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

Speed camera fun....

  • 02-12-2010 11:34am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,822 ✭✭✭✭


    ....now here's a bit of thinking outside the box. RSA take note.

    I'd sign up - would you ?

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



«1

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 816 ✭✭✭Opinicus


    Brilliant!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Excellent.

    Thanks.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 204 ✭✭mecanoman


    Brilliant stuff


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,220 ✭✭✭✭biko


    Great idea!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 782 ✭✭✭Cunning Alias


    That is fantastic. I would love if they did that here.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,461 ✭✭✭--Kaiser--


    If it's encouraging people to look at their speedometers rather than the road then I think it's a bad idea


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,210 ✭✭✭argosy2006


    --Kaiser-- wrote: »
    If it's encouraging people to look at their speedometers rather than the road then I think it's a bad idea


    Their there to be looked at in all fairness, thats why their in cars, u glance at them,


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    thats a brilliant idea..........

    and i would say it works... somebody needs to email that to the RSA


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,463 ✭✭✭run_Forrest_run


    very good little idea but not a chance of it happening here, I can see the strikes and protests by the people charged for handling the speed limits on our roads having to do something that deviates from their defined job description :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    Forget the lottery, the Government needs all the money it can get to pay off the IMF. :mad:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,553 ✭✭✭murphyebass


    Sounds like a great idea in theory but wont happen due to the Goverments eh "relationship" with the IMF.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 23,243 Mod ✭✭✭✭godtabh


    How much money was in the pot? Seems a vital part of the story


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Depends on what the aim of the lottery scheme would be.

    Big jackpots the best stimulus for participation in the National Lottery.

    But since the purpose of this scheme is to encourage/reward compliance then maybe a larger number of smaller payouts would be better.

    I don't know -- perhaps the chance of winning a single big prize has more appeal in all lotteries...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 827 ✭✭✭VinnyTGM


    It would definitely encourage people to drive under the limits, who doesn't like free money.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    I can't see the video, but are we talking about a position where if you get caught, you are entered a lottery and your fine might be 100 to 1,0000,000 euros? :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,282 ✭✭✭BlackWizard


    Nope!

    There is a pot created from all those caught speeding.

    The money is then given away in a type of lotto. All cars that passed the camera and were not speeding are entered into the draw to win the pot.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,822 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    Victor wrote: »
    I can't see the video,

    ..eh ? A mod, 50k posts.....and you can't see a YouTube video ? Eh ? :confused:

    On another note: my SO has just informed me traffic will increase. People will cruise, just to get their pick taken/entry into the lotto.

    Damn. There's always One, isn't there ? :p

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    All cars that passed the camera and were not speeding are entered into the draw to win the pot.


    Not speeding!?

    So they're just a shower of boring old do-gooders, probably tootling along barely above walking speed in the type of uncool car even your old codger of a Dad wouldn't be seen dead in. Such smarmy gits don't deserve any kind of reward.

    And so on etc... (:rolleyes:)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,158 ✭✭✭✭Berty


    3.5 years.
    2 Specialist advisory companies.
    European Tender.
    Purchase of equipment.
    Change of mind.
    Storage of equipment.
    Bills for storage of equipment.
    More REAL speed cameras to pay for storage of lottery cameras.

    Basically more money for "Traffic Solutions".


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    galwaytt wrote: »
    traffic will increase. People will cruise, just to get their pick taken/entry into the lotto.



    You have a point there.

    In which case, a large jackpot would not be the way to go.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,262 ✭✭✭Vertakill


    galwaytt wrote: »
    ..eh ? A mod, 50k posts.....and you can't see a YouTube video ? Eh ? :confused:

    I'm assuming Victor is in work maybe?
    galwaytt wrote: »
    On another note: my SO has just informed me traffic will increase. People will cruise, just to get their pick taken/entry into the lotto.

    Damn. There's always One, isn't there ? :p

    The traffic may increase but if it's made public knowledge that the cars are only entered into the draw once, as opposed to however many times they drive by the camera... then that'd negate that issue.

    Also, even if the 'lottery winner' gets only say.. 10% and the rest goes to the government. That would be incentive enough I think.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,822 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    Vertakill wrote: »
    I'm assuming Victor is in work maybe?
    I'm only slagging -ok Victor ? :)

    Vertakill wrote: »
    The traffic may increase but if it's made public knowledge that the cars are only entered into the draw once, as opposed to however many times they drive by the camera... then that'd negate that issue.

    Also, even if the 'lottery winner' gets only say.. 10% and the rest goes to the government. That would be incentive enough I think.
    Yeah, I know, it'd be easy to control really, but trust an Irish person to try and think of a way to shorten the odds.......:p

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    galwaytt wrote: »
    trust an Irish person to try and think of a way to shorten the odds.......:p


    Yes, and a syndicate would be formed within minutes... :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,822 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    Berty wrote: »
    3.5 years.
    2 Specialist advisory companies.
    European Tender.
    Purchase of equipment.
    Change of mind.
    Storage of equipment.
    Bills for storage of equipment.
    More REAL speed cameras to pay for storage of lottery cameras.

