Road deaths on the rise

Iwannahurl

SpaceTime wrote: »

need to start actually fining ... pedestrians walking on roads without reflective gear at night.

The other issue is that the traffic corps needs to be more visible. You hardly ever see them outside of key locations.

Do you mean literally walking on the road? If so, there may other, much more important factors: e.g. no footpath provided (fine the officials in the relevant roads authority?), footpath obstructed by illegally parked vehicles (fine the owner/driver), pedestrian is intoxicated (fine the publican for giving them too much alcohol?).

In any case, there is no law requiring the wearing of hi-vis. Finland has such a law, and there is about a 20% compliance rate.

As for the Traffic Corps, they are highly conspicuous by their absence or even apathy in certain situations. Straight away I can think of two events I attended where several TC Gardai were present, but where they didn't lift a finger to enforce any traffic or parking regulations. Hi-vis, including the TC's own gear, made not an iota of difference.

SpaceTime

Realistically footpaths can't be provided on rural roads at any kind of reasonable cost and the setup is similar elsewhere in Europe.

I think if you're walking along a dark rural road at night without reflectors you're a total idiot tbh.

Iwannahurl

There may be idiocy involved.

However, according to the RSA over 80% of road deaths and injuries occur in built-up areas, and two thirds of pedestrians killed on the roads have been consuming alcohol.

How would fining pedestrians for not wearing hi-vis alter that situation to any significant degree?

Victor

SpaceTime wrote: »

Realistically footpaths can't be provided on rural roads at any kind of reasonable cost and the setup is similar elsewhere in Europe.

Then stop building houses in rural areas - put them in villages.

There are lots of houses in rural areas where they could have provided foot paths, but didn't.

mydiscworld

ROAD DEATHS RISE FOR SECOND CONSECUTIVE YEAR

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=14571

A total of 196* people have lost their lives in 2014, compared to 190 in 2013, a 3% rise.

However, it represents a 21% increase when compared to the 162
road deaths that occurred in 2012, the safest year on Irish roads.

Leonard Hofstadter

"Amazing" how ever since the scameras, sorry I mean speed cameras have been introduced, that fatalities have gone UP after many, many years of the fatalities going down.

Co-incidence? I think not! Will we hear anyone in the Government (or FF who introduced the pesky money making scams) admit they got it wrong? Will we hear or see anyone in the media challenge the Government or the RSA about their misleading claims that speed cameras save lives? Will we what! Too much money to be made, besides, in the eyes of the speed camera lobby, either way it's justification for more of the damn things. And of course, don't forget the 'regression to the mean' argument. Even if this is true, then all this proves is that at best, they've made no difference whatsoever.

A reduction in fatalities? Oh, that must be because of the speed cameras because 'speed cameras save lives', therefore we need more of them! An increase in fatalities? Oh, too many people are driving "too fast" (or whatever BS excuse they can think of), therefore we need more of them! You couldn't make this up.

flazio

captainspeed wrote: »

"Amazing" how ever since the scameras, sorry I mean speed cameras have been introduced, that fatalities have gone UP after many, many years of the fatalities going down.

Co-incidence? I think not! Will we hear anyone in the Government (or FF who introduced the pesky money making scams) admit they got it wrong? Will we hear or see anyone in the media challenge the Government or the RSA about their misleading claims that speed cameras save lives? Will we what! Too much money to be made, besides, in the eyes of the speed camera lobby, either way it's justification for more of the damn things. And of course, don't forget the 'regression to the mean' argument. Even if this is true, then all this proves is that at best, they've made no difference whatsoever.

A reduction in fatalities? Oh, that must be because of the speed cameras because 'speed cameras save lives', therefore we need more of them! An increase in fatalities? Oh, too many people are driving "too fast" (or whatever BS excuse they can think of), therefore we need more of them! You couldn't make this up.

I'd be very interested in your cost effective, non discrimination way in tackling the issue.

Caliden

flazio wrote: »

I'd be very interested in your cost effective, non discrimination way in tackling the issue.

So it's only worthwhile if it's cost effective?


Proper enforcement is the only solution and to do that, more Gardai need to be recruited.

veryangryman

flazio wrote: »

I'd be very interested in your cost effective, non discrimination way in tackling the issue.

