many a time I have often cursed the light bars on marked cars......sitting in traffic waiting for a car to come by......they spot the light bar and turn off a side street........and were stuck in traffic.

Also handy for RTA offences like seat belt and mobile phone. I think they would be a great idea here......once there is plenty blue lights on the front windscreen/grill.

Irish_polizei

On second proper non prejudice indepth thoughts ye are all right......it wouldnt be a bad idea.....but its like suiting up and forgetting to wear your trousers though....

eroo

nice guy always wrote: »

Also handy for RTA offences like seat belt and mobile phone. I think they would be a great idea here......once there is plenty blue lights on the front windscreen/grill.

Just admit it.. you want a marked car with no lightbar, and just the single attachable blue light that you can pop up on the roof whilst adjusting your sunglasses!?

The most ridiculous thing is having the lightbar on when on patrol. It merely serves to warn people of your presence, and anyone commiting an offence under RTA, or in some cases POA, can see you coming before you see them!

eroo

eroo wrote: »

The most ridiculous thing is having the lightbar on when on patrol. It merely serves to warn people of your presence, and anyone commiting an offence under RTA, or in some cases POA, can see you coming before you see them!

It also serves to show people that you are on patrol in an area. You could drive an un-marked car through an area all day and people will say they never see the gardaí. Drive a marked one through once and it's a different story.

And while we all want to detect crime it's even better when no crime occurs.

Terrontress

Am I correct in thinking that under the relevant legislation, there is no difference between reflective markings on a vehicle and lights?

Irish_polizei

foreign wrote: »

It also serves to show people that you are on patrol in an area. You could drive an un-marked car through an area all day and people will say they never see the gardaí. Drive a marked one through once and it's a different story.

And while we all want to detect crime it's even better when no crime occurs.

Yeh thats the other thing too this high vis policing...Im sure the seniors could through up a few arguments against it fairly quickly if they wanted.....it would be all down to expense at the end of the day :rolleyes:

foreign

foreign wrote: »

It also serves to show people that you are on patrol in an area. You could drive an un-marked car through an area all day and people will say they never see the gardaí. Drive a marked one through once and it's a different story.

And while we all want to detect crime it's even better when no crime occurs.

I don't really think that's a great argument, to be honest.

A Garda car is easy enough to spot without it's lightbar on, with the lights turned on, you're just giving people a better chance to see you than they would have had.


If Scumbag A is going to break into a building, or smash up a car, etc. and he's about to start off his scumbag activities, but he sees a blue halo coming down the road, he's not going to proceed to break in or damage anything. He will just sit aside and wait until the Gardaì have passed him by. He also then knows that a Garda car has just passed by the area, and it's now quite unlikely there's gonna be another one for a while.


He can now freely go along and do some damage.


If someone's going to break the law, they're going to do it regardless of whether or not the Gardaì have their lights on. I'd rather see someone smash up a car, and have a Garda car pull up beside them during it, than have the car be damaged after a Garda car has already passed through an area.

I don't believe that a light bar being turned on prevents crime in any way at all.

Rialtas

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't believe that a light bar being turned on prevents crime in any way at all.

I'd say we're talking about different policing scenarios here. The lit up light bars are useful in public order situations, i.e. Washington Street at 2am on a Friday night. They add to the high - profile surge you'd often see at the weekends

They're probably redundant out on a country road with low ditches at 4am on a Friday night when you're trying to intercept drink drivers. Even the old light bars with the GARDA backlit with red had a similar nullifying effect in the country.

Anyway I thought it was just the Federal Signal bars that were introduced in 2001 that had the function? I never see the newer Haztec ones lit up.

goldie fish

Traffic corps in monaghan had a mondeo without a lightbar for a while. Full markings, no lightbar, just screen mounted strobes.(before the corner strobes were introduced).

It made sense at the time. Discreet for traffic, yet at the same time clearly identifiable, given the "situation" on the border.
It even had a roof number.

ILA

When I was in America, it was fairly common to see "slick tops" which were basically marked cars without a light-bar but with low profile lights on the front. Have to say that they were quite effective and were awkward to spot, generally parked under overpass bridges on the Freeway.

