Garda Traffic on Twitter

inforfun

Not too bothered about the 122 in 100 zone but how the **** can anyone think it is ok to drive a car looking like that?

boardsuser1

inforfun wrote: »

Not too bothered about the 122 in 100 zone but how the **** can anyone think it is ok to drive a car looking like that?

The whole 'it's my car, I pay for it, i'll do what I want' nonsense.

Or 'oh sorry about that Guard, I didn't realise it was dirty'

***shakes head***

smelly sock

I have been looking at this thread a long time now but never posted.

Some of the regular posters here sum up everything that's wrong with boards in the last few years.


Judgemental, lack of any empathy whatsoever, and "that's the law" serves you right BS.

Some of the offences are indefensible but the like of a dirty car? Get over it FFS.

A dirty car ain't gonna kill someone. The speeding by more than 20 per cent of the limit will though.

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

Atlantic Dawn

smelly sock wrote: »

I have been looking at this thread a long time now but never posted.

Some of the regular posters here sum up everything that's wrong with boards in the last few years.


Judgemental, lack of any empathy whatsoever, and "that's the law" serves you right BS.

Some of the offences are indefensible but the like of a dirty car? Get over it FFS.

A dirty car ain't gonna kill someone. The speeding by more than 20 per cent of the limit will though.

Parked on the side of the road it won't but doing 120km/h on a motorway with not being able to properly see out the rear or side of the car and likely mirrors are in filth condition will make the drivers visibility very limited for lane changing compared to a car not covered in debris, especially at night.

Cheensbo

smelly sock wrote: »

I have been looking at this thread a long time now but never posted.

Some of the regular posters here sum up everything that's wrong with boards in the last few years.


Judgemental, lack of any empathy whatsoever, and "that's the law" serves you right BS.

Some of the offences are indefensible but the like of a dirty car? Get over it FFS.

A dirty car ain't gonna kill someone. The speeding by more than 20 per cent of the limit will though.

Well you've just joined them - the stretch of road (barrel) that the guards are checking for speed (shooting fish) is a dual carriage way, with a good surface, with excellent visibility in all directions & excellent access roads on and off - which should never have an 80kmh limit.

So to say they WILL kill someone, puts you in the basket with the rest of them I reckon.

cjt156

smelly sock wrote: »

I have been looking at this thread a long time now but never posted.

Some of the regular posters here sum up everything that's wrong with boards in the last few years.


Judgemental, lack of any empathy whatsoever, and "that's the law" serves you right BS.

Some of the offences are indefensible but the like of a dirty car? Get over it FFS.

A dirty car ain't gonna kill someone. The speeding by more than 20 per cent of the limit will though.

He's got absolutely no rearward visibility, his plate is obscured and his lights will be severely dimmed by the caked on mud. No one cares that it is dirty. The problem is he's a danger to himself and other road users.

Mc Love

smelly sock wrote: »

I have been looking at this thread a long time now but never posted.

Some of the regular posters here sum up everything that's wrong with boards in the last few years.


Judgemental, lack of any empathy whatsoever, and "that's the law" serves you right BS.

Some of the offences are indefensible but the like of a dirty car? Get over it FFS.

A dirty car ain't gonna kill someone. The speeding by more than 20 per cent of the limit will though.

And you sum up the majority of motorists in this country that see their car is a means of getting from a to b - i think you're in the wrong forum.

inforfun

smelly sock wrote: »

I have been looking at this thread a long time now but never posted.

Some of the regular posters here sum up everything that's wrong with boards in the last few years.


Judgemental, lack of any empathy whatsoever, and "that's the law" serves you right BS.

Some of the offences are indefensible but the like of a dirty car? Get over it FFS.

A dirty car ain't gonna kill someone. The speeding by more than 20 per cent of the limit will though.

Speeding in it self doesn't kill at all. Speeding at the wrong moment/the wrong circumstances does.
Like speeding in a car that has its windows covered in mud so you dont have proper vision.

My car is pretty bad at the moment but i do make sure the windows and lights are clean. For my own and others benefit.

smelly sock

inforfun wrote: »

Speeding in it self doesn't kill at all. Speeding at the wrong moment/the wrong circumstances does.
Like speeding in a car that has its windows covered in mud so you dont have proper vision.