More Dual Carriageways is a simple one. Even simple central medians like they use on many major single carriageway roads in Scandanavia would easily reduce deaths which mainly occur due to head-ons.

Tragedy

What we need is an actual Road Safety Authority that does something beyond collate statistics given to it, hand out free hi vis jackets, publish the odd and mostly useless TV ad and have Gaybo tell us about speeding.


Where's the research? Where's the analysis of those statistics? Where's....really, anything of use or worth?

Why don't we have detailed reports on how, when, where and why road fatalities and serious injuries are happening? Why don't we know how these change year to year? Why don't we know if there has been a correlation between camera vans and a reduction in deaths/accidents involving vehicles travelling over the speed limit? Why aren't there programs and press releases targeting those areas where deaths are increasing? Why can't they predict what areas of dangerous driving will respond best to education and enforcement?

The RSA is not fit for purpose and to be honest, until we have a real RSA - any talk of increased Gardai to tackle road deaths is pointless. Throwing more darts at random targets will not help.

D Trent

Seems as though this fatal RTC was a head on collision on a single carriageway road that is what, 7 years old ?
http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/four-people-killed-and-three-seriously-injured-in-road-accident-30888376.html

L1011

Just under 5 I think. High speed singles are always high risk unfortunately

veryangryman

Sadly, a good example of a road that should have the central reservation.

Are they really that expensive to install?

munchkin_utd

veryangryman wrote: »

Sadly, a good example of a road that should have the central reservation.

Are they really that expensive to install?

nope, which is why (IIRC) wide single lane roads with a (useless, and mostly unused) hard shoulder are from now on to be built as a 2+2 with a central median.

loyatemu

munchkin_utd wrote: »

nope, which is why (IIRC) wide single lane roads with a (useless, and mostly unused) hard shoulder are from now on to be built as a 2+2 with a central median.

WSC is inherently dangerous as it encourages overtaking and weaving in and out of the hard shoulders - I hate driving on those roads. But I don't think the NRA have scrapped it as a road type yet.

veryangryman

loyatemu wrote: »

WSC is inherently dangerous as it encourages overtaking and weaving in and out of the hard shoulders - I hate driving on those roads. But I don't think the NRA have scrapped it as a road type yet.

If they have, its been recent as the Ballaghadreen bypass ain't too old yet.

L1011

veryangryman wrote: »

If they have, its been recent as the Ballaghadreen bypass ain't too old yet.

Its not as wide as the old WS2 was. Different spec. However I think the N78 is the same spec.

shedweller

Whats the percentage of accidents per road user? It would be nice to see a graph of this over the last few years. I suspect (but may be wrong!) that the increase in accidents is somewhat due to the increase in road users. I see way more vehicles on the roads now compared to 2008-2010 or thereabouts so of course theres going to be more accidents.

Sam Russell

Why do the Gardai not publish the results of all the post-fatality analysis of accidents. They close the road, examine the vehicles, I presume breathalise the drivers, measure and photograph everything.

Would not an annual report of their findings be of huge benefit to the general public and inform rational debate and cause a general appreciation of what can be done to reduce these terrible waste of lives?

I feel for the families and their loss.

monument

Sam Russell wrote: »

Why do the Gardai not publish the results of all the post-fatality analysis of accidents. They close the road, examine the vehicles, I presume breathalise the drivers, measure and photograph everything.

Would not an annual report of their findings be of huge benefit to the general public and inform rational debate and cause a general appreciation of what can be done to reduce these terrible waste of lives?

I feel for the families and their loss.

Mainly because it could impact on court cases.

Sam Russell

I appreciate that point, but the report could be annonomised or generalised or summarised to remove that difficulty.

For example, a table showing how many mechanical faults were full or partial causes; how much speed affected the accident as cause or exacerbating injuries; how many drivers were found over the limit; how much drivers contributed through lack of skill/experience.

Particular accidents could be examined in detail after the court cases are finalised, again without names. I appreciate that would be historical, but still valuable.

If it is important, it is important to understand why it is important.

Sheldons Brain

I'm not sure that this recent accident on a modern road tells us a huge amount about the trend in road accidents. Sometimes things happen, although this seems difficult to explain.

Was there not supposed to be another Euro RAP report at some stage?

BaronVon

Sam Russell wrote: »

I appreciate that point, but the report could be annonomised or generalised or summarised to remove that difficulty.

