RSA - Stop With Your Bloody Slogans And Watch This

Atomic Pineapple

Gophur wrote: »

The cold weather has shown that if you reduce the speed of traffic, lives will be saved. It is inconvertible. Look at the cold spell RTA stats, and you will see a huge effect from slowing people down.

Never mind the fact that there was less people on the roads traveling shorter distances. Well over 50% of people I know didn't drive during the snow, I would suggest that was a pattern repeated all over the country and would easily account for the drop in fatal accidents.

The RSA is more like a tea spoon trying to crack a nut than a sledgehammer, the issue is that I dont feel affected by it because they are not doing their job, they have no effect on boy racers at all and in my opinion the RSA is responsible for saving very few lives.

It will be interesting to see with €9 million taken out of road maintenance and no new roads being built or upgraded how the figures for road deaths stack up then.

Gophur

draffodx wrote: »

........Well over 50% of people I know didn't drive during the snow, I would suggest that was a pattern repeated all over the country and would easily account for the drop in fatal accidents.
..........

Really?

Using that logic the number of fatalities should have fallen by a similar proportion, but they didn't. Apart from the scumbags in Limerick, there were no fatalities.

Your theory doesn't wash. Is it because you are an advocate for allowing people drive at whatever speed they like?

The facts don't lie.

Atomic Pineapple

Gophur wrote: »

Really?

Using that logic the number of fatalities should have fallen by a similar proportion, but they didn't. Apart from the scumbags in Limerick, there were no fatalities.

What logic? What I stated was an observation. I never said it would equate to a fall in similar proportions but that taking it into account could be seen as a reason for the lack of fatalities just the same as you claim the lack of speed is the reason.

Gophur wrote: »

Your theory doesn't wash. Is it because you are an advocate for allowing people drive at whatever speed they like?

Neither does your theory that the slowdown is the reason behind a lack of fatalities, you fail to take into account other factors. I am not an advocate for allowing people to drive at whatever speed they like that would be incredibly irresponsible.

Anyway this thread is nothing to do with speed it is to do with the Irish tax payer paying for a service that is not up to scratch.

kippy

draffodx wrote: »

What logic? What I stated was an observation. I never said it would equate to a fall in similar proportions but that taking it into account could be seen as a reason for the lack of fatalities just the same as you claim the lack of speed is the reason.



Neither does your theory that the slowdown is the reason behind a lack of fatalities, you fail to take into account other factors. I am not an advocate for allowing people to drive at whatever speed they like that would be incredibly irresponsible.

Anyway this thread is nothing to do with speed it is to do with the Irish tax payer paying for a service that is not up to scratch.

I have no issues with people questioning the value for money of the RSA.
However, the issue I have is people being exceptionally blinkered in their questioning.
The premise here is that the TAC are doing a far better job over the past 20 years or so than the RSA in this country.

However, the very same reasons that you are saying the numbers of deaths on the roads are reducing here (outside of the control of the RSA), could be applied to Australia also.
I am sure bigger, better and safer roads have been built there as well in the period (cant back this up), am sure they use the same or similiar cars that have gotten safer.

Also, they have these things called speed limits over there as well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_in_Australia
They aint exactly advocating higher speed limits, and as you'll see if you read the piece, speed limits have been coming down in the 20 year period that is being discussed here.

draffodx

draffodx wrote: »

It will be interesting to see with €9 million taken out of road maintenance and no new roads being built or upgraded how the figures for road deaths stack up then.

Not really as it coincides with loads of folk emmigrating and also loads of other folk not being able to run their car due to wage cuts and job losses. In Cork City the amount of boy racers cruising around at night is much reduced compared to a year or two back.

Atomic Pineapple

kippy wrote: »

I have no issues with people questioning the value for money of the RSA.
However, the issue I have is people being exceptionally blinkered in their questioning.
The premise here is that the TAC are doing a far better job over the past 20 years or so than the RSA in this country.