My car is pretty bad at the moment but i do make sure the windows and lights are clean. For my own and others benefit.

But if you refrain from speeding at all it would solve the issue of speed killing.

inforfun

smelly sock wrote: »

But if you refrain from speeding at all it would solve the issue of speed killing.

Yeah. And if we all would stay home, wrapped in bubble wrap no one would be killed in traffic.

smelly sock

inforfun wrote: »

Yeah. And if we all would stay home, wrapped in bubble wrap no one would be killed in traffic.

So you are saying that it's ok to speed?

If people were to drive in a safe and responsible way (not speeding) there would be less road deaths and accidents? Driving is a safe way to travel but it's the risks people take that cause accidents.

A real intelligent argument you are making by the way.

Shannon757

In other news
https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/822037869040717824

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Bogger77

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

you heartless b*xtard!

leave the man's chips alone

inforfun

smelly sock wrote: »

So you are saying that it's ok to speed?

If people were to drive in a safe and responsible way (not speeding) there would be less road deaths and accidents? Driving is a safe way to travel but it's the risks people take that cause accidents.

A real intelligent argument you are making by the way.

My last reply on this

That first line (that i bolded) i would completely agree with if you had left the "not speeding" out.

It is obviously not ok to speed, since you get fines and points if you get caught.

20+ years of driving and at times, speeding typing here.
Number of people i killed on the road: 0

smelly sock

inforfun wrote: »

My last reply on this

That first line (that i bolded) i would completely agree with if you had left the "not speeding" out.

It is obviously not ok to speed, since you get fines and points if you get caught.

20+ years of driving and at times, speeding typing here.
Number of people i killed on the road: 0

Fair enough, it was more your smart ass sarcastic bubble wrap comment that made me think you condone irresponsible risk taking on the road.

bear1

smelly sock wrote: »

Fair enough, it was more your smart ass sarcastic bubble wrap comment that made me think you condone irresponsible risk taking on the road.

What speed is considered speeding to you?
Or do you enjoy pissing and moaning?

smelly sock

bear1 wrote: »

What speed is considered speeding to you?
Or do you enjoy pissing and moaning?

Would you not consider 122 in a 100 zone speeding?

Or 70 in a 50 zone speeding?

In relation to the dirt car; You can see the lights very clearly (they're even causing camera glare in the pic), and the driver's side mirror is visible and clean.

Driving that car would be no different to driving a van or other vehicle with no back window. Make no difference whatsoever.

Big Nasty

[Deleted User] wrote: »

In relation to the dirt car; You can see the lights very clearly (they're even causing camera glare in the pic), and the driver's side mirror is visible and clean.

Driving that car would be no different to driving a van or other vehicle with no back window. Make no difference whatsoever.

And the reg plate?

jackofalltrades

Shannon757 wrote: »

In other news
https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/822037869040717824

Some people really are their own worst enemy.
You'd think if you were flouting the law that much you'd try and keep under the radar.

smelly sock wrote: »

Would you not consider 122 in a 100 zone speeding?

Or 70 in a 50 zone speeding?

Poster complains about people being judgemental, then judges others. :rolleyes:
Maybe best to start a new thread on speeding.

smelly sock

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Some people really are their own worst enemy.
You'd think if you were flouting the law that much you'd try and keep under the radar.

Poster complains about people being judgemental, then judges others. :rolleyes:
Maybe best to start a new thread on speeding.

You are way off the mark there. I was complaining about people being judgemental over silly trivial stuff. I clearly stated that certain road offences are much more dangerous than other and a dirty car is trivial. Speeding isn't.

Big Nasty

Big Nasty wrote: »

And the reg plate?

People were complaining about his reduced visibility and being dangerous.

Atlantic Dawn

The driver will have a chip on their shoulder after this, lol...

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/822037869040717824

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Faith+1

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

The driver will have a chip on their shoulder after this, lol...

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/822037869040717824

Expensive bag of chips!;)

boardsuser1

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/822070774592864256

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

boardsuser1

is the linking of a driver's licence number to a registration number a good thing I wonder?

I can only assume that this is how the Audi driver was caught.