For example, a table showing how many mechanical faults were full or partial causes; how much speed affected the accident as cause or exacerbating injuries; how many drivers were found over the limit; how much drivers contributed through lack of skill/experience.

Particular accidents could be examined in detail after the court cases are finalised, again without names. I appreciate that would be historical, but still valuable.

If it is important, it is important to understand why it is important.

After all fatal accidents, this will be done in the Coroner's Court. There's a record of it there, it's just not collated nationallty, which i presume would be the job of the RSA.

Sam Russell

infacteh wrote: »

After all fatal accidents, this will be done in the Coroner's Court. There's a record of it there, it's just not collated nationallty, which i presume would be the job of the RSA.

The coroners court is to determine the cause of death, not the cause of the accident that gave rise to it. Coroners have a very limited number of verdicts they can give.

What I am looking at is a systematic analysis and collation of all relevant data for all accidents that included a fatality. It is facile to say 'there were [x] extra deaths last year' when what is needed is to categorise the cause of those deaths to see what action needs to be taken by the road authorities, the Gardai, the RSA, and the general public.

Why is so much action taken when a plane goes down, but not a lot when a few people are killed in a RTA? Maybe there is a lot done but not reported.

I am not talking about recent tragedies.

mydiscworld

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

Was there not supposed to be another Euro RAP report at some stage?

Yes, see here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056618782

Iwannahurl

veryangryman wrote: »

More Dual Carriageways is a simple one. Even simple central medians like they use on many major single carriageway roads in Scandanavia would easily reduce deaths which mainly occur due to head-ons.

This kind of thing? Ugly but effective I guess. It would be a lot cheaper than conversion to DC or motorway. I wonder whether it has been considered, and what objections might be raised. Perhaps not suited to Ireland's dense road network and ubiquitous ribbon development?

Sam Russell

Looking at the RSA report on the road deaths for 2014 would suggest that the rise in deaths could be accounted for by either the rise in deaths of pedestrians or the rise in deaths of cyclists.

A lot of pedestrians died while attempting to cross roads. Hi-viz jackets or reflective belts might help here.

Cyclists do not help their cause by so many of them insisting on ignoring the rules of the road.

Hotblack Desiato

what annoys me is that most of the reporting (and official announcements) about this issue shows a complete failure to understand the nature of statistics.

If fatalities go substantially down one year, chances are they'll increase the next for no apparent reason - regression to the mean

There's also the issue of small sample size. Ireland is a small country so the overall total will show more variation year on year, just because of the relatively small sample size. For particular road user groups e.g. pedestrian or cyclist fatalities, the sample size is far smaller again so the variation year on year can be 50% or more. This is normal. It doesn't mean anything in itself.

Long term trends are the only things from which inferences can be usefully drawn, not the statistical noise of year-to-year mostly random variations.

There's also a great deal of politicking that goes on, e.g. people in rural areas can't (rightly) drive to the pub and have a few pints, so they walk, but now they're being demonised. Just because you had a couple of pints in you walking home doesn't mean you were doing anything dangerous, in any case the motorist has a duty to be able to stop in the distance they can see to be clear at all times. If you are in a vulnerable road user group or ever have a drink, you're ripe for demonisation by the RSA.

What's particularly annoying for me this year is that motorcycle fatalities are down about 10%, but no mention is being made of this. It's within the normal variation, but when the figure goes up by the same amount it's always mentioned. Again, there is a lot of victim blaming going on here as the most usual cause of motorcycle fatalities in two vehicle accidents is a car pulling out from a minor road in front of a motorcycle, or turning right across an oncoming one.

BaronVon

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

What's particularly annoying for me this year is that motorcycle fatalities are down about 10%, but no mention is being made of this. It's within the normal variation, but when the figure goes up by the same amount it's always mentioned. Again, there is a lot of victim blaming going on here as the most usual cause of motorcycle fatalities in two vehicle accidents is a car pulling out from a minor road in front of a motorcycle, or turning right across an oncoming one.

With regards motorcycle fatalities, I'd like to know how many riders were unlicensed / uninsured / untrained? In my experience, I would imagine it is relatively high, and I feel those riders being included in the statistics of serious riders does a disservice to proper motorcyclists!

Sam Russell

Actually, they examine the statistics by age and for motorcyclists and cyclist, training does not appear to be an issue, but the sample size is small.