However, the very same reasons that you are saying the numbers of deaths on the roads are reducing here (outside of the control of the RSA), could be applied to Australia also.
I am sure bigger, better and safer roads have been built there as well in the period (cant back this up), am sure they use the same or similiar cars that have gotten safer.

Also, they have these things called speed limits over there as well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_in_Australia
They aint exactly advocating higher speed limits, and as you'll see if you read the piece, speed limits have been coming down in the 20 year period that is being discussed here.

The issue is not to do with speeds or speed limits or other factors that should be taken into account when analysing the reduction of fatalities, its the issue that the RSA aren't doing a good enough job with their advertising campaigns, driver education and interacting positively with the highest risk group instead of negatively.

In this area it would appear the TAC have a better approach, it could be due to budget but it is clear the RSA could learn lessons from them. They could also look to the US where legal street races are held, and are policed by the traffic police who actively and positively promote it and even take part. Instead here you have the highest risk group demonised in public which leads to them being looked down on by the Gardai, not the way to get them to slow down or act responsible at all.

RoverJames wrote: »

Not really as it coincides with loads of folk emmigrating and also loads of other folk not being able to run their car due to wage cuts and job losses. In Cork City the amount of boy racers cruising around at night is much reduced compared to a year or two back.

Thats true but a year on year comparison might be closer than over a long period. We've been in the crapper properly for about a year now

kippy

draffodx wrote: »

The issue is not to do with speeds or speed limits or other factors that should be taken into account when analysing the reduction of fatalities, its the issue that the RSA aren't doing a good enough job with their advertising campaigns, driver education and interacting positively with the highest risk group instead of negatively.

In this area it would appear the TAC have a better approach, it could be due to budget but it is clear the RSA could learn lessons from them. They could also look to the US where legal street races are held, and are policed by the traffic police who actively and positively promote it and even take part. Instead here you have the highest risk group demonised in public which leads to them being looked down on by the Gardai, not the way to get them to slow down or act responsible at all.



Thats true but a year on year comparison might be closer than over a long period. We've been in the crapper properly for about a year now

The OP posted a video with accompanying statistics about road deaths in Australia and pointed out he believed the TAC were doing a better job of reducing road deaths mainly because of their "educational" adds.
If you want to link a reduction in road deaths in Aus with what TAC are doing then fair enough.
If however you want to say the RSA arent doing a good enough job and that the reductions in road deaths here are plainly down to better infrastructure and safer cars you are failing to see where the double standards exist.
Being honest, I see very little different between that add posted and most of the generic ones the RSA have done.

If the issue is not about speed why are you talking about street legal races?

Voodoomelon

Gophur wrote: »

The cold weather has shown that if you reduce the speed of traffic, lives will be saved. It is inconvertible. Look at the cold spell RTA stats, and you will see a huge effect from slowing people down.

Of course people slowed down, to a crawl. Of course no one dies in a crash doing 30kph, I completely fail to see your point. Its like saying if we all got out and pushed our cars to work there would be no road deaths?

By your reasoning speed is accountable for ALL road deaths, because if we were all doing 30kph no one would die. Be realistic (and yes I have read the RSA website inside out, theres a thread on it here every week), the RSA's own stats show that speed is a minor cause of deaths. Its bad driving at the end of the day that causes accidents.

The reason I believe the RSA is a waste of time and money is because I believe the money could be better spent elsewhere. Lump their budget in with the millions contracted to the speed camera fiasco and you could start on a new driver education program which everyone has to sit on an ongoing basis.

At the end of the day I don't entirely disagree with what you're saying, we're all in favour of lower road deaths but they aren't going to go down because of speed cameras or the RSA.

Gophur

draffodx wrote: »

.........
In this area it would appear the TAC have a better approach,.............

That's one hell of an assumption!

Paparazzo

Absurdum wrote: »

I agree and disagree :P

The Australian ad looks too Hollywood imo, I don't relate to it, it may as well be a series of movie trailers.

The RSA ads with the A&E doctor and the other ones with the short clips of parents speaking about their loved ones are more hard-hitting for me because they could easily be my family.