Got nabbed by one once as well. Very similiar to this type:

sdanseo

Terrontress wrote: »

Am I correct in thinking that under the relevant legislation, there is no difference between reflective markings on a vehicle and lights?

A Garda car is a Garda car. Could be painted bright pink and the law would see no difference.

I was under the impression slicktops in the US were also used to save fuel economy? although granted in traffic you can't tell the difference unless you're right in front of or behind them so obvious benefits there too.

Mise thinks they look silly anyway.

sdonn

sdonn wrote: »

A Garda car is a Garda car. Could be painted bright pink and the law would see no difference.

I could be taking his post completely wrongly, which is why i didn't reply to it, but I think he means from a safety standpoint?

ie; if you have a bicycle with no lights, is it ok to just wear a reflective jacket.

So the scenario that ran through my head when I read his post was; If you plough into a Garda car parked on a motorway at a crash scene, for example, can you claim you didn't see it, as it had no flashing lightbar.

Tango November.

I was out and about today and I saw a mondeo with markings on the boot and only on the doors and not over the wheel arches and garda was on the bonnet.

The light bar had Garda wrote in tiny writing it also had the red's so i presumed it was traffic there was no aerials and the men in it looked the part .

I also saw one of the new opels they lit up prity well but the siern is brutal.


TN.

Irish_polizei

Tango November. wrote: »

I was out and about today and I saw a mondeo with markings on the boot and only on the doors and not over the wheel arches and garda was on the bonnet.

The light bar had Garda wrote in tiny writing it also had the red's so i presumed it was traffic there was no aerials and the men in it looked the part .

I also saw one of the new opels they lit up prity well but the siern is brutal.


TN.

Yeh no doubt that mondeo was after being repaired...if ye put any kind of force on them at all they dint badly very easy......

goldie fish

Yeah, old pattern lightbar(tiny writing) and the car is after a knock. It was not uncommon for some districts to not bother redoing the stripe, they were getting rammed so often.

Manic Moran

Deleted User wrote: »

Whilst I obviously don't know the reasoning, I would assume that the theory behind them is that when you stop and look at the car, it is clearly a Police car and there's no doubting that whatsoever, but if you're driving and it's amidst a sea of cars travelling on a road, it would be fairly disguised, as there is no lightbar popping up above the height of other cars.


If you're driving along and they wave you over to the side of the road, you'll know they're genuine, whereas with an unmarked car, there can sometimes be iffy circumstances when people might not feel safe stopping (I believe there was a thread on here recently about someone who didn't stop for what he believes could have been an unmarked car).

That's about the size of it. The all-white slick-top CHP Chargers are quite nasty, as the Charger is a little less distinctly 'police' than the Crown Vics: You have to start looking for antennae or license plates and need to be a bit closer for that.

Indeed, there are some slick-top cars with very low-vis markings that only show up when reflecting lights or at certain angles/distances. Known as 'stealth' cruisers.





There are also some cost issues, slick-tops obviously give less drag, and less prone to damage.

And ye're all correct, they're not called Low Profile cars at all. That name was just stuck on my head when making the thread. I believe "low profile" is a clear/transparent lightbar? I'm not the best with the terminology.

This would be a low-profile light bar.


NTM

sdanseo

ILA wrote: »

When I was in America, it was fairly common to see "slick tops" which were basically marked cars without a light-bar but with low profile lights on the front. Have to say that they were quite effective and were awkward to spot, generally parked under overpass bridges on the Freeway.

Got nabbed by one once as well. Very similiar to this type:

Is that a siren mounted on the front bullbar? What a silly place to put it, gonna be broken with a small knock - and the CHP seem to do a lot of PITing

Corcioch

sdonn wrote: »

Is that a siren mounted on the front bullbar? What a silly place to put it, gonna be broken with a small knock - and the CHP seem to do a lot of PITing

Where else would you put it???


It is protected there by bull bars.

Hooch

Corcioch wrote: »

Where else would you put it???


It is protected there by bull bars.

