Garda Traffic on Twitter 2

joujoujou

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1218656851795021826

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1218657488087797761

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1218658705257959424

drunkmonkey

That Clancy agreement was a bad idea, I know people pretending to be there brothers and sisters behind the wheel just so they can go to work. They don't have an alternative. City's served with good public transport there's no excuse but outside of that it needs to be looked at.

splinter65

drunkmonkey wrote: »

That Clancy agreement was a bad idea, I know people pretending to be there brothers and sisters behind the wheel just so they can go to work. They don't have an alternative. City's served with good public transport there's no excuse but outside of that it needs to be looked at.

The alternative is to take the lessons and pass the test. There isn’t really a long wait for the test any more. If you can’t pass the test then you shouldn’t be driving.

pablo128

drunkmonkey wrote: »

That Clancy agreement was a bad idea, I know people pretending to be there brothers and sisters behind the wheel just so they can go to work. They don't have an alternative. City's served with good public transport there's no excuse but outside of that it needs to be looked at.

If they are that desperate to get to work, they could use a moped unaccompanied.

joujoujou

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1218847957426102272

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1218902182914744326

punisher5112

Yeah great job, clamp it..... Be much better to remove it...

GNWoodd

The Clancy amendment should be reviewed as should the introduction of mandatory disqualification for being slightly over the alcohol limit .The amendment effective from October 2018 was unnecessary .Hopefully the newly elected FF will revisit .

kirving

I mostly disagree with clamping, as it just extends the problem.

(Overstaying a ticket should be a 30 quid fine in the post with very high enforcement, but with US style credit card meters at every space that you can let run for the duration of your stay. Easy to use and no excuses.)

But this is beyond obnoxious parking forcing pedestrians on roadway, and deserves the 3 points under the "Parking a vehicle in a dangerous position" FCPN offence.

Eric Cartman

drunkmonkey wrote: »

That Clancy agreement was a bad idea, I know people pretending to be there brothers and sisters behind the wheel just so they can go to work. They don't have an alternative. City's served with good public transport there's no excuse but outside of that it needs to be looked at.

Thankfully the mobility app will soon make roadside name checks a lot easier, Theres no excuse ever for a provisional driver to be driving unaccompanied.

joujoujou

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1219002795413721089

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1219019640032190467

CrabRevolution

GNWoodd wrote: »

The Clancy amendment should be reviewed as should the introduction of mandatory disqualification for being slightly over the alcohol limit .The amendment effective from October 2018 was unnecessary .Hopefully the newly elected FF will revisit .

Not a chance. I can't think of any occasions where driving laws have been loosened after being passed (except where they've been found deficient by the courts). Right or wrong we've been on a consistent path of stricter regulation and lower limits for decades. It's also been a cross party effort across various different parties and governments. It's not like the USA or UK where incoming governments seek to undo the work of the previous one.

In any case, if FF were so against the RTA amendments you dislike, wouldn't they have voted against them in the Dáil? The NCT, RSA, lower drink driving limits, mandatory driving lessons etc. were all brought in under FFs watch. I've seen no evidence that they want to loosen the driving laws, so unless they're 2 seats short of a majority and desperately need the Healy-Raes' support, it won't be on the agenda...

dsmythy

GNWoodd wrote: »

The Clancy amendment should be reviewed as should the introduction of mandatory disqualification for being slightly over the alcohol limit .The amendment effective from October 2018 was unnecessary .Hopefully the newly elected FF will revisit .

I wonder which one of them will break the news to Noel Clancy? No chance.

Dravokivich

GNWoodd wrote: »

The Clancy amendment should be reviewed as should the introduction of mandatory disqualification for being slightly over the alcohol limit .The amendment effective from October 2018 was unnecessary .Hopefully the newly elected FF will revisit .

You're right, but not for the reason you think you are. The Clancy amendment didn't go far enough. Driving on a learners permit and not meeting the requirements for doing so, should result in forfeiture of the learners permit.

joujoujou

High speed, high...

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1219180242398523393

Not the best set of tyres for the conditions on that upside down yoke, I'd say:

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1219188233470468096

Mentally disabled perhaps?

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1219234917864890369

joujoujou

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1219534773137432579

joujoujou

Previous record we had here was 18 years IIRC...

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1219752980477566978

tuxy

How did they know the driver was unaccompanied for 23 years?
That's some damn fine detective work!

colm_mcm

Assuming they failed a test way back, it wasn’t an issue for years driving unaccompanied.

CoBo55

I’d say my neighbour is on a learner permit longer than that.

punisher5112

Wife hadn't a licence 6 years but had insurance, never had an issue renewing or getting tax or NCT sorted...

Emmersonn

punisher5112 wrote: »

Wife hadn't a licence 6 years but had insurance, never had an issue renewing or getting tax or NCT sorted...

If the sh!t hit the fan you would have discovered that she did not have insurance

tuxy

punisher5112 wrote: »

Wife hadn't a licence 6 years but had insurance, never had an issue renewing or getting tax or NCT sorted...

I can understand how she got tax and NCT.
But actual insurance and not just a worthless piece of paper and disc, I don't believe you.

pablo128

tuxy wrote: »

I can understand how she got tax and NCT.
But actual insurance and not just a worthless piece of paper and disc, I don't believe you.

I think he means a full licence? Open to correction.

tuxy

pablo128 wrote: »

I think he means a full licence? Open to correction.

That would make it a strange statement.
I don't see why anyone would have trouble renewing insurance on a learner permit. Most companies will insure learners.

Charles Babbage

CoBo55 wrote: »

I’d say my neighbour is on a learner permit longer than that.

The Gardai should identify any vehicles at that address or insured for that person and make an especial effort to check that this person is accompanied.

joujoujou

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1219900729881698304

dsmythy

Emmersonn wrote: »

If the sh!t hit the fan you would have discovered that she did not have insurance

Not true. But your next quote would be astronomical.

joeysoap

joujoujou wrote: »

Previous record we had here was 18 years IIRC...

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1219752980477566978

If he’d just put on his seat belt he might have added another 23.

tuxy

joeysoap wrote: »

If he’d just put on his seat belt he might have added another 23.

I'd say they have learnt their lesson.
Probably back driving already but this time with the seatbelt on.

punisher5112

Emmersonn wrote: »

If the sh!t hit the fan you would have discovered that she did not have insurance

Not how it works but anyway whatever...

Yes some go after for expense etc but very rarely to be honest.