Maybe the rsa should use actors? Doctors or guards can't act, and they sound like fair city actors in the ads. But the worst thing about the rsa ads is how fake their crashes are. The one where a dog runs out in front of a car that's overtaking so he swerves and the car flips is so bad its funny. Or the one where a car flips into a back garden where the kid is playing. Or the one where a car pins a bloke against a wall and his girlfriend is trapped, but forced to watch her boyfriend slowly die. If you think they're real and not Hollywood, you never saw a car crash.
A normal crash just shown from one angle, with no dramatic music is far more effective imho.

Absurdum

Paparazzo wrote: »

Maybe the rsa should use actors? Doctors or guards can't act, and they sound like fair city actors in the ads. But the worst thing about the rsa ads is how fake their crashes are. The one where a dog runs out in front of a car that's overtaking so he swerves and the car flips is so bad its funny. Or the one where a car flips into a back garden where the kid is playing. Or the one where a car pins a bloke against a wall and his girlfriend is trapped, but forced to watch her boyfriend slowly die. If you think they're real and not Hollywood, you never saw a car crash.
A normal crash just shown from one angle, with no dramatic music is far more effective imho.

they must be doing something right if you can remember them that well :pac:

kippy

Paparazzo wrote: »

Maybe the rsa should use actors? Doctors or guards can't act, and they sound like fair city actors in the ads. But the worst thing about the rsa ads is how fake their crashes are. The one where a dog runs out in front of a car that's overtaking so he swerves and the car flips is so bad its funny. Or the one where a car flips into a back garden where the kid is playing. Or the one where a car pins a bloke against a wall and his girlfriend is trapped, but forced to watch her boyfriend slowly die. If you think they're real and not Hollywood, you never saw a car crash.
A normal crash just shown from one angle, with no dramatic music is far more effective imho.

"Normal Crash"??

Atomic Pineapple

kippy wrote: »

If however you want to say the RSA arent doing a good enough job and that the reductions in road deaths here are plainly down to better infrastructure and safer cars you are failing to see where the double standards exist.

I am saying their adverts and campaigns are not as good as the Australian ones demonstrated, not that the Australian drop in road deaths is purely due to the TAC, same as the situation here with the RSA.

kippy wrote: »

If the issue is not about speed why are you talking about street legal races?

Because its a way to educate and interact with the target group, its a way that the Gardai and safety reps can get in amongst them and chat to them, talk to them about road safety and how important it is to keep it off the public roads, where Gardai can take part and get to know them instead of just being seen as authority figures to hate.

Gophur wrote: »

That's one hell of an assumption!

Apologies, I should have stated that it was in my opinion (in the context of the adverts they have created)

kippy

draffodx wrote: »

I am saying their adverts and campaigns are not as good as the Australian ones demonstrated, not that the Australian drop in road deaths is purely due to the TAC, same as the situation here with the RSA.



Because its a way to educate and interact with the target group, its a way that the Gardai and safety reps can get in amongst them and chat to them, talk to them about road safety and how important it is to keep it off the public roads, where Gardai can take part and get to know them instead of just being seen as authority figures to hate.



Apologies, I should have stated that it was in my opinion (in the context of the adverts they have created)

The OP stated this:
"The TAC in Australia took a far more educated look into the actual causes of
road accidents, what actually gets through to people,
and in the last 20 years have halved the road deaths in Australia."

So the TAC in Australia halved the road deaths there in the past 20 years, using videos which provided driver education like that which was posted.
People have come on here since hammering the RSA and pointing out the stats in this country are helped by improving roads and car safety while not admitting the same for australia.

RSA adds, in general are very similiar to the add posted. Theres not a huge amount of difference.

I've been involved with "educating" groups of young lads on the dangers on the road and have worked with the Traffic Core in getting some of there reps in to talk to the lads - the lads have all said that this is a good thing and good intervention and I agree with that, however advocation these "closed" races as a way in which to improve how these young lads drive and their attitudes is totally unproven and only suits certain people.
Enforcement of the current laws, the modification of a few of the current laws and a bit of cop on (hopefully brought about by the RSA adds and a bit of education from those older) is what is required to further reduce deaths.