And its much MUCH better to be outside rather than behind an engine block.

Manic Moran

It would be kindof muffled if you kept it behind the engine block under the hood, wouldn't it? I'm thinking not so much for the siren sound as much as the 'megaphone' function.

NTM

charlemont

donvito99 wrote: »

Here ya go...

clonmel ...i can make out the windows of an apartment i once lived in...

Terrontress

Deleted User wrote: »

I could be taking his post completely wrongly, which is why i didn't reply to it, but I think he means from a safety standpoint?

ie; if you have a bicycle with no lights, is it ok to just wear a reflective jacket.

So the scenario that ran through my head when I read his post was; If you plough into a Garda car parked on a motorway at a crash scene, for example, can you claim you didn't see it, as it had no flashing lightbar.

What I meant was that if you put a reflective marking on a vehicle the law sees it as no different than if you had put a light.

While private security firms may put reflective markings on their vehicles, this is illegal as, in effect, Gardai markings are light emitting fixtures and private cars may only have specified colours in specified places.

I suppose I can best explain it by saying that it would be illegal to affix a standard red rear reflector to the front of your car.

In spite of all this, there are still plenty of jokers with all colours of lights and LEDs on ther vehicles, never mind reflective material.

source

It's not light emitting, it's light reacting material, In other words the high visibility markings need the application of light to make them work, ie they react to light.

Whereas an LED or regular bulb is light emitting.

sdanseo

Terrontress wrote: »

While private security firms may put reflective markings on their vehicles, this is illegal as, in effect, Gardai markings are light emitting fixtures and private cars may only have specified colours in specified places.

I suppose I can best explain it by saying that it would be illegal to affix a standard red rear reflector to the front of your car.

Can you substantiate that? I think it's rubbish although I stand to be corrected.

Corcioch

sdonn wrote: »

Can you substantiate that? I think it's rubbish although I stand to be corrected.

Have a look at the Construction, Equipment & Use of Vehicle Regulations under the road traffic act.

the laws relating to what light can and cannot be exhibited on the front and rear of a car/ van/ truck etc etc are very exact and limited.

sdanseo

Corcioch wrote: »

Have a look at the Construction, Equipment & Use of Vehicle Regulations under the road traffic act.

the laws relating to what light can and cannot be exhibited on the front and rear of a car/ van/ truck etc etc are very exact and limited.

Yes - but as was noted above, reflective materials are not lights.

Terrontress

sdonn wrote: »

Can you substantiate that? I think it's rubbish although I stand to be corrected.

How articulate! I bet you are a regular down at the local debating society.

I cannot substantiate it but would ask any serving member if they would stop a driver with a full width mirror on the front of their vehicle blinding motorists or would the blame lie with the passive party as they are emitting the light?

Would you allow a vehicle with reflective yellow and blue battenburg markings proceed?

Spartan09

Terrontress wrote: »

How articulate! I bet you are a regular down at the local debating society.

I cannot substantiate it but would ask any serving member if they would stop a driver with a full width mirror on the front of their vehicle blinding motorists or would the blame lie with the passive party as they are emitting the light?

Would you allow a vehicle with reflective yellow and blue battenburg markings proceed?

I would guess from your posts that you're not a regular debater yourself as you're basically asking the opposing side of the debate to make your points for you. Rather an obscure point to make re the full width mirror on the front of a car, have you ever heard of that occurring, no of course not but you already knew that. If a vehicle had reflective yellow and blue battenbutg markings but did not in any place claim to be a garda vehicle, ie by having the words Garda written on it, it could be argued that the battenburg markings were a safety mechanism.

I've been intrigued by this topic for sometime now and the argument of not pulling over for a car with blues on. I asked 24 friends / relatives if they would pull over for a car with no lightbars but with blue alternating lights in the front grill / front windscreen and 24/24 stated they would as they would make the reasonable presumption that the car was a Garda car and they wished to speak with them. As previous posters have stated on a number of occasions, if you're willing to take the chance of driving on and not stopping - best of luck.

challengemaster

sdonn wrote: »

A Garda car is a Garda car. Could be painted bright pink and the law would see no difference.