    Basically more money for "Traffic Solutions".

    Actually, no: none of the above. There's no reason they can't implement the policy using the existing camera's. Use the campaign as an inclusive one, to engage with motorists, positively, rather than goad and condescend to them, as current campaigns to.

    What 'we' do with the fines is our business, it has nothing to do with the EU. If we want to give some of it back to 'good citizens', then that's down to us.

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 908 ✭✭✭Overature


    hells yeah


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    This would only work with advertising so people new what was going on. I wonder how much that cost them ?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 147 ✭✭conor052001


    This would only work with advertising so people new what was going on. I wonder how much that cost them ?

    I'm sure sending a press release to media outlets would be enough to get people talking


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,694 ✭✭✭✭drunkmonkey


    This should be no problem to start here as it's all about reducing speed and not revenue collection. Just like out Go Safe vans.


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 7,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭Yakult


    Great idea, but I cant imagine the government given that money to anyone but themselves despite saying its not a revenue generator.
    --Kaiser-- wrote: »
    If it's encouraging people to look at their speedometers rather than the road then I think it's a bad idea

    Thats happening anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭Caliden


    As if they would give away all the money they make from speeders.
    Great idea but the government is too greedy


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,273 ✭✭✭twowheelsonly


    --Kaiser-- wrote: »
    If it's encouraging people to look at their speedometers rather than the road then I think it's a bad idea

    1 ; You're supposed to monitor your speed at all times...
    2 ; What's the first thing that people do when they see a speed camera anyway!!

    I think it's brilliant!!!
    Getting speeding fines 'looked after' could become a thing of the past too.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,001 ✭✭✭✭opinion guy


    galwaytt wrote: »
    What 'we' do with the fines is our business, it has nothing to do with the EU. If we want to give some of it back to 'good citizens', then that's down to us.

    Um...IMF...ECB....faustian deal....all of that......so no its not down to us anymore.....

    --Kaiser-- wrote: »
    If it's encouraging people to look at their speedometers rather than the road then I think it's a bad idea

    I actually agree with this. Speed cameras always make me overcheck my speedo and thus spend less attention to the road


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,461 ✭✭✭--Kaiser--


    1 ; You're supposed to monitor your speed at all times...
    2 ; What's the first thing that people do when they see a speed camera anyway!!

    I think it's brilliant!!!
    Getting speeding fines 'looked after' could become a thing of the past too.

    At all times? No, you're supposed to spend most of the time looking at the road actually.

    My point is that, because they could possibly win money, people will tend to keep looking at their speedometer rather than the road to ensure they stay below the speed limit, thus increasing the likelihood of an accident, or else people will drive significantly (around 10 kph) below the speed limit, thus affecting traffic flow.

    Either way, I don't think it's a good idea.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    R_H_C_P wrote: »
    Great idea, but I cant imagine the government given that money to anyone but themselves despite saying its not a revenue generator.
    The introduction of widespread speed cameras tends to be profitable for the first 6-12 months, but after that is loss making or about breaks even.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭limklad


    galwaytt wrote: »
    ....now here's a bit of thinking outside the box. RSA take note.

    I'd sign up - would you ?

    While It is a brillant idea, I doubt it very much that RSA will not adopt it, It would be way outside their cosy narrow minded box.
    They should put one of these at Pedestrians crossings and punish drivers there and reward good drivers. We would be in fantasyland if the RSA did that. Disneyland/Disney world/Eurodisney would apply it before the RSA would.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭limklad


    Victor wrote: »
    The introduction of widespread speed cameras tends to be profitable for the first 6-12 months, but after that is loss making or about breaks even.
    Increase the fines to compensate, But I doubt that the prize is too large to succeed. If it works in a lottery type prize therefore You get a sample amount depending on fines collected at that point within that period. There will never be 100% compliance to speed limits. There will always be the ignorant, arrogance and don't care drivers who will always break speed limits, therefore it will be a win-win for Enforcement authorities and good drivers. But saying that there should be a limit on the top prize to keep the traffic volumes low, for example if prize is x amount then increase the number of individuals prized that month/week and on winning the lottery you are exempt on future lottery prizes for the next X lotteries.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,461 ✭✭✭--Kaiser--


    limklad wrote: »
    Increase the fines to compensate, But I doubt that the prize is too large to succeed. If it works in a lottery type prize therefore You get a sample amount depending on fines collected at that point within that period. There will never be 100% compliance to speed limits. There will always be the ignorant, arrogance and don't care drivers who will always break speed limits, therefore it will be a win-win for Enforcement authorities and good drivers. But saying that there should be a limit on the top prize to keep the traffic volumes low, for example if prize is x amount then increase the number of individuals prized that month/week and on winning the lottery you are exempt on future lottery prizes for the next X lotteries.