I am all for hammering government agencies when they are at fault, however I see very little issue here, this thread is just a very very poorly thought out basis for hammering them.

rossc007

Just saw this on the RSA website

40% of deaths were aged under 25

I'd love to know why people in that bracket feel so aggrieved at being targeted? Its not like they make the stats up to annoy young males.

Atomic Pineapple

rossc007 wrote: »

Just saw this on the RSA website

40% of deaths were aged under 25

I'd love to know why people in that bracket feel so aggrieved at being targeted? Its not like they make the stats up to annoy young males.

That means 60% were over 25 (60 > 40)

Its the manner in which they try to get the message through to young males thats the problem, it simply isn't working and will never work until they become more open minded about the approach rather than demonising them which just keeps the general public happy without actually achieving anything.

kippy

draffodx wrote: »

That means 60% were over 25 (60 > 40)

Its the manner in which they try to get the message through to young males thats the problem, it simply isn't working and will never work until they become more open minded about the approach rather than demonising them which just keeps the general public happy without actually achieving anything.

Ah, jaysus,
You're presented with statistics and a valid point and end up making a joke about it.

To be bluntly and brutally honest, the ONLY ways to get the "message" across to MANY young males, is by getting more draconian with the laws and increasing the enforcement of existing laws.
Graduated driving licenses, with harsher penalties if breaking the laws on learner permits for one, better driving instruction in general to all drivers.

Gophur

draffodx wrote: »

............. demonising them which just keeps the general public happy without actually achieving anything.

From RSA

39% of the people killed due to excessive speed were young male aged 17-24,
Just under half of all drivers responsible for fatal collisions where excessive speed was cited as contributory
factor were young male aged 17-24.

48% of drivers involved in fatal accidents in 2008 were males aged between 17 and 25
27% were males aged between 25 and 34.
That's 75% of drivers involved in fatal crashes were males aged between 17 and 34.

The remaining 25% are those males aged over 34 and ALL female drivers. (Almost half of that number were males between 34 and 49)

Now, try to tell us educating young male drivers about the dangers is time and money wasted?

freyners

one thing i would love to see them target, drivers how to use a fcking pedestrian crossing, especially older drivers

I live beside a roundabout that has pedestrian crossings on its four exits, now regardless of the fact i think its a stupid place to site pedestrian crossings (imo shud be at least 50m away from the entry/exit) i dont no how many times ive seen people drive through, sometimes even speeding up, the pedestrian crossing while ive been standing at it waiting for them to slow the fck down and stop so i can cross. Its mainly older people who do this, from my experiences its younger drivers who are more aware of them and stop

Atomic Pineapple

kippy wrote: »

Ah, jaysus,
You're presented with statistics and a valid point and end up making a joke about it.

To be bluntly and brutally honest, the ONLY ways to get the "message" across to MANY young males, is by getting more draconian with the laws and increasing the enforcement of existing laws.

Enforcement will never work as its impossible to be enforced everywhere all of the time, young males wont learn anything from being caught and given a €80 fine and 2 penalty points either. Your suggestion of draconian laws is a very very out dated point of view.

It wasn't a valid point, as I've stated over and over the problem isn't with them being targeted its the fact the RSA are failing to properly tackle the problem at the root and instead are choosing to churn out sensationalist campaign after campaign to make it look like they are doing something and this keeps Joe public happy.

kippy wrote: »

Graduated driving licenses, with harsher penalties if breaking the laws on learner permits for one, better driving instruction in general to all drivers.

At least you recognise this, why are the RSA failing to do this? Or introduce 10 or even 5 year renewals of tests? Why do they babble on about introducing new rules for learners when the ones that are there aren't enforced at all?

Gophur wrote: »

try to tell us educating young male drivers about the dangers is time and money wasted?