Actually, painting them pink would be a good idea....IIRC the SAS paint their vehicles pink for camouflage reasons - it's next near impossible to spot in complete darkness.

Terrontress

Spartan09 wrote: »

I would guess from your posts that you're not a regular debater yourself as you're basically asking the opposing side of the debate to make your points for you. Rather an obscure point to make re the full width mirror on the front of a car, have you ever heard of that occurring, no of course not but you already knew that. If a vehicle had reflective yellow and blue battenbutg markings but did not in any place claim to be a garda vehicle, ie by having the words Garda written on it, it could be argued that the battenburg markings were a safety mechanism.

I've been intrigued by this topic for sometime now and the argument of not pulling over for a car with blues on. I asked 24 friends / relatives if they would pull over for a car with no lightbars but with blue alternating lights in the front grill / front windscreen and 24/24 stated they would as they would make the reasonable presumption that the car was a Garda car and they wished to speak with them. As previous posters have stated on a number of occasions, if you're willing to take the chance of driving on and not stopping - best of luck.

What are you bringing this up again for!?! Read the beneath very carefully

Firstly: http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68253774&postcount=68

Secondly: There are very strict laws as to which lights can be placed at which point on a vehicle. A reflective marking has the same function in law as a light. A red reflector on the front of a vehicle is as illegal as a red light. End of story.

sdanseo

Terrontress wrote: »

How articulate! I bet you are a regular down at the local debating society.

I cannot substantiate it but would ask any serving member if they would stop a driver with a full width mirror on the front of their vehicle blinding motorists or would the blame lie with the passive party as they are emitting the light?

Would you allow a vehicle with reflective yellow and blue battenburg markings proceed?

If I was a Garda, I'd be stopping said vehicle and ascertaining whether or not the driver was attempting to impersonate a Garda. The markings would only be dangerous to others, and in my interpretation would only contravene the law, if the intention was to make others think the car belonged to AGS.

That said, by sticking a couple of non functional LEDs to the bumpers and adding a aerial or two one could never be overtaken again if driving the right type of vehicle, would that be illegal too I wonder? :P

Rialtas

challengemaster wrote: »

Actually, painting them pink would be a good idea....IIRC the SAS paint their vehicles pink for camouflage reasons - it's next near impossible to spot in complete darkness.

Off topic, but I'm sure the pink Land Rovers were only around in Gulf War I and the reason for it was they were meant to blend into the desert sands. That crowd are more likely to be driving clapped out land cruisers to blend in these days. Apologies, totally off topic.

Shield

Warning issued. On this forum we attack the post, not the poster.

No further comment will be permitted on this post as it has received moderator action.

Back on topic please.

Terrontress wrote: »

How articulate! I bet you are a regular down at the local debating society.

goldie fish

sdonn wrote: »

If I was a Garda, I'd be stopping said vehicle and ascertaining whether or not the driver was attempting to impersonate a Garda. The markings would only be dangerous to others, and in my interpretation would only contravene the law, if the intention was to make others think the car belonged to AGS.

That said, by sticking a couple of non functional LEDs to the bumpers and adding a aerial or two one could never be overtaken again if driving the right type of vehicle, would that be illegal too I wonder? :P

Coastguard Jeeps?
Road maintenance?
Airport Police?

I know many motorcyclists have fitted LED strobes to their bikes for use when escorting cycle races etc.
Do you think this is illegal too?

Terrontress

goldie fish wrote: »

Coastguard Jeeps?
Road maintenance?
Airport Police?

I know many motorcyclists have fitted LED strobes to their bikes for use when escorting cycle races etc.
Do you think this is illegal too?

They have a dispensation under the law as emergency-vehicles. Vehicles which are causing or warning of a hazard can display a flashing or rotating yellow or amber light. I think perhaps one of the lights must be visible from 360 degrees to be legal.

The only light to be emitted from the side of your private vehicle, be it reflected (passive) or generated (active) is yellow.