    This is the wrong way of going about reducing traffic accidents. The British Road Traffic Authority puts speeding as a major cause of less than 5% of accidents. The Irish NRA puts speeding as a cause of only 20% of accidents. Penalizing someone going 5 KPH over a 25KPH speed limit is not going to stop any accidents.

    I admit I speed. I'll go at 120 kph on a dual carriageway if the conditions are good. But I won't drive 100 kph around bends on country roads (which could well be well be the legal limit, depending on the road). People need to cop on and take driving seriously, pay attention to the road, drive at an appropriate speed for the road and conditions, be aware of possible hazards at all times, etc.....

    A huge factor for road fatalities (in this country at least) is drink driving. I'd say about 70% of the crashes happen at the weekend, at night, when there are much less cars on the road. I'd don't think it would be wildly inaccurate to say a significant percentage of those crashes are caused by impairment due to drink and drugs, yet how many times have I been breathalysed in the five years I've been driving in this country? You guessed it, none.

    The above scheme addresses none of the factors I've mentioned.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    just for the record, the RSA point of view is
    RSA launched the Mess and Crash campaign to highlight the danger of speeding: Every time human error causes a road collision it is the speed of the vehicles which determines the outcome – whether someone lives or dies, or is maimed for life.
    Speed is directly killing an average of 141 people a year in Ireland, but impacting over 500 road deaths a year, making speed the biggest contributing factor to road deaths in Ireland.
    But research shows that a reduction in speed leads to a reduction in collisions. "We are committed to making our roads safer," says Assistant Chief Constable Roy Toner. "In the first three years of the Safety Camera Scheme, there has been a 41% reduction in the number of fatal or serious injury collisions."

    and
    stats.png


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,461 ✭✭✭--Kaiser--


    ^^^^
    Obviously if everyone drove at 5 kph then there would be close to zero fatalities, but the whole point of automotive transport is getting places at a reasonable speed. My point is that the real cause of accidents - bad driving and bad roads - should be addressed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    --Kaiser-- wrote: »
    ^^^^
    Obviously if everyone drove at 5 kph then there would be close to zero fatalities, but the whole point of automotive transport is getting places at a reasonable speed. My point is that the real cause of accidents - bad driving and bad roads - should be addressed.

    Same old red herrings and misinformation.

    Which competent authority is proposing a general 5 kph speed limit?

    What is your definition of "reasonable" speed in the context of the legal obligation on motorists to drive within the lawfully-determined speed limit as well as generally driving with due care and attention?

    What research evidence can you point to that conclusively identifies bad driving and bad roads as the "real cause" of accidents?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,461 ✭✭✭--Kaiser--


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    What research evidence can you point to that conclusively identifies bad driving and bad roads as the "real cause" of accidents?

    Common sense, driving too fast in an inappropriate place is bad driving. Going above the speed limit on a motorway where all the cars are going the same way...not so much.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    --Kaiser-- wrote: »
    Common sense, driving too fast in an inappropriate place is bad driving. Going above the speed limit on a motorway where all the cars are going the same way...not so much.

    That doesn't answer the other two questions posed, nor does it go anywhere near substantiating your sweeping statement re "the real cause" of accidents.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 49 philkelly32


    defo a brilliant idea needs to be emailed to rsa


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,272 ✭✭✭✭Atomic Pineapple


    defo a brilliant idea needs to be emailed to rsa

    Email goes too fast for the RSA you need to send it via pigeon :D

    On the idea, it sounds cool in general but is likely to have serious flaws that aren't addressed, like people jamming on coming up to it, people driving round and round to enter as much as possible, it looks like a distraction etc... but at least it shows show outside the box thinking.

    And seeing as its outside the box the RSA will just be confused by it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 893 ✭✭✭I.S.T.


    galwaytt wrote: »
    ....now here's a bit of thinking outside the box. RSA take note.

    I'd sign up - would you ?


    Nice idea, but there are some flaws as other have pointed out.

    The most sensible thing they could do to prove speed cameras are not a money making scam is remove the fine aspect of a speeding offense. So when someone gets caught speeding they just get penalty points. There is no need for a fine whatsoever, penalty points are a big enough deterrant.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,822 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    robtri wrote: »
    just for the record, the RSA point of view is

    "RSA launched the Mess and Crash campaign to highlight the danger of speeding: Every time human error causes a road collision it is the speed of the vehicles which determines the outcome – whether someone lives or dies, or is maimed for life.
    Speed is directly killing an average of 141 people a year in Ireland, but impacting over 500 road deaths a year, making speed the biggest contributing factor to road deaths in Ireland.
    But research shows that a reduction in speed leads to a reduction in collisions. "We are committed to making our roads safer," says Assistant Chief Constable Roy Toner. "In the first three years of the Safety Camera Scheme, there has been a 41% reduction in the number of fatal or serious injury collisions."

    Complete nonsense - not you Robtri, but the link you quote. The fault with the above is the word 'speed'. As pointed out, 5km/h is a "speed". It is not the term as we use it generally around here, which is, specifically "exceeding the legally posted limit". This is a deliberate act - actually, imho, policy - of the RSA, as it deliberately obfuscates the issue, allowing them to add "A Speed" + "Breaking the legally posted Speed Limit" = "Speed Kills". And that equation, is completely false.

    Given that, after an RTA, the GTC forensic guys work out the speeds involved, and include them in data, they quite often quote "exceeding the SAFE limit" - this is NOT the "legally posted limited". So, they can attribute a crash at 15kp/h into this category, and the RSA et al conveniently sweep this into the "speed" bin, as it's used to justify not only policy, but, frankly money. If they couldn't make speed the 'bad boy' they wouldn't be given the budget, you see.............aaahhh.....

    edit 14:14hrs - I meant to add: they do this because, if you were to subtract all those accidents where they exceeded the posted limit, from the no of 'speed' accidents, the resultant much smaller number, would give lie to all that they profess.....[/edit]

    The RSA's own figures for 'speed' as cause of accident is similarly tiny - it's actually between 5% and 10% iirc (don't have the no's to hand.....)

    Now, the comment on speed camera's above........?....We Have An App Thread for That........already :D But I would make this quick point: the safest county in the UK is the one that............never had any speed camera's, and........if they are so fantastic......why is the UK switching them off ? Easy.........the money trail has gone cold.

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,378 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    robtri wrote: »
    just for the record, the RSA point of view is



    and
    stats.png

    Based on those stats it's obvious that the only solution is to give male drivers Hormone Replacement Therapy.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,822 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    Based on those stats it's obvious that the only solution is to give male drivers Hormone Replacement Therapy.

    ...or, someone to work their Hormone's on.....:D :D

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    galwaytt wrote: »
    The fault with the above is the word 'speed'. As pointed out, 5km/h is a "speed". It is not the term as we use it generally around here, which is, specifically "exceeding the legally posted limit". This is a deliberate act - actually, imho, policy - of the RSA, as it deliberately obfuscates the issue, allowing them to add "A Speed" + "Breaking the legally posted Speed Limit" = "Speed Kills". And that equation, is completely false.

    Given that, after an RTA, the GTC forensic guys work out the speeds involved, and include them in data, they quite often quote "exceeding the SAFE limit" - this is NOT the "legally posted limited". So, they can attribute a crash at 15kp/h into this category, and the RSA et al conveniently sweep this into the "speed" bin, as it's used to justify not only policy, but, frankly money. If they couldn't make speed the 'bad boy' they wouldn't be given the budget, you see.............aaahhh.....
    --Kaiser-- wrote: »
    Penalizing someone going 5 KPH over a 25KPH speed limit is not going to stop any accidents.

    .../...

    I admit I speed.

    You'd need a very large slurry pit to contain the river of bilge being spouted regarding speed cameras in this forum.

    I'm aware that there's a speed camera mega-thread, but since the same old rubbish is being recycled, rehashed and regurgitated here I may as well respond.

    Please cite the direct evidence -- eg RSA/Garda policy documents -- which shows that the competent authorities are attributing any significant level of death and injury on our roads to speeds in the range 5-25 kph, as implied above.

    Evidence is what counts, but since emotive rhetoric and fanciful speculation are still fashionable in this forum, here's what I imagine is the 'thought' process behind all this anti speed camera guff.

    I like cars.
    I like fast cars especially.
    I like my car.
    I like driving fast in my car.
    I like to believe that I can drive safely at high speed when I choose to do so.
    I like to believe that I may even be one of those "excellent drivers in this country who could thread a needle at twice the speed limit".
    I like to believe that road accidents are mainly caused by bad drivers and bad roads.
    I like to believe that speed cameras are unfair because they "penalise" good fast drivers and ignore bad slow drivers.
    I like to believe that speed cameras are just another tax in the NAMA/IMF era.
    I don't like paying extra tax.
    Ergo, I don't like speed cameras.

    Mix together all of the above, add an extra dollop of faulty thinking and anti government resentment, and you have the makings of a Boards thread on the topic of speed cameras.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    One problem. People will game the system and make other people speed by vandalising speed limit signs.
    --Kaiser-- wrote: »
    Common sense
    They say its not so common. :)


  • Advertisement
Advertisement