Do you not read my posts??

I'm blue in the face from posting that I agree with that and my only problem is that the money is being used but young drivers aren't getting educated.

kippy

draffodx wrote: »

Enforcement will never work as its impossible to be enforced everywhere all of the time, young males wont learn anything from being caught and given a €80 fine and 2 penalty points either. Your suggestion of draconian laws is a very very out dated point of view.

It wasn't a valid point, as I've stated over and over the problem isn't with them being targeted its the fact the RSA are failing to properly tackle the problem at the root and instead are choosing to churn out sensationalist campaign after campaign to make it look like they are doing something and this keeps Joe public happy.



At least you recognise this, why are the RSA failing to do this? Or introduce 10 or even 5 year renewals of tests? Why do they babble on about introducing new rules for learners when the ones that are there aren't enforced at all?




Do you not read my posts??

I'm blue in the face from posting that I agree with that and my only problem is that the money is being used but young drivers aren't getting educated.

No idea why the RSA arent bringing this in, however I do believe it is on the cards for the next few years.

Enforcement works if the penalties are harsh enough, hence the draconian laws (laws that would have a graduated speed limit for learners for instance.

Ultimately people in those age groups are "learning" to drive. They need to be taught properly and penalties put in place to punish if they go outside of the rules.

I amnt disagreeing with you in general, just the way in which this thread is being used to hammer the RSA.

We were all young drivers once,
those of us who were lucky enough probably had one "close call" or worse knew of someone who wasnt so lucky, that gave us a bit of a kick up the backside to improve our driving.

Paparazzo

Absurdum wrote: »

they must be doing something right if you can remember them that well :pac:

Remembering the ad isn't the idea, slowing people down is. And the only reason they're remembered is because they're repeated so often.

kippy wrote: »

"Normal Crash"??

Yes, a non Hollywood, non a team style crash. One where a skid doesn't result in a barrel roll that Norris McWhirter would be interested in.

Run_to_da_hills

A variety of shorter nasty adds would be more effective.

People will only switch channels once they see a 5 minute epic add particularly if it is regularly repeated.

By the time one finds the remote the shorter adds would be over.

Good idea would be if the RSA / Garda inject the surplus cash made from safety cameras into similar road safety adds.

franksm

It's also down to RTE, etc, not giving accidents and victims the proper coverage. Show the damage, tell us about the people that were involved and who they left behind. Show us the wrecked cars. It needs to shock.

At the moment, a road death gets 10 seconds of coverage on the TV news. On the RTE website, such coverage disappears off the page within a couple of hours.

I think the 'ghost bike' idea in the UK works well - makes ya think.

L1011

franksm wrote: »

It's also down to RTE, etc, not giving accidents and victims the proper coverage. Show the damage, tell us about the people that were involved and who they left behind. Show us the wrecked cars. It needs to shock.

At the moment, a road death gets 10 seconds of coverage on the TV news. On the RTE website, such coverage disappears off the page within a couple of hours..

You don't seem to realise that this is basically the only country in the world that fetishises road accidents so. We do not need more coverage, anything but.

Even the local news broadcasts in the UK don't cover road crashes *at all*. Unless they get to the level of the 7 people in one car type, which will get a brief mention; or cause a road to be closed.

Three people in one car will get 5 minutes airtime on RTE bulletins for a day and three pages in the Indo here. Nothing in the national, regional or local TV media in the UK, possibly a bit in the local papers and radio.

timt

To the person who suggested having an ad with a crash from just one viewpoint and without music, I agree, its much more effictive.

Something a bit like this except in normal road conditions obviously

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFdGKeQph-Q

johnos1984

Does anyone have a copy of the old anti speeding ad from the early 90's.

It had a red Ford Sierra which hit a pedestrian, young school girl, on a bend and then rolled over.

I think the song what a wonderful world was playing.

Always struck me as a good ad

Also this is a good ad.

Could be a young person could be someone older

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pubTiDCEVZ8&feature=related