If you look at a vehicle belonging to the AA, it would appear that they have a similar chevron marking to an emergency vehicle. In fact only the red element is reflective as you are not allowed a solid yellow active or passive light to emit from the rear of a non-emergency vehicle.

goldie fish

Terrontress wrote: »

They have a dispensation under the law as emergency-vehicles. Vehicles which are causing or warning of a hazard can display a flashing or rotating yellow or amber light. I think perhaps one of the lights must be visible from 360 degrees to be legal.

The only light to be emitted from the side of your private vehicle, be it reflected (passive) or generated (active) is yellow.

If you look at a vehicle belonging to the AA, it would appear that they have a similar chevron marking to an emergency vehicle. In fact only the red element is reflective as you are not allowed a solid yellow active or passive light to emit from the rear of a non-emergency vehicle.

I look forward to seeing this law of which you speak.

Corcioch

goldie fish wrote: »

Coastguard Jeeps?
Road maintenance?
Airport Police?

I know many motorcyclists have fitted LED strobes to their bikes for use when escorting cycle races etc.
Do you think this is illegal too?

It is illegal for those motorcyclists to do that indeed,

Coastgaurd are provided for under the Road Traffic Acts, Road Maintenence too, the yellow flashing lights . . .no idea about the Airport lads.

sdanseo

Terrontress wrote: »

They have a dispensation under the law as emergency-vehicles. Vehicles which are causing or warning of a hazard can display a flashing or rotating yellow or amber light. I think perhaps one of the lights must be visible from 360 degrees to be legal.



The only light to be emitted from the side of your private vehicle, be it reflected (passive) or generated (active) is yellow.



If you look at a vehicle belonging to the AA, it would appear that they have a similar chevron marking to an emergency vehicle. In fact only the red element is reflective as you are not allowed a solid yellow active or passive light to emit from the rear of a non-emergency vehicle.

Once again, PLEASE corroborate what you say by providing a source - I can't see that on the statute anywhere. In any event if it's actually a law (and it isn't) there would be literally thousands of breaches nationwide of which I see several a day, whether it be security companies, delivery vans etc. Almost every truck has a reflective chevron strip on some part of the side undercarriage protecting beams.

goldie fish wrote: »

Coastguard Jeeps?
Road maintenance?
Airport Police?

I know many motorcyclists have fitted LED strobes to their bikes for use when escorting cycle races etc.
Do you think this is illegal too?

I was being funny there. I'm on the side of people who stick whatever they want to their vehicles, once it's legal tbh.

As for Airport Police, they get powers as authorised officers (this has been done to death and back here). Road maintenance use amber as they're recovery / highway maintenance...and no I don't it is or should be illegal and never did and dunno where you got that impression.

You know all this though, you're a Garda are you not (going by your previous posts here)??

Corcioch wrote: »

It is illegal for those motorcyclists to do that indeed

I was under the impression that it's illegal to DISPLAY a light, not to have one fitted. In the RTA somewhere. There was a case posted here a while back where someone had an amber LED in their dashboard for use at a track day and was asked to remove it by a Garda (which the poster disputed) - but he was not prosecuted, fined etc etc.

Corcioch

sdonn wrote: »

I was under the impression that it's illegal to DISPLAY a light, not to have one fitted. In the RTA somewhere. There was a case posted here a while back where someone had an amber LED in their dashboard for use at a track day and was asked to remove it by a Garda (which the poster disputed) - but he was not prosecuted, fined etc etc.

You did not say to simply have one fitted . . .you said "use" . . . .here are your words below . . . .


I know many motorcyclists have fitted LED strobes to their bikes for use when escorting cycle races etc.
Do you think this is illegal too?

Does Using/ or the use of a light not involve its illumination?? Yes it does,

And it is illegal.

goldie fish

Corcioch wrote: »

You did not say to simply have one fitted . . .you said "use" . . . .here are your words below . . . .


I know many motorcyclists have fitted LED strobes to their bikes for use when escorting cycle races etc.
Do you think this is illegal too?

Does Using/ or the use of a light not involve its illumination?? Yes it does,

And it is illegal.

No doubt you have legislation that supports your